The votes Condidit missed were on a Thurs. immediately after Chandra's disapperance. These are the only votes Condidit had missed in years. That Thurs would have been a great time to "get rid of the body" or to do whatever else he had to do to clean up. No one else has suggested a connection with other Congressmen because they missed a vote, except you. You are the one that is using non-sequetor arguments and are not arguing from the facts. You are the one who looks silly here.
And has anyone, anyone at all, been able to place Condit at or near Levy's home at the time of her disappearance? Um, uh, NO!
Again, lets argue from the facts. The holes in Condidit's alibi timeline gives him ample opportunity to be at Chandra's apt or meet her somewhere. If he would fill in those blanks in the timeline it would go a long way to taking the heat off of himself.
I do not have anything against Fox. But when you devote most of your news time to speculation, including some hilarious innuendo ("Condit threw a garbage bag into a dumpster miles away from his home! Why? What was in it? (Psst! Do you think it may be because he is getting tired of having people constantly go through his garbage at home? We report. You decide.) ")
Again you are not arguing from the facts. The watchbox was not at his home, but in his office. All trash thrown out from the Congressmen's offices is disposed of in a secure way so there was no need for him to single this watchbox out and drive miles away to dispose of it. The watch from this watchbox was an expensive gift from a previous girlfriend who he was having an affair with. Now, if he had given this watch to Chandra and the watch was found on her if they found the body then it strengthens his connection with her.
See how silly it sounds when you're not arguing from the facts.
Chandra and her parents are who I feel sorry for.
And? So what? During my senior year in high school, I missed ONE day. Does that mean I was out doing something criminal?
That Thurs would have been a great time to "get rid of the body" or to do whatever else he had to do to clean up.
Speculation. Not fact.
No one else has suggested a connection with other Congressmen because they missed a vote, except you.
I was merely illustrating how absurd your accusation is. What you are saying is: Condit missed a few votes, therefore, he is responsible for the disappearance of Chandra Levy. I do not care what you may want to call that, but I see it for what it is, a Grand Canyon-sized leap in logic.
Again, lets argue from the facts. The holes in Condidit's alibi timeline gives him ample opportunity to be at Chandra's apt or meet her somewhere.
FACT: A packed suitcase, among other items, were found in her apartment.
Again you are not arguing from the facts. The watchbox was not at his home, but in his office. All trash thrown out from the Congressmen's offices is disposed of in a secure way so there was no need for him to single this watchbox out and drive miles away to dispose of it. The watch from this watchbox was an expensive gift from a previous girlfriend who he was having an affair with.
And you just answered your own question.
My question is: Why have a journalist follow Condit in a way that suggests he was being kept under some kind of suveillance? Why make a big deal out of something that was nothing?
Now, if he had given this watch to Chandra and the watch was found on her if they found the body then it strengthens his connection with her.
And yet, it was not, making your point speculative, again, and moot.
You know, before you start accusing people of not arguing from facts I think you should give yourself a good, long look in the mirror, cowboy.