Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 2,063 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 586,860
Pageviews Today: 1,522,674Threads Today: 869Posts Today: 17,467
11:11 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Isn’t this admissible in a court of law??

 
Always Looking

User ID: 78916826
United States
11/08/2020 09:31 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Isn’t this admissible in a court of law??


Last Edited by Always Looking on 11/08/2020 09:33 PM
Truth and Facts - The two words liberals hate most!
Zovalex

User ID: 77432258
United States
11/08/2020 09:39 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Isn’t this admissible in a court of law??
Context is everything.

Biden is a stinking pile of shit, but we can’t extract just one sentence from a speech and levy allegations. That’s precisely what the Libtards have been doing with Trump for 4+ years now.

I can show in the Bible where it clearly states, “There is no God”, but when we look at the context in which that statement is made, it states:
“The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God’.”


Context is everything.

What was this shitbag saying before and after that statement?

.

Last Edited by Zovalex on 11/08/2020 10:12 PM
“Mental slavery is the worst form of slavery.
It gives you the illusion of freedom,
makes you trust, love, and defend your oppressor,
while making an enemy of those
who are trying to free you or open your eyes.”
-Fiyah

“None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.”
-Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

“You have been programmed to resist the very person that is here to set you free, from the prison of your Mind... You are not free... everything you are has been manufactured by Minds that have not your best interest. You are imprisoned by beliefs and not reality. Religions are mental programs to imprison your Mind.”

-SOL
Justice4all

User ID: 72965131
United States
11/08/2020 09:41 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Isn’t this admissible in a court of law??
When a party opponent says something incriminating it's admissible as a "statement against interest." It is admissible but as with all evidence, the other side will try to keep it out, and if it comes in, try explain it away.

Here, it's going to be that he just misspoke. Knowing Biden, that is sort of believable.

But it would be up to the trier of fact to decide.





GLP