Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

Finally this Hearsay Report with million errors Here is the Constitutional exposing the errors of law 1. They admitted the Hearsay Evidence from Vuyo Zungula and Arthur Frazer without following the admissibility procedures. 2. The never tested the information before it. That's an error of law 3. The report... show more

RET ARE THIEVES

2,456 subscribers

52,510 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Новости и политика Здоровье и велнес

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Senator Johnson has stated that most of the Legacy Media is refusing to report on this story… “They hid the data, they knew what they were doing…even when they were presented with evidence”

Senator Johnson has stated that most of the Legacy Media is refusing to report on this story… “They hid the data, they knew what they were doing…even when they were presented with evidence”

Liz Churchill

13,416 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

We're not free until this stops. Masked agents of the government shouldn't exist, but if they do, they shouldn't stop you without evidence that you've violated the law.

We're not free until this stops. Masked agents of the government shouldn't exist, but if they do, they shouldn't stop you without evidence that you've violated the law.

David J. Bier

15,478 просмотров • 19 дней назад

The EFF is not winning this case I’m afraid - A member of parliament asks the speaker to appoint an independent panel to look into Phala Phala - The Speaker approves and the panel reports found out that there was prima facie evidence - But Parliament votes against the report - Justice Mathopo arguing that the EFF doesn’t have a case because parliament has the final say in this matter per rules - EFF must fight to change the rules

The EFF is not winning this case I’m afraid - A member of parliament asks the speaker to appoint an independent panel to look into Phala Phala - The Speaker approves and the panel reports found out that there was prima facie evidence - But Parliament votes against the report - Justice Mathopo arguing that the EFF doesn’t have a case because parliament has the final say in this matter per rules - EFF must fight to change the rules

Blissfully Retarded

118,551 просмотров • 1 год назад

Breaking news President Ramaphosa to Challenge Phala Phala Panel Report in High Court President Cyril Ramaphosa will seek a High Court review of the Phala Phala panel report, which found prima facie evidence of serious misconduct over the theft of $580,000 in undeclared foreign currency from his Limpopo farm. The move follows last week’s Constitutional Court ruling that Parliament unlawfully blocked the inquiry in 2022.

Breaking news President Ramaphosa to Challenge Phala Phala Panel Report in High Court President Cyril Ramaphosa will seek a High Court review of the Phala Phala panel report, which found prima facie evidence of serious misconduct over the theft of $580,000 in undeclared foreign currency from his Limpopo farm. The move follows last week’s Constitutional Court ruling that Parliament unlawfully blocked the inquiry in 2022.

MDN NEWS

24,064 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

"What the investigation found after looking hard to see if they could find a time when the convention or the executive committee knew about abuse and failed to report it, or facilitated an abuser being able to continue to abuse, they didn't find any instances where the convention or the executive committee did that... "That would lead me sometimes to say we know the Southern Baptist Convention has never has never made a mistake in terms of not reporting abuse." Bart Barber acknowledges no one has EVER presented evidence that the Executive Committee or the Convention covered up abuse or facilitated abuse. They have never failed to report abuse. This is EXACTLY what I have said for nearly two years now. And what I was pilloried for by the sexual abuse activists (including those in SBC leadership). And now the president of the Southern Baptist Convention admits it too.

"What the investigation found after looking hard to see if they could find a time when the convention or the executive committee knew about abuse and failed to report it, or facilitated an abuser being able to continue to abuse, they didn't find any instances where the convention or the executive committee did that... "That would lead me sometimes to say we know the Southern Baptist Convention has never has never made a mistake in terms of not reporting abuse." Bart Barber acknowledges no one has EVER presented evidence that the Executive Committee or the Convention covered up abuse or facilitated abuse. They have never failed to report abuse. This is EXACTLY what I have said for nearly two years now. And what I was pilloried for by the sexual abuse activists (including those in SBC leadership). And now the president of the Southern Baptist Convention admits it too.

Megan Basham

217,298 просмотров • 2 лет назад

Breaking news The Constitutional Court, in the first judgment, has found that Parliament’s impeachment rules were unconstitutional for allowing the National Assembly to halt proceedings against President Cyril Ramaphosa at an early stage, before a full inquiry into the allegations in the Phala Phala scandal. The court found that this approach undermined accountability and transparency, as it prevented proper consideration of whether a prima facie case existed. It also set aside the 2022 parliamentary vote rejecting the independent panel report, finding it was influenced by a material error of law and therefore invalid.

