But I feel like even if they feel in some conflicted sense, contrarily, there’s still an impulse to respond
Edit: i feel like this might be the basis behind when lawyers treat witnesses as hostile: make a bunch of claims that can be variably supported/assessed and you can get somewhat closer in the assurance that the witness at issue is going to have some feelings about the matter at hand
I don’t understand the point you’re trying to make. It seems like what you’re saying doesn’t follow the conversation logically. I think that’s why the other commenter asked if you’re ok.
But I feel like even if they feel in some conflicted sense, contrarily, there’s still an impulse to respond
Edit: i feel like this might be the basis behind when lawyers treat witnesses as hostile: make a bunch of claims that can be variably supported/assessed and you can get somewhat closer in the assurance that the witness at issue is going to have some feelings about the matter at hand
I don’t understand the point you’re trying to make. It seems like what you’re saying doesn’t follow the conversation logically. I think that’s why the other commenter asked if you’re ok.
Can you pinpoint where this “concern” began? I really can’t understanf although I maybe shouldn’t have commented on this particular branching off
deleted by creator