- Joined
- Mar 3, 2018
- Messages
- 16,876
- Reaction score
- 7,398
- Location
- San Diego
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Liberal
Dear (not so) Honorable Sen. Lindsay Graham,
Regarding your recent whinings about "due process" and "facing accuser" ( the whistleblower )
1. Why are you whining due process, that dems only present "hearsay" evidence, when:
A. Trump won't allow his own direct evidence witnesses to testify
B. This is not a trial, it's a hearing, it's not about hearsay evidence, it's about the credibility of those giving testimony.
2. Why are you whining about the Whistleblower and "Trump should be allowed to face his accuser"
A. When Trump won't testify under oath, and he is free to do so
B. Noting that the WB is not the accuser, and until the house votes on impeachment and writes up articles in impeachment, there is no formal accusation being made
also noting that if the house votes to impeach, the accuser is Congress. After that, arguments about process should be directed at trial, that's when someone is being accused, and put on trial, hence it is called "Senate Impeachment Trial", capiche?
See, Sen, Graham, the whistleblower is just a tipster, not an accuser, it's similar to how many law enforcement agencies across the land have anonymous tip lines
Someone calls in an anonymous tip, and the cops prove the veracity of it, confirm or deny it, and if the alleged crime is confirmed, they state because the accuser, which is why, in criminal proceedings, the plaintif is always the United States, Joe Killer V. the United States, for a criminal act is a crime against the state, and the state accuses, the victim is just a witness. But, in the case of tipsters, no law enforcement agency would drag the tipster into court because. 1. he or she is not the accuser. 2, if they did drag the tipster to court and grill the tipster, who would give tips in the future, doing this would be a tremendous disincentive to people to give tips anonymously, which is the entire reason tip lines are anonymous in the first place.
The WB law is a more elaborate version of anonymous tip lines, and the principle is the same.
And during Clinton, wasn't Linda Tripp's "evidence" hearsay, as well, and lawdy, you sure didn't have a problem then.
Moreover, as head of the Sen. Judiciary committee, you are free to conduct your own investigations, and for some reason, you are not doing that.
So quit whining, and do what taxpayers are paying you to do.
Got it?
Regarding your recent whinings about "due process" and "facing accuser" ( the whistleblower )
1. Why are you whining due process, that dems only present "hearsay" evidence, when:
A. Trump won't allow his own direct evidence witnesses to testify
B. This is not a trial, it's a hearing, it's not about hearsay evidence, it's about the credibility of those giving testimony.
2. Why are you whining about the Whistleblower and "Trump should be allowed to face his accuser"
A. When Trump won't testify under oath, and he is free to do so
B. Noting that the WB is not the accuser, and until the house votes on impeachment and writes up articles in impeachment, there is no formal accusation being made
also noting that if the house votes to impeach, the accuser is Congress. After that, arguments about process should be directed at trial, that's when someone is being accused, and put on trial, hence it is called "Senate Impeachment Trial", capiche?
See, Sen, Graham, the whistleblower is just a tipster, not an accuser, it's similar to how many law enforcement agencies across the land have anonymous tip lines
Someone calls in an anonymous tip, and the cops prove the veracity of it, confirm or deny it, and if the alleged crime is confirmed, they state because the accuser, which is why, in criminal proceedings, the plaintif is always the United States, Joe Killer V. the United States, for a criminal act is a crime against the state, and the state accuses, the victim is just a witness. But, in the case of tipsters, no law enforcement agency would drag the tipster into court because. 1. he or she is not the accuser. 2, if they did drag the tipster to court and grill the tipster, who would give tips in the future, doing this would be a tremendous disincentive to people to give tips anonymously, which is the entire reason tip lines are anonymous in the first place.
The WB law is a more elaborate version of anonymous tip lines, and the principle is the same.
And during Clinton, wasn't Linda Tripp's "evidence" hearsay, as well, and lawdy, you sure didn't have a problem then.
Moreover, as head of the Sen. Judiciary committee, you are free to conduct your own investigations, and for some reason, you are not doing that.
So quit whining, and do what taxpayers are paying you to do.
Got it?