As Twitchy readers know, Josh Hawley put together a quite frankly terrifying thread about Biden’s SCOTUS pick, Ketanji Brown Jackson, and her history of going easy on sex offenders. He actually pointed out that she would let ‘child porn offenders’ off the hook, and highlighted several cases where this was her ruling.
You’d think if Hawley’s accusations were out of line they would just claim he was wrong, with a simple, ‘No, this is incorrect’ sort of response. Instead, they called his thread toxic, got pretty snippy, and claimed he cherry-picked cases. When you think about it, it makes sense since he’s looking for things that could be an issue.
That’s not really cherry-picking, that’s doing his job.
The White House response, from @AndrewJBates46:
“This is toxic and weakly-presented misinformation that relies on taking cherry-picked elements of her record out of context – and it buckles under the lightest scrutiny.” https://t.co/N51nRmWwQ1
— Seung Min Kim (@seungminkim) March 17, 2022
Buckles under the lightest scrutiny?
Where?
By all means, disprove his thread.
We’re all waiting.
The full statement here pic.twitter.com/IqDiTAm6r4
— Seung Min Kim (@seungminkim) March 17, 2022
Riiiight.
List those cases, like Josh did.
Excerpt it’s comprehensive and detailed and hasn’t buckled and the Dems want a pedo apologist in every office in America especially Andrew’s boss’ office.
— Raheem J. Kassam (@RaheemKassam) March 17, 2022
I would like Andrew to explain how even just one person convicted of possessing CP receiving a light sentence isn't disqualifying.
— 🙄Erin 🤔 (@MsErinMurray) March 17, 2022
But but but … TOXIC.
Cherry picked wouldn't be a trend, just say'n.
— Scott Coleman (@bandphan) March 17, 2022
What exactly does the White House believe to be untrue?
— Nathan Brand (@NathanBrandWA) March 17, 2022
This is lose-lose for the left.
Admit it’s true and withdraw support for the nomination: Loss
Deny it in the face of evidence, continue supporting the nomination, and now be on the side defending “taking it easy” on sex offenders: Loss
— Critical Thinking (@irtated_bowels) March 17, 2022
Show your work, Andrew
— Ingenuous Firebrand (@ING2Firebrand) March 17, 2022
He can’t.
And he knows we know he can’t BUT if we question Ketanji’s record that makes us either A) racist, B) sexist, or C) both.
***
Related:
Join the conversation as a VIP Member