2. The #Memogate scandal involved allegedly stolen files from @SenJudiciary Democratic staff. I follow @jadler1969 in calling them "allegedly stolen" (http://bit.ly/2oOzNra ) because Republican ex-staffer Manuel Miranda was never criminally charged.
-
-
Show this thread
-
3. If you don't recall the
#Memogate scandal - I can't blame you, it dates back to 2001 - read@charlie_savage (https://nyti.ms/2CpkkHq ), or@jadler1969 (http://bit.ly/2oOzNra ), or@KimberlyRobinsn &@PatrickGregry (http://bit.ly/2NTwDNF ).Show this thread -
4. Another reason to put "stolen" in quotes is because no hacking took place. The files were on a shared server - Repubs could access Dem files, and vice versa - so the "stealing" was really exploiting a glitch. But legality aside, it was unethical and wrong.
Show this thread -
5. At his 2004 and 2006 confirmation hearings, and again this week, Judge Brett Kavanaugh testified that although he worked with Manny Miranda on judicial nominations, he (Kavanaugh) never knowingly received "stolen" files.
Show this thread -
6. Kavanaugh's critics, including
@SenatorLeahy, argue that Kavanaugh knew or should have known he was getting "stolen" files - and some, such as my@ATLblog colleague@ElieNYC, even assert that Kavanaugh perjured himself (http://bit.ly/2M2uOME ).Show this thread -
7. There's no evidence, in recently released emails or elsewhere, showing Kavanaugh had knowledge of Miranda's acts. To the contrary, Miranda told
@NYTimes &@WashingtonPost that Kavanaugh "had no knowledge." https://nyti.ms/2CpkkHq ,https://wapo.st/2wSXnHsShow this thread -
8. Lacking evidence, some have speculated Kavanaugh MUST have known.
@SenatorLeahy tweeted out several emails to support this claim. But if you view the individual emails, fairly and without applying hindsight, they don't quite get there.Show this thread -
9. Here's the worst email, subject line "spying," in which Miranda mentions "a friend who is a mole for us on the left." But far from proving Kavanaugh knew of theft, Email #1 suggests he was told the opposite: a Dem staffer was voluntarily sharing info.pic.twitter.com/3oGTcFre4r
Show this thread -
10. In the gossipy, intrigue-filled, often backstabbing worlds of Capitol Hill and D.C., having "moles" in different camps is common (cf.
@GameOfThrones). While some might view this as sleazy or unsavory, it's neither uncommon nor illegal.Show this thread -
11. Email #2 is even less incriminating. Miranda passes along info about what the
@SenJudiciary Dems are up to, but it sounds like it could easily have been gleaned through backchanneling, Capitol Hill gossip, etc.pic.twitter.com/2f8rrTqpUS
Show this thread -
12. The subject line says "highly confidential." As
@EdWhelanEPPC tweeted, "Leahy pretends that memo marked 'highly confidential' means that K must have known source. Because we all know that no one in D.C. overmarks things as confidential."pic.twitter.com/nyjaC8EGtB
Show this thread -
13. Email #3. Read it without the benefit of hindsight, i.e., not knowing about
#Memogate. Would YOU know from the face of this email that Republican@SenJudiciary staffers were improperly accessing Democratic staffers' files through a shared server?pic.twitter.com/XKGcrmdY6t
Show this thread -
14. Email #4. Yet again, there's no indication that this info was improperly obtained. With the benefit of hindsight, maybe Kavanaugh SHOULD have interrogated Miranda on how he got such detailed info - but that's a far cry from actual knowledge of theft.pic.twitter.com/5lCFedBxZC
Show this thread -
15. Email #5 from
@SenatorLeahy's Twitter feed, which makes much of the "not [for] distribution" subject line. But just because something is marked "not for distribution" doesn't mean it was stolen; it might be so marked for any number of reasons.pic.twitter.com/o61MPx3TGH
Show this thread -
16. Leahy's tweet also claims this email was "8 pages of material taken VERBATIM from my files." But how was Kavanaugh to have known that, since he didn't do the improper accessing? The memo simply presents the info as "Points they [Democrats] make."pic.twitter.com/HiIFrZFuW5
Show this thread -
17. This week, Judge Kavanaugh was asked about another email he received, containing a draft letter by
@SenJudiciary Democrats - but his response at the time, asking "Who signed this?", shows he didn't realize it was a draft.http://bit.ly/2Q8XiHHShow this thread -
18. I might have missed a few emails or new ones might emerge, but in each case, ask yourself: would a busy
@WhiteHouse lawyer, reading & responding to numerous emails a day on many different subjects, know from the email's face that it contained stolen info?Show this thread -
19. Would it have been great if Brett Kavanaugh had figured out what Manuel Miranda was doing and reported it to the authorities (as Kavanaugh testified he would have, if he had known)? Sure. But that's hindsight.
Show this thread -
20. There is no reason to believe Brett Kavanaugh knowingly received stolen information from the
#Memogate scandal - and no reason to believe he lied about it, in 2004, 2006, or 2018.#SCOTUS#KavanaughHearings#KavanaughConfirmationHearingsShow this thread -
P.S. I tweeted this correction earlier, but I'd like to add it to the thread for the record: as you can see from reading Email #1 (pasted again below), it came from not from Manny Miranda but from a different Senate staffer (Barbara Ledeen).pic.twitter.com/n96QLjckHX
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
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.