(September 29, 2018 at 9:58 am)Jörmungandr Wrote: I don't think his account of his memory of events is at all credible. He may justifiably be angry, but not necessarily because he's innocent.And the question is why do you not think that it is credible. What facts and reasons do you point to, to say that his testimony is unbelievable. Should we dispense with the judicial process altogether and just go off of what you feel is credible?
Quote:Sounds like the tale about a dead Jew that I'm familiar with.
In that case there where a number of collaborating witnesses. I don't think that your comparison is apt, and if there was that kind of evidence against Kavenaugh I think that the discussion would be very different.
It is said that an argument is what convinces reasonable men and a proof is what it takes to convince even an unreasonable man. - Alexander Vilenkin
If I am shown my error, I will be the first to throw my books into the fire. - Martin Luther
If I am shown my error, I will be the first to throw my books into the fire. - Martin Luther