I'd be inclined to give "some credit" if his name just hit the headlines for some reason. Like a guy runs for office for the first time & the woman then tells her (legitimate) story to stop him? She wouldn't have much reason to otherwise.
BUT!
Brand's been famous for YEARS now. This is a targeted fake attack. They'd have to have clear videos and a signed & notarized confession before I'll believe it.
I'd be inclined to give "some credit" if his name just hit the headlines for some reason. Like a guy runs for office for the first time & the woman then tells her (legitimate) story to stop him? She wouldn't have much reason to otherwise.
No. If it was real she should have brought it to light when it happened. That these women don't bring this stuff up until their target has garnered fame, money and influence tells us everything we need to know: She's a lying sack of shit and her accusations aren't real.
Well yes! That is the usual "default" for us deciding if it's real or not: was it told at the time?
Biden's accuser registered a complaint with 2 entities, iirc? Documented and verified. She told a half-dozen people or more, iirc.
Blasey Ford told... no one. Not one person. Her husband? Nope. Her BFF? Nope. Her therapist? Nope. Not a soul. Not even a diary entry.
But there's also women who've filed false claims too, so this isn't the sole arbiter of verification.
There's been women in the past (at least locally, like Peter Nygaard eh?) who stayed silent for fear of reprisal (for example) but came forward when he got into politics or when others accused him too. They could back their accounts up, usually, like one woman's doctor visit with pictures of her injuries.
So it is possible the event was real but the women stayed silent. Just not in this case, it's all people approached by leftist lawyers seeking a "victim" to go after him.
Every single allegation that takes this long to come out is false. No exceptions. This is just malicious lies designed to destroy a man.
I'd be inclined to give "some credit" if his name just hit the headlines for some reason. Like a guy runs for office for the first time & the woman then tells her (legitimate) story to stop him? She wouldn't have much reason to otherwise.
BUT! Brand's been famous for YEARS now. This is a targeted fake attack. They'd have to have clear videos and a signed & notarized confession before I'll believe it.
No. If it was real she should have brought it to light when it happened. That these women don't bring this stuff up until their target has garnered fame, money and influence tells us everything we need to know: She's a lying sack of shit and her accusations aren't real.
As I said: No exceptions.
Well yes! That is the usual "default" for us deciding if it's real or not: was it told at the time?
Biden's accuser registered a complaint with 2 entities, iirc? Documented and verified. She told a half-dozen people or more, iirc. Blasey Ford told... no one. Not one person. Her husband? Nope. Her BFF? Nope. Her therapist? Nope. Not a soul. Not even a diary entry.
But there's also women who've filed false claims too, so this isn't the sole arbiter of verification.
There's been women in the past (at least locally, like Peter Nygaard eh?) who stayed silent for fear of reprisal (for example) but came forward when he got into politics or when others accused him too. They could back their accounts up, usually, like one woman's doctor visit with pictures of her injuries.
So it is possible the event was real but the women stayed silent. Just not in this case, it's all people approached by leftist lawyers seeking a "victim" to go after him.
What part of "no exceptions" was ambiguous?