The problem with saying you believe her, but not any of the details she relates is that it goes against everything we know about survivors of traumas like this - they remember the attack and the attacker but generally, after decades, not the ancillary details.

To say that is to invent your own hypothesis of how memory in trauma works, and insist on that hypothesis in the face of considerable counterevidence.

It would be a lot more honest to say, “I want to vote for him, and voting for him requires that I not believe Dr. Ford, so I don’t believe Dr. Ford.”