Breaking news The Constitutional Court, in the first judgment, has found that Parliament’s impeachment rules were unconstitutional for allowing the National Assembly to halt proceedings against President Cyril Ramaphosa at an early stage, before a full inquiry into the allegations in the Phala Phala scandal. The court found that this approach undermined accountability and transparency, as it prevented proper consideration of whether a prima facie case existed. It also set aside the 2022 parliamentary vote rejecting the independent panel report, finding it was influenced by a material error of law and therefore invalid.

MDN NEWS

53,545 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

For thousands of years of Jewish history in the Levant, in the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, the people who lived and governed that land were Jews, who spoke the Hebrew language and who practiced the Jewish religion. There are three buckets of independent evidence that prove this. I like to call them: 1. Rocks in the ground —archeological evidence. 2. Words on the page—documentary evidence. 3. Blood in the veins—DNA evidence. In the law, one piece of evidence is good, two pieces of evidence is great, but when three fully independent pieces of evidence corroborate one another, when they didn't get together and get their stories straight, but they still confirm what one another is saying, that's dispositive proof.

For thousands of years of Jewish history in the Levant, in the land between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea, the people who lived and governed that land were Jews, who spoke the Hebrew language and who practiced the Jewish religion. There are three buckets of independent evidence that prove this. I like to call them: 1. Rocks in the ground —archeological evidence. 2. Words on the page—documentary evidence. 3. Blood in the veins—DNA evidence. In the law, one piece of evidence is good, two pieces of evidence is great, but when three fully independent pieces of evidence corroborate one another, when they didn't get together and get their stories straight, but they still confirm what one another is saying, that's dispositive proof.

Roy K. Altman

17,588 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

It seems that the law is implemented immediately on the street, without police, investigation, or any evidence, especially if the accused or the victim is a Muslim. Here is an example of humiliating a young Muslim just because they suspect that he is a thief, without evidence !

It seems that the law is implemented immediately on the street, without police, investigation, or any evidence, especially if the accused or the victim is a Muslim. Here is an example of humiliating a young Muslim just because they suspect that he is a thief, without evidence !

د.عبدالله العمادي

134,347 просмотров • 3 лет назад

Adam Schiff spent years claiming there was evidence of Trump collusion with Russia. When asked if the FBI followed proper protocol to receive the FISA warrants Schiff said “EVERYTHING THAT I HAVE SEEN THE FBI ACTED COMPLETELY APPROPRIATELY” They found 17 errors in the 4 FISA applications…they found no evidence of collusion.

Adam Schiff spent years claiming there was evidence of Trump collusion with Russia. When asked if the FBI followed proper protocol to receive the FISA warrants Schiff said “EVERYTHING THAT I HAVE SEEN THE FBI ACTED COMPLETELY APPROPRIATELY” They found 17 errors in the 4 FISA applications…they found no evidence of collusion.

Clyp Keeper

364,503 просмотров • 11 месяцев назад

YOU NEED TO HEAR THE PARENTS OF THIS CHILD…EVIDENCE THAT TERMINATES EVERY ARGUMENT. WHAT GOD CANNOT DO DOES NOT EXIST !!!

YOU NEED TO HEAR THE PARENTS OF THIS CHILD…EVIDENCE THAT TERMINATES EVERY ARGUMENT. WHAT GOD CANNOT DO DOES NOT EXIST !!!

Jerry Eze

86,774 просмотров • 1 год назад

🚨🇺🇸ELIZABETH WARREN: ISRAEL IS COMMITTING GENOCIDE U.S Sen. Warren: “If you want to do it as the application of law, I believe they will find that it is genocide, and they have ample evidence to do so." Source: RT

🚨🇺🇸ELIZABETH WARREN: ISRAEL IS COMMITTING GENOCIDE U.S Sen. Warren: “If you want to do it as the application of law, I believe they will find that it is genocide, and they have ample evidence to do so." Source: RT

Mario Nawfal

144,915 просмотров • 2 лет назад

Errors Identified in Fulton County Audit Report An analysis by the Rossie James team identified 36 factual errors in the Fulton County hand audit report published by the Secretary of State. These errors represented over 4,000 false absentee ballot votes out of 147,000 counted, a 2.7% error rate. The errors were validated by Governor Kemp's team. Admissions of Flawed Audit Report Initially the Secretary of State's office denied errors, but after the Governor's validation they admitted the Fulton County audit report was severely flawed. In a radio interview the Secretary of State acknowledged "they were off by several thousand ballots" because some ballots were scanned twice. Damage to Election Integrity Mr. Watters argues the audit errors and flawed report from Fulton County does not inspire confidence or trust in the election results. He says it was sloppy, inconsistent, and undermines election integrity.

