Interesting thread about whether Kavanaugh committed perjury w/r/t the files stolen from Senate Dems in the early 2000s. A criminal defense lawyer could make a very strong case against perjury, a charge that requires great precision. BUT... 1/ @gelbach @DavidLat @jadler1969https://twitter.com/gelbach/status/1038163689222889472 …
-
-
I don't understand this interpretation. The question was directed to him in 2006, long after it was clear that the information was improperly obtained. No one asked whether he knew it was improperly obtained. The question was whether he received it at all. He answered falsely.
-
We could quibble about whether he misunderstood the question (whether he understood the "memos" to be the same information he was sent in the e-mails we're now seeing, etc.), but that's not what you're saying here.
-
We could go back and forth endlessly in our parsing. At the end of the day, I don't think any case is clear enough to compel a Collins or Murkowski (or one of the three Dems in play) to vote against Kavanaugh. But this is just my guess; I might be wrong.
-
I'm not even making political point. I've been around block enough times to assume that none of this matters politically. But this particular answer is very troubling to me, in that he went out of his way to mislead. (Note that he wasn't even asked whether he received memos.)
-
I agree with
@imillhiser. If the docs had been handled normally, Kav could have tried to explain, perhaps as you suggest@DavidLat. To the extent this process is unfair to him b/c he can’t explain himself, that is the fault of the Rs, not the Ds. - 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
It’s entirely possible though that it might sound like splitting hairs because it’s splitting hairs.
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.