The following is satirical.
McCarthyite Congressman Adam Schiff says in order to stop Donald Trump from violating every sentence in our Constitution he must violate every sentence in our Constitution.
In an address to the American Association of Soulless Weasels, Schiff said:
<blockquote>“Donald Trump is a threat to everything we hold dear as Americans, and in order to stop him I must destroy everything we hold dear as Americans. Trump has repeatedly shown his disrespect for every single one of the principles I’m about to abandon and continues to hold himself above the laws I’m in the process of breaking. Therefore, in order to end this threat to our way of life, I have to completely eradicate our way of life.”</blockquote>
After announcing the opening of a make-believe impeachment hearing, Schiff began interviewing witnesses in a locked room in the basement of the Capitol where no one could hear their testimony, though Schiff said he would release appropriate bits and pieces of it to the New York Times because, after all, if you can’t trust the New York Times, who can you trust besides everybody else?
Though Republicans and other reliable witnesses were not allowed into the interrogation room, a janitor wandering by the door heard loud screams of agony followed by Schiff shouting, “Confess the president is unAmerican or I will use the hot pincers on you again.”
Later Schiff admitted that his methods were an extreme betrayal of every ethical and moral standard on which our civilization rests, but he added, “I only did these things in reality, and they are nothing compared to what Trump has done in my imagination.”
President of the Chuck Todd fan club, Chuck Todd, went on totally objective NBC news, or completely leftist MSNBC News, it’s impossible to tell the difference, and announced that he was inspired by Schiff and from now on would defend journalism from Trump’s attacks by violating every standard of journalism in an effort to destroy him. So basically, he’ll just go on doing what he’s been doing.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/watch-republican-matt-gaetz-drops-in-on-impeachment-deposition-gets-kicked-out-calls-schiff-a-liar">WATCH: Republican Matt Gaetz Drops In On Impeachment Deposition, Gets Kicked Out, Calls Schiff A Liar</a>

Adam Schiff

Adam Schiff: &#8216;I Must Destroy America To Save It.&#8217; [Satire]

New York Times

Satire

On Wednesday, the Biden campaign sent a letter excoriating The New York Times for daring to provide coverage that is unfavorable to former vice president and 2020 Democratic presidential hopeful Joe Biden. The campaign also sent letters to enormous news disseminators Facebook and Twitter for allowing ads that highlight Biden&#8217;s shady dealings with Ukraine.
In the letter to the Times essentially trying to bully the newspaper into only publishing favorable coverage on the powerful Democrat, the Biden campaign complains that President Donald Trump is the real threat to a free press.
The two-page letter is addressed to Dean Baquet, executive editor of the Times, and is penned by Biden&#8217;s deputy campaign manager and communications director, Kate Bedingfield.
According to Bedingfield, the Times has done &#8220;little&#8221; internalizing of &#8220;the sobering lessons of 2016.&#8221; In other words, the Times did not do enough to stop Trump from being elected in 2016, and the Times is similarly failing to stop him in the upcoming 2020 election.
Bedingfield&#8217;s letter highlights the Times running an op-ed critical of Hunter Biden&#8217;s dealings with Ukraine while his father was serving as vice president. The op-ed was written by Peter Schweizer, whom Bedingfield smeared in the letter as a &#8220;discredited right-wing polemicist.&#8221;
As reported by <a href="https://www.npr.org/2019/09/24/763502822/what-were-the-bidens-doing-in-ukraine-5-questions-answered">NPR</a>, Biden began making trips to Ukraine in the spring of 2014, when his son Hunter took a position on the board of Burisma, Ukraine’s largest private gas company — thereby earning a reported $50,000 a month. “The question of a possible conflict of interest — with Hunter Biden profiting in a country where his father was actively working with the government — was raised publicly at the time,” the left-leaning outlet noted. Moreover, in March 2016, “Biden made one of his many trips to Ukraine and told the country’s leaders that they had to get rid of the prosecutor” probing corruption “if they wanted $1 billion in U.S. aid,” NPR reported. Stunningly, Biden openly bragged last year at the Council on Foreign Relations about wielding his influence to seemingly protect his son. “I said, ‘You’re not getting the [$1 billion]. I’m leaving in six hours. If the prosecutor is not fired, you’re not getting the money.’ Well, son of a b****. He got fired,” he harrowingly boasted.
Bedingfield complained by name about journalist Ken Vogel and accused the paper of spreading right-wing and Russian propaganda. &#8220;What was especially troubling about the Times&#8217; active participation in this smear campaign is that prior to its reporting on the subject by Ken Vogel, this conspiracy had been relegated to the likes of Breitbart, Russian propaganda, and another conspiracy theorist, regular Hannity guest John Solomon,&#8221; the letter <a href="https://mailchi.mp/cnn/rs-oct-9-2019">said</a>.
Lacking even the most basic self-awareness, the letter also took a shot at President Donald Trump for being the real threat to a free press:
<blockquote>&#8220;Like so many media organizations today, the Times is confronted with unprecedented challenges and judgment calls as it navigates a high-volume, competitive news environment that is heavily disrupted by increased trafficking in misinformation online and complicated by the repulsive attacks on the free press by a commander-in-chief who is hostile to the truth itself.&#8221;</blockquote>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Here&#39;s the letter Biden deputy campaign manager <a href="https://twitter.com/KBeds?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@KBeds</a> sent NYT editor Dean Baquet. &quot;Are you truly blind to what you got wrong in 2016, or are you deliberately continuing policies that distort reality for the sake of controversy and the clicks&#8230;?&quot; <a href="https://t.co/fCJ8Ii32Ds">https://t.co/fCJ8Ii32Ds</a> <a href="https://t.co/DoVzSm5MXI">pic.twitter.com/DoVzSm5MXI</a>
&mdash; Oliver Darcy (@oliverdarcy) <a href="https://twitter.com/oliverdarcy/status/1182137760670523392?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 10, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The Times responded on Thursday to Biden, defending its reporting.
&#8220;Our coverage of the Biden campaign and Hunter Biden has been fair and accurate,&#8221; a spokesperson said in a statement to <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/10/media/joe-biden-new-york-times-reliable-sources/index.html">CNN</a>. &#8220;[The Times] will continue to cover Joe Biden with the same tough and fair standards we apply to every candidate in the race and we&#8217;re happy to sit down with Biden advisers anytime to discuss news coverage.&#8221;
The spokesperson also noted that the Schweizer op-ed was published in the paper&#8217;s opinion section, &#8220;where [the] mission is to invite intelligent discussion on a range of opinions and ideas. The op-ed makes an argument that nonpartisan government watchdogs would make, arguing in favor of a law that would prohibit self-dealing by those with government connections.&#8221;
According to <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/10/media/joe-biden-new-york-times-reliable-sources/index.html">CNN</a>, the Biden campaign also sent letters to Facebook and Twitter on Wednesday, &#8220;imploring the companies not to run an ad that spread the debunked theory about Biden and Ukraine.&#8221;

Joe Biden

Biden Sends Letter Excoriating New York Times For Unfavorable Coverage. NYT Responds.

