Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield
You are dead wrong if you believe based on a credible accusation alone, and a blanket denial, a nominee should be dinged. That's dangerous thinking.
|
First, it's not. Nothing bad was going to happen to him.
But second, he lied about things to bolster his blanket denial. Of course he never blacked out, because if he had, it could be he couldn't remember and he needs to be able to say "no", not "I don't remember." That's enough to discredit his denial. Once you've done that...
Finally, no one said credible accusation and blanket denial alone.
Quote:
|
Agreed on lies, not on temperament.
|
He as much as threatened partisan retribution from the bench ("what goes around comes around"). That's disqualifying on temperament.
