Would you attempt to discredit the testimony in front of the jury?
Of course you would.
---
Granted, if you were in that situation, the accused would be entitled to a presumption of innocence. Apparently that is not the case here, as we are not in a court of law, which means that the accused is not entitled to a presumption of innocence (this is merely a job interview). And, the accused is not really an accused but merely a job candidate. And, the accuser is merely providing a character reference for that job candidate. If that is the case, then why would the person providing the character reference be entitled to any deference at all, especially when that person has been caught in lies and admitted not knowing basic facts germane to the reference?
This is a political process, is it not? Politics is the way it is in this country right now. The Dems took the low road (and I dare say she knew what she was volunteering to do, although you could say that Feintein forced her), but they want Trump to take the high road. Obviously, he will not comply. So, the meanies can continue to call him mean.
Now, I agree with you that both sides should take the high road. But, when one side takes the low road, I just can't get too upset when the other side follows them there.