2020 Election

Donald Trump

Ukraine

The big takeaway from The New York Times&#8217; bombshell report on the House Intelligence Committee Chair&#8217;s connection to the whistleblower complaint that sparked the Democrats&#8217; impeachment inquiry is not what the paper intended, conservative commentator Rush Limbaugh argued Wednesday.
&#8220;This is a New York Times&#8217; attempt to praise [Democratic Rep. Adam] Schiff for really sharp political maneuvering and thinking,&#8221; Limbaugh told his audience Wednesday (transcript via <a href="https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2019/10/02/the-whistleblower-went-to-pencil-neck-first/">RushLimbaugh.com</a>). But what the left-leaning paper has actually accomplished, said Rush, is to officially blow up the entire &#8220;whistleblower&#8221; narrative.
&#8220;It looks like this whole whistleblower thing is an Adam Schiff setup,&#8221; said the host, in his discussion of the Times&#8217; big scoop.
&#8220;The Democratic head of the House Intelligence Committee, Representative Adam B. Schiff of California, learned about the outlines of a C.I.A. officer’s concerns that President Trump had abused his power days before the officer filed a whistle-blower complaint, according to a spokesman and current and former American officials,&#8221; the Times <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/02/us/politics/adam-schiff-whistleblower.html">reported</a> Wednesday. &#8220;The early account by the future whistle-blower shows how determined he was to make known his allegations that Mr. Trump asked Ukraine’s government to interfere on his behalf in the 2020 election. It also explains how Mr. Schiff knew to press for the complaint when the Trump administration initially blocked lawmakers from seeing it.&#8221;
&#8220;The C.I.A. officer approached a House Intelligence Committee aide with his concerns about Mr. Trump only after he had had a colleague first convey them to the C.I.A.’s top lawyer,&#8221; the report continues. &#8220;Concerned about how that initial avenue for airing his allegations through the C.I.A. was unfolding, the officer then approached the House aide. In both cases, the original accusation was vague. The House staff member, following the committee’s procedures, suggested the officer find a lawyer to advise him and meet with an inspector general, with whom he could file a whistle-blower complaint. The aide shared some of what the officer conveyed to Mr. Schiff. The aide did not share the whistle-blower’s identity with Mr. Schiff, an official said.&#8221;
&#8220;Let me give you the upshot,&#8221; said Rush after reading the first two paragraphs of the article. &#8220;The guy was not a whistleblower. He went to Adam Schiff first.&#8221;
&#8220;Apparently what happened is the person we know as the whistleblower was not a whistleblower,&#8221; he said. &#8220;He went to Adam Schiff after he’d been told secondhand what had happened on the phone call. He went to Schiff. Schiff is who had him fill out the whistleblower form. The guy did not do it on his own initiative.&#8221;
&#8220;A C.I.A. officer in the White House went to Adam Schiff, much like Christine Blasey Ford went to Dianne Feinstein!&#8221; Rush exclaimed. &#8220;Before going to Congress, the C.I.A. officer had a colleague convey his allegations to the agency’s top lawyer.&#8221;
&#8220;So the upshot that the New York Times does not want us to conclude is that he was not a whistleblower, that this was an act of collusion,&#8221; Limbaugh said. &#8220;Adam Schiff is colluding with this guy and suggested that he become a whistleblower, and right here it’s clearly stated that Schiff did not expect Trump to release the transcript! That was the original play to call Trump a stonewaller. Or to say that he was obstructing or, at best, covering up.&#8221;
In another <a href="https://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2019/10/02/what-we-learned-from-pelosi-and-pencil-neck/">segment</a> on Wednesday, Limbaugh elaborated on his theory that the Democrats didn&#8217;t anticipate Trump agreeing to release the transcript of the July 25 call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. &#8220;They were prepared to accuse him of obstruction. They were prepared to accuse him of stonewalling. That’s what they wanted, because the cover-up is always more problematic than whatever alleged crime — and Trump has not committed a crime here,&#8221; said Limbaugh, pointing to Schiff&#8217;s preemptive threats about Trump &#8220;obstructing justice&#8221; in a press conference as evidence of his theory.
&#8220;The White House needs to understand that any action like that forces us to litigate or to have to consider litigation will be considered further evidence of obstruction of justice. And of course that was an article of impeachment —&#8221; said Schiff.
&#8220;And there you have it,&#8221; said Limbaugh after playing the tape. &#8220;Schiff has his obstruction and Trump hadn’t even done anything yet! See how this works?&#8221;
Limbaugh isn&#8217;t the only one interpreting the Times&#8217; big story on Schiff as evidence of &#8220;collusion&#8221; between the Democrats and the whistleblower. As The Daily Wire reported, Trump, Republican lawmakers, and several members of the media have responded in similar ways to the Times&#8217; revelation.
&#8220;It shows that Schiff is a fraud,&#8221; Trump said in a press conference Wednesday. &#8220;It’s a scandal … he knew long before and [Schiff] helped write [the whistleblower complaint].&#8221;
&#8220;Chairman Adam Schiff just got caught orchestrating with the whistleblower before the complaint was ever filed,&#8221; House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy tweeted. &#8220;Democrats have rigged this process from the start.&#8221;
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/trump-schiff-helped-write-whistleblower-report-schiff-no-i-didnt-but-i-shouldve-been-more-clear">Trump: Schiff Helped Write Whistleblower Report; Schiff: No I Didn’t, But I Should’ve Been ‘More Clear’</a>

President Trump

Limbaugh: NYT Bombshell Just Accidentally Blew Up ‘Whistleblower’ Story

The following is satirical.
A bombshell in the press today. A shadowy anonymous source within a sinister intelligence agency trying to overthrow the results of a legal election has stepped out of the shadows into even deeper shadows to reveal that President Donald Trump has not returned a library book he took out over seven weeks ago.
At the New York Times, a former newspaper, printers needed two workers to carry each of the enormous letters that would spell out the headline declaring the story, while at the same time one of the workers carried in his pocket the entire text of the correction that would retract the story later in the day.
Times Editor-in-Chief Blithering Prevarication the Third, speaking to his staff at a cell meeting of the Union of Soviet Socialist Journalists, said, “We built our newsroom to cover one intelligence-driven hoax that ended up leaving us humiliated and discredited, so I’m happy to announce that everything is already in place for us to cover this one.”
At CNN, Anchorwoman Shapely Nudnick, told her audience as she rushed across the airport to catch her connection to Topeka, “Up until now, I have refused to get on the impeachment train, but a continual drumbeat of phony Trump scandals from anonymous sources meant to distract the public from the corruption of the Obama intelligence community has finally made me utterly hysterical. The dam is breaking, the walls are closing in, and this is the beginning of the end that marks a tipping point of walls and dams and, oh my God, someone bring me my Ativan, I need to lie down.”
At NBC, Chuck Todd, who doesn’t need a made-up funny name because he’s already a parody of himself, told the mirror in his dressing room, “This is very serious. You can tell because I have my serious face on. If this gets any more serious, I may even wear glasses to look more serious than my serious face already looks.”
Stay tuned for more baseless accusations as they come in.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/state-department-takes-new-action-on-hillary-investigation">State Department Takes New Action On Hillary Investigation</a>

