You're not even trying to argue the matter. Instead, you just lapse into misogyny in the hopes that it will derail a discussion of the facts. I'm not going to play along. The facts matter to me. The facts are that a highly accomplished academic has claimed that Kavanaugh got drunk and tried to rape her when she was 15. She passed a polygraph. She has presented ample evidence to establish that her claim predates the nomination. And she provided strong testimony, with a hired-gun lawyer failing to find any holes in her claims. Does that mean she really was a victim of an assault by Kavanaugh? No. She could be a really high functioning sociopath who is just preternaturally skilled at lying. Neither of us knows for sure what happened in that room. We're both forced to guess based on what we know of the two people. That's what has led me to the guess that it really did happen. She comes across as highly credible. He comes across as a liar and an emotionally immature man (as well as a problem drinker, at the time). And his side is the one trying to avoid transparency -- they tried to prevent the testimony in the first place, and now they refuse to subpoena Judge and to have the FBI look into it. All things considered, I just find her story more plausible than his. Note, I'm not saying the same about the other two women who have made claims against him, so this isn't just a matter of me believing anything that's said against him for political reasons. The second woman's long delay in being able to identify the attacker is suspicious, and the third woman's story seems so extreme that I'm withholding judgment. At most, they tilt the balance only a bit. But Ford's claim is extremely strong. Now, check your own conscience and ask if you're judging each individually, on its merits, or just deciding you'll reject any claims against Kavanaugh because of the politics.
Blissfully wallowing in their own endless circle of stupidity like a brain dead douchebag.
