The difficulty in trying to assess the behaviour of Democrats these days is thinking sufficiently low.  When I wrote about Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing in these virtual pages a couple of weeks ago, I predicted grandstanding from Cory ‘Spartacus’ Booker and Kamala Harris. I did not think low enough to suspect that the Democrats would help orchestrate a series of embarrassing outbursts from the NeverKavanaugh Left, but so it happened.

Nor did I expect the Democrats to orchestrate a last-minute allegation of sexual abuse dating from 35 years ago when Kavanaugh was 17 and in high school.  As all the world now knows, that happened too.

Christine Blasey Ford, a leftie psychology prof at Palo Alto University, claims that Kavanaugh and a high school friend, both drunk, accosted her at a party and dragged her into a bedroom. Kavanaugh, she claims in a Washington Post interview, ‘pinned her to a bed on her back and groped her over her clothes, grinding his body against hers.’ She tried to scream, but, she said,  Kavanaugh ‘put his hand over her mouth.’

When Kavanaugh’s friend (since identified as the writer Mark Judge) jumped onto the bed, they all tumbled off and she made her escape.

Ford appears to be a delicate plant. She claims that the alleged incident ‘derailed’ her life for ‘four or five years,’ contributing to ‘anxiety and post-traumatic stress disorder symptoms,’ and made it impossible for her to have ‘healthy relationships with men.’

There is a lot that Ford does not remember, including the year of the alleged assault, whose house it was, and many other details.  She first spoke about the alleged incident in 2012 — 30 years after it is supposed to have happened — when she was in couples therapy. The therapist’s notes contradict Ford’s account in several details, including how many people were supposed to have been involved.

So what do you think?  Mark Judge flatly denies the story. Kavanaugh did so as well. ‘I categorically and unequivocally deny this allegation. I did not do this back in high school or at any time.’

Everything we know about Kavanaugh — and we know a lot — suggests that he is telling the truth. Is there a more honourable, charitable, and public-spirited public servant padding about Washington today? If there is, I do not know him.

Kavanaugh has been through six — count ’em — FBI background investigations and none turned up this allegation. I suspect that, whatever traumas Ford claims to have experienced, none has damaged a rich fantasy life.

Sen. Chuck Grassley, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, cut to the chase when he said that it was ‘disturbing’ that ‘uncorroborated allegations from more than 35 years ago, during high school, would surface on the eve of the committee vote.’

Think the timing is significant? ‘It raises a lot of questions about Democrats’ tactics and motives,’ Grassley said, ‘to bring this to the rest of the committee’s attention only now rather than during these many steps along the way.’ Quite right.

Also correct was Grassley’s determination not to delay the Judiciary Committee’s vote, which is scheduled for September 20.  In my earlier column on Kavanaugh, I concluded that ‘the Republic will be enjoying the services of Justice Kavanaugh very soon.’ I continue to believe that is the case, though as I say the Democrats have descended to new lows in their determination to politicise the process of confirming Justices.  Probably, I should have expected it.  They tried the same thing when they wheeled out Anita Hill during the hearings on Clarence Thomas.  It didn’t work then and I don’t think it will work now, either.