What, in your estimation, would constitute genuine evince as opposed to unfounded assertions? Every piece of evidence is an assertion to some extent. At what point does it rise to the level of prosecution worthy? Please give an example. Thank you.
[What, in your estimation, would constitute genuine evince as opposed to unfounded assertions? Every piece of evidence is an assertion to some extent. At what point does it rise to the level of prosecution worthy? Please give an example. Thank you.]
Evidence that secures a win instead of a loss at trial. Powell has sustained numerous losses in non-political cases, including the Arthur Andersen case I cited. Her entire career seems to consist of making excuses for why she lost. In the political arena, she has met her metier - finally, a venue where losing makes her a martyr instead of just another below average attorney. Best of all, her losses can be milked for contributions from people convinced that the best is yet to come for a latter day Joan of Arc. Problem with the comparison? Joan of Arc *won*.