May 2020 LSAT
Section 3
Question 16
Emil-Kunkin on May 21 at 09:47PM
You're right that in cases with no legitimate evidence presented, D wouldn't weaken (although in those cases we would likely have an independent reason to doubt the verdict), but that still weakens the argument by a lot. The conclusion is that in all instances of bluster we have reason to doubt the outcome. D tells us that this is untrue for a large subset of cases. A weakener does not need to completely kill the argument, just to make it weaker, which D does here.