- Joined
- Mar 27, 2019
What "sheer amount of stories"? What even qualifies as a "sheer amount"? Really, how many stories have to come up before the corpus of stories is to be believed, when none of the stories have real substantiation? We have three, and then a bunch of anonymous stories of dubious quality and even dubious severity in allegation that are now all but lost to the aether-- to say nothing of the dubiousness of the aforementioned three.
Have you ever had people outright make up stuff against you? Or have people spread rumors about you? Or perhaps you were the people who were responsible for those kind of things in grade school (whether you're still in grade school notwithstanding), so you can't recognize that a rumor is a rumor no matter how many people say it?
Let's take a recent event: the Projared scandal. Within hours of Heidi's response, of her just claiming she had proof of her ex-husband's misdeeds, not only were there many people jumping to her defense, there were many people sharing actual evidence of Jared's misdeeds. Chat logs, his secret Tumblr, his nudes.
That's the evidence being asked of you. And for nearly four months, you've produced nothing of the sort. The more allegations that come out against Vic, the more it becomes clear that you're asking us to believe he's Solid Snake for how stealthily can just assault people and have nobody notice it despite being an extremely photographed person.
Anybody can make something up. Hundreds of people can make something up-- more than that believe in a flat earth, and millions voted for... who they did in the 2016 elections. And you best believe that people can make things up when there's no impunity-- at this point, with an active lawsuit, until they have to be threatened by the fires of perjury, why should I care about the supposed "sheer number of stories"? And again, I ask, why does defense not include the personal accounts of their clients but are happy to allude to your thread, a now-defunct blog, and McConnell?
Have you ever had people outright make up stuff against you? Or have people spread rumors about you? Or perhaps you were the people who were responsible for those kind of things in grade school (whether you're still in grade school notwithstanding), so you can't recognize that a rumor is a rumor no matter how many people say it?
Let's take a recent event: the Projared scandal. Within hours of Heidi's response, of her just claiming she had proof of her ex-husband's misdeeds, not only were there many people jumping to her defense, there were many people sharing actual evidence of Jared's misdeeds. Chat logs, his secret Tumblr, his nudes.
That's the evidence being asked of you. And for nearly four months, you've produced nothing of the sort. The more allegations that come out against Vic, the more it becomes clear that you're asking us to believe he's Solid Snake for how stealthily can just assault people and have nobody notice it despite being an extremely photographed person.
Anybody can make something up. Hundreds of people can make something up-- more than that believe in a flat earth, and millions voted for... who they did in the 2016 elections. And you best believe that people can make things up when there's no impunity-- at this point, with an active lawsuit, until they have to be threatened by the fires of perjury, why should I care about the supposed "sheer number of stories"? And again, I ask, why does defense not include the personal accounts of their clients but are happy to allude to your thread, a now-defunct blog, and McConnell?
