The article was a couple of thousand words that had nothing to do with her answer. Her memory was not suppress and recovered in therapy. The attack was something  that she lived with every day since it happened.

And yet, she can't remember when or where it happened..  Every day of her life.

Funny,  I recall exactly where I was and what I was doing when I heard that JFK had been shot.  And I was much younger, and bad as it was, it certainly was not as traumatic as being assaulted. Kinda like most important events in my life.  Details get a little more sketchy with each passing year for some..  But time, date, location?   Not too much.

May I ask,  were you this forgiving and supportive of the dozens of Clinton accusers?  BTW,  they did not appear on the eve of his election.

She probably had a mad crush on him and fabricated that "affection" he showed her.

She's got one huge emotional problem from VERY early in life. She was either rejected by all the boys she liked, or was molested by a family member or some other "superior" male throughout her childhood. Either way, she's reached the point of using that experience to gain attention and has turned quite evil.

Then again...there's the mind control games she's played for years.

The article was a couple of thousand words that had nothing to do with her answer. Her memory was not suppress and recovered in therapy. The attack was something  that she lived with every day since it happened.

And, of the people she named as being there, how many corroborated her testimony?  

Think of that fifteen year old girl traumatized like that.  Surely she told her parents?  If not, surely she told her friends?  A fifteen year old girl who told no one??

An isolated memory with no detail whatsoever?  No memory of when the party was?  No memory of whose house it was at?  No memory of how she got to the party?  No memory of who drove the little traumatized girl home?

Like you said Carl - she said, he said.  And what she has is a thirty-six year old memory that would simply be a fragment of what had to have happened.

And, that is enough to deny a man a seat on the SC?  And, that is enough to destroy a good family?

Only the Left thinks that way. 

the left does this for another major reason.....the abillity to kills thousands of babies. They cannot say it, cannot get around t but its true.

Yeah, as a scientist that also has studied alot of biology and medicine, when she responded this way, it seemed so over the top and contrived to give her the appearance of an unquestioned authority that it was obvious to me what was really going on. 

For a short period, I studied to be a meteorological consultant that testified about weather in court cases. NEVER, would such a person tell the underlying, science/physics of the meteorology..........unless they wanted to intentionally impress everybody and present themselves as knowing more than anybody else as an authority. 

In court cases, they want to know the documented facts. For instance, it snowed 4.3 inches on February 15, 1982 and the temperatures were below freezing, according to National Weather Service records from DTW airport, so we can assume that many roads were slippery from snow and ice that day.

To, instead, testify about the amount of positive vorticity advection and vertical lift which created the snow would be 100% intended to make the person testifying appear to be an expert.............not providing any factual evidence relevant to the case but instead baffling with bullshit.

If the snow fell the day after, February 16, 1982 and I got the days wrong by 1 day..........so that the day in question actually featured clear skies and dry roads, I can impress with scientific expertise until the cows come home but my documented facts can't substantiate the scenario that is being claimed. 

Ford has zero documentation of anything, not even the people who were supposedly there remember anything related to it that could corroborate. 

What really makes it bad, is when they take no evidence and try to make it look like there is evidence.............when its obvious there is no evidence.  Then you know that there is a deliberate attempt going to distort the truth. 

The claim that she could not come in right away because of her fear of flying, then we found out that she has a hobby of surfing and flies around the world to surf and also with her work was when I went from believing her to not believing her anymore.........and the bs just kept getting deeper. 

The flying excuse was clearly a verifiable  lie and delay tactic. 

so does this now mean, metmike, that you now agree this latest delay for yet another fbi investigation was total BS. Another contrived delay by the libs to destroy a good man and overly qualified Judge?

"And yet, she can't remember when or where it happened..  Every day of her life."

The CIA sure did a lousy job in setting up her story.

Not buying the CIA angle, but It was perfect for the mission.  Too many details means too many things can be disproved.  The only intent here was to cast doubt and delay.

One of the most disgusting displays of political gaming in my life. And there is a lot of competition.