3523: Gold Mine

[nordcharonmir]

Originally Posted by Bucho

You're on the right track.

Now read the New York Times article.

If you think because someone "heard" a story about the content of a private phone call between others that both parties say didn't happen...and wrote a salacious article for the clicks...Then I heard someone read a piece of paper that someone wrote that said Chemda had a call with Keith that said you shit your pants at Disneyland therefore IT IS NOW TRUTH you shit your pants at Disneyland irrespective that you say you didn't, no one including Chemda saw any proof of the shit in question and she specifically addresses this alleged call and says she never said that...what kinda reasoning is this?

[Bucho]

Originally Posted by nordcharonmir

If you think because someone "heard" a story about the content of a private phone call between others that both parties say didn't happen...and wrote a salacious article for the clicks...Then I heard someone read a piece of paper that someone wrote that said Chemda had a call with Keith that said you shit your pants at Disneyland therefore IT IS NOW TRUTH you shit your pants at Disneyland irrespective that you say you didn't, no one including Chemda saw any proof of the shit in question and she specifically addresses this alleged call and says she never said that...what kinda reasoning is this?

Don't take this the wrong way, but is your first language something other than English?

[nordcharonmir]

Originally Posted by Bucho

Don't take this the wrong way, but is your first language something other than English?

Yep

[Bucho]

Originally Posted by nordcharonmir

Yep

No crime in that, and your English is at least as proficient as Jesse Joyce's Espanyol.

So, to try to be more clear, are you saying, after reading the couple of (CK-affirmed) NYT paragraphs detailing Rebecca Corry's story, that you believe CK would've erroneously apologized for shoving Rebecca Corry in a bathroom even if he'd never shoved a woman (who was not Rebecca Corry) in a bathroom?

That Corry's notion - that CK had transgressed so many times that he'd lost track of exactly which transgressions he'd visited upon which women - holds no water?

[nordcharonmir]

Originally Posted by Bucho

So, to try to be more clear, are you saying, after reading the couple of (CK-affirmed) NYT paragraphs detailing Rebecca Corry's story, that you believe CK would've erroneously apologized for shoving Rebecca Corry in a bathroom even if he'd never shoved a woman (who was not Rebecca Corry) in a bathroom?

That Corry's notion - that CK had transgressed so many times that he'd lost track of exactly which transgressions he'd visited upon which women - holds no water?

I question if that part of the conversation happened since that seems odd. The whole multilevel game of hearsay telephone involved in all this then original info "sources" saying it didn't happen like that seems...odd to say the least.

If that really happened then fuck Louis, if it is a story of a story that was rumored to have been heard on a phone call between other people not involving the person who heard a story about the rumor which it sounds like is the case then that evidence chain just isn't good enough to say for sure.

[Bucho]

Originally Posted by nordcharonmir

I question if that part of the conversation happened since that seems odd.

CK says it happened.

Corry's not "the person who heard a story about the rumor". Corry's the person in the story. Corry's one of the five people who reported - not via any "multilevel game of hearsay telephone", but directly to the NYT - stories which CK himself says are true.

Corry's story - which CK himself says is true - is that CK phoned Corry and said he was sorry for shoving her in a bathroom. So, at the very least, we know CK admitted to apologizing for shoving a woman in a bathroom.

Which is exactly what I said three weeks/half a dozen posts ago.

[nordcharonmir]

Originally Posted by Bucho

CK says it happened.

Corry's not "the person who heard a story about the rumor". Corry's the person in the story. Corry's one of the five people who reported - not via any "multilevel game of hearsay telephone", but directly to the NYT - stories which CK himself says are true.

Corry's story - which CK himself says is true - is that CK phoned Corry and said he was sorry for shoving her in a bathroom. So, at the very least, we know CK admitted to apologizing for shoving a woman in a bathroom.

Which is exactly what I said three weeks/half a dozen posts ago.

I see what you're saying. No chance he was responding to the allegations of misconduct and not the allegation of the content of the phone call when he said it was true? Any chance he and she both have since multiple times agreed that that was not the content of that phone call?

[Keith]

Louis’ news album: Any Chance Tho?

[nordcharonmir]

Originally Posted by Keith

Louis’ news album: Any Chance Tho?

Any chance she even told a few people after the article's publishing that she didn't tell the reporter that was what was said on the call but had agreed to go along with it afterwards when she and the writer had discussed it again afterwards? What if it was the writer attributing to her a rumor they had heard but was unable to substantiate and she agreed to go along with it?

[Keith]

What if the woman is Louis and he’s teaching us all a lesson in believing what you read?