And don’t forget: what she says MIGHT be true, even though no one will ever be able to prove it…therefore we ALL MUST BELIEVE HER, even if it goes against any logic and undermines the concept of due process.
I think I’ll sue @Dr_Milker and claim that he poisoned my dog in 1993 when we were neighbors. I’ll make a very touching speech, explaining how he always hated my poor Turdy (my good old dog’s name) and poisoned him with meatballs while I was not at home. There will be some eyewitnesses, some of them claiming this thing clearly happened, some of them pointing out I’ve never lived near Dr Milker, and other will also suggest that in 1993 I didn’t own a dog…but people should believe me and my hurt feelings. Time to open a “In Memory of Turdy” GoFundMe account and let the shekels flow.
Fair’s fair, but again you’re the only person who’s been willing to admit it’s possible she’s telling the truth.
Nobody’s saying anybody HAS to believe anybody, but if you think it’s insane to blindly believe in all allegations then blindly dismissing them must be equally as insane, wouldn’t you think?
Of course, given what we know, it is possible. Even she doesn’t remember how she got there or how she got home, I wouldn’t dismiss it as I remember events that happened at parties a long time ago and couldn’t tell you how I got there or how I got back home or even the exact date.
Her testimony was convincing to some I know who are not at all politically minded.
Like I say, people have made conflicting statements, which have probably been made to the FBI as well. It’s my guess there will be further developments.
Weird qualifier. But I get it, I’ve noticed in my circle that her testimony was unconvincing to those I know who purchase used Trump underwear off the internet. It’s not my cup of tea, but I don’t fetish shame either.
Chelsea’s been big on leaving the kids of public figures alone. I think she says something every time something like this comes up, regardless of the politics involved.
Well if her plan is to continue her work as a professor, she indeed has nothing to gain from being in the forefront of American political mess, which makes her side of the story very convincing.
That is not necessarily true. CB Ford, the woman, may well conclude that her gain was to be an agent of a fellow citizen’s ruin last week, and in the future she will gain by having the American press ask her for comments in the wake of further #metoo shenanigans.
There are many other ways by which she may think she has gained, and not all are obvious (for example, I’m sure she’s very popular now in Palo Alto, CA, USA).
Sorry but such gain is completely worthless when she’s bound to become the enemy of the other half of the country. Imagine the level of harrassment she’d have to face in the coming months or even years, not to mention more extreme measures like death threats. The minus outweighs the gain by a country mile.
That is not necessarily true. You are judging her gain by your perception and value of it, not by hers. For example, I suspect that in Palo Alto becoming “the enemy of the other half of the country” is a feature, not a bug.
My point is that while I admit I don’t know that for sure, neither can you.
Well, what I’m trying to accomplish is to show you that nobody but CB Ford knows why she waited as long as she did, what she wanted to accomplish with her Congressional testimony, and what she perceives as her gain in its wake (if anything).
You think that she committed a selfless act. I say fine, that’s your opinion - but it’s impossible for you to know for sure.