RE: Kavanaugh Can Join Thomas.
September 28, 2018 at 9:46 am
(This post was last modified: September 28, 2018 at 9:52 am by Mister Agenda.)
(September 28, 2018 at 9:13 am)alpha male Wrote:(September 28, 2018 at 9:12 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: If they can determine the night of the party and the location of the house
How do they do that?
Are you playing dumb? Genuinely curious.
There were only five people at the alleged party; the house almost certainly belonged to the parents of one of them. They question every witness, and if any witness gives them a name that might be helpful, they question that person too. Heck, maybe they question every student at both high schools that they can still get ahold of. They showed up at my High School and questioned a number of random teachers and students about me when they ran a background check on me. They could do all of this in a couple of weeks, still before the midterms.
And if that doesn't turn up any information that corroborates Ford's story, her credibility is diminished and more benefit of the doubt ought to be given Kavanaugh. Investigation didn't turn up anything, let's move on from this accusation.
The fact that you regard it to be so difficult for the FBI to corroborate Ford's story ought to make you wonder why Kavanaugh and the Republicans don't want to jump on the opportunity to have the FBI saying they couldn't determine any facts of the case that support Ford. If the party didn't happen, of course they won't find anything. That's good for Kavanaugh, right?
(September 28, 2018 at 9:24 am)alpha male Wrote:(September 28, 2018 at 9:12 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: You know, if the FBI finds evidence that supports Ford's story, that supports Ford's version; and if they don't, that supports Kavanaugh's version. Tricky stuff.
If the bolded were actually the case, I'd support an investigation if it could be done in a reasonable amount of time. But, others here have said that isn't the case - absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence. You're the exception. There's no corroborating evidence now and the left thinks he's guilty. An investigation's failure to find corroborating evidence wouldn't change that.
Absence of evidence is only evidence of absence in certain circumstances. Absence of strong evidence for Bigfoot doesn't mean Bigfoot doesn't exist, it means that it's unreasonable to conclude that Bigfoot exists (i.e. is guilty of existing). Absence of evidence against Kavanaugh doesn't mean he's innocent of the allegation; it means that it's unreasonable to conclude that he's not innocent of the allegation.
I'm not anti-Christian. I'm anti-stupid.