The Velvet Argument "proof" of it being a hoax is not persuasive, for all the reasons previously pointed out.
On the other hand, those who so willingly accept this as truth should realize what they are enabling. This is a newly-minted allegation of something that allegedly happened 34 years ago. It is impossible for any man to disprove this kind of allegation because it is far too old. There's no date, no flight number, nothing that would enable an accused to rebut the accusation. It is simply accepting the word of a woman none of us know, at a key point in a political campaign where the incentive to manufacture a false allegation is at its peak.
If we accept this kind of garbage rather than rejecting it out of hand as unverifiable and too-suspiciously timed, then we might as well roll up the carpets in terms of winning elections. It's just another variation of the Killian memos and Dan Rather's bogus hit piece of George Bush -- late manufactured garbage designed to make a quick emotional impact on voters, truth be damned. We cannot accept these kind of last-minute smears as true based on nothing more than the unverified, unverifiable word of someone none of us knew existed until this story.
Sorry, but it someone wants to be believed with this kind of accusation, then they can't wait until the closing weeks of a Presidential campaign to make it unless they have some kind of independent verification demonstrating that it is not a last-minute invention. That should be the response of most thinking conservatives and Republicans, but because the target is Trump, too many are hopping gleefully on this as proof that they "were right all along".
Something more important than Trump-bashing is at stake, and it is a shame more don't see that.
