...accuse him or her of being part of a conspiracy against you and finish their sentences for them, throw their questions back at them and then demand they answer you, or simply refuse to answer them at all, while monopolizing the conversation so they can't get a word in edgewise in order to run out the clock. Sarcasm, smugness and hostility does not come across as well as it feels.

I was very sympathetic to his initial remarks, angry and passionate, even indignant, he spoke in very much the way I would have if I had been unjustly accused of terrible crimes I was innocent of. But he overdid it, his interactions with the Democratic committee members became increasingly more partisan and confrontational, and less and less to do with refuting the charges against him and establishing his innocence. On the Testosterone Planet, bullying and aggression is frequently mistaken for courage and determination.

If I had been in his shoes, I would have sounded like he did early in his testimony. But only if I had been guilty would I have shifted as he did later, to putting on a show for the benefit of allies in the committee and the audience. In other words, he was overly hysterical and emotional, even "feminine", precisely the demeanor the Majority was probably expecting from Dr Ford.

I realize my comments refer more to the rhetoric and not the substance. I would not expect my opinions to carry much weight before an impartial jury. But I have encountered that same snarky rhetoric before; right here on the Zone, and I am perfectly familiar with the bullshit behind the bluster.