You’re going to have to close a lot of threads if “listening” is the new standard.
nevermind
I’m honestly curious to hear what certain posters think the 4chan thing shows. The documents shown, even if they aren’t doctored, seem to be corroborating her testimony not contradicting it.
What part of the 4chan stuff is so damning?
Serious answer: This is the hot topic of the week. Shutting down this thread will just send the discussion, such as it is, to one of the other threads. In fact, there is significant overlap already.
Maybe you could disallow discussion of 4chan as a cite (or using it as one in the first place.)
It’s informative to me. The source people use to cite something is extremely informative, actually. I didn’t know what 4chan was before this thread, now I do. That’s a good thing.
More news about Kavanaugh’s drinking:
Charles Ludington, a classmate and friend of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh at Yale, told the Washington Post that Kavanaugh was an “aggressive” drunk who once started a fight that landed a mutual friend in jail.
To be honest, it’s been allowed to fester so long, you might as well leave it open. The fact that people are seriously considering posts from 4chan is telling.
There’s only 4 or 5 days left in this sad, sordid process. Might as well leave it open for the conclusion.
Post of the Day.
Whether 4chan or the New York Times it is of little importance where the information is first made widely known. The idea of using public records to attempt to verify a part of any witness’ testimony in this matter is a reasonable approach. It may not be dispositive in an absolute sense, but it could help corroborate one part of Ford’s account.
Ed Whelan’s doppelganger idea was tossed but a few bits of his reasoning were a logical approach - try to identify the scene using physical features of the home as described by Ford. It’s not much to go on, but there is little else pointing at the location.
According to Ford there was at least one more person at the party whom she has been unable to name. Reports indicate that the named partygoers did not live in the immediate vicinity of the Country Club. Perhaps if the home could be identified that could lead to identifying this heretofore unidentified potential witness - possibly a resident of the home where the incident occurred?
This is what I’m asking about. The stuff on 4chan, even if it isn’t doctored, corroborates her testimony. What are people seeing that makes them think the opposite is true?
Your optimism is misplaced. If Jenny McHenny is found to have been at that party and she corroborates Christine Ford’s story, her corroboration will be embraced by the left as the support they’ve been waiting for, and denounced by the right as even more liberal lies.
I’d say nothing short of video evidence would matter, but I’m pretty sure even that wouldn’t.
It’s of critical importance. Information from the NYT’s in inherently more reliable than a message board. There is no vetting process to post on a message board - anyone can post anything. There is a vetting process before the NYT’s publishes a story. Thus, the information is much more likely to be reliable.
Am I missing something?
I want this spelled out too. Its supposed to be a big enough deal that it merits shooting people over, according to one poster. But I’m not getting why.
Why close the thread now? It seems like the truth is being revealed and the “technical objections” from the far right have slowed down, and in fact sound more absurd with each fact that is revealed. Sounds like a topic that is hot, with a lot of ignorance addressed.
The only difference locking this thread would make is that the same conversation would still take place in different threads. You are right, neither side is listening to the other. You can chase multiple threads, or eliminate one. Your circus, your monkeys.
Personally, I’ve purchased an old Jeep, and spent the last several weeks driving over stuff in the real world. Wheeeeee!
Looks like people are trying to get to the FBI to talk about kavanaughs behavior in High School and College and can’t get through.
I take exception to the idea that “both sides” are not listening to each other. I have heard what is being said here, and I’m on the left. What we have had is 100 pages of “technical objections” from the far right, totally tied to “momentary” conditions in an investigation. When a “condition” changes then the technical objections alter their form to 1) object to the current conditions as if it just happened; and 2) to deny the previous condition had any meaning or existed at all.
Saying that both sides do it isn’t enough these days with all due respect.
Au contraire, multiple people on the left have started threads trying very hard to listen to those on the right! It’s just that they seem to have very little to say that isn’t nonsense. I mean, holy shit, have you been reading this thread? Well, apparently not, by your own admission - maybe you should read at least some of it before launching right into both-sides-ism? 
Yes. You a conflating evidence with media source. Shooting the messenger as it were. 4chan can post a shit ton of crap but that doesn’t preclude a true post. The NYT can post stellar well sourced reporting but still occasionally badly misreport something. Get to Know the New Tax Code While Filling Out This Year's 1040 - The New York Times
Public records can be searched and verified by NYT reporters or by a 4chan poster. I am not arguing to simply take as true something posted on 4chan. But the idea of using a public record to help confirm or refute testimony is not a bad idea.
If you take the view that an investigation should be a search for the truth then it is no longer about supporting a particular side.