Ann Coulter book

BOMBSHELL: Shadowy Spies Say Trump Has Overdue Library Book [Satire]

Chuck Todd

A feminist author and attorney, seemingly desperate that her media outlet of choice, The New York Times, might be having trouble making money, issued a thread on Twitter pleading for customers of the Times not to abandon the paper. Jill Filipovic, the author of “The H-Spot: The Feminist Pursuit of Happiness,” described the Times as “one of the best publications in the history of American journalism” and claimed it featured “serious, hard-hitting journalism.”
<a href="https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/new-york-times-stock-price-q2-earnings-revenue-outlook-drops-2019-8-1028427773">Markets Insider</a> reported in August, &#8220;Shares of The New York Times Company plunged as much as 20% on Wednesday after the publisher said it expects total advertising revenue to fall next quarter. The newspaper publisher reported second quarter results on Wednesday that beat expectations for earnings per share but fell short of revenue estimates.&#8221;
Filipovic began: “Before you cancel your New York Times subscription: Do you think our country would be better off without the New York Times, or with an under-funded New York Times? Of course express your frustration. But man, more than ever, we need to support serious, hard-hitting journalism.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Before you cancel your New York Times subscription: Do you think our country would be better off without the New York Times, or with an under-funded New York Times? Of course express your frustration. But man, more than ever, we need to support serious, hard-hitting journalism.
&mdash; Jill Filipovic (@JillFilipovic) <a href="https://twitter.com/JillFilipovic/status/1177332841794932748?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 26, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
She continued, “Yes, there are a lot of publications doing great work. But very few can afford to take on the kind of projects a big legacy publication like the Times does. That was so obvious reading She Said &#8211; when you investigate people with deep pockets, you need your own lawyers &amp; resources.’
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Yes, there are a lot of publications doing great work. But very few can afford to take on the kind of projects a big legacy publication like the Times does. That was so obvious reading She Said &#8211; when you investigate people with deep pockets, you need your own lawyers &amp; resources
&mdash; Jill Filipovic (@JillFilipovic) <a href="https://twitter.com/JillFilipovic/status/1177333332524306436?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 26, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Then an attempt to minimize the damage the partisan outlet does by admitting there is basis for criticism but the paper remains necessary: “You don&#8217;t have to love everything the Times does. You certainly should criticize them! I do. But they remain one of the best publications in the history of American journalism. It is so crucial to balance critique with the full view of what they do and what they offer.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
You don&#39;t have to love everything the Times does. You certainly should criticize them! I do. But they remain one of the best publications in the history of American journalism. It is so crucial to balance critique with the full view of what they do and what they offer.
&mdash; Jill Filipovic (@JillFilipovic) <a href="https://twitter.com/JillFilipovic/status/1177333674330722308?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 26, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
More of the same: “How many publications still have foreign correspondents all over the globe? How many have the resources to investigate someone like Weinstein, with David Boies in the background? It&#8217;s easy to ignore all the great things, which are on balance so many more than the bad ones.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
How many publications still have foreign correspondents all over the globe? How many have the resources to investigate someone like Weinstein, with David Boies in the background? It&#39;s easy to ignore all the great things, which are on balance so many more than the bad ones.
&mdash; Jill Filipovic (@JillFilipovic) <a href="https://twitter.com/JillFilipovic/status/1177334350016319493?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 26, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Just to edify Filipovic, here is a list of some of the actions the Times has taken just since the beginning of 2019 that would be enough to dismiss it as a reliable source for news:
January 2019: Following the brouhaha revolving around the Covington Catholic schoolboys at the March For Life and the hashtag #ExposeChristianSchools went viral on social media, New York Times reporter Dan Levin <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/new-york-times-reporter-seeking-expose-christian-paul-bois">asked people on social media</a> to provide him any tips or leads that would help him with a story to seemingly expose Christian schools.
April 2019: The Times <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/anti-semitic-new-york-times-runs-another-cartoon-hank-berrien">ran two vitriolic anti-Semitic cartoons</a> targeting Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu; one depicted Netanyahu as a dog on a leash held by a blind President Donald Trump, who was wearing a yarmulke; the other depicted a sour-faced Netanyahu in sunglasses taking a selfie while holding what looks like a stone tablet with a Star of David on it. The Times only apologized for the first carton after the terrorist shooting at the Poway synagogue in California.
June 2019: <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/29/us/louisiana-abortion-heartbeat-bill.html">Reporting</a> on a new piece of “heartbeat” legislation that had passed in Louisiana, the Times <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/newspeak-new-york-times-finds-absurd-way-avoid-amanda-prestigiacomo">avoided the term “fetal heartbeat” </a>by describing it as “embryonic pulsing: as follows:
<blockquote>A State House vote on Wednesday moved the abortion measure to the governor’s desk, after lawmakers rejected a series of amendments including an exception for cases of rape or incest. The measure would require an ultrasound test for any woman seeking to terminate a pregnancy, and forbid abortion if the test detects embryonic pulsing— which can occur before many women know they are pregnant.</blockquote>
August 2019: After President Trump made a televised statement condemning racism and calling for unity, the Times&#8217; initial headline read, “TRUMP URGES UNITY VS. RACISM.&#8221; But after screams of outrage from Democratic presidential candidates Sens. Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) accompanied by the Huffington Post and FiveThirtyEight Editor-in-Chief Nate Silver at the sympathetic way the president was portrayed in the headline, the Times <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/democrats-blast-nyt-after-outrageous-trump-speech-james-barrett">pusillanimously changed the headline</a> to &#8220;ASSAILING HATE BUT NOT GUNS.&#8221;
H/T <a href="https://twitchy.com/samj-3930/2019/09/27/dont-beg-its-a-bad-look-jill-filipovic-pleads-with-tweeps-not-to-cancel-their-nyt-subscription-in-hilariously-pathetic-thread/">Twitchy</a>

