Hey I’ve got a new analogy. Suppose that there was a man who had a son who had a drug problem, was found to be behind on his taxes (which he eventually paid back) and at one point owned at lap top. What jobs should this man be deemed as unsuitable to hold from holding despite the fact that there is no tangible evidence of any sort that he himself actually did anything wrong. Should we, for example, suggest that he is unfit for the presidency because it might be that the international conspiracy]but by going states evidence to the CIA he had managed to get the charges reduced to tax crimes? Or would that be too partisan. What if the son had a gold tooth?
But seriously forget about Kavanaugh, he isn’t why you are being pitted. Answer the question Yes or No. Do you really believe that a woman can’t tell the difference between a drunken fall and the drunk trying to take their clothes off against their will?