2204
Comments (143)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
225
LevonRiver 225 points ago +249 / -24

That is NOT A FUCKING QUOTE*. Christ! Spreading shit-lies like this only WATERS DOWN THE REAL CRIMES of these liberal cucks, and makes us look like idiots.

Gateway Pundit is fucking CNN of the right.

57
deleted 57 points ago +69 / -12
43
jrgreen73 43 points ago +52 / -9

Correct. Coomer probably said it. But coming from the mouth of another person, it's hearsay.

20
Geeee 20 points ago +25 / -5

It is not hearsay, ffs. That's not what hearsay is.

You can say you said "X". I can say I heard you said "X". What is hearsay is "John told me jrgreen73 said X"

4
SirPokeSmottington 4 points ago +7 / -3

That's not what hearsay is.

Literally is what hearsay is.

"coming from the mouth of another person, it's hearsay."

Literally.

hear·say
/ˈhirˌsā/
noun
information received from other people that one cannot adequately substantiate; rumor.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
1
Whoopies_tds 1 point ago +1 / -0

Eric Ciaramella has entered the chat

1
lurkwellmyfriends 1 point ago +1 / -0

I believe u/Geeee 's interpretation is correct. The former is a type of "eyewitness" testimony that can be and is used in court. Ex: The USPS whistleblower who testified to overhearing his direct supervisors discussing the backdating of PA ballots. He can (and possibly did) sign an affidavit to that effect and federal inspectors came and braced him so that Adam Schiff could tweet out that the postal worker ""recanted"".

The latter from u/Geeee 's example is rumor and innuendo and has no legal basis. IANAL, of course.

0
HurdyGurdyHer 0 points ago +1 / -1

Literally that's not what he wrote.

Literally.

0
jrgreen73 0 points ago +1 / -1

Hearsay evidence, in a legal forum, is testimony from a witness under oath who is reciting an out-of-court statement, content of which is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted. Wikipedia

14
Taylor814ce 14 points ago +14 / -0

Negative. Hearsay is "I heard someone else say that they heard x, y, and z."

Ear-witness testimony is not hearsay.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
0
jrgreen73 0 points ago +1 / -1

Hearsay evidence, in a legal forum, is testimony from a witness under oath who is reciting an out-of-court statement, content of which is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.

Wikipedia

-1
jrgreen73 -1 points ago +1 / -2

Hearsay evidence, in a legal forum, is testimony from a witness under oath who is reciting an out-of-court statement, content of which is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.

Wikipedia

-1
jrgreen73 -1 points ago +1 / -2

Hearsay evidence, in a legal forum, is testimony from a witness under oath who is reciting an out-of-court statement, content of which is being offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.

Wikipedia

6
deleted 6 points ago +16 / -10
10
jrgreen73 10 points ago +13 / -3

I agree it's not fake news. It's just not going to do much good in court.

When I said "correct" I was not referring to GP being the CNN of the right. I was referring to it not being a quote

Sorry for the misunderstanding.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
2
Silver 2 points ago +2 / -0

Why do we not like Breitbart now?

0
deleted 0 points ago +2 / -2
1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0
2
MAGA_Flocka_Flame 2 points ago +2 / -0

I’m not saying you are wrong, I just want to point out that this is still as much evidence as MSM had when they heard the president might have called some soldiers “losers” (which they had no actual evidence)

2
jrgreen73 2 points ago +2 / -0

I agree with that

19
VoteCyborgTrump2040 19 points ago +20 / -1

You mean you can't verify whether he actually said it? This is testimony from someone who went undercover in Antifa and says that Coomer said this, and that he posted the Antifa manifesto to Trump on his Facebook.

Why is this comment so high up? It's a trash comment that makes it sound as if this is wholly fabricated.

4
we_kill_creativity 4 points ago +4 / -0

Why is this comment so high up?

Because this is how internet astroturfed propaganda works. They can't downvote the posts so they do battle in the comments. It's not new, we just have too many long time users who have forgotten this, and too many new people who don't understand.

We need to do a sitewide re-education campaign about online shill techniques.

1
spezisapedo 1 point ago +1 / -0

you actually can downvote posts... but your point stands.

1
we_kill_creativity 1 point ago +1 / -0

Ah, thanks. And I now just turned off the community style. Haven't been on reddit for over a year and forgot this place can do it too. Didn't even think to check.

3
deleted 3 points ago +3 / -0
4
Jimmy_Russler 4 points ago +8 / -4

You're right we need hard evidence of stuff not rumors

Now if that alleged witness wanted to testify in court it might be a different story

2
Sand313man 2 points ago +3 / -1

Hold your horses on gateway pundit...

The misquote is by the user who posted article - not by gateway pundit.

1
deleted 1 point ago +1 / -0