Comparison of statements made at different periods frequently enable us to give maximal and minimal dates to the appearance of a cultural element or to assign the time limits to a movement of population.
We never fully grasp the import of any true statement until we have a clear notion of what the opposite untrue statement would be.
Folks really need to be very cautious about overanalyzing or overparsing what I've said to this reporter or that reporter.
Understanding that these statements do not represent reality, we should not be threatened by the language that he has used.
Oh, here's a clever one. Do you remember this question from the first test?It reads, 'What wrong with this statement?' And do you know what Constance wrote in reply? She wrote, 'What's wrong with you?
Sentences are not as such either true or false.
I would never say someone's else's film isn't 'a real film.' The quote is inaccurate.
A common and highly effective method for challenging a statement is to compare it to the previous statements of the witness for consistency and to compare it with the physical evidence.
