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.
-
-
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 threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Weird. It’s almost like
@ElieNYC can’t look at things like this objectively. -
In fairness, none of us is totally objective; we all bring our own biases to the table. I try my best to try and view things objectively, but I acknowledge my own "priors."
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
By 2004 he knew the provenance of Miranda’s documents. To cover it up, he claimed under oath to never having RECEIVED them. That was a lie. He knew it was a lie. He said it anyway.
-
New conversation -
-
-
This argument leads to being sold a very fine bridge. It’s the duty of every professional to act ethically and be cognizant of being involved in any potentially unethical behavior. It being “common” is irrelevant. It shows a lack of due care at the very best.
-
No professional can afford to investigate every email or communication they receive.
-
No professional has to. Not even close. Assuming you are an ethical professional that works with other ethical people, when something comes across your desk that is “not like the others”, you can tell instantly, it trips alarms and raises questions which you have a duty to ask.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
So impressed with Kavanaugh. Incredibly sincere and thoughtful. Many Trump supporters are social liberals, and knew from the beginning Trump was a New Yorker, not a neocon conservative. Relieved Kavanaugh and his wife ran from White House on 9/11 vs. being in on the TREASON.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Is the an email asking where these came from? A person with integrity and honesty would ask where a democrat memo can from right? Or not-better angels is the DC norm? Sounds dubious.

Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I will give you the former, but to say he wouldn't have been able to put 2 and 2 together later on is bullshit. If he wasn't able to piece it together when it was a major national scandal & he had behind the scenes context, he's not smart enough to be on the Supreme Court.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Since "lying" requires knowledge, I think this turns on two things. 1. Did he even read these emails? Having done some work in D.C. I know someone in his position would get thousands of emails today. Could have easily fallen through the cracks. A reply would show he did.
-
2. How prominent was the Miranda issue during 2004 and 2006 hearings? Was it important enough for him to be expected to read through all his past emails on the subject to prep for his testimony? If a minor issue, not reasonable to expect that he would.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Seems to me there is a lot of evidence he VERY CAREFULLY AVOIDED having any knowledge of where this material came from, which isn't perjury but suggest poor ethics and criminal intent.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Your point only makes sense if you only focus on him knowing the documents were “stolen” that’s specifically not what he was asked in 2004pic.twitter.com/lYveiwzaal
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I'll buy he didnt know they were stolen when he received them but you're asking a lot when you argue he didn't lie in conformation hearings after the scandal had broken. You say "without the benefit of hindsight" a lot but he had that benefit at the hearings.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Excellent research. I admire the thoughtful and comprehensive effort put into this. The mere fact this topic is even discussed means Kavanaugh is OK with the "gray area" of ethics. We should be nowhere near a discussion like this.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
What about when he testified after Miranda’s actions were made public that he never received the stolen info? Hard to say he couldn’t have known by that point, right?
-
Point right over your head. They weren’t stolen to begin with
-
So, like, it’s not perjury because you asked me about “stolen” memos and these memos weren’t technically stolen, just taken without the permission or knowledge of the owner? Sure, Jan.
-
None of which was known..it was apparently a shared server. This is a big a reach as Russian collusion.
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.