You're doing the same thing he did.
Your side of this argument--not you but my looking at CBB's logic--has won me over. But that doesn't mean I'm not holding "our" side to the same standard.
You're making an assumption, and saying "Well it's logical to assume..."
Kinda like a Dan Rather "the facts are true, though the documents are not" excuse.
You don't know. Neither, alas, does CongressmanBillyBob.
Yep...I'm doing "research."
And to think I was just getting ready to post my breaking news, "Mrs. Alito's tears result of entering menopause during hearings".
Got scooped again.
It's pointless to argue that issue. But I will remind you that every single article about the incident claimed that Mrs. Alito left because of the Democrats' attacks on her husband. None of them mentioned Mary Jo Kopechne. And, at any rate, my problem wasn't with the assumptions in his article. He also assumed that Mrs. Alito had heard of Mary Jo through her husband which I saw no proof for. But that wasn't what I was arguing about. Mrs. Alito crying over Mary Jo was a complete LEAP, not just an assumption. It goes beyond assuming and lands in the realm of absurdity.