My logic is very straightforward.
I believe that video and sound recording of congress is 1) only sporadic; 2)requires a certain amount of skill to pull off; and, 3) is not financially possible at all times and in all places.
Therefore, it doesn't happen constantly and there are huge gaps in the record.
You believe; 1) that the recording goes on all the time, and that it goes on everyplace that congress as a whole or individuals or groups of congressmen go; 3) that there is high quality video and sound available of everything they do.
If your assumptions are correct, then there is a visual and sound record of everything that went on with the Cleaver party; that the detainment is on record; that it can be proven by examination of this record — which by your assumptions would suggest has to exist — whether or not the incident as described by the Cleaver party actually happened.
My assumptions would say that this may not be possible at all, that there could well be gaps in the record for very good reasons, as I have previously discussed.
Your assumptions say that the record has to exist. It must exist.
Therefore, your folks, Fox news, or their friends at The Right Wing Side of the demonstration must, according to your assumptions, have available records of this available. By looking through these records, it should be possible to prove that Congressman Cleaver is a lier, then, shouldn't it?
Not from my assumptions, Mike, from yours, since you insist that such a record exists.
So where is it, Mike?
If your assumptions are correct, all you have to do is produce enough continuous tape to cover that single party during that brief walk, right?
I say, it's likely that no such record exists. You say it does and that it must.
So show it. It'll quiet down the whole issue. It will still leave you with the other issues that Jennifer mentioned, which we can put aside for now, but this issue we shoiuld be able to put aside.
Produce this tape that you insist exists. Produce this high quality, news grade tape that you insist exists, and demonstate the superiority of your assumption here. Of course, you realize that for your assumption to prove true, every action of these people at all times has to be on tape, and that in order to prove mine, only occasional lapses need be proven.
But then, I didn't take the incredibly unlikely end of this proposition, Mike, Did I?
You're the one who insisted that all this stuff had to be on tape, opening you up to a demand that the tape be produced from the Fox folks who are presumably sure that such things happen because they MUST DO IT THEMSELVES, in order to make a sweeping assertion with any degree of certainty. Where is the Fox Tape? Where is the Tape from the TEA Party crowd?
I would say that such tape wouldn't necessarily exist, mind you, because I took the parrt of the proposition that seemed like a rational proposal.
You, on the other hand, took the position that was most unlikely and hardest to prove.
And you suggest I'm being irrational.
Look in your mirror, Friend, before you try to take the side of the proposal that has the smallest sign of logic to recommend it.