Sorry so just to be clear if it is uncorroborated against Fairfax it’s a non-story but if it’s uncorroborated against Kavanaugh we all get to call him a rapist and destroy his life, right?
Where "uncorroborated" = documented and described years before to others, who documented the conversations, and "destroy his life" = give him a lifetime seat to the Supreme Court on an almost party-line vote despite rampant perjury... cry me a river, Uncle Sam.
adjective: uncorroborated
not confirmed or supported by other evidence or information.
"the unreliability of uncorroborated confessions"What part of this is difficult to understand. Uncorroborated has a precise meaning and Blasey-Ford's testimony is literally exactly that definition. It is unsupported by any external evidence. Repeating the same story over time does not make an uncorroborated story a corroborated one. It does make it more believable.
Uncorroborated does not mean false. Uncorroborated doesn't even mean unbelievable.
It does mean that we can't take it at face value, at least in my opinion. I am applying this view consistently to Fairfax, and believe that he should not resign over this uncorroborated allegation.
I was, however, noting the rampant partisan hypocrisy on this forum with regard to the proper response to uncorroborated allegations.
And Democrats absolutely tried to destroy his life. That they failed, as you noted, on a party-line vote does not make it less of a hypocritical stance to take when it comes to Fairfax.
Poll
