To: Bill who wrote (282193 ) 4/2/2024 6:49:58 PM From: Lane3 Read Replies (3) | Respond to As I recall... Message 34477376 Message 34202553 I recall having an extended conversation with i-node about the dubious nature of testimony not subject to cross examination. I would think that you would want that evidence held until trial where the evidence can be effectively refuted. Not fair to not hear both sides before making a judgment, after all. As i-node used to argue re the Select Committee evidence, there has been no cross-examination. Because, I argued, that format had no provision for it. We're a long way down the road from there, there still has not been a formal rebuttal let alone cross examination, nor has there been a credible informal rebuttal. Different situations call for different levels and types of evidence. Some things, like a criminal trial, require more; some things, like accepting as plausible fact what some yahoo says on SI will pass with less. an early transcribed interview conducted by the committee included precisely that evidence from a key source Your offering is insufficient. Show me where the claim was somehow validated or give it up.
