...As legal analysts we have a duty to at least try to be accurate in discussing the literal meaning of our laws and terminology. This type of attack is an appeal to the lowest common denominator in our public debate. It may drive ratings but it does harm to national dialogue.
-
-
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
virtually.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I assume that includes you
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
The big problem here is that there are no repercussions for such absurd and vile statements (or for poor use of English). 50 years ago, she would have been dismissed from a news program and would have faced some repercussions at Yale, regardless of the party of the president.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
She’s been leading that charge for 4 years now. How are you just noticing?
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
She meant that ‘literally.’ Does
@jack take her literally, because I do!#TwitterCensorship#BlatantTwitter#JackThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Wow, she’s a professor? That’s terrifying in itself.
-
And a very good reason for not allowing any of my children to ever apply for Yale.
- Show replies
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.