Isn't it true that the testimony of Dr. Ford was simply a baseless allegation? - 1

Isn't it true that the testimony of Dr. Ford was simply a baseless allegation?

We don't know without a complete investigation unfettered by politicians. The fact that they hobbled the investigation tells us that Republicans knew something and just pulled off a major coverup.

We don't know since there were no witnesses

She can't even state where she was, how she got there, how she got home etc. The only thing she can say is that it was Kavanaugh. There's a pic from years ago and she is with Soros… The whole thing was DIRTY!

No

I think it's more accurate to simply say there was no evidence to back it up.

That is correct. Not even enough to get a search warrant.

No. Nobody knows the truth about her allegation, except her, Kavanaugh and God. And the latter two are not talking.

She has an accusation that has insufficient evidence to make it worth pursuing.

It gets a bit dodgy when the people she named as witnesses have no idea what she's talking about.

At best, it is unproven and what testimonial evidence was offered supported the accused's denial.

It is hardly sufficient to derail the Senate approval of a Supreme Court nominee.

Mark Judge did it and acted alone. But his association with Kavanaugh was too good for political opportunists to pass up.

I wouldn't call it baseless; however, I do think it's fair to say that the base on which Dr. Ford presents her allegation is weak.

I do think that the therapist's notes from 2012 can serve as a base, albeit a flimsy one. While she fails to mention Justice Kavanaugh by name, I think it is strong enough to suggest that a sexual assault did happen to her. Perhaps it's strong enough to launch an investigation, but on it's own it is far too weak to convict Kavanaugh. Granted, this is a hearing and not a trial, but presumption of innocence should not be dismissed by something that can't conclusively state whether or not an event even happened in the first place (and just on whether or not there was an assailant, not whether or not it was Brett Kavanaugh).

A lot of people are using the reputation of Dr. Ford and the idea that women do not lie about sexual assault (at least, not often) to support the legitimacy of these allegations. I think that's good to use when taking her seriously; however, that's also something flimsy to rely on in terms of uncritically believing criminal allegations. People lie, and women are no exception to that rule. Besides, Justice Kavanaugh had a good reputation too, and a rather spotless record prior to these confirmation hearings. I think this can also be used to say that we shouldn't regard the allegations as baseless… But we really should have more to go off of than just the idea that she's probably not lying.