Errors Identified in Fulton County Audit Report An analysis by the Rossie James team identified 36 factual errors in the Fulton County hand audit report published by the Secretary of State. These errors represented over 4,000 false absentee ballot votes out of 147,000 counted, a 2.7% error rate. The errors were validated by Governor Kemp's team. Admissions of Flawed Audit Report Initially the Secretary of State's office denied errors, but after the Governor's validation they admitted the Fulton County audit report was severely flawed. In a radio interview the Secretary of State acknowledged "they were off by several thousand ballots" because some ballots were scanned twice. Damage to Election Integrity Mr. Watters argues the audit errors and flawed report from Fulton County does not inspire confidence or trust in the election results. He says it was sloppy, inconsistent, and undermines election integrity.

White 🤍 Queen

29,451 просмотров • 2 лет назад

"Why don't victims of rape report?", ask misogynists who seek to dismiss reality. Veronika Rodriguez went to the police with recorded evidence of her rape. The police then charged her with wire tapping, for recording the man without his consent, & she was also charged with filing a false report.........after providing recorded evidence of the rape. Law enforcement have yet again failed to do their job & instead charged a victim, what happened to Veronika is infuriating & absolutely horrific.

"Why don't victims of rape report?", ask misogynists who seek to dismiss reality. Veronika Rodriguez went to the police with recorded evidence of her rape. The police then charged her with wire tapping, for recording the man without his consent, & she was also charged with filing a false report.........after providing recorded evidence of the rape. Law enforcement have yet again failed to do their job & instead charged a victim, what happened to Veronika is infuriating & absolutely horrific.

Miranda 🖤🤍💜

73,528 просмотров • 1 год назад

🚨BIG BREAKING NEWS #CBI files ‘Closure Report’ in #SushantSinghRajput death case. “No Evidence of Abetment to Su!cide” is the conclusion in the report after the probe. *It was well known, anyways the evidence were destroyed and crime scene contaminated, no evidence was left for CBI to investigate , this report was known from day one.

🚨BIG BREAKING NEWS #CBI files ‘Closure Report’ in #SushantSinghRajput death case. “No Evidence of Abetment to Su!cide” is the conclusion in the report after the probe. *It was well known, anyways the evidence were destroyed and crime scene contaminated, no evidence was left for CBI to investigate , this report was known from day one.

Amitabh Chaudhary

22,508 просмотров • 1 год назад

BREAKING - SHOCKING: Judge Juan Merchan just instructed the jury that they do not need unanimity to convict and do not need to agree on what specifically occurred. He said the prosecution's broad approach is due to the absence of direct evidence that Donald Trump personally recorded the material in question. "They're making this very expansive," CNN legal analyst said, "because they don't have direct evidence that Donald Trump actually recorded that." WATCH She said, "Even if he himself did not falsify the business record, as long as, as they mentioned in the closing argument, if he made or caused the false entry. They're making this very expansive as part of the cast analogy. He doesn't have to be the person to have actually recorded it. That's very important because they don't have the direct evidence that Donald Trump actually recorded that information. You have invoices, you've got ledgers, you've got checks. And so as long as he was a part of it to make or cause it, they could find, if they choose to, beyond a reasonable doubt."

BREAKING - SHOCKING: Judge Juan Merchan just instructed the jury that they do not need unanimity to convict and do not need to agree on what specifically occurred. He said the prosecution's broad approach is due to the absence of direct evidence that Donald Trump personally recorded the material in question. "They're making this very expansive," CNN legal analyst said, "because they don't have direct evidence that Donald Trump actually recorded that." WATCH She said, "Even if he himself did not falsify the business record, as long as, as they mentioned in the closing argument, if he made or caused the false entry. They're making this very expansive as part of the cast analogy. He doesn't have to be the person to have actually recorded it. That's very important because they don't have the direct evidence that Donald Trump actually recorded that information. You have invoices, you've got ledgers, you've got checks. And so as long as he was a part of it to make or cause it, they could find, if they choose to, beyond a reasonable doubt."

