"Serious Allegations"

Dumocrats talk about Kavanaugh having “serious allegations against him,” and that this, alone, should cause them to “bend over backward” to investigate (which they did, six times). One congressman even asked a newswoman, “Would you have preferred that she not come forward?” (The Kavanaugh case) My answer would be, no. I would have preferred she come forward with something besides her unsupported word to back up her allegations. Anybody can “allegate,” if he/she is not required to provide PROOF of his/her allegations. The same congressman asked that same newswoman, “Is it possible that three women, who have never met, would come up with allegations about the same thing? The answer is, yes, if somebody (the Dumocrat operatives) “beat the bushes” (which they did), even offering money under the table, for such allegations, with or without proof. And how do we know those three women had never met one another? In a world where “the seriousness of the allegation” means more than NO PROOF, we’re in big trouble. That means ANYBODY, who has a grudge against someone, can ruin his/her life with ease, just by coming out with an “allegation” of some evil act, even three or four decades later, with no proof required, to ruin his/her life. In the real world, allegations mean NOTHING, without some PROOF the thing alleged ever happened. (Just common sense)