Shipwreck

Feminist Author Begs Readers Not to Cancel Subscriptions To New York Times

Donald Trump Jr. slammed another editor for The New York Times on Sunday after a news report revealed that the editor had made numerous racist and anti-Semitic comments on Twitter.
Jazmine Hughes, an editor at The New York Times Magazine, made the remarks according to a <a href="https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/09/22/another-new-york-times-editor-made-racist-anti-semitic-comments/">report</a> from Breitbart News, which noted that Hughes&#8217; &#8220;most recent project for the Times&#8217; magazine was the 1619 Project, a comprehensive series of articles and essays arguing that slavery was the institution that fundamentally shaped the modern United States.&#8221;
Hughes made numerous condescending remarks about white people and promoted anti-Semitic tropes about Jewish people and money.
Trump Jr. tweeted: &#8220;I started to make a list of all the racist, anti-Semitic @NYTimes employees who&#8217;ve made cookie-cutter &#8216;apologies&#8217; and kept their jobs &#8230; But I quickly realized there just aren&#8217;t enough hours left in the day.&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">I started to make a list of all the racist, anti-Semitic <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@NYTimes</a> employees who’ve made cookie-cutter “apologies” and kept their jobs&#8230; But I quickly realized there just aren’t enough hours left in the day. <a href="https://t.co/LkA0RME4TI">https://t.co/LkA0RME4TI</a>
— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) <a href="https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1175942254265020419?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 23, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
The uncovered tweets come less than a week after more bigoted tweets from New York Times fact-checker Gina Chérélus were unearthed, which Trump Jr. also called out on Twitter, writing: &#8220;Another day, another bigot exposed at the @nytimes. Are they ever going to do anything to address the rampant hatred at their paper?&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Another day, another bigot exposed at the <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@nytimes</a>. Are they ever going to do anything to address the rampant hatred at their paper? <a href="https://t.co/FfFSrkjC7l">https://t.co/FfFSrkjC7l</a>
— Donald Trump Jr. (@DonaldJTrumpJr) <a href="https://twitter.com/DonaldJTrumpJr/status/1174108528728039424?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
The tweets from Chérélus featured &#8220;homophobic and racial slurs as well as animus toward other racial groups dating back several years ago,&#8221; The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/51906/trump-jr-blasts-new-york-times-after-more-bigoted-ryan-saavedra">reported</a>.
The bigoted tweets from Chérélus came after another New York Times editor, Tom Wright-Piersanti, had his old anti-Semitic tweets <a href="https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2019/08/22/exclusive-crappy-jew-year-new-york-times-editors-antisemitism-racism-exposed/">published</a> by Breitbart News late last month.
So far it does not appear that The New York Times has taken any action against any of their employees whose bigoted tweets have surfaced.
Ben Domenech, co-founder of The Federalist, wrote on Twitter: &#8220;Was anyone held accountable for the obvious NYT social media and opinion failures in the past week? Anyone?&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Was anyone held accountable for the obvious NYT social media and opinion failures in the past week? Anyone?
— Ben Domenech (@bdomenech) <a href="https://twitter.com/bdomenech/status/1175934541149679616?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 23, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
&#8220;The New York Times had to face charges of racism against white people last year after they hired Sarah Jeong to be on their editorial board and numerous bigoted tweets from her were unearthed and instantly went viral,&#8221; The Daily Wire reported. &#8220;The New York Times has also has also faced recent scandals over <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/46501/nyt-ripped-anti-semitic-cartoon-non-apology-ryan-saavedra">anti-Semitic</a> <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/46523/anti-semitic-new-york-times-runs-another-cartoon-hank-berrien">cartoons</a> it has published and over offensive tweets about <a href="https://nypost.com/2019/09/11/new-york-times-deletes-tweet-saying-airplanes-took-aim-at-towers-on-9-11/">9/11</a>, <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/new-york-times-deletes-tweet-calling-mao-zedong-one-of-historys-great-revolutionary-figures">Mao Zedong</a>, and <a href="https://nypost.com/2019/09/17/ny-times-reporter-who-co-wrote-kavanaugh-book-cops-to-writing-penis-tweet/">sexual assault</a>.&#8221;
The latest series of bigoted tweets to surface from New York Times employees comes after &#8220;Dean Baquet, the executive editor of the New York Times, said recently that, after the Mueller report, the paper has to shift the focus of its coverage from the Trump-Russia affair to the president&#8217;s alleged racism,&#8221; The Washington Examiner <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/columnists/new-york-times-chief-outlines-coverage-shift-from-trump-russia-to-trump-racism">reported</a>.
The drama involving the Twitter accounts of the newspaper&#8217;s employees comes as the newspaper also has dealt with more than a week of fallout over its failed attempt to smear Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
The allegation, contained in a new book, was <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/51805/breaking-new-york-times-adds-correction-kavanaugh-ryan-saavedra">published</a> by The New York Times on Sunday: &#8220;We also uncovered a previously unreported story about Mr. Kavanaugh in his freshman year that echoes Ms. Ramirez&#8217;s allegation. A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student.&#8221;
The Federalists&#8217; Mollie Hemingway noted: &#8220;The book notes, quietly, that the woman Max Stier named as having been supposedly victimized by Kavanaugh and friends denies any memory of the alleged event. Seems, I don&#8217;t know, significant.&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-conversation="none" data-lang="en">The book notes, quietly, that the woman Max Stier named as having been supposedly victimized by Kavanaugh and friends denies any memory of the alleged event. Seems, I don’t know, significant.
— Mollie (@MZHemingway) <a href="https://twitter.com/MZHemingway/status/1173203831397801984?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 15, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
The New York Times was later forced to issue a correction to their reporting: &#8220;An earlier version of this article, which was adapted from a forthcoming book, did not include one element of the book&#8217;s account regarding an assertion by a Yale classmate that friends of Brett Kavanaugh pushed his penis into the hand of a female student at a drunken dorm party. The book reports that the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say that she does not recall the incident. That information has been added to the article.&#8221;
The reporters then went on a media tour where they deflected blame for the smear article onto their editors and were again caught spreading more lies, as noted by Hemingway.
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">NYT authors <a href="https://twitter.com/rpogrebin?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@rpogrebin</a> and <a href="https://twitter.com/katekelly?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@katekelly</a> conceded the lack of evidence for anti-Kavanaugh forces, but said that their &#8220;gut&#8221; told them to believe them. One &#8220;reason&#8221; they cited? Pro-Kavanaugh witnesses &#8220;kept mum.&#8221; That was yet another lie they spread. <a href="https://t.co/N5q3SJCrhB">https://t.co/N5q3SJCrhB</a>
— Mollie (@MZHemingway) <a href="https://twitter.com/MZHemingway/status/1174174388813467649?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 18, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>

trump_jr

Trump Jr. Rips Another New York Times Editor Over ‘Racist,’ ‘Anti-Semitic’ Tweets