Simon Ateba

2,906,819 просмотров • 2 лет назад

🔥BOOM. President Trump just posted this video: Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard just blew the lid off one of the biggest political scams in American history. Right before they tried to impeach President Trump, the Democrats and their deep state allies quietly changed the rules on purpose. They ditched the long-standing requirement for firsthand evidence and credible proof and replaced it with hearsay, secondhand gossip, and even information they knew was unreliable. Tulsi laid it out clear: “In the lead-up to the impeachment of President Trump, the standard was that it had to be firsthand information. Then, right before the process, the standard changed allowing secondhand information, even if it was deemed unreliable. ”The Inspector General went from demanding real evidence or direct knowledge... to greenlighting pure hearsay and nothing else. Zero documents. Zero eyewitnesses. The whistleblower never even heard the call. And the IG didn’t bother asking for the transcript. They rigged the system so they could impeach Trump on rumors alone. This wasn’t oversight. This was a deliberate setup. And to this day not a single person has been held accountable.The weaponization of impeachment wasn’t a glitch. It was the plan.

🔥BOOM. President Trump just posted this video: Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard just blew the lid off one of the biggest political scams in American history. Right before they tried to impeach President Trump, the Democrats and their deep state allies quietly changed the rules on purpose. They ditched the long-standing requirement for firsthand evidence and credible proof and replaced it with hearsay, secondhand gossip, and even information they knew was unreliable. Tulsi laid it out clear: “In the lead-up to the impeachment of President Trump, the standard was that it had to be firsthand information. Then, right before the process, the standard changed allowing secondhand information, even if it was deemed unreliable. ”The Inspector General went from demanding real evidence or direct knowledge... to greenlighting pure hearsay and nothing else. Zero documents. Zero eyewitnesses. The whistleblower never even heard the call. And the IG didn’t bother asking for the transcript. They rigged the system so they could impeach Trump on rumors alone. This wasn’t oversight. This was a deliberate setup. And to this day not a single person has been held accountable.The weaponization of impeachment wasn’t a glitch. It was the plan.

Commentary Donald J. Trump Posts From Truth Social

234,890 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Whitehouse: What became of the $50,000 in cash that the FBI gave to Mr. Homan? Bondi: The investigation of Mr. Homan was subjected to a full review They found no evidence of wrongdoing. Whitehouse: What became of the $50,000? Did the FBI get it back? Bondi: You're welcome to talk to the F.B.I Sen. Whitehouse: They report to you. Can’t you answer this? Did Homan keep the $50,000?

Whitehouse: What became of the $50,000 in cash that the FBI gave to Mr. Homan? Bondi: The investigation of Mr. Homan was subjected to a full review They found no evidence of wrongdoing. Whitehouse: What became of the $50,000? Did the FBI get it back? Bondi: You're welcome to talk to the F.B.I Sen. Whitehouse: They report to you. Can’t you answer this? Did Homan keep the $50,000?

Acyn

2,296,400 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад

‘They had the opportunity once before to do that, and they failed.’ Abuse survivor Ellie Reynolds speaks out after resigning from the grooming gangs inquiry panel, believing the panel was shying away from the uncomfortable questions about race and ethnicity.

‘They had the opportunity once before to do that, and they failed.’ Abuse survivor Ellie Reynolds speaks out after resigning from the grooming gangs inquiry panel, believing the panel was shying away from the uncomfortable questions about race and ethnicity.

GB News

14,532 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Sir Sir Jeremy Hunt MP is calling for an urgent re-examination of the Lucy Letby case after an international panel of experts presented evidence that the babies' deaths and injuries were due to natural causes or errors in medical care.

Sir Sir Jeremy Hunt MP is calling for an urgent re-examination of the Lucy Letby case after an international panel of experts presented evidence that the babies' deaths and injuries were due to natural causes or errors in medical care.

