If only journalists were as dogged when it comes to reporting the news as they are when it comes to throwing the book at Brett Kavanaugh.
Remember when journalists practiced journalism? Those days are long gone, it seems.
In response to NBC Capitol Hill reporter Leigh Ann Caldwell’s account of a meeting between Orrin Hatch and Brett Kavanaugh:
NEWS: @OrrinHatch just spoke to Kavanaugh and Kavaaugh denies being at the party in question per a Hatch aide.
Hatch told me kavanaugh is “honest” and “straightforward” and said after talkng to Kavanaugh the woman might be “mixed up”
— Leigh Ann Caldwell (@LACaldwellDC) September 17, 2018
Some of our favorite Real Journalists™ are — dare we say it? — pouncing on the account as evidence that Kavanaugh is lying:
So Kavanaugh remembers the party in question?https://t.co/5NhWTNWhRs
— Sam Stein (@samstein) September 17, 2018
So Kavanaugh remembers this party — and that he wasn't there? https://t.co/gEnwC0AMCe
— Judd Legum (@JuddLegum) September 17, 2018
How can Kavanaugh deny being at the party where there’s very few specifics about which party it even was? https://t.co/YiydEmG8BB
— Josh Marshall (@joshtpm) September 17, 2018
There is literally nothing Brett Kavanaugh could say that these hacks wouldn’t try to twist.
Logic has a hole in it
— Wandering Tiger (@Lucan_Mor) September 17, 2018
These journalists’ logic, that is. A pretty gaping one, in fact.
ffs, don't you write for a living? Do you understand how English works?
— neontaster ??? (@neontaster) September 17, 2018
Recommended
Oh! That was quick. So damn predictable.. https://t.co/SzvTX7CyvW
— LaurieAnn ? (@mooshakins) September 17, 2018
Watch as leftist turns "Denies being at this party" into "Remembers this party." https://t.co/uL4I4yjLnc
— (((Pete Kaliner))) (@PeteKaliner) September 17, 2018
That’s a dishonest twist of words.
— ❌Walkaway from DNC!❌ (@GoForLiberty) September 17, 2018
You’re obviously twisting this, but go ahead
— Larry Hawk (@szeminska61) September 17, 2018
Referring to "the party in question" does not mean you remember any such party, slimeball. The accuser said it happened at a party. That's "the party in question."
— mediapostate (@mediapostate) September 17, 2018
Sam, I held a party at my house in 1984. You weren’t there.
Do you remember it? Can you honestly deny being there?
See how that works?
— Mike Breslin (@mikebreslin815) September 17, 2018
How does Kavanaugh know which party is in question when not even the accuser knows which party it was is quite the take. pic.twitter.com/PfNeg3YDzo
— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) September 17, 2018
This is quite the indictment Marshall is making about the accuser here.
— Stephen Miller (@redsteeze) September 17, 2018
One that coincidentally was uniformly regurgitated by @samstein and @JuddLegum and more. https://t.co/UvJ4gksgbN
— Big Pickle Energy (@sunnyright) September 17, 2018
It’s amazing how every comment from reporters like Sam clearly has a presumption of guilt attached, and the only question is how hey can spin it to advance that conclusion. https://t.co/sNFy01vcCD
— (((AG))) (@AG_Conservative) September 17, 2018
See how convoluted the liberal logic has become?
"PROVE TO US YOU WEREN'T AT THAT PARTY KAVANAUGH!'
The lack of logic is incredible. https://t.co/U3l25PihGd
— Pradheep J. Shanker, M.D., M.S. (@Neoavatara) September 17, 2018
Not so incredible when you consider whose “logic” it is. This is pretty much par for the course with these people.
The lack of evidence is just further proof of his guilt.
— Jim Treacher (@jtLOL) September 17, 2018
This really is giving kangaroo courts a bad name.
— J. Shaka (@jjshaka) September 17, 2018
What a dumb time to be alive.
Editor’s note: This post has been updated with an additional tweet.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member