Anti-Semitism

Media

Racism

Last week, Democrats held their first true presidential debate. With the field winnowed down to 10 candidates — three of them actual contenders for the nomination — only one moment truly stood out. That moment came not from Joe Biden, Elizabeth Warren or Bernie Sanders but from a candidate desperate for attention: Beto O&#8217;Rourke.
O&#8217;Rourke ran in 2018 for a Senate seat in Texas and lost in shockingly narrow fashion to incumbent Republican Sen. Ted Cruz. But his persona at the time was more Biden than Bernie: He ran as a unifying quasi-moderate, an Obama-esque figure determined to bring Americans together. In the early going of the presidential race, Beto was figured to be a prime contender: An April poll showed him in a solid third place. But he&#8217;s faded dramatically; now the once-media darling is polling below 3%.
So O&#8217;Rourke has refashioned himself into a woke warrior. He&#8217;s declared that he wants to forcibly remove guns from law-abiding Americans (&#8220;Hell, yes, we&#8217;re going to take your AR-15&#8221;), that President Trump is a &#8220;white supremacist&#8221; posing a &#8220;mortal threat to people of color&#8221; and that the time has come for race reparations. Most dramatically, O&#8217;Rourke has refashioned his vision of American history. In this debate, he laid out his retelling of the American story, saying: &#8220;Racism in America is endemic. It is foundational. We can mark the creation of this country not at the Fourth of July, 1776, but Aug. 20, 1619, when the first kidnapped African was brought to this country against his will and in bondage, and as a slave built the greatness and the success and the wealth that neither he nor his descendants would ever be able to fully participate in and enjoy.&#8221;
This version of history is cribbed from &#8220;The 1619 Project&#8221; by The New York Times, a retelling of American history as a story rooted in white supremacy — not colored by or affected by white supremacy but rooted in it. Capitalism, criminal justice, lack of universal health care, traffic patterns, Donald Trump&#8217;s election — all of it, according to &#8220;The 1619 Project,&#8221; is fundamentally based on America&#8217;s legacy of slavery and racial discrimination.
That perspective on American history, in turn, is merely warmed over Howard Zinn. Zinn, the Marxist author of &#8220;A People&#8217;s History of the United States,&#8221; sought to recast America&#8217;s story as a story of hideous ugliness covered with the hypocritical facade of goodness. Never mind that &#8220;A People&#8217;s History&#8221; is, in fact, rotten history — factually inaccurate, wildly disjoined from a more comprehensive examination of time and place, near plagiarized from the work of better leftist historians. Zinn&#8217;s history has now infused the teaching of American history in high schools and colleges across the country.
But that historical retelling is at odds with the better, truer story of America: the story of a nation founded on eternally good and true principles, principles only fully realized for many Americans at the cost of blood and sweat and death. Ex-slave Frederick Douglass&#8217;s take on American history remains the most honest, as well as the most visionary. While acknowledging that to the American slave, Independence Day represents &#8220;more than all other days in the year, the gross injustice and cruelty to which he is the constant victim,&#8221; Douglass recognized that the Constitution is a &#8220;glorious liberty document,&#8221; the Declaration of Independence a charter of &#8220;saving principles.&#8221;
American history is our common history. O&#8217;Rourke&#8217;s pathetic rewriting of American history is designed not to unify us as a nation but to divide us — to call us away from the unifying principles that lie at the foundation of America, in favor of divisive principles of tribal partisanship. We must recognize the evils of American history — that is part of our common story. In fact, our quest to rid ourselves of those evils is our common story. But if we wish to survive as a nation, we must also recognize that the story of America lies in the constant purification of our actions to align with our founding principles, not oppose them.

O&#8217;Rourke debate

SHAPIRO: The Alternative History Of The United States

Ben Shapiro

Beto O'Rourke

Patriotism

United States

Fresh from being the subject of the Commentary Magazine roast on Monday, Daily Wire Editor-In-Chief Ben Shapiro continued along that path, roasting The New York Times and former Vice President Joe Biden on Fox &amp; Friends Wednesday morning. He lambasted the Times for its story about Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in which they lamely acknowledged after it had been published that the woman supposedly making the central allegation did not remember the incident. Shapiro asserted that the Times had done something even worse by not reporting that Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford’s best friend said she was pressured by Ford’s allies to change her story. He commented, &#8220;That’s not just bad journalism; that’s not botchery; that’s purposeful at that point.&#8221;
Vis-à-vis Biden, Shapiro joked, &#8220;He basically is the body in &#8216;Weekend at Bernie&#8217;s&#8217; and all you have to do is walk him out there around.&#8221;
Host Steve Doocy began by noting Shapiro was in New York because he was the subject of a roast by Commentary Magazine on Monday. He asked if there had been one line that stood out; co-host Ainsley Erhardt added, &#8220;that made you mad?&#8221; Shapiro quipped, &#8220;(Fox host) Dana Perino kept calling me short and I found that particularly insulting; Dana’s a tiny human.&#8221;
Doocy turned serious, asking, &#8220;What do you make of The New York Times being caught, not only in having to apologize for an inappropriate tweet, but then an editorial noted fixed on this news analysis that said, essentially, &#8216;yeah, you know what, we left out the fact that the woman involved in this story does not remember the story?'&#8221;
Shapiro said:
<blockquote>I would say that it’s unbelievable except it’s insanely believable. Every time The New York Times makes a mistake, it is always in the direction of somebody on the Right getting clocked, and that’s particularly true in the Kavanaugh story. There is a much bigger story in that book that was not reported in The New York Times, namely that Leland Keyser, who is the best friend of Christine Blasey Ford, said she didn’t believe Ford’s story and was pressured by Ford’s allies to change her story. The New York Times didn’t see fit to report that; they buried this particular story in their news analysis section so they didn’t have to run it through the news section, and then they actually removed the line that said that the alleged victim didn’t remember the incident in question and then replaced it later. That’s not just bad journalism; that’s not botchery; that’s purposeful at that point.</blockquote>
Host Brian Kilmeade then played a clip of the Times writers protesting the error was simply an oversight. Earhardt commented, &#8220;Is there even a victim? She doesn’t remember it.&#8221;
Shapiro responded, &#8220;There is no story here. This prompted editorials from The New York times and The Washington Post talking about how the FBI was engaged in a sham investigation, based on them not investigating an allegation that has no alleged victim? It’s insanity.&#8221;
Kilmeade asked, &#8220;Do you buy that explanation?&#8221; Shapiro replied bluntly, &#8220;No. Of course, I don’t buy that explanation. That’s not an &#8216;oversight.&#8217; How is it an &#8216;oversight&#8217; when you don’t just remove the name, you remove the key detail of the entire story? That’s not a detail; that is the center of the story.&#8221;
Kilmeade asked, &#8220;And what about every Democratic candidate that called for Kavanaugh to be impeached on a story that had no substance?&#8221;
Shapiro answered, &#8220;You mean Democrats don’t care about due process? Again? And it’s always Brett Kavanaugh? They should just make him the face of We Don’t Care About Due Process. Every time they say, &#8216;We don’t care about due process&#8217; they should just flash his picture.&#8221;
Earhardt asked about former Vice President Joe Biden’s comment that he would put 720 million women back in the workforce, noting there are only 330 million Americans.
Shapiro quipped:
<blockquote>I’m pretty sure that that doesn&#8217;t add up. I will say that this is all baked into the cake for Joe Biden; we all know that he is stumbling into objects and that he is just searching for an early bird dinner at Dennys and drinking cans of Ensure and forgetting where he is on a routine basis, but I think that’s baked into the cake; I think everybody sort of knows that. In fact, I take the perspective, that in the general election, it might not be bad for him to look senile and old and ineffectual, because honestly, at least he doesn’t look dangerous. If you’re trying to run somebody against President Trump, and you don’t want to scare the general population, Joe Biden is the face of not scary, because what’s scary about a guy walking around with tennis balls on the bottom of his walker?</blockquote>
Doocy asked, &#8220;What do you make of Elizabeth Warren?&#8221; Shapiro answered, &#8220;If she picks up the rest of Bernie Sanders'&#8221; support obviously she’s the front runner. The big problem for Elizabeth Warren remains and will continue to be the fact that she has no black support. The fact is that Joe Biden retains an enormous share of black support and that’s because he was vice-president to Barack Obama … despite the fact that Joe Biden is older than Methuselah, there is a shot that that actually cuts in his favor a lot more than Elizabeth Warren’s crazed radical from Harvard.
When Doocy asked if Shapiro thought Biden was the only Democratic candidate with a shot at beating Trump, Shapiro answered, &#8220;I don’t think he’s the only one who has a shot, but he certainly has the best shot. I would say that Donald Trump has an advantage against every other Democrat; against Joe Biden, he is default Democrat because he basically is the body in &#8216;Weekend at Bernie&#8217;s&#8217; and all you have to do is walk him out there around.&#8221;
Video below:
<div class="embed video fluid-video"><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/H86GWyrM3zE" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></div>

