Absolutely — there was significant probable cause to believe that he had behaved in a manner which precluded him from being a worthy candidate for the high court. In the face of that probable cause, he should have been subjected to a thorough investigation and multiple days of hearings as Clarence Thomas was — not one day. He should not have been presumed innocent until proven guilty because that only applies to who has the duty of persuasion in a trial setting.

Dispelling cultural myths with research-driven stories. My favorite word is “specious.” Not fragile like a flower; fragile like a bomb! Twitter @ElleBeau

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store