Weight depends on location. For example, you would weigh less on the moon.
I think you can. For example, I am 100% sure that Ethan Crumbley shot his classmates. (That doesn't mean I think he should be executed though).
If they get one "unimportant" fact wrong, then why should I trust the "important" facts?
"Harris has a consistent platform and refuses to flip-flop the second time she is asked about it"
It's not up to Congress, states decide how to run their elections.
If none of the facts need to be correct except that police pointed a gun at someone's head, why read the other 2000+ words in the article?
I don't think that said there is footage of him buying rope, they said there is evidence of him buying rope. That could be something like a credit card charge, eyewitness reports, etc.
he was close enough to the ground that at least his feet were touching
FWIW, he was found in a seated position
Tout creating clean energy jobs and training for them
In other words, do what HRC did.
"We are going to train you for different jobs" does not inspire as much optimism as you seem to think.
In all of those fringe cases, 12 people thought the person was guilty beyond any reasonable doubt. And beyond any reasonable doubt basically means 100% certainty (ie any doubt is unreasonable).
People who think it's ok to execute someone when guilt is "100% certain" are the people who designed the current system.