Tim Walz

[Clint45]

To recognize a persons own bias, replace the disliked character with a favored one, all things the same, and see if you'd still give it the same treatment.

If this article was about Donald Trump sleeping with minors, based on vague twitter innuendo from a comment, with hearsay'ed hearsay from a supposed witnesses uncle's brother who in a twitter comment said they saw'd it all....

Would you be saying to yourself, "Yup, Trump probably diddles kids".

I wouldn't.

Take it another way, there are legitimate cases and named people with circumstantial evidence that accuse Trump of rape.

Do you think those are credible or non credible? They are much more fleshed out than hindustan twitter comments, and actually have circumstantial testimony entered. There are cities that are very unwelcoming to Trump as well, which is far better documented. Hell there are restaurants that won't serve him or the VP candidate.

TLDR:
What, exactly, makes something "fairly credible"? Would you agree that the standard should be the same vs those you really like, and those you really dislike?

With all due respect, I've seen thousands of affidavits pertaining to sex crime investigations, and while it's certainly possible this "October surprise" could be a political PSYOP, but I have familiarity with those as well and this feels legit.

Also, I'm an apolitical Centrist whose primary concerns are child protection and border security, I am not a Trump supporter and am unbiased in that regard.

What I saw was vastly different from the wild allegation of a clearly unbalanced woman who had zero supporting evidence, not even circumstantial evidence, that Trump raped her in a shop dressing room... then laughed about his small penis and premature ejaculation, but could not recall the date, or even the year, this alleged assault occurred... then proceeded to receive tangible benefits (wealth and status) for dropping an obviously false accusation (which was never reported until 20+ years after the fact as Trump was running for political office).

But like I said, we need to wait and see if this matter actually goes before a court.