The moment she wrote the accusation to a politician in opposition to a candidate, she lost the fiction of anomymity. It is now up to her to prove the almost forty year old allegations. She is a “professor” so her job is not in jeopardy, and the first problem is the drunken state she was in. The second is how she remembers it was Judge Kavanaugh. The third is does she have any contemporary documentation. Those questions are how you get to a point at which you can ascertain whose story is closer to the truth. It is not a he said she said, but because of the timing, extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof. Or at least some proof.
DK
All that investigation should have been done by FBI and the political receipients of her letter.
The moment she wrote the accusation to a politician in opposition to a candidate, she lost the fiction of anomymity. It is now up to her to prove the almost forty year old allegations. She is a “professor” so her job is not in jeopardy, and the first problem is the drunken state she was in. The second is how she remembers it was Judge Kavanaugh. The third is does she have any contemporary documentation. Those questions are how you get to a point at which you can ascertain whose story is closer to the truth. It is not a he said she said, but because of the timing, extraordinary claims need extraordinary proof. Or at least some proof.
DK
**********************************************************
The real and only question is, who’s paying her to lie?