More ad hominem attacks. This is how I know my arguments are valid.
If my arguments are speculation, RC can easily clear this up by disclosing at least the age range of the claimants, or if they are children or not. Or if there are any children making any claims at all.
How old the cases are tells us if “coverups” are going on now, or in the recent past. This is absolutely critical to the claims of RC, and they flatly say these alleged “mishandlings” are currenly happening. It will validate or invalidate their claims.
You are LYING if you say someone is covering up child sex abuse now, and then as evidence, cite Regan-era child abuse complaints.
Since then, government and organization policies have changed dramatically, and hence, no one can be judged for what happened in the 80s, based on modern day standards that simply did not exist back then.
As pointed out before, the habit of people like them are to cite outdated and replaced policies, and say they are current practice. That is done for the specific purpose of attempting to make old claims appear to reflect modern practice.