The case against Brett Kavanaugh

From Discourse DB
Revision as of 23:23, December 28, 2018 by Yaron Koren (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Item |author=San Francisco Chronicle editorial board |source=San Francisco Chronicle |date=October 4, 2018 |url=")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is an opinion item.

Author(s) San Francisco Chronicle editorial board
Source San Francisco Chronicle
Date October 4, 2018
Quotes-start.png Kavanaugh was allegedly drunk during his encounters with Ford and Ramirez, and his defensive, I-like-beer testimony on the subject last week was one of several instances in which he seems to have been less than candid under oath. His earlier sworn testimony about his receipt of information stolen from Democratic senators when he served in President George W. Bush’s administration also strained credulity. So did his explanation of a series of coded references in his high school yearbook, a trivial matter that nonetheless underscored his readiness to lie to senators. Quotes-end.png

Add or change this opinion item's references

This item argues against the position Kavanaugh should be confirmed on the topic Brett Kavanaugh Supreme Court nomination.