her, and for my ability to take her at her word... but that has not happened. Not a single person who knew her in the past, came forward to offer to tell their story of her bad character to the FBI... not a single one.
You don't know that. The statements made as part of the extended investigation were, and remain, sealed.
At least one person, her ex boyfriend, did actually come forward to say bad things about her character.
Media people will continue to investigate, and will publish things in the future. I'm not sure that's a good thing, but it will happen. We can judge more when we have more data.
Regardless, that's not really the point. The real point is that you have declared that she has no reason to lie, but that is a statement you cannot make based on the evidence available to you.
And, once again, you leave out the possibilities of mistakes or delusions.
Can you say the same thing about the 40+ people who came forward to tell the FBI about Kavanaugh; about his bad character and about how he lied to the Senate Judiciary Committee?
Perhaps if you knew Kavanaugh better (as those people clearly did), you might have a different opinion of him.
(see how that works?)
You seem to be suggesting that if he lied about anything, then she must be telling the truth about everything. If so, that's a fallacious statement. If not, I can't understand why you think his misleading statements about beer consumption are relevant to whether or not he assaulted Ms. Ford when they were in high school.
You are confusing an untruth with a lie. They are not necessarily the same thing.
Delusion is not a motivation to lie
Being mistaken is not a motivation to lie
You are right about one thing. I must not be getting how this works. To me, it seems like you are saying that she had no motivation for lying, therefore she is not lying, therefore what she says must be true. Do I understand your argument?
If so, there are several things wrong with it. First, you do not know her motivations, so your claim that she has no motivation to lie cannot be verified. Second, even if she is not lying, it does not mean that what she says is true.
Or, perhaps, what you are saying is that since Kavanaugh lied about one thing (beer, or yearbooks, or something), his statements about a different thing (assaulting Christine Blasey Ford) cannot be trusted. You are surely correct. They cannot be trusted. We must weigh those words against the available evidence, being skeptical about any protestations of innocence.
They have something to hide, e.g. one or more bad acts.
