Funny events in anti-woke world

[The Rogue Wolf]

That said, there is a silver lining

Cybertruck Owner Who Decried Taxes Mocked for Begging for Help as California Wildfire Threatens His Property

West Coast-based real estate mogul and Elon Musk fan Keith Wasserman, who has called for cutting property taxes, triggered a tidal wave of schadenfreude on social media after begging for "private firefighters" to come "protect our home" in the city. Los Angeles has been battling with several...

www.yahoo.com

View attachment 12609
View attachment 12610

"They were supposed to cut other people's vital services, not mine!"

 

[Agema]

I'm analyzing her testimony

I guess analysing badly and biasedly is still analysing of a sort, yes.

and while be interviewed about the event she suggested it wasn't rape because rape is sexy.

Given the linguistic somersaults you have performed to try to excuse things Trump has said, this sort of misrepresentation sticks out like a sore thumb. Never mind that it also demonstrates your abject hypocrisy for all the times you've pedantically criticised anyone else for not being word perfect.

She's got potential ulterior motives and a record of absurd statements to nuke her own credibility on top of the specific details of the claim that seem less than likely.

I love the way you hyperbolically write "nuke her own credibility", with no sense of context or reflection on the man she is accusing. Whatever her flaws, eccentricities, and inaccuracies, she's still more credible than Donald Trump.

Obviously, her superior credibility was critical to the case itself, with its limited evidential scope. However, you could look more widely at Trump's non-stop, decades-long dishonesty binge of fraud, cheating and lies. You appear on the one hand to be aware of this (even if as a grudging concession), and yet at the same time incapable of practically applying that to any "analysis".

 

[tstorm823]

I love the way you hyperbolically write "nuke her own credibility", with no sense of context or reflection on the man she is accusing. Whatever her flaws, eccentricities, and inaccuracies, she's still more credible than Donald Trump.

Obviously, her superior credibility was critical to the case itself, with its limited evidential scope. However, you could look more widely at Trump's non-stop, decades-long dishonesty binge of fraud, cheating and lies. You appear on the one hand to be aware of this (even if as a grudging concession), and yet at the same time incapable of practically applying that to any "analysis".

In this particular instance, and I think you will agree to this, Donald Trump's credibility should be irrelevant. If someone is accused of rape, their public image should not determine the verdict, nobody is so credible as to be incapable of great crimes, nor is anyone so problematic as to be inherently guilty of crimes. Cases do get decided by these things, but they really shouldn't.

The credibility of the accuser, on the other hand, is inherent to the case. If she seems credible, that is important, and it doesn't matter if he seems like a more reliable source, it's still a credible accusation. If she doesn't seem credible, that is a mark against the accusation, and it doesn't matter if he seems like a less reliable source, that's still reason to doubt her.