ben_on_fox.jpg

WATCH: Shapiro Roasts NY Times And Biden On Fox &#038; Friends

Fox News

House GOP Conference Chair Liz Cheney (R-WY) took a jab at House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) on Wednesday after the California congresswoman tried to spin a recent Democratic loss as a win for the party.
&#8220;I was particularly interested to see Speaker Pelosi say that in her view that the Democratic candidate won the campaign in North Carolina, but just lost the election,&#8221; Cheney told reporters during the weekly GOP leadership press conference. &#8220;And we really look forward to the Democrats winning an awful lot more campaigns like that because we feel very good about coming up with the wins in the election cycle.&#8221;
Cheney&#8217;s remarks come nearly a week after Pelosi praised House candidate Dan McCready after his unsuccessful run to represent North Carolina’s Ninth Congressional District. McCready, a Democrat, lost by two points in the consistently red district — therefore far outperforming prior Democratic candidates in the district.
&#8220;I&#8217;m very proud of Dan McCready, he&#8217;s a great patriot. He&#8217;s an independent voice for the district that he would have represented,&#8221; Pelosi said at the time. &#8220;It&#8217;s too bad he&#8217;s not coming here, but he did a great job.&#8221;
&#8220;Actually, he came out ten points higher than our last three presidential candidates, so he won the campaign,&#8221; she continued. &#8220;He didn&#8217;t win the election, but he won the campaign.&#8221;
Pelosi officially swore in McCready&#8217;s Republican challenger, now-Rep. Dan Bishop (R-NC), on Tuesday evening. Rep. Greg Murphy (R-NC), who won a special election on the same day as Bishop, was also sworn in. With the addition of the two North Carolina congressmen, the House is finally at full strength.
While updating reporters on the Republican conference following Congress&#8217; August recess, Cheney noted that the GOP is energized to not only prevent the government overreach promoted by the Democratic Party, but also to retake the House majority in 2020.
&#8220;We have a record of accomplishment for the American people … that our folks are going to be focused on and running on from economic growth, national security, regulatory reform,&#8221; Cheney said. &#8220;It&#8217;s a long list of very real deliverables for the American people that we&#8217;ve seen from President [Donald] Trump and from the Republicans.&#8221;
The Wyoming lawmaker also took aim at her Democratic colleagues for shirking their constitutional responsibilities in pursuit of impeaching Trump and U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
&#8220;[House Democrats] have been flailing around for a reason to impeach — I&#8217;d say blatantly trampling on the Constitution in doing that, and flailing around for a target,&#8221; Cheney said. &#8220;We all saw that in these last few days with what The New York Times did to Justice Kavanaugh.&#8221;
Accordingly, the Times published a report earlier in the week alleging that a friend of the Supreme Court justice pushed his genitalia into the hands of a female student while attending a party at Yale University in the 1980s. After publication, the newspaper issued an editor&#8217;s note stating that the alleged victim reportedly did not recall the incident.
While the omission received widespread backlash, the majority of Democratic presidential candidates continued to call for Kavanaugh&#8217;s impeachment over the flubbed report.
&#8220;[They&#8217;re] completely sliming Justice Kavanaugh in a way that doesn&#8217;t rise to any standard of journalism and obviously was just an absolute continued attack on him that they ought to be ashamed of,&#8221; Cheney added.

liz_cheney.jpg

Liz Cheney Trolls Pelosi: Republicans ‘Look Forward To Democrats Winning An Awful Lot More Campaigns’