Good Morning Britain

205,080 просмотров • 1 год назад

NEW: Important Advice to Maḏhab Fanatics by Shaykh Sulaymān al-Ruḥaylī 1. We study the fiqh that was known to the Companions, and known to the Tābiʿīn, and known to the Imāms. 2. We study fiqh that is connected to evidence and built upon proof. This is the legitimate Sharʿī fiqh—the fiqh whose practitioner is praised, whose action is commended, and which is true understanding of the religion of Allāh. 3. As for binding people to a single Maḏhab from which they may not depart, and obligating them to adhere to everything stated within it, then this is an innovation—an innovation that did not exist in the time of the Companions. Rather, the Companions used to forbid it. It did not exist in the time of the Tābiʿīn, nor in the time of the four Imāms. In fact, the four Imāms were united upon forbidding the sanctification of people’s statements; rather, matters are to be examined in light of their evidence. 4. It is authentically reported from the four Imāms that they said: "If the Ḥadīth is authentic, then it is my Maḏhab." 5. Evidence for this is that the students who were raised upon the teachings of the four Imāms did not sanctify the Imām's opinion; rather, they would sometimes differ with the Imām's opinion. Anyone with even minimal exposure to the books of jurisprudence will find this clear and evident. 6. The four Imāms did not teach their students to sanctify their opinions. Rather, they taught them to look to the evidence and to support the evidence. Whoever examines the books of the Maḏhabs will find this plainly evident. 7. If you look into the books of the Ḥanafīs, you will find that Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan sometimes differed with Abū Ḥanīfah, and that Abū Yusuf sometimes differed, and that Zufar sometimes differed. 8. If you look at the statements of ibn al-ʿArabī al-Malikī, and Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr, you will find this clearly evident. This is how Imām Mālik nurtured his students. Imām Mālik would sometimes not hold a particular view, but when a Ḥadīth reached him, he deemed it sound and adopted it. The same applies to al-Shāfiʿī when you look at his students, and likewise Imām Aḥmad. 9. The strict obligation to adhere to Maḏhabs in such a way that one may not depart from them only arose among the later scholars. We, in reality, do not condemn following a Maḏhab or affiliating oneself with a Maḏhab —this is a permissible matter according to what is well known among the scholars. Rather, what is blameworthy is fanaticism to Maḏhabs, and tying fiqh to Maḏhabs in such a way that one does not go beyond them and does not consider the evidence at all. Instead, issues are decided solely by the statements of the scholars of the Maḏhabs. 10. Following a Maḏhab, according to the scholars, if taken as a path to fiqh and not as fiqh itself, they do not condemn it. But if it is taken as the fiqh itself, and one restricts himself to it—indeed, even casting doubt upon what people know of rulings established upon evidence—then this is not permissible, and it is not the praiseworthy fiqh.

NEW: Important Advice to Maḏhab Fanatics by Shaykh Sulaymān al-Ruḥaylī 1. We study the fiqh that was known to the Companions, and known to the Tābiʿīn, and known to the Imāms. 2. We study fiqh that is connected to evidence and built upon proof. This is the legitimate Sharʿī fiqh—the fiqh whose practitioner is praised, whose action is commended, and which is true understanding of the religion of Allāh. 3. As for binding people to a single Maḏhab from which they may not depart, and obligating them to adhere to everything stated within it, then this is an innovation—an innovation that did not exist in the time of the Companions. Rather, the Companions used to forbid it. It did not exist in the time of the Tābiʿīn, nor in the time of the four Imāms. In fact, the four Imāms were united upon forbidding the sanctification of people’s statements; rather, matters are to be examined in light of their evidence. 4. It is authentically reported from the four Imāms that they said: "If the Ḥadīth is authentic, then it is my Maḏhab." 5. Evidence for this is that the students who were raised upon the teachings of the four Imāms did not sanctify the Imām's opinion; rather, they would sometimes differ with the Imām's opinion. Anyone with even minimal exposure to the books of jurisprudence will find this clear and evident. 6. The four Imāms did not teach their students to sanctify their opinions. Rather, they taught them to look to the evidence and to support the evidence. Whoever examines the books of the Maḏhabs will find this plainly evident. 7. If you look into the books of the Ḥanafīs, you will find that Muḥammad ibn al-Ḥasan sometimes differed with Abū Ḥanīfah, and that Abū Yusuf sometimes differed, and that Zufar sometimes differed. 8. If you look at the statements of ibn al-ʿArabī al-Malikī, and Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr, you will find this clearly evident. This is how Imām Mālik nurtured his students. Imām Mālik would sometimes not hold a particular view, but when a Ḥadīth reached him, he deemed it sound and adopted it. The same applies to al-Shāfiʿī when you look at his students, and likewise Imām Aḥmad. 9. The strict obligation to adhere to Maḏhabs in such a way that one may not depart from them only arose among the later scholars. We, in reality, do not condemn following a Maḏhab or affiliating oneself with a Maḏhab —this is a permissible matter according to what is well known among the scholars. Rather, what is blameworthy is fanaticism to Maḏhabs, and tying fiqh to Maḏhabs in such a way that one does not go beyond them and does not consider the evidence at all. Instead, issues are decided solely by the statements of the scholars of the Maḏhabs. 10. Following a Maḏhab, according to the scholars, if taken as a path to fiqh and not as fiqh itself, they do not condemn it. But if it is taken as the fiqh itself, and one restricts himself to it—indeed, even casting doubt upon what people know of rulings established upon evidence—then this is not permissible, and it is not the praiseworthy fiqh.

Yasar A Rahman

16,413 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад