I commend @DavidLat for getting to the heart of the matter: how you feel about #Kavanaugh depends in part on your view of whether he had a duty to be candid. http://www.legalethicsforum.com/blog/2018/09/kavanaugh-and-the-duty-of-candor.html …https://twitter.com/DavidLat/status/1038630129025646593 …
-
-
Replying to @ProfMarkovic @DavidLat
wait, one can fail to be candid and also not mislead, right?
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
A bit more seriously, your question does remind me of a case in which the sellers of a house didn’t tell the buyers that the house they were buying was haunted. The defense: “it’s not like we told them it wasn’t haunted!” Defense didn’t work.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
the idea that the burden is solely on the questioners—here, apparently, the senators of the opposing party—is deeply cynical. and not obviously consistent with other competing duties, those of sitting judges and licensed lawyers—rather than political hacks.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes
I prefer to call it "realistic" rather than "cynical." You see the same conduct from both sides at hearings: "gotcha" tactics by senators, evasive/minimalist responses by nominees (and these behaviors reinforce each other). I do wish things were different.
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.