*Is* Neil Gorsuch a plagiarist? As an intro to the way Our Media works, the Twitter storyline is kinda fascinating…
Buzzfeed initially on Gorsuch https://t.co/Xr7NJA3opW
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) April 5, 2017
Politico reports on documents showing that SCOTUS nominee Neil Gorsuch plagiarized the work of others. Behold: https://t.co/XQnCmd62Ia pic.twitter.com/ooc2TkG2bA
— Christina Wilkie (@christinawilkie) April 5, 2017
Then Politico https://t.co/3k9x9d9Zb9
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) April 5, 2017
The White House and JCN appear to have orchestrated a prebuttal to publish before the stories about Gorsuch posted https://t.co/oApI1hCSIy
— Shane Goldmacher (@ShaneGoldmacher) April 5, 2017
The people working on the Gorsuch nomination side are pros, who have been trying to pull the WH comms shop along https://t.co/9h5YmylGUT
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) April 5, 2017
Um, no>>>>WH "asserted that the criteria for citing work in dissertations on legal philosophy is different than for other types of academia" https://t.co/373Xo4K4OS
— Alondra Nelson (@alondra) April 5, 2017
People can question severity and certainly timing. But never heard the "author says it's fine" defense before https://t.co/cdh0Z82AKx
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) April 5, 2017
I'd like some pundit to explain why "restoring the balance" of a SCOTUS that gave us Citizens United and Shelby County is a good thing.
— Charles P. Pierce (@CharlesPPierce) April 2, 2017