07-22-2020, 09:15 AM
(07-22-2020, 12:59 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: If you're game, I'd like to engage in an interesting (to me at least) exercise. You are now Carlson's defense counsel, Fred. Please do your level best, as his defense attorney, to attack the allegations made against him as you would in court.
I don't have a clue where to begin. I don't know hardly anything about the evidence.
The one thing I DO NOT DO is try to paint every woman who ever made a sexual harrassment claim as a liar. And I don't play what I call the "Trump defense" where I claim it is impossible for him to be guilty of anything just because a lot of people don't like him. I know how good prosecutors will tear those apart.
Despite what many people think, just one unwanted advance is usually not enough to establish a "hostile work environment". But the problem Tucker faces is that he was in a position to effect her job opportunities and she alleges those were effected by her refusal. In cases where there is an implied quid pro quo of sex for job opportunities then just one declined advance is enough. So i would have to see the actual records of how often she was on his show before and after. if there is a big difference Tucker will have to come up with a good explanation.
Tuckers problem is that since he is a public figure he is really dealing with two separate trials, one in court and one in the media. Playing the victim of a media bias may work with his core supporters it won't do shit in court. But we are in the era when even people that get convicted in Courts are considered innocent by their followers. So maybe that is all Carlson is worried about.
