Rep. Quigley: "Hearsay Can Be Much Better Evidence than Direct" - Laughable...Absurd... #WitchHunt #ImpeachmentInquirypic.twitter.com/lUuzDCh3Yy
-
-
Replying to @GreggJarrett
It can be better evidence in certain circumstances, particularly for crimes that involve intent or knowledge. But it's fair to say that usually direct evidence is better. Hopefully the White House permits witnesses with direct knowledge like Mulvaney and Pompeo to testify.
17 replies 16 retweets 138 likes -
Replying to @renato_mariotti @GreggJarrett
Hearsay is not inherently unreliable. There are many exceptions to hearsay rule, hearsay is admitted in trials every day. All of us rely on hearsay every day. Nothing unreliable about this hearsay; it's corroborated by every witness, all of whom are of impeccable credibility.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
When a crime is committed and the police ask for help the tips they get are heresay yet can lead to the culprit. It is called investigation or inquiry...same here...solving a crime.
3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
When we sit in class day after day for twelve+ yrs, what we're attempting to absorb is ALL hearsay. But it's based on primary knowledge, documented & peer-reviewed. Not to say it's all accurate & up-to-date, but that's why a habit of critical thinking is important.
@Zigmanfreud?!2 replies 1 retweet 2 likes -
Replying to @rdknowles2010 @ZanaMason10 and
Doctors tell us results of tests they didn't perform; brokers tell us about real estate/stock values, etc.; we act on such expertise all the time. We only know our own names because someone else told us.
1 reply 1 retweet 2 likes
And again, all this is documented and available for first-hand verification.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.