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.
The part where she was under duress. Even a signed confession is nullified by that, so saying she cannot be telling the truth because it took so long is also nullified.
Of course her statement still has to stand on its own merit, just like a false report "all those years ago" is disputed by its lack of merit.
So duress is not a valid reason? 🙄 Thank you for your genius insight. 🤭
Again: (because you seem to have skipped it) I'm not saying THESE women were under duress, they clearly were not (since their accusations are all probably fabricated anyhow). I'm saying there have been many real-life examples of men or women who withheld going to police for a very real fear of retaliation and/or meeting a stone wall of protection.
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?
The part where she was under duress. Even a signed confession is nullified by that, so saying she cannot be telling the truth because it took so long is also nullified.
Of course her statement still has to stand on its own merit, just like a false report "all those years ago" is disputed by its lack of merit.
You're an idiot.
So duress is not a valid reason? 🙄 Thank you for your genius insight. 🤭
Again: (because you seem to have skipped it) I'm not saying THESE women were under duress, they clearly were not (since their accusations are all probably fabricated anyhow). I'm saying there have been many real-life examples of men or women who withheld going to police for a very real fear of retaliation and/or meeting a stone wall of protection.