You are correct, but you’re also assuming they testified truthfully.

The reason I brought up Kavanaugh is because he had gone his whole life unaccused, then suddenly one accuser showed up, then several, all accusing the same things.

It could be interpreted as establishing Kavanaugh’s patterns, OR it could be interpreted as establishing a pattern by which the enemy fires his slings and arrows once someone dares to stand against him. We could, and did, look at E. Jean Carroll the same way, or the two women bringing the baby before Solomon. Not all accusers are telling the truth.

“Thou shalt not bear false witness.”

I have not looked deeply into the Cosby case’s evidence, feel free to present specifics, but at a summary level of the cases, tens of accusers all coming forward all at once decades after the fact, against a person who had never been known for anything of negative reputation, absolutely screams “sketchy!”

It’s all but certain that Michael Jackson was fighting against child abuse, yet the media accused him for years of being a pedophile child molester.

Think “mirror”.

Hillary Clinton ran “child safety” services in Haiti. We suspect she literally ate them.

Michael Jackson created the Neverland ranch as a safe haven for abused children. The media said he was molesting them there.

In both cases we have some actuals, we have what they said they were doing, and we have what the media said happened, and in both cases, we do not know for certain what actually happened. Discernment and logical thinking are key, but it’s odd how they accuse the one and cover for all the others, isn’t it? “Gosh, maybe Epstein was actually rescuing children and the Clintons were both falsely accused and are just loving people standing against the hateful republicans who all want to be tyrants by demanding sovereignty.”

None of their connections hold up to scrutiny. There are always logical gaps between their claims.