The Bret thing
What did he lie repeatedly about? I must have missed that? (I check BBC news frequently)
I'm also a bit wary of "credibly" - I don't think we'll ever know in this case, it was too long ago and has become political - I would have gone with "accused".
The first question is entirely serious, I don't remember anything about him caught in a lie and I check BBC news ... gotta be at least 3 times a day.
As for the second bit, that's nothing to do with this case, in general "credible" in a "he said she said" type thing is *VERY* difficult, and I really hate how polar things are these days this is not something I have a stance on (UK here, it's 3000-5000 miles away!)
The court of public opinion is getting silly now (again not this thing) with anger and counter-anger and counter-counter-anger ect ect ....
Lastly (to try and stave off those downvotes!) literally incredible means "not credible" - what would be incredible here? By being "not incredible" we get credible? Maybe I'm just wary after a crazy girl when I was in sixth form...