设万维读者为首页 万维读者网 -- 全球华人的精神家园 广告服务 联系我们 关于万维
 
首  页 新  闻 论  坛 博  客 视  频 分类广告 购  物
搜索>> 发表日志 控制面板 个人相册 给我留言
帮助 退出
求真知的博客  
求真知其也可能乎?知不可而勉为其难。  
        http://blog.creaders.net/u/5661/ > 复制 > 收藏本页
网络日志正文
转贴:信不信由你:谁撒谎?! 2018-09-29 00:23:10

Every time Ford and Kavanaugh dodged a question, in one chart

There was a striking difference in style — and substance.

By 


There were several noticeable differences between the Senate testimony of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and the woman accusing him of sexual assault, Christine Blasey Ford.

The most obvious was the tone each took. Ford was polite and quiet in recounting her accusation against Kavanaugh; he was angry and loud in his denials of the allegations against him.

Beyond the style of their testimonies, there was a striking difference in the content of their words. Both Ford and Kavanaugh fielded questions from senators and the prosecutor hired by Republicans, Rachel Mitchell.

But only Ford made an effort to answer every single question.

Kavanaugh actively dodged questions. He often repeated the same non-answer over and over. Other times, he insisted on answering a question with “context” — which inevitably was a long story about his childhood — but never actually answered the question.

We went through the transcript of the hearing and noted every single time a question was asked of Ford and Kavanaugh. (We didn’t include the times a questioner didn’t ask an explicit question.) Then we noted every instance in which answered the question or said they didn’t know the answer — and we also noted every time they either refused to answer or gave an answer that didn’t address the question. Here are the results:

(点击任何线条可以看到详细的问和答)




浏览(788) (3) 评论(11)
发表评论
文章评论
作者:求真知 回复 牛仔 留言时间:2018-09-30 21:06:26

欢迎牛仔兄光临。

我倒有兴趣看他会不会来回应?

其实我已经对他的胡搅蛮缠作过不再回应的声明了。

回复 | 0
作者:牛仔 回复 求真知 留言时间:2018-09-30 20:44:16

博主,你贴这段英文,假郭看不懂。呵呵。

回复 | 0
作者:求真知 留言时间:2018-09-30 10:35:08
Brett Kavanaugh Said Blasey’s Friend ‘Refuted’ Her Testimony. She Didn’t.Leland Keyser said she believed Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.

By Paul Blumenthal

Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh is backing up his denial of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s claims of sexual assault by using a friend of Blasey’s who was allegedly present at the 1982 gathering where the incident occurred. The problem with Kavanaugh’s insistence that this letter is exculpatory is that it is not true.

Leyland Keyser sent a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee on Sept. 22 stating that she did not remember any gathering that matched the one Blasey described as the place where Kavanaugh and Mark Judge allegedly shoved her into a room and sexually assaulted her. “Simply put, Ms. Keyser does not know Mr. Kavanaugh and she has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford,” the letter from Keyser’s lawyer to the committee reads.

But Keyser also personally told the Washington Post that, while she cannot remember the gathering taking place or having met Kavanaugh, she believes Blasey’s testimony. This did not stop Kavanaugh and Republicans from twisting Keyser’s statements that she can’t remember into an exonerating statement that implies the events never happened at all.

回复 | 0
作者:gmuoruo 留言时间:2018-09-30 00:15:34

福特提到的最重要的证人是自己的好朋友。她在精神上支持福特,但都否认参加过那个party,甚至否认认识Kavanaugh。

土共同志们还在这里学左媒的舌。

回复 | 0
作者:求真知 回复 西岸 留言时间:2018-09-29 19:45:14

欢迎西大侠光临。

完全同意。

他可能还有点“超常”表演,就是控制不住自己的情绪,居然反问提问者:你喜不喜欢啤酒?你有没有喝醉过?这个一定在排演时重点提醒过的。

回复 | 0
作者:西岸 留言时间:2018-09-29 18:35:49

如果对比卡瓦纳的回答和川普最近的这次记者招待会,可以很容易看出具有极大的相同性。

都是没有回答问题,都是采取不让提问者说完话的方式,都是一旦开口就是长篇大论谈不直接与问题相关的内容,都是上纲上线到党派政治的做法,也就是完全是同一个模式。

换句话讲,两人都是同一个人或者同一种思维coach出来的。按照白宫记者团成员的解释,卡瓦纳在白宫进行过几次模拟作证,共和党有三个参议员参加,模仿民主党议员的提问方式和内容,白宫有专人指导(川普是否参加不知道)。

因为卡瓦纳也好,川普也好,参院多数党领袖奥康诺也好,都是认为这个任命是很直接很简单的事情,因为共和党在控制参院后修改了大法官任命规则,不再需要60票的超级多数,而是51票的简单多数就行了,而共和党参议员有51个,只要反水的不超过两个,这个法官任命就是一定会通过。

所以在卡瓦纳的作证中不难看出他那种entitled的心态,根本就不把民主党们当干部,上来就是一副老子的好事被你们搅了,老子委屈死了,你们混蛋的姿态。

尤其是关于FBI调查问题上,一致回避直接回答,而是把责任推到法律委员会头上。因为他认为共和党控制的参议员法律委员会不可能接受福特要求的FBI介入调查的要求,因此这样说很保险,自己不用负责。

没想到的是法律委员会在最后一刻达成了FBI调查的结论。

而从他dodged这个问题的角度看,他害怕这件事发生,因为很可能证明他撒谎了,尤其是在喝醉酒失去神志的事情上,如果证明,他就是犯罪。按照FBI一向的做法,就是会从背景调查转为犯罪调查,他将会失去一切,不仅仅是大法官的位置。

回复 | 0
作者:求真知 留言时间:2018-09-29 10:22:55

欢迎各位光临。

一般说,回避问题不等于撒谎,但是在这种情形下,一再回避,答非所问,那就再无可辩的了。

看看川普态度的转变,最好在发表意见时稍微保留一点,以免话出难追。

回复 | 0
作者:liucarl 留言时间:2018-09-29 07:52:08

另外只看回答,不看问题也是不行的。你要知道福特那部分所有republican senator都不问问题了,哪像民主党那么刁难?

回复 | 0
作者:gmuoruo 留言时间:2018-09-29 07:35:45

你真地有看么?

你若看了各自的第一个问答,就不会只抄标题,而是知道谁撒了谎,还被证明撒谎了,被证明了还不知。

回复 | 0
作者:马甲 留言时间:2018-09-29 07:13:24

如果教授同意催眠,就简单了,不过催眠中可能会暴露很多其它不相干的隐私。

回复 | 1
作者:Madhatter 留言时间:2018-09-29 06:37:48

川普不傻,听过之后命令调查。看来,大法官的事基本黄了,如果没有奇迹发生

回复 | 0
 
关于本站 | 广告服务 | 联系我们 | 招聘信息 | 网站导航 | 隐私保护
Copyright (C) 1998-2017. CyberMedia Network /Creaders.NET. All Rights Reserved.