people would say, it's a high school yearbook, but here he is as a supreme court nominee and he is repeatedly asked by senator whitehouse what does this mean, what does that mean? and he -- you know, he said that they were drinking games. or whatever. and to anybody with a dictionary, knows that that's not the case. should that be disqualifying, though? >> i think there's a pattern of him not being candid with the committee, it goes back to his nomination hearings in 2006. and also the fact that in the research that i did, is that he will mistake facts and one case that i'm particularly familiar with, dealing with a case from hawaii, not only did he misstate the holding of the case, as being a 14 or 15th amendment decision, which is not true, and then he misapplies the case. so this is a pattern where he very much is outcome driven.