Quote Originally Posted by Julio3000 View Post
I think the argument is for ****. You’re entitled to your opinion about the justification of his anger. If you genuinely believe he’s being falsely accused, it follows that you’d feel that way.

To me, today was a further indictment of his character. That he was willing to be so cavalierly dishonest about his school days speaks very poorly of his character today. Drinking to excess, slut-shaming a contemporary—those things don’t speak well of unformed Baby Brett, but his telling the truth would have been a better testament to the man he is today. Instead, he got pissy when asked about drinking, and told gaslight-quality whoppers about the yearbooks, Renate Dolphin, and his poor sensitive stomach. Like, I get that telling the truth might have opened some doors that he needed to keep tightly shut, but, if we are to discount temperament and character, surely we aren’t supposed just toss out basic honesty as a requirement for SCOTUS, right?
I don't know that's he being falsely accused, and frankly I'm not that invested beyond the theater.

That being said if we were, for a moment, both to presume he was (falsely accused) and the narrative as is ascribed holds water .... what other reaction is there given the stage and the moment and the imperative?