3. The shortest refutation of the NSA claim: read the last ten (10) paragraphs of this article by @Charlie_Savage of @NYTimes - which is a news article, not an opinion piece, from a publication that's far from pro-Kavanaugh. The End.https://nyti.ms/2Ctpfak
-
-
14. As already noted, Kavanaugh was not "read into" Stellarwind, and his signature does not appear in the ledger. His 2006 testimony was accurate; he did not see "docs about 'the president’s N.S.A. warrantless wiretapping program'" prior to the Times story.
Show this thread -
15. One other point, made by
@RajShah45 this week: the 2006 questions related to what docs Kavanaugh had seen "as staff secretary,” a role Kavanaugh didn't assume until 2003 - i.e., well after the 9/17/01 email and memo traffic.Show this thread -
16. What about Kavanaugh's latest testimony, in his
#SCOTUS confirmation hearings? This week,@SenatorLeahy posed different, more general questions.Show this thread -
17. This time around,
@SenatorLeahy pressed Kavanaugh "to say whether he had ever raised questions 'about the constitutional implications of a warrantless surveillance program' with Mr. Yoo in 2001," per@NYTimes.https://nyti.ms/2CtpfakShow this thread -
18. Kavanaugh said that "he could not 'rule anything out like that,' allowing that in the early days after [9/11], White House lawyers worked on many things before regular assignments were sorted out. But, he said, his answer in 2006 was about [Stellarwind]."
Show this thread -
19. So Kavanaugh's 2006 testimony was accurate; he didn't see Stellarwind docs because he wasn't authorized to do so. When asked a broader question this week about whether he had discussed surveillance more generally, he said he "couldn't rule it out."
Show this thread -
20. Far from constituting "perjury," Judge Brett Kavanaugh's testimony about NSA warrantless wiretapping/surveillance, in both 2006 and 2018, was truthful, accurate, and complete.
#SCOTUS#KavanaughHearings#KavanaughConfirmationHearingsShow 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.