Numark3

Lol internet conspirator clown says what?

It’s not even a premise. There are countless whistleblowers without direct knowledge that have been proven right. Just saying someone doesn’t have direct knowledge and therefore they are a rumor mongerer is just a stupid statement. That’s my point. as for here, you kinda need the whistleblower report to see what the allegations are before you can see if they conflict with other evidence... (do we know what the report is, or just what the media reported on it...and noting they consistently get facts wrong)

Any alleged statement by the president, even if it’s heard second hand, is explicitly not hearsay in any proceeding against him..... (assuming evidentiary rules even apply, I have no idea if they do or don’t...doesn’t matter for this issue since it’s not hearsay) so yea, not hearsay dumbass

And it’s so pathetic people think whistleblowers can only be credible if they have direct knowledge of something. I dont expect much from some of you though (“durrrrrr they didn’t even here da call”)

You do realize hearsay is a legal term? And you do realize you are misusing it?

Yup, secondary sources can be bad. Good insight. They can also be good.

Lol whatever floats your boat. Insults that we both know aren’t true don’t bother me. Experienced big law attorney and teach at a top 20 law school....I’ll forever be more qualified than you on this

That’s just not true. Secondary sources can be just as credible. And don’t even get me started on hearsay. It doesn’t necessarily goes to credibility, but admissibility....so who cares? Plus it’s not that simple. You clearly dont. Find a tedtalk or something on evidence dude. You sound dumb when you parrot dumb things. That’s blatantly not true and objectively wrong. But okay

Eye roll. Just pointing out your your lack of understanding of how evidence works. ”No direct source” and “No quid pro quo” are dumb things to say.

Constantly pointing out there is no quid pro quo, direct evidence, etc. is dumb. It’s nice buzz words you can repeat.... Secondary and circumstantial evidence can be just as strong. indirect whistelblowers can be 100% credible Explicit Quid pro quo isn’t the only way to do what he is accused of doing. i haven’t thought about this scandal at all, but you all parroting these defenses show you really don’t know anything

You are a clown. You got caught lying about arguing motions as a first year student, go sit down. You sound and talk like a student or an idiot.

I asked for the type of case, not your clients name. Yea being secretive about the type of public motion that is 20 years old in a slam dunk case makes you look totally honest. like I said, no you didn’t. So dumb

“Sorry ass receiver”

Federal court motions are public you idiot. Folks, this is how you catch a liar...

Not a brag, someone asked if I saw the inside of the courtroom, that is the most substantive thing I have done in a court room. When your clients are all major corporations, you aren't first chairing trials until you are a more senior partner. And no you didn't. What type of motion and case? Do you have trouble reading? I was answering a question about being in court.

I have won plenty of motions. Thank you. I have done one trial, as a third chair. But if I wanted to go to trial as a first chair I would have went to a small law firm, or practiced something like family law and criminal law

No you were not.

I do actually. I have won dispositive motions in federal court...so box checked

idk, he is a funny clever character. It isn't insulting, as I'm like, an actual lawyer. I'm bored. DR, learn to write. DC Tom, go publish something now that you aren't a student. 3rdandlong, go to work, i'm sure people are hungry.

Well, we have things other than community colleges. You didn't seem to be aware. Also......"published" (as a student lol)

Not sure why you think always sunny is an insult. It's a great character.

i practice civil law, teach writing. And I live in a big city, so there is a top 20 college here. Keep up cubicle lol? That would be terrible. And I like teaching quite a bit, but not the most important thing to me. Again, top 20 law school....but facts haha

The popular, successful, RICH, problem solver with great results? Don't you have a hat to put on and a job to go to? My only advice to you was to write like an adult. I don't care about my qualifications at all, I am quite comfortable with them.

hahahaha oh gosh. Um, something like that

safe bets are safe bets.