Unabogie
Philosopher
It's not a media report, it's an article/essay/whatever by Alan Dershowtiz.
I highlighted the parts about the media source in your claim. Seems like an important aspect. Why is it an aspect at all when the primary source is Alan Dershowitz ? Please explain.
So, you are not calling Dershowtiz a liar, you just don't believe what he says ? Or, the person who told Dershowitz that this all happened is the liar, because they thought lying to him would advance their career. Hmm. Lots of theories to consider.
http://articles.orlandosentinel.com...lan-dershowitz-murder-charge-sanford-shooting
Asked about the Newsmax column today, a Corey spokeswoman said "we're not going to comment about that."
Dershowitz's post doesn't say when exactly Corey's call occurred. A Harvard Law School spokeswoman didn't immediately return a call seeking comment.
So, a non-denial. If it was all horrendous lies, why not deny it ?
Wait, so no comment from any of the sources means it's true?
I'm also curious why Dershowitz or the editors at NewsMax also didn't try and contact Corey or Harvard to verify that this call took place before making the accusation? Wouldn't a normal news organization do so?
Ah, but we're talking about NewsMax as if it's a real news org.
So in this case, we should default to believing that Corey ranted for 40 minutes to a stranger about suing Harvard until such time as she and Harvard take the time to deny the substance of the call or that the call took place?
I'll eagerly await this standard for other events in this case, like George defrauding the court. After all, no one here suggested waiting for George to have the opportunity to defend himself, right?