Woman who accused Supreme Court nominee refuses to give sworn testimony to congress

For those of you in college who don't have much time to follow the ghastly sh*tshow called politics (and I didn't either in college), a woman named Christine Blasey Ford has accused Brett Kavanaugh (nominated to US Supreme Court) of sexual misconduct 36 or so years ago, trying to bully the senate into voting not to confirm his nomination.

There are only about a thousand problems with this woman's story:  First, she didn't tell anyone at the time--not a family member or close friend or anyone--yet she now claims the "assault" was utterly traumatic. And by "assault," she claims a drunk Kavanaugh jumped on top of her in a bedroom at a party when she was 15.  A friend of Kavanaugh's then "tumbled into them" and rolled both off the bed.

That's it.  According to Ford no clothes came off, nothing else happened.  Ford can't remember whose party it was, whose house it was held at, who was there, or even what year it was.  Yet she claimed it was so traumatic that it "derailed her for four or five years."
So...VERY sketchy.  But senate republicans--understandably not wanting to be accused of not giving her a fair hearing for her serious accusations--have invited her to Washington to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee.  They gave her the choice of either a totally closed session, or one open to the public.

She now refuses to testify. But we're supposed to believe her, despite her refusal.

Here's the statement from one of Ford’s attorneys:

Dr. Ford was reluctantly thrust into the public spotlight only two days ago.

I'll BET reluctantly:  She wrote an anonymous letter to crazy fruitcake Diane Feinstein, hoping to torpedo Kavanaugh while staying totally anonymous.  Cuz justice, comrade.  She 

She is currently unable to go home, and is receiving ongoing threats to her and her family's safety. 

Really?  So I assume you've reported those "threats" and recorded 'em, right?  But that's odd--if you'd done that, the TV would have been replaying those threats 24/7, since the Lying Media is totes behind the Dems on this issue.

Fairness and respect for her situation dictate that she should have time to deal with this.  She continues to believe that a full non-partisan investigation of this matter is needed and she is willing to cooperate with the committee.

"And she is willing to cooperate with the committee," eh?  But just not willing to testify, even in a closed-door session.   Hmmm....  This must be a new definition of "cooperate."

However, the committe's stated plan to move forward with a hearing that has only two witneses is not a fair or good-faith investigation.  There are multiple witnesses whose names have appeared publicly and should be included in any proceeding..

The rush to a hearing is unnecessary and contrary to the committee discovering the truth. 

"The rush to a hearing," eh?  Let's see...the guy's nomination was announced months ago.  You had ages to come forward and make your case, but you waited til one week before the vote to confirm was scheduled.  So you waited til the last minute, and now complain that the senate wants to move forward.  Sounds like bullshit to me.

This whole thing is designed to keep the senate committee chasing shadows until after the election--because there are half a dozen Democrat senators up for re-election in states Trump won who are worried that if they vote to reject Kavanaugh, they won't get re-elected.   If the Dems can stall the vote until after the mid-terms, those senators can vote to reject without worrying about losing.

Brilliant.  And a classic bit of Democrat cunning..