Why was her questioning on the “personal stuff” effective? Sure it got press and notice but it was terrible, demagogic, innuendo filled and insinuating on no evident basis. It’s bizarre that she didn’t name a name but kept muttering insinuating asides. It was mala fide. 1/2
-
-
-
I don't support it as a normative matter. I was merely observing, as you also acknowledge, that it got press and social-media attention (which was
@KamalaHarris's main goal). -
Ok. But my own sense is that the clearly violative nature of those questions should be noted as prominently as noting their notoriety.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
There was never any question that he’d be confirmed barring the proverbial dead girl or live boy.
-
I generally agree; I just acknowledged the 10 percent chance of some bad response going viral.http://bit.ly/2oDg51n
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Re: 1, are you high?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
What is your definition of “magnificent”?
-
I guess “magnificent” is the new “disingenuous.”
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
He lies and non-answers his way through testimony, being completely disingenuous, and you label that as "magnificent"? Wtf, man?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Is “magnificent” an objective assessment? Certainly confirmation is not in doubt, but my sense is that if Leahy has the withheld documents then BK is caught lying. Now that may not matter to his supporters but that’s a litigator perspective.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
He stands accused of previously lying to the senate and having conversations about the president with his law firm. The first offense alone should disqualify him. The second could get him charged by mueller.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
He's a liar and doing so under oath means he's a CRIMINAL.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
A court wouldn’t allow it and would at a minimum admonish Harris about such weasily, patently unfair manner of questioning. 2/2
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Point 1: Sen Harris revealed him to be a liar but I guess in the lawyer-world that's a positive?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Well, sure, if you ignore all the lying.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Card-carrying Republican here. I've always found Senator Coons to be eminently sensible, which means I've probably cursed him in his next primary...
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
You're an idiot. Added, your article on David Whitehead is slanderous, mainly because several judges ruling against him, partners w/firm.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
All basically true.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.