Democratic Party

House Republicans

Liz Cheney

Media Bias

Nancy Pelosi

Republican Party

America&#8217;s &#8220;paper of record&#8221; has long been an arm of the Democratic Party, but it wasn’t always that way.
The New York Times was founded in 1851, and in the first two presidential elections it gave no endorsement. Over the next 94 years, The Times was balanced, endorsing 12 Republican presidential candidates (including its first six) and 12 Democratic presidential candidates (along with one candidate from the Bourbon Democrats).
Since 1960, though — the last 15 elections — the paper has endorsed only Democrats (its win-loss record: 7-8).
During those last 60 years, the paper has become more openly liberal. Its op-ed page is, of course, hardcore left. But that bias has been creeping into the news pages for years, with reporters and editors twisting facts and spinning the news to fits its leftward lean, often in support of Democrats.
But everything changed Sunday. On September 15, 2019, The New York Times became a dangerous tool of misinformation controlled by the Left, one that simply can no longer be trusted on any story.
On that day, the paper put out a &#8220;bombshell&#8221; headlined: &#8220;Brett Kavanaugh Fit In With the Privileged Kids. She Did Not.&#8221; The story was all about Deborah Ramirez’s experience at Yale University, where she met the future Supreme Court justice. Years later, in an attempt to derail his nomination to the Supreme Court, she would claim he thrust his penis in her face at a dorm party when they were both students.
The story — written by two Times reporters, Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, and adapted from their forthcoming anti-Kavanaugh book — contained this: &#8220;We also uncovered a previously unreported story about Kavanaugh in his freshman year that echoes Ramirez’s allegation. A classmate, Max Stier, saw Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student.&#8221;
Well. Quite an accusation.
But there was a problem. A big problem.
Mollie Hemingway, a senior editor at The Federalist, got an advance copy of the book. She tweeted, &#8220;The book notes, quietly, that the woman Max Stier named as having been supposedly victimized by Kavanaugh and friends denies any memory of the alleged event. Seems, I don&#8217;t know, significant.&#8221;
Indeed it is.
The story gets very ugly from here.
The Times put out an &#8220;Editor’s note&#8221; (not a correction, mind you).
&#8220;The book reports that the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say that she does not recall the incident. That information has been added to the article,&#8221; the note said.
Here&#8217;s why what The Times did Sunday is far worse than what they normally do. It&#8217;s one thing to spin facts and twist context to make a case (both sides do that). But omitting a fact that kills your entire story is an entirely different thing.
This wasn&#8217;t an accident. That detail — the fact that friends of the alleged victim told the book authors that she doesn&#8217;t remember a thing about the alleged incident — was contained later in the book, which was written by the same people who wrote the article. They knew that they were lying by omission, and they did it anyway.
More. The editors of the piece, who (duh) should have read the book by then, knew that, too. They all knew that the piece would hit social media hard and trend heavily (it did, with the headline, &#8220;NYT reporters&#8217; book details new sexual assault allegation against Brett Kavanaugh&#8221;).
Even more. The authors on Tuesday said they had included the important information but claimed an editor took it out. And yet they let the story run, saying nothing to anyone until they were found out.
Here&#8217;s the bottom line: The New York Times deliberately withheld information that shot holes in their salacious story. The authors knew it, the editors knew it, and yet they did it anyway. The goal — take down a Supreme Court justice, an effort that failed the last time they tried.
So deep is the hatred for President Trump that a once-great newspaper is now sinking so low as to omit key facts just to damage the president. The Times now is publishing unverified gossip under the guise of news reporting, and even omitting facts that unravel its flimsy &#8220;bombshell.&#8221;
The Times&#8217; motto, tucked in the upper left ear of the print edition for the last 115 years, reads &#8220;All The News That&#8217;s Fit To Print.&#8221; But after what they did September 15, 2019, they should change that to &#8220;If You&#8217;re Looking For Facts, You Won&#8217;t Find Them Here.&#8221;
The New York Times is dead. And that ain&#8217;t fake news.
*Joseph Curl ran the Drudge Report from 2010 to 2014 and covered the White House for a dozen years. He can be reached at josephcurl@gmail.com and on Twitter at @JosephCurl. A version of this article ran previously in The Washington Times.

CURL: NYT Has Become A Dangerous Misinformation Tool Of The Left

Brett Kavanaugh

Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, the New York Times journalists who co-authored a new book on Brett Kavanaugh and have come under fire for apparent anti-Kavanaugh bias, are receiving yet more blowback over an adapted passage of their book, this time published by The Atlantic.
In the piece — which, like their much-maligned New York Times piece, is based on an excerpt from their new book — Pogrebin and Kelly claim that potential witnesses to an alleged incident at a party at Yale involving Kavanaugh and accuser Deborah Ramirez remained &#8220;mum&#8221; on the allegation. But as pointed out by The Federalist&#8217;s <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/17/witnesses-defended-kavanaugh-nyt-authors-falsely-claimed-they-were-silent/">Molly Hemingway</a> who co-authored her own Kavanaugh book, that&#8217;s simply not true. Some of the named witnesses have gone on the record to address the allegation — and defended Kavanaugh. The &#8220;major error,&#8221; notes Hemingway, is now the second such error in an excerpt from the Times reporters that has ended up burying exculpatory evidence.
In the new excerpt for The Atlantic titled, &#8220;<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/09/pogrebin-kelly-kavanaugh/598159/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">We Spent 10 Months Investigating Kavanaugh. Here’s What We Found</a>,&#8221; Pogrebin and Kelly write (emphasis added):
<blockquote>Using Martha’s common-sense test, the claims of Deborah Ramirez, while not proven by witnesses, also ring true to us. Ramirez, who was a Yale classmate of Kavanaugh’s, said he drunkenly thrust his penis at her during a party in their freshman-year dormitory, Lawrance Hall. The people who allegedly witnessed the event—Kavanaugh’s friends Kevin Genda, David Todd, and David White—have kept mum about it. Kavanaugh has denied it. If such an incident had occurred, Kavanaugh said, it would have been the &#8220;talk of campus.&#8221;</blockquote>
&#8220;It is not true that the alleged witnesses kept mum,&#8221; counters Hemingway. &#8220;This is another major error by The New York Times reporters.&#8221;
Hemingway points to the clear evidence that Pogrebin and Kelly appear to be attempting to bury evidence which was provided from the very beginning, in the first report on Ramirez&#8217;s claim. Ronan Farrow and Jane Meyer broke the story in a report for <a href="http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/senate-democrats-investigate-a-new-allegation-of-sexual-misconduct-from-the-supreme-court-nominee-brett-kavanaughs-college-years-deborah-ramirez">The New Yorker</a> that makes quite clear that potential witnesses were willing to go on the record about the claim and that they sided with Kavanaugh:
<blockquote>One of the male classmates who Ramirez said egged on Kavanaugh denied any memory of the party. &#8220;I don’t think Brett would flash himself to Debbie, or anyone, for that matter,’&#8221; he said. Asked why he thought Ramirez was making the allegation, he responded, &#8220;I have no idea.&#8221; The other male classmate who Ramirez said was involved in the incident commented, &#8220;I have zero recollection.&#8221;
In a statement, two of those male classmates who Ramirez alleged were involved in the incident, the wife of a third male student she said was involved, and one other classmate, Dan Murphy, disputed Ramirez’s account of events: &#8220;We were the people closest to Brett Kavanaugh during his first year at Yale. He was a roommate to some of us, and we spent a great deal of time with him, including in the dorm where this incident allegedly took place. Some of us were also friends with Debbie Ramirez during and after her time at Yale. We can say with confidence that if the incident Debbie alleges ever occurred, we would have seen or heard about it—and we did not. The behavior she describes would be completely out of character for Brett. In addition, some of us knew Debbie long after Yale, and she never described this incident until Brett’s Supreme Court nomination was pending. Editors from the New Yorker contacted some of us because we are the people who would know the truth, and we told them that we never saw or heard about this.&#8221;</blockquote>
Hemingway notes that the book contains the same &#8220;major error&#8221; as the adapted passage published by The Atlantic.
This new decision to bury exculpatory evidence follows the controversy stirred up by the first excerpt of the book published by the Times over the weekend, which glaringly left out a key piece of information that was included in the book and which the authors blame Times editors for removing.
In a piece published in the Times&#8217; Sunday Review, Pogrebin and Kelly wrote: &#8220;We also uncovered a previously unreported story about Mr. Kavanaugh in his freshman year that echoes Ms. Ramirez’s allegation. A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student.&#8221;
But after being called out by other journalists, including Hemingway and co-author Carrie Severino, for leaving out a key piece of information, the Times issued a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/51805/breaking-new-york-times-adds-correction-kavanaugh-ryan-saavedra">correction</a> revealing that the alleged victim declined to be interviewed and her friends &#8220;say that she does not recall the incident&#8221;:
<blockquote>An earlier version of this article, which was adapted from a forthcoming book, did not include one element of the book&#8217;s account regarding an assertion by a Yale classmate that friends of Brett Kavanaugh pushed his penis into the hand of a female student at a drunken dorm party. The book reports that the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say that she does not recall the incident. That information has been added to the article.</blockquote>
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/51883/cbs-real-bombshell-kavanaugh-fords-allies-james-barrett">CBS: ‘Real Bombshell’ On Kavanaugh Is Ford’s Allies Pressuring, Threatening Key Witness</a>

