During the first hearing of the House impeachment inquiry against President Donald Trump, a prominent Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee made the contention that hearsay “can be much better evidence” than direct evidence at the proceedings.
“I think the American public needs to be reminded that countless people have been convicted on hearsay because the courts have routinely allowed and created, needed exceptions to hearsay,” Rep. Mike Quigley (D-IL) said while facing Ukraine Ambassador Bill Taylor and deputy assistant secretary of state for Europe and Eastern Europe George Kent during today’s hearings.
“Hearsay can be much better evidence than direct, as we have learned from painful instances, and it’s certainly valid in this instance,” he added.
He can be seen making the incomprehensible statement here:
— Gregg Jarrett (@GreggJarrett) November 13, 2019
Quigley was referencing the 23 legally recognized exceptions to the rule making hearsay inadmissible during court proceedings. According to the Legal Information Institute at Cornell University, those exceptions are as follows:
(1) Present Sense Impression.
(2) Excited Utterance.
(3) Then-Existing Mental, Emotional, or Physical Condition.
(4) Statement Made for Medical Diagnosis or Treatment.
(5) Recorded Recollection.
(6) Records of a Regularly Conducted Activity.
(7) Absence of a Record of a Regularly Conducted Activity.
(8) Public Records.
(9) Public Records of Vital Statistics.
(10) Absence of a Public Record.
(11) Records of Religious Organizations Concerning Personal or Family History.
(12) Certificates of Marriage, Baptism, and Similar Ceremonies.
(13) Family Records.
(14) Records of Documents That Affect an Interest in Property.
(15) Statements in Documents That Affect an Interest in Property.
(16) Statements in Ancient Documents.
(17) Market Reports and Similar Commercial Publications.
(18) Statements in Learned Treatises, Periodicals, or Pamphlets.
(19) Reputation Concerning Personal or Family History.
(20) Reputation Concerning Boundaries or General History.
(21) Reputation Concerning Character.
(22) Judgment of a Previous Conviction.
(23) Judgments Involving Personal, Family, or General History, or a Boundary.
While Quigley is technically correct that there are exceptions that allow hearsay to be admissible during certain court proceedings, his contention that it “can be much better evidence than direct” is an insult to the intelligence of the American people, and shows how Democrats are grasping at straws in the new phase of their witch hunt against President Trump.
It was essentially revealed during today’s proceedings that the entire case against President Trump is based entirely on hearsay, with the deep state whistleblower who filed the initial complaint being unwilling to take public questions:
WATCH: Both of the Democrats #impeachmenthearing witnesses just admitted that they were NOT on the phone call with President Trump and Ukraine's President Zelensky.
Democrats only care about hearsay and opinions, not facts! pic.twitter.com/28lHfT2qWk
— Trump War Room (Text TRUMP to 88022) (@TrumpWarRoom) November 13, 2019
First it was the Russia Hoax, now it’s the Ukraine Hoax.
And what are Democrats basing this sham on? HEARSAY. pic.twitter.com/Olzhy2LBYX
— Ronna McDaniel (@GOPChairwoman) November 13, 2019
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-OH) of the House Freedom Caucus was particularly effective in his new role on the House Intelligence Committee. He embarrassed the Democrats for the partisan fiasco they have inflicted upon the American people.
“This anonymous so-called whistle-blower with no firsthand knowledge, who's biased against the president, who worked with Joe Biden, who is the reason we're all sitting here today— we'll never get a chance to question that individual.” –@Jim_Jordan pic.twitter.com/1pZ785nXgq
— GOP (@GOP) November 13, 2019
Jordan rightfully pointed to President Trump as the big winner of the day, with the stupidity of the Democrats being showcased on a grand stage.
“I think it is a sad chapter for the country but a good day for the facts and the President of the United States,” Jordan said.
This sad chapter will hopefully come to a close on Nov. 3, 2020, when the public reaffirms Trump as president for a second term and the Democrats cries of conspiracy are muted once and for call.
Democrat Black Farmers Bill Would Give Away $8 Billion of Land Yearly in Reparations Program
South Africa-style land redistribution?
Democrat Senators are touting new legislation that would purchase national farmland and give it away to Black Americans for free.
Democrats Cory Booker, Kirsten Gillibrand, and Elizabeth Warren are sponsoring the the Justice for Black Farmers Act, which seems likely to be the most wide-ranging affirmative action program ever enacted if it’s signed into law. It’s not inaccurate to call the bill a reparations program.
— Cory Booker (@CoryBooker) November 24, 2020
The law establishes preferences for Black Americans within Department of Agriculture policy. Blacks would be granted free land purchased by the federal government, in total increments that appear to add up to $8 billion a year.
An undersecretary of a USDA “Equitable Land Access Service” would be entrusted with purchasing(using taxpayer funds) and redistributing land. The reparation bill appropriates for a massive 20,000 grants annually over ten years, adding up to a total redistribution package of $80 billion.
The under-secretary would be commissioned to “(1) purchase from willing sellers, at a price not greater than fair market value, available agricultural land in the United States; and (2) subject to section 205, convey grants of that land to eligible Black individuals at no cost to the eligible Black individuals.”
If the bill redistributes 160 acres per grant, it would ultimately end up transferring 1.6% of the total land in the continental United States for free.
Democrats cite a decline in the numbers of black farmers since the 1920’s as an impetus for the bill, pointing out that there were 1 million black farmers in 1920 and 50,000 today. Such logic ignores that the number of American farmers broadly has declined sharply as the United States transitioned to an industrial economy, and that millions of Black Americans who worked under poor conditions as sharecroppers in the American South have long since moved to northern cities.
The bill is somewhat similar to South African racial land redistribution policies, which differ primarily in that they forcibly nationalized land owned by Afrikaner farmers and redistributed them to South African Blacks. South Africa’s land reforms in the name of “equity” have proven to generally be a failure, with novel farmers unable to utilize the land they’ve been gifted in a manner beneficial to society. South Africa has transitioned from a bountiful agricultural society known as the “bread basket of Africa” to a net food importer, with experts pointing to arbitrary land redistribution as a factor in doing so.
Immigration4 days ago
BOMBSHELL: President Trump May Sign Executive Order to End Birthright Citizenship Before First Term Ends
Campaign 20203 days ago
Georgia Recount Worker Describes “Pristine” Batch of Ballots – 98% for Joe Biden!
Videos3 days ago
‘Biggest Scandal in U.S. History’: Reporter Shane Trejo Describes Detroit’s Election Night Chaos to One America News
Politics2 days ago
RNC Chair Ronna McDaniel is Getting Ready to Stab President Trump in the Back to Keep Her Post
Campaign 20204 days ago
John Oliver: It is ‘Completely Insane’ to Use Vulnerable Computer Systems to Count Votes; Trump is ‘All the Way Completely Right’
Hollywood4 days ago
Warner Bros. Signs ‘Trained Marxist’ BLM Co-Founder Patrisse Cullors to Produce TV Shows
Campaign 20202 days ago
WATCH: Fulton County Poll Manager Susan Voyles Recounts Election Improprieties in Georgia Recount
Campaign 20202 days ago
Sidney Powell is No Longer Working With President Trump’s Legal Team