15) Before I continue, please know that I express my own personal opinions only.
-
-
26) Also noteworthy is that she says “in the early 1980’s.” The grammar here is wrong - you would write “1980s” without the apostrophe.pic.twitter.com/WbJTVnlUZd
Show this thread -
27) Further, in the letters I have reviewed, emotional constituents are usually hyper-specific about their complaints — never vague. Logically, that is why they are writing to Congress: to remedy a wrong that is clear to them, but not others. So “early 1980’s” is not normal.pic.twitter.com/sOYc4sPf2G
Show this thread -
28) Here’s another odd thing. Why didn’t she put Kavanaugh’s name in the first line, eg “I am writing to express my concerns about Judge Brett Kavanaugh.”pic.twitter.com/wQbQFrfJun
Show this thread -
29) Why did the writer of the letter go to such pains to say: “I have not knowingly seen Kavanaugh since...” What does “knowingly” refer to? Was she drunk at other parties and can’t remember him?pic.twitter.com/olQ5FxRPwg
Show this thread -
30) “They” locked the door. Who is “they?” Which one? Both together?pic.twitter.com/HtZJWe56FH
Show this thread -
31) “a very drunken Judge said mixed words to Kavanaugh” — this is the writing of either an illiterate or someone for whom English is a second language. —“Very drunken”? She means “very drunk.” —“Mixed words?” She means “said contradictory things.”pic.twitter.com/t73djlNI7r
Show this thread -
32) This is not to offend people who don’t have good English skills or who are struggling to learn. Rather it is to point out that the letter does not reflect someone of Dr. Ford’s professional rank.
Show this thread -
33) The awkward English and poor grammar is interspersed with flowery language. “The two scrapped with each other,” for example. “I was able to take this opportune moment.”pic.twitter.com/N8OIUHWFIP
Show this thread -
34) Why does she refer to psychotherapy as “medical treatment?”pic.twitter.com/Ha4tpy8Gy7
Show this thread -
35) This person has been published in countless peer-reviewed journals. Doesn’t add up.
Show this thread -
36) Another example: The letter writer refers to the same bathroom twice, but the second mention makes it sound like it is a totally different bathroom.pic.twitter.com/Uqva0uwjls
Show this thread -
37) If she is married and published under her married name why is she using her maiden name?pic.twitter.com/FVOQqrqRyt
Show this thread -
38) Why doesn’t she refer to herself as “Dr.?” Where is her return address? Where is Feinstein’s address? Eshoo’s?pic.twitter.com/3fwyYctT1c
Show this thread -
39) The word “confidential” appears three times, once in bold. Where did Ford agree to have her name released again?pic.twitter.com/gfDgEPUu6J
Show this thread -
40) Shift in tense here: “It is upsetting” (present tense) but “I felt” (past tense). Again not PhD level writing or even basic business writing.pic.twitter.com/6t2V2nVU8f
Show this thread -
41) Where is the Privacy Release Form that would allow Feinstein to inquire on Ford’s behalf?
Show this thread -
-
43) Why did Ricki Seidman, a loyal Clinton and Obama operative, say. 20 days before the letter was written, “I expect a strategy will emerge” to counter Kavanaugh?https://dailycaller.com/2018/09/21/ricki-seidman-strategy-defeat-kavanaugh/ …
Show this thread -
44) Timeline: July 6, “I notified my local representative.” July 10, Seidman does interview predicting “strategy.” July 30–letter. Was it snail mailed or emailed? Faxed?
Show this thread -
45) This whole story just doesn’t add up. Starting with that very fake-sounding letter.
Show this thread -
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.