Because of this? You can't be serious. You cannot allow SCOTUS nominees to be derailed by accusations like this that are so incredibly dubious.
-
-
-
Because of a lot of things. Wrote an article about it.https://arcdigital.media/everyones-applying-the-wrong-standard-to-kavanaugh-s-nomination-9b5859209039?source=friends_link&sk=4973bf2f07aec042d2ede336c92a5dca …
-
It's not "more likely than not" when you have his sworn testimony against her unsworn testimony, a clear political motivation for lying (which is not to say she's lying but we should take note of possible motivations), no track record of Kavanaugh behaving this way, etc., etc.
-
There's more of a track record now than when I wrote the article.
-
What, the bogus Amy Chua stuff? This is a smear campaign and his critics are grasping at straws. He was not named in the therapists notes. Three other people she mentions say they know nothing about this. The weight of evidence is not as you describe.
-
Oh, you genuinely don't know. Okay, you're about an hour behind the news. There's a second accuser, from college, and a third line of accusation from Michael Avenatti. My argument is we can do better than a nominee clouded by personal integrity questions. Roberts, Alito, Gorsuch
-
Democrats can always create a cloud.
-
But sometimes it's easier for them than others, no?
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
I feel that Dems wouldn't be obstructing if the candidate were actually a good one. They played along on Gorsuch, without much drama. This is more about whether he's a good pick. Remember, Feinstein had the letter from Dr. Ford months ago, but couldn't release it.
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.