THREAD. An overarching thought on Judge Brett Kavanaugh & "perjury."
1. After analyzing the evidence in several lengthy threads, I believe the "perjury" claims against Kavanaugh lack merit. #SCOTUS #KavanaughHearings #KavanaughConfirmationHearings
-
Show this thread
-
2. But over the past few days, I've received many smart tweets expressing respectful and thoughtful disagreement with my views. I'm grateful for this feedback, and I'm sorry I can't respond to all of it individually.
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likesShow this thread -
3. Many of these responses, like my original analyses, take a deep dive into the evidence - reading transcripts more closely, parsing testimony more finely, and bringing up additional evidence. (Lawyers are especially good at this.)
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likesShow this thread -
4. I believe that Kavanaugh's defenders generally have the better of the argument - see my new threads from earlier today, in case you missed them - but even if his critics prevail on a point here or there, there's another issue.
1 reply 1 retweet 3 likesShow this thread -
5. If thousands of smart people around the nation look long and hard enough at anyone's testimony, especially a nominee who testified for dozens of hours at three hearings, they can find - or manufacture - what might look like errors in the testimony.
1 reply 2 retweets 6 likesShow this thread -
David Lat Retweeted Benjamin Wittes
6. The issue then becomes, as to any specific alleged error, is the mistake (a) significant and (b) intentional? Or is it, as
@BenjaminWittes puts it, "minor and inadvertent"?https://twitter.com/benjaminwittes/status/1038531832168554497 …David Lat added,
Benjamin WittesVerified account @benjaminwittesThere’s a far simpler explanation for Kavanaugh’s behavior: He believed his testimony in 2004 and 2006 to be truthful, and he told the truth as he understood it this time too—and that any errors are minor and inadvertent and not the result of trying to cover something up.Show this thread1 reply 1 retweet 3 likesShow this thread -
7. (This is why perjury has a "materiality" requirement. The supposedly false statement must have "a natural tendency to influence, or [be] capable of influencing, the decision of the decision-making body" in question.)http://bit.ly/2MfbY50
2 replies 1 retweet 2 likesShow this thread -
8. As I've explained at length, based on reviewing the testimonial and documentary evidence, I believe that Judge Kavanaugh has given truthful, accurate, and complete testimony, on all issues where his testimony has been questioned.
2 replies 3 retweets 7 likesShow this thread -
9. But even if one can identify SOME specific snippet of testimony that might be erroneous, and can further show that the defense of the testimony's correctness doesn't hold water, the alleged error must also clearly be (a) important and (b) deliberate.
1 reply 1 retweet 1 likeShow this thread
10. I respectfully submit that none of the alleged errors in Kavanaugh's testimony meet this standard - at least from the vantage point of a moderate U.S. senator who might cast the deciding vote on his nomination, as opposed to a partisan on either side.
-
-
11. Critics of Kavanaugh should focus on his jurisprudence, which liberals and progressives DO have legitimate reason to question, and refrain from attacks on his character, which are not warranted. .
#SCOTUS#KavanaughHearings#KavanaughConfirmationHearings7 replies 10 retweets 35 likesShow this threadThanks. 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.