Some of these pop culture references could've been twisted and contorted, and then layered with meaning specific to his jerkish little friend group. I agree that in aggregate he's painted a misrepresentative picture of himself, but litigating individual references seems crazy.
-
-
Show this thread
-
This lays out an extremely clear and persuasive case establishing Kavanaugh's pattern of deception. (I still don't think the case hinges on the precise meaning of in-group yearbook references, but that doesn't detract much at all from the core argument)https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/09/how-we-know-kavanaugh-is-lying …
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Not completely accurate. The slang terms like “boof” or “boff” were popular in movies like risky business in that era. They may evolve but like anything, you can place them in the period specifically
-
The meaning of inside jokes can vary by region, town, and even friend group. There’s no way to definitively conclude he was lying based on what we currently know. His complete disregard for civil liberties and deference to police is exponentially more concerning.
- 6 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
I think the fixation is because he lied under oath about what each of them meant, specifically, for him, in the context of his life at Georgetown Prep.
-
Given the multi-layeredness and inscrutability of inside jokes there’s no way to definitively prove he was lying. I agree he sought to misrepresent his overall early-life temperament, but pinning down outright lies based on 36-year-old references is close to impossible.
- 4 more replies
New conversation -
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
I see a way clear if we can just get him to read the Constitution as generously as he reads his yearbook.
-
Underrated comment.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
I'm 53. I know what those terms meant in 1983. So does Kavanaugh. Why lie about it in sworn testimony? Which leads to: why have those references in your yearbook in the first place?
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Wow - legitimate reasons to oppose him rather than focusing on he said she said events from high school??? Now that would be an interesting discussion worth listening too.
-
And yet, it is not the discussion we were treated to. Shame because Ben Sasse previewed that debate, and it would have at least been informative.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
Are you seriously arguing 'The Devils Triangle' is a drinking game 'inscrutable to outsiders'? ahahahahaha NO
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
There are many legitimate reasons to oppose him. They won't work. The idea that he is unappointable due to his previous drunken sexual assaults is a last resort. Sad but true. And yet, this man has only lied about his drinking and sexual history.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
He’s pro-war and surveillance Bushy. Disqualified.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
Yes, but if he's lying about trivial things why?
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.