Biden for President?

Status
Not open for further replies.
wareyin said:
And possession of marijuana charges are equivalent to bouncing a check? Actually, now that it's getting legal in so many places they probably are. But back in the 90's they sure weren't.
Click to expand...
In the sense that both are statutory violations that can be vigorously prosecuted but in so many cases are of such minor consequence that a whole ecosystem of pre-trial alternatives exist, uh, yes.

Your totally baseless and unsupported assertion that they weren't seems just as valid as my finding such a scenario entirely plausible is.
 
wareyin said:
Are you denying that there was a court filing? Other than the already provided case number and paperwork, what would you accept?
Click to expand...
Filing charges for fraud and then dropping them is not exactly firm evidence.

Do you understand the concept of "leverage" in the context of legal negotiations? You're starting to reek of strategically feigned ignorance.
 
wareyin said:
Are you denying that there was a court filing? Other than the already provided case number and paperwork, what would you accept?
Click to expand...

What evidence do you think you have, and what do you think it proves? You're making the claim, post it.
 
Delphic Oracle said:
Filing charges for fraud and then dropping them is not exactly firm evidence.

Do you understand the concept of "leverage" in the context of legal negotiations? You're starting to reek of strategically feigned ignorance.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen anything definitively stating that they were dropped. All we have is the filing, and Reade not remembering anything about that through her lawyer.
 
wareyin said:
I haven't seen anything definitively stating that they were dropped. All we have is the filing, and Reade not remembering anything about that through her lawyer.
Click to expand...

You haven't heard anything definitely about anything other than a court file existed and was purged. We don't know what it said, what happened after, or how it was purged.

it's almost as if we know almost nothing.

And yet, you claim this is one more piece of the "she's not credible" pile.

How is this proof of her poor character?
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
You haven't heard anything definitely about anything other than a court file existed and was purged. We don't know what it said, what happened after, or how it was purged.

it's almost as if we know almost nothing.

And yet, you claim this is one more piece of the "she's not credible" pile.

How is this proof of her poor character?
Click to expand...

SuburbanTurkey looks at one piece of a 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle and argues that it doesn't show the picture on the front of the box. Therefore throw the whole puzzle out.
 
wareyin said:
SuburbanTurkey looks at one piece of a 1000 piece jigsaw puzzle and argues that it doesn't show the picture on the front of the box. Therefore throw the whole puzzle out.
Click to expand...

I'm just curious what your process is for casting judgement here.

Because you gave me hell when I speculated that a bad check diversion was the most likely explanation for how someone could have a purged record like this. Apparently I was going out on a limb without evidence to suggest that this very routine process was the likely explanation.

So i reeled in my speculation to keep to the facts. yet you will not do the same.

It's quite clear that, in areas where direct evidence is lacking, you will let your assumptions about Reade's bad character fill in the gaps.

Wareyin looks at a puzzle piece that doesn't fit where he/she thinks it should so busts out the scissors to make it fit.
 
Last edited:
wareyin said:
It sounds like we're both assuming she didn't claim that defense then, doesn't it? Can you come up with some way that she did claim it?
Click to expand...

What I'm not doing is assuming that she is guilty because she didn't mount a hearty legal defense. That is all on you.

Shall I take it that you don't know either?
Click to expand...

You like making assumptions. Why not make more?
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
...Ford's timing was equally inconvenient for Kavanaugh. I think it makes plenty of sense. If someone did that to me, I'd want to kick them where it hurts most. Nailing them to the cross when they are in the public spotlight makes perfect sense to me. I don't question Ford's motives for waiting decades. I don't question Reade's either.
Click to expand...
The way you ignore the facts as you fail to distinguish these scenarios -- you may as well be reacting to ink blots. The opposite of critical thinking.

By the way, I'm embarrased on your behalf for that not so clever trap. That will cause me to permanently look at your posts askance. Is ST tossing out bait again?
 
Dr. Keith said:
What I'm not doing is assuming that she is guilty because she didn't mount a hearty legal defense. That is all on you.



You like making assumptions. Why not make more?
Click to expand...

I must say, the second line right after the first where you make an assumption yourself is quite funny! Good job!
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
I'm just curious what your process is for casting judgement here.

Because you gave me hell when I speculated that a bad check diversion was the most likely explanation for how someone could have a purged record like this. Apparently I was going out on a limb without evidence to suggest that this very routine process was the likely explanation.
Click to expand...

If asking you to support your claims is giving you hell, why do you post here at all?

SuburbanTurkey said:
So i reeled in my speculation to keep to the facts. yet you will not do the same.

It's quite clear that, in areas where direct evidence is lacking, you will let your assumptions about Reade's bad character fill in the gaps.

Wareyin looks at a puzzle piece that doesn't fit where he/she thinks it should so busts out the scissors to make it fit.
Click to expand...

Even were we to assume that this check fraud court case was somehow a complete forgery by some nefarious twitter detective, how does it negate the thefts, the dishonest go-fund-me scam, etc? And since not even Reade or her lawyer dispute that there was a check fraud case, why is it not evidence?
 
wareyin said:
If asking you to support your claims is giving you hell, why do you post here at all?



Even were we to assume that this check fraud court case was somehow a complete forgery by some nefarious twitter detective, how does it negate the thefts, the dishonest go-fund-me scam, etc? And since not even Reade or her lawyer dispute that there was a check fraud case, why is it not evidence?
Click to expand...

The Tare Reade Gish Gallop, hard at work.

How many pages do we get to talk about the charity scam before you throw it back to the check fraud nonsense?

It's quite clear to me you aren't interested in determining if your check fraud smears are true.
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
The Tare Reade Gish Gallop, hard at work.

How many pages do we get to talk about the charity scam before you throw it back to the check fraud nonsense?

It's quite clear to me you aren't interested in determining if your check fraud smears are true.
Click to expand...

First you hyper-focus on casting doubt on one bit of one of the many instances. Then complain that there are too many instances. That way you can dismiss everything without actually refuting anything. If you're a creationist or 911 troofer.
 
wareyin said:
First you hyper-focus on casting doubt on one bit of one of the many instances. Then complain that there are too many instances. That way you can dismiss everything without actually refuting anything. If you're a creationist or 911 troofer.
Click to expand...

I've noticed that you are extremely willing to accept these negative stories about Reade at face value rather than actually demanding that claims be substantiated.

It's almost as if you have a strong confirmation bias for claims that are extremely negative towards Reade.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom