Quantcast
Connect with us

Sorry, GOP, the whole ‘my witness for your witness’ thing isn’t the law — it only casts doubt on you: Ex-prosecutor

Published

on

In an op-ed for the Washington Post, former federal prosecutor Joyce White Vance explained that the idea of “witness reciprocity” that Republicans seem to think exists, isn’t actually a thing.

“Witness ‘reciprocity’ isn’t a thing. So no, there can’t be a Biden for every Bolton. Only testimony that bolsters or casts doubt on facts necessary to deciding on the articles of impeachment is relevant at trial,” she wrote.

ADVERTISEMENT

Her comment comes after Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) decided that because Democrats want a first-hand witness to testify at the impeachment trial in the Senate. Cruz, wants someone that has nothing to do with President Donald Trump’s obstruction of justice or his abuse of power, and instead is part of one of the president’s conspiracy theories.

“Leave aside for the moment that no evidence of illegality by Biden has turned up, and Trump’s Justice Department has not charged anyone, which it could presumably do if such evidence existed,” wrote Vance. “The implication was that reciprocity might discourage Democrats from pursuing witness testimony. Some commentators took up Cruz’s challenge, however, saying Democrats should be willing to offer up Hunter Biden, or even his father, Joe Biden, Trump’s rival in the 2020 presidential race, to get the testimony of firsthand witnesses such as Bolton, Trump’s former national security adviser, acting White House chief of staff Mick Mulvaney and others during the Senate proceedings.”

As Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA) explained, the Republicans may as well ask to subpoena Santa Claus.

Vance went on to say that the idea of “witness reciprocity” isn’t the way the legal system works. Cruz, who went to Harvard Law School should be aware of that fact.

“It might seem like a good idea at first: Treat each side equally and give them the same number of witnesses,” Vance explained. “But in our system, evidence must be relevant to the charges or issues at hand before it can be introduced in a trial. To be relevant, evidence must tend to make the existence of any fact that is necessary to deciding the case more or less likely than it would be if the evidence was unavailable to the decision-maker. The rule of relevance ensures that cases are decided based on evidence, not distraction or trick. It compels focus on the issues in the case being decided, not those in any other matter.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Read her full editorial at the Washington Post.


Report typos and corrections to: [email protected].
READ COMMENTS - JOIN THE DISCUSSION
Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

‘Angry’ Trump Michigan voters admit they want ‘this nightmare to end’ in November

Published

on

President Donald Trump's Michigan supporters are abandoning their 2016 pick for Vice President Joe Biden as the election comes closer.

In a series of interviews on MSNBC Sunday, revisited voters they'd met earlier in the election cycle in Kent County.

Katey Morse and her husband were both working full time, and their kids were in school back in March, but things quickly changed as the coronavirus spread throughout the country. Luckily, she and her husband didn't lose their jobs, but they, like many parents, are struggling to do virtual school for their kids.

"I'm turning into more of an angry person than I've ever been in my life," she said about how she feels politically, noting that it makes her sad. "I've just got a countdown to November now, and I'm hoping we'll wake up from this nightmare we're in."

Continue Reading

Breaking Banner

Trump abusing the intelligence community in an attempt to keep them quiet about Russia election hacks: Conservative

Published

on

The New York Times Magazine piece outlining President Donald Trump's battles with the U.S. intelligence community revealed that Russia is continuing to wage its own cyberwar against the world. According to conservative Washington Post columnist Max Boot, the devastating report explained the extent to which the president is ignoring the threats to the 2020 election.

“The options faced by the intelligence community during Trump’s presidency have been stark: avoid infuriating the president but compromise the agencies’ ostensible independence, or assert that independence and find yourself replaced with a more sycophantic alternative," wrote Robert Draper in his lengthy investigation into Trump's efforts to politicize international intelligence. According to Boot, the most shocking part of the investigation was that the experts in the intelligence community have been banned from speaking honestly about the Russian attacks.

Continue Reading
 

2020 Election

‘Incompetent moron’ Chuck Todd ripped for letting Trump official claim Democrats want more COVID-19 deaths

Published

on

"Meet the Press" host Chuck Todd is under fire -- once again -- after letting Donald Trump's trade adviser Peter Navarro claim on NBC that Democrats want more Americans to die during the coronavirus pandemic to boost their chances at the polls in November.

Instead of pushing back the NBC host known for his lack of follow-up questions let the comment slide by responding, "I take your point."

Todd's failure to call out the Trump aide for what one Twitter commenter called a "disgusting" comment led to an avalanche of criticism for the MBC political director who recently saw his weekday show cut back to make room for more commentary by colleague Nicolle Wallace.

Continue Reading
 
 
You need honest news coverage. Help us deliver it. Join Raw Story Investigates for $1. Go ad-free.
close-image