notshocking
New Member
You'd think so, but Doug could easily say "Rob had a lot of people working on his campaign, and I obviously didn't know all of them closely. If I met Lisi, I certainly don't remember." It's not enough to say that something is likely with Doug, you have to have evidence that's clear as day, otherwise he'll find some way to weasel out.
I agree with this, but it's still worth bringing up. The sort of evasions and semantic exercises Slob and Thug specialise in might technically get them off the short-term hook of any specific question, but when they're so consistent and slippery over and over again, the pattern is unavoidable and any inclination to give them the benefit of the doubt fades fast. By all means, let's make them keep saying dubious things and operating in obvious bad faith.