I don’t think that someone not into airplanes mistaking “707” for “727” is going to kill this story.
seriously, that was my thought. Like I know what model jet I am flying on every time I get on board.
Agreed! The media won't even bring this up.
Is it just me or do the years keep changing? Wasn’t it 1989 then 1984 now 1979?
There is zero chance I would remember a plane from a commercial flight 30 years ago—so even that claimed level of detail us suspicious to me.
There is zero chance I would remember a plane from a commercial flight 30 years ago—so even that claimed level of detail us suspicious to me.
There is zero chance I would remember a plane from a commercial flight 30 years ago—so even that claimed level of detail us suspicious to me.
The fact that she even remembers the type of airplane 37 years later screams to me that she is liar. Indeed, I have flown on 10 different airplanes over the last 12 months, and while I can remember where I was flying to, I can only remember the airline for about half the flights, and I would be guessing if I tried ti recall the type of airplane. She's a liar.
A normal person wouldn’t put the type of plane used in their story because they wouldn’t know even if it were yesterday’s flight, let alone from 30 years ago. This was added to the story to make it more believable.
Yes, 707 vs 727 is a silly and dead-end way to debunk this. I couldn’t tell you the manufacturer or model of aircraft I flew last month, much less 30 years ago.
Seriously. This kind of ditz could easily have thought she flew on a B-52.
Fact Check/details are only used against repubs.
Dims skate with a “What difference does it make?”
That isn’t the entire point. The “testimony” is that her molester raised the armrest between the two seats. So far there is no corroboration that any first class configuration ever existed in which that was possible. I’ve never traveled first class air and, given the price difference, likely never will. But it would seem that the type of airplane, and probably the airline as well, would be relevant to an investigation of the armrest issue.It is one thing to claim that there was, some time in the distant past, an airline somewhere with movable armrests in first class. Disproving that could be close to “proving a negative.” But if the “testimony” contains specifics to make it more believable, they can be checked and, perhaps but not certainly, specifically disproven.
If I tell you that Donald Trump hit me with a 32 pound house bowling ball, don’t you think it might be relevant if somebody asked me to prove that some specific bowling alley somewhere, ever had a 32 pound bowling ball on offer? Is it credible to believe that Trump moved an immovable object (not to mention, did it publicly without attracting attention while acting abusively toward a woman)?