Okay, then. Our difference is that you describe his response as "extreme partisan behavio(u)r." I describe it as the honest response of a man responding to lies, slander, and a well plotted conspiracy.
This is the bit I don’t get.
I mean I can understand having conservative leanings. That’s fine.
But in this day and age - when SO MANY powerful and/or privileged men have been found to have committed acts the likes of which Kavanaugh has been accused of - it’s just bizarre to be so completely comfortable and certain in the belief that this is all made up.
For one thing, the whole “it’s a conspiracy” idea just doesn’t line up with known facts. She first highlighted her accusations against Kavanaugh BEFORE HE WAS NOMINATED, when he was just one of many names on a shortlist.
For another, the idea that this women would upend (potentially irrevocably) her and her family’s life to falsely accuse someone who in all likelihood would get confirmed anyway is just beyond the realms of likelihood
And for a third, Democrats didn’t do anything like this (indeed actually supplied confirmation votes) for Gorsuch to fill a seat that D’s were WAY more ****ed off about, with the seat having been stolen from Obama by McConnell.
Moving on from the conspiracy angle - it’s pretty well established now that Kavanaugh was part of a hard-drinking culture at Georgetown Prep, and that the school also had shall we say an “issue” with some of the sexual goings on in and around it. Is it really SO unbelievable that these two could have combined together and led to a circumstance where a young, privileged guy could have stepped way over the line, once or a number of times? Or even that he could have done so while so inebriated that he didn’t remember what he had done the next day?
And that is even putting aside the lying under oath. Now I get the idea of having SOME sympathy with that “oh he’s under attack and defending himself” - surely someone who wants to serve on the highest court doesn’t get that option (as Ben Wittes said).
