Crap like this from @EdWhelanEPPC is why presumptive "inside-the-mind-of-RBG" pieces like @NYTimesDowd's are no good:http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/418528/more-injudicious-ginsburg-ed-whelan …
-
-
@DraftRyan2016@EdWhelanEPPC@NYTimesDowd Her piece had some facts, which I'm glad were reported, but "inside-her-head" stuff was crap, too.Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
@chrisgeidner oh. Bc your original tweet says that the "crap like"@EdWhelanEPPC piece is *the* reason the@NYTimesDowd piece is no good -
@chrisgeidner sounded like your issue was with@EdWhelanEPPC piece & not@NYTimesDowd -
@DraftRyan2016@EdWhelanEPPC@NYTimesDowd Her opinion stuff in there was pointless; it is nefarious of Whelan to pretend it's fact. -
@chrisgeidner@DraftRyan2016@EdWhelanEPPC@NYTimesDowd heh. nefarious. simmer down, hoss. -
@MZHemingway@DraftRyan2016@EdWhelanEPPC@NYTimesDowd Yes, intentional misuse of a dumb column's claim to pretend that something is fact. -
@MZHemingway@DraftRyan2016@EdWhelanEPPC@NYTimesDowd ... in an attempt to undercut the authority of the Supreme Court.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
@chrisgeidner@EdWhelanEPPC confuses impartiality with judicial thought giving no effect to the timeline#Obergefell was prob decided May 1 - 1 more reply
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.