And you're forgetting how the meaning of "collecting on" has radically changed since 2001.
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel
Mieke Ooooooooyang 🎃 Retweeted David Lat
Yes, but I'm legit puzzled by what you mean by lying. Did you see this
@DavidLat thread explaining:https://twitter.com/DavidLat/status/1038195699513520129 …Mieke Ooooooooyang 🎃 added,
David LatVerified account @DavidLatTHREAD. "Perjury" claims against Judge Brett Kavanaugh re: NSA surveillance. 1. I've done long threads on claims that Kavanaugh "perjured" himself re: Pryor &#Memogate. This thread will be shorter.#SCOTUS#KavanaghHearing#KavanaughConfirmationHearingsShow this thread2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @MiekeEoyang @DavidLat
Yes. I reported the significance of that memo before this came out. I stand by it. Kavanaugh is telling the same lie Gonzales told, and everyone involved is playing games w/how BOTH torture and warrantless wiretapping were approved.
1 reply 7 retweets 11 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel @DavidLat
In Gonzales' case, he was personally involved with warrantless wiretapping & trying to strong arm Ashcroft. But Kavanaugh's in a different position. What do you mean by "lie" as applied to Kavanaugh? He's not in the same position as Gonzales.
2 replies 1 retweet 3 likes -
Replying to @MiekeEoyang @DavidLat
I think when I said "(it's less substantive for him, but still)" I made that point in the very first tweet in this thread. It's still using the same bullshit tactic. It remains bullshit, just not as significantly important as it was for Gonzales.
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel @DavidLat
Right, but reporters are writing that Kavanaugh lied about it, which is inaccurate. Based on what we know in the public record, he did not knowingly make a materially false statement in his testimony about the NSA surveillance program.
2 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
When *you* say he lied, but what you mean is that he's parsing finely to avoid having to answer for things others did in the Bush Administration about which he would have approved & defended ex post you give cover to people claiming a violation of 18 USC 1001.
2 replies 0 retweets 3 likes -
Which I trust you would agree on that particular question his answer doesn't rise to a statutory violation.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MiekeEoyang @DavidLat
In my post on how his response to allegedly learning he used stolen emails I said I think he avoided legal jeopardy with his lies (I might revisit that take on some topics, but not this one). But he did lie.
1 reply 2 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @emptywheel @DavidLat
Again, you keep using this word "lie." I do not think it means what you think it means. And as a legal analyst, I would encourage you to be specific when you throw around an accusation like that.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
I am. He lied. End sentence. He is, admittedly, a skilled liar. Which is not what I thought what we looked for in judges. But based on my (again, I keep saying this REPORTING, he lied.
-
-
Replying to @emptywheel @DavidLat
Did he lie about other things? probably. I think he is likely lying about not the Miranda memos. Do I think he doesn't meet the SCOTUS standard? Yes, keep him off the court. But on this narrow issue, based on how Leahy asked & the QFR was phrased, I don't see how its a lie.
0 replies 0 retweets 3 likesThanks. 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.