>Her own testimony has made her claim baseless.

That sentence doesn't even make sense.

> She offered no concrete date, time, location, or anything else.

I imagine more details will come from the hearing in a few days.

>It happened thirty years ago with no physical proof, no testimonies, no witnesses. Absolutely nothing. And that wasn't fishy enough

wait, what? What is fishy about the things you listed there? You wouldn't even expect any of that after just a week later.

>The need for physical evidence to prove guilt is the base of American law.

Absolutely wrong. You think they had security cameras and dna testing 100 years ago?

>The fact that I and others claim that she is a lying bitch has no bearing on that.

Where is your "physical evidence" to prove she is lying?

> I and others claim she is a lying bitch using this as a political tool too keep a man of a position offered to him by a president she hates

without evidence.