Mueller relied on a Witness who has been charged twice for Child porn.

What a great witness😂

He was charged in 1991 for child porn as well. Mueller still used him😂

Just arrested again last week for it😂

What a loser, Great Job Mueller!

Link

First he edits transcripts, now this.

Dont worry, someone will be in here soon and somehow vouch for his credibility.

Crickets

Soon

"But Trump said"

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
Dont worry, someone will be in here soon and somehow vouch for his credibility.

He's a Republican, that already speaks to his credibility, am I right 😱

Yeah... in a court of law he would be discredited as a witness.

"But.. but... it isn't a trial!! So we can still use him as a 'credible' witness!!"" lmao

Originally posted by snowdragon
He's a Republican, that already speaks to his credibility, am I right 😱

Im talkin about the witnesses credibility. Mueller need a convicted kiddy porn guy as a witness, then he was arrested last week for the same thing, priceless😂

Originally posted by eThneoLgrRnae
Yeah... in a court of law he would be discredited as a witness.

"But.. but... it isn't a trial!! So we can still use him as a 'credible' witness!!"" lmao

This is Murika baby, our biggest court is twitter.

Originally posted by BrolyBlack
What a great witness😂

He was charged in 1991 for child porn as well. Mueller still used him😂

Just arrested again last week for it😂

What a loser, Great Job Mueller!

Link

When calling into question the credibility of a witness, you first check their angle of bias, if they have one.

Does he have one?

What is his relationship with the accused?

Next check their criminal history.

Does he have one?

What were their crimes and could they lead to the witness lying about their testimony? Meaning, they are not trustworthy?

So how do these questions play out? Does it change the thread?

Repeat criminals who turn state's evidence have been used many times as reliable witnesses...

This is another "Mueller is hurting Trump so he's bad!" thread. #13

Originally posted by Robtard
Repeat criminals who turn state's evidence have been used many times as reliable witnesses...

This is another "Mueller is hurting Trump so he's bad!" thread. #13

The OP needs to create some more Trump defense threads to prove how well his life is going.

Why does Adam Hate Free Speech?

Other then him being a Leftist that is...

Originally posted by dadudemon
When calling into question the credibility of a witness, you first check their angle of bias, if they have one.

Does he have one?

What is his relationship with the accused?

Next check their criminal history.

Does he have one?

What were their crimes and could they lead to the witness lying about their testimony? Meaning, they are not trustworthy?

So how do these questions play out? Does it change the thread?

I will say I'd be a lot more concerned if the guy had gotten something in exchange, sometimes you hear about low level criminals getting lesser sentences in exchange for testifying that a higher level criminal did something illegal. To me that is wrong to do unless you have other evidence that supports the claims of the low level criminal.

He didn't get anything in exchange, but it is still important to know his agenda. That goes for everybody though

Originally posted by Bashar Teg
trump hired him long after he was caught the first time. sorry, how does that exonerate him? special fee-fees again?

Nobody in this thread said the word "exonerate".

nice distraction. so trump knowingly hired a pedophile and this somehow makes the Russia investigation fall apart because...?

Originally posted by Surtur
First he edits transcripts, now this.

Why is Mueller using a pedo as a witness bad, but Trump hiring a pedo is a "meh, who cares"?

Originally posted by Adam_PoE
The OP needs to create some more Trump defense threads to prove how well his life is going.

Life is going pretty good actually. PB your life going well?

Brilliant, off to Cyprus in two weeks. 🙂