She was there to disrupt the hearing at a minimum…maybe something even more nefarious.
Read ThomasWictor's thread on Twatter…he lays out his theory in great detail.
While I generally agree with your assessment, I'd offer that the opposite effect has happened as well. The majority of women out there who have NOT had some trauma (which honestly is most of them), were appalled and revolted by the attacks on Kav. They see someone attacking their own husband and/or sons falsely, and it pisses them off.
I think the rebound affect will be net positive for the Repubs in the elections, TBH.
South Front Street. Memphis. After dark.
Not a good place to be, and I speak from experience.
It was all over the threads last night newfag…maybe find it yourself?
All good questions. I think it comes down to the fact that, yes, the questioner could have absolutely crucified her had she taken an adversarial stance if this were an actual trial. As you say, there are at least 50 inconsistencies in her story, revisions, timelines, facts, etc., but I think Dems would have seized on this and labeled it as an "attack on the poor victim". This was basically a national he-said, she-said with cameras rolling. A draw was all we were looking for, is my belief.
Consistent with earlier twatter rumors I recall as well (sorry, phonefagging no sauce atm)…especially the part about several Dems voting in favor of.