Probably best to not dig into the details too much since this thread isn't about that, but I personally absolutely understand why they characterized it as an "unhinged mob", given you had a very transparent attempt to fabricate a life-altering rape claim in order to hold up a nomination.
I watched every minute of the hearing, read the memo released by Rachel Mitchell (the lawyer hired by the Republicans to ask questions in their stead), and did a bunch of other research around the issue, and it became clear to me that the story was completely fabricated, given that even close friends of the accuser could not corroborate her story, let alone the party itself ever having existed, and Kavanaugh produced a (weirdly) meticulous calendar that showed that he wasn't in the area whatsoever.
Personally, I am a strong believer that sexual assault is a criminal matter. It's not the kind of thing you stay silent about for decades, having never stored any memorandums of the alleged crime (the therapist notes did not name Kavanaugh specifically and were relatively recent), and then try to spring on someone to prevent their appointment. If you really think someone is a rapist, you should try to put them in jail, not just stop them from taking a political position. (And yes, I understand that often victims do not want to bring up criminal charges and I understand why. But if you haven't documented any real evidence, trying to bring up an issue 3-4 decades later is just totally absurd. These are life-destroying claims being made here. Ford (the accuser) had NO EVIDENCE (the "therapist's notes" did not identify Kavanaugh, or go into any detail into the supposed act)).
Anyway, I've rambled enough. Sorry for the wall of text, but I really hate how so many friends of mine to this day still think Kavanaugh is a rapist without a shred of evidence; indeed, it's worse than that because all the evidence makes me personally feel that this was a case of outright deceit rather than false memory or a simple mixup. There were just too many contradictions and changes to the story and lack of detail where it really mattered to make the allegation even remotely credible, even if we use a "there's reasonable cause to believe he was a rapist" standard. That is to say that I don't think Blasey Ford met even an incredibly weak standard of evidence.
>[sexual assault is] not the kind of thing you stay silent about for decades, having never stored any memorandums of the alleged crime
I'm not going to get into any specifics about Kavanaugh, but this is flatly untrue. Plenty of people stay silent about being assaulted. One reason is people like you who will call them liars whenever they come forward.
No I understood your words. You misunderstand the damage your words could cause. There is little in the way of proof that could possibly exist for a 35+ year old rape. You are not only calling this woman a liar because she can't provide something that doesn't exist, but you are also saying she shouldn't even come forward unless she has enough proof to put this man in jail. That shows a total lack of knowledge of these type of crimes and a total lack of empathy towards the victims of these crimes. The end result is that people with your mindset continue to discourage victims from coming forward.
I am aware of that, thus why I immediately followed my statement up with this:
> And yes, I understand that often victims do not want to bring up criminal charges and I understand why. But if you haven't documented any real evidence, trying to bring up an issue 3-4 decades later is just totally absurd. These are life-destroying claims being made here. Ford (the accuser) had NO EVIDENCE
My point is, if you wait 30 years to come forward, you should have evidence. If you don’t have evidence then don’t expect someone to not be confirmed. Again this case was worse than no evidence because the “evidence” presented was mutually contradictory
> If you don’t have evidence then don’t expect someone to not be confirmed.
Basically everybody went into this process expecting Kav to be confirmed, since there is a long history of ignoring these sorts of claims.
"You shouldn't expect justice without evidence" and "people who come forward after decades are liars because nobody does that" are very very very different claims.
Karanaugh's interesting interpretation of the law is enough to give him a hard pass but he also lied under oath.