new_york_times_gi.jpg

NYT Reporters Slammed For Another ‘Major Error’: Witnesses DID Defend Kavanaugh

Supreme Court

On Monday’s episode of “The Andrew Klavan Show,” Klavan breaks down the most recent Kavanaugh accusation published by The New York Times and talks about how quickly it fell apart. Video and partial transcript below: 
This [New York] Times story is an amazing piece of self-destruction. It&#8217;s in keeping with what they&#8217;re doing now, everything is get Trump, everything is destroy conservatives, everything is lump conservatives with Trump and just page after page about how Trump is evil, what a terrible thing he&#8217;s done to us, how we’ll never recover. Never mind the economy, never mind the fact that we&#8217;re not at war, never mind the fact that everything is actually going pretty well.
At The New York Times, Donald Trump is the devil and they cannot stop attacking him, and part of him is, of course, the appointment of Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. You know, not wishing anything bad on Ruth Bader Ginsburg, but very possibly another Supreme Court pick [is] coming up, so they&#8217;re getting all the more hysterical about it.
So a book is going to come out [“The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation”] written by two New York Times reporters. So they run this thing &#8230; and you all remember how they tried to get him with Christine Blasey Ford, [saying] he&#8217;d done this horrible thing when he was 18- or 17- or 16-years old, whatever it was. Now, [the Times] say they&#8217;ve got a shocking new sexual allegation.
<div class="embed video fluid-video"><iframe src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/aPbkB9lFXMo?start=405" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe></div>
When [Kavanaugh] was at Yale in the &#8217;80s, he was at a party, and I guess the idea is he was naked and some of his pals shoved him into a girl so that his penis touched her hand. This is written by Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, and we&#8217;ll get back to them in a minute. …
Mollie Hemingway and Carrie Severino wrote this wonderful, wonderful book called “Justice On Trial.” I read it, I recommend it highly. It is deeply, deeply researched. All about this attack on Brett Kavanaugh, and where it came from, and the strategies they were using, all this stuff. Here&#8217;s Mollie talking about the way the Times reported this allegation:
<blockquote>HEMINGWAY: So there is this book coming out on Tuesday, it&#8217;s written by two reporters who were actually kind of involved in anti-Kavanaugh efforts, probably the best way to put it. They were reporting on it for The New York Times, they were pulled off of their beats to help, because they both had privileged backgrounds where they had intersected with people who were in the story, and Robin Pogrebin went to Yale with Kavanaugh, she actually roomed with one of the central figures who coordinated anti- Kavanaugh efforts. She lightly discloses that in her book, and now they’re out with a book — and Carrie [Severino] and I have been reading it, I just finished it. They also have an essay where they claim that there was another allegation. Left out of the essay is &#8230; that the claim that was made is actually denied by the alleged victim. They put that in their book, but they didn&#8217;t put that in their essay, which is causing some people to question their journalistic ethics.</blockquote>
This is amazing stuff. They did put an editorial note after 24 hours of enduring the wrath of all humankind. They put in an editorial note mentioning that the woman who is supposed to be at the center of this doesn&#8217;t remember this. She doesn&#8217;t say it happened, she&#8217;s not denying it, she just says she doesn’t remember something like that ever happened, which is pretty amazing [to leave that out].
I mean, that is an amazing piece, and you have to remember the big thing, the big take on this, is why didn&#8217;t the FBI research this? You have to go back and remember that the whole thing was about delaying the Kavanaugh acceptance, delaying putting him on the Court, so that hopefully something magical would happen — they would find that Trump was actually Vladimir Putin in disguise, you know, they would actually get to an election and vote him out of office — something, anything to delay.
So they kept pouring things on, kept masking more and more things, kept moving the goalpost, and finally, the Republicans agreed to let the FBI investigate the two most believable allegations: The Blasey Ford allegation and one other allegation. They investigated those [and] found no proof that they had taken place. It’s obvious nonsense.
Now here&#8217;s Carrie Severino, the other author of the book “Justice On Trial,” talking about the chain, how this piece of intelligence actually becomes a story, [and] how the sources pass it along.
<blockquote>SEVERINO: What&#8217;s so funny about this allegation is the incredibly attenuated nature of it. So what they really have is two Senate staffers who say that Stier told them that he heard from a woman at a party — when &#8230; everyone was maybe drunk — Kavanaugh’s friends pushed him and his genitalia into her. Now what&#8217;s crazy is that this story itself is, I mean if you even followed that, that&#8217;s impressive, it&#8217;s so many links in the chain. And the part that they leave out is that this woman apparently had told her friend that she doesn’t even remember it [and] Stier himself — and the woman are not speaking to Pogrebin and Kelly. So this is a, you know, it&#8217;s not even like third-hand, fourth-hand, account of an incident that, even if it happened as it is described, sounds like it was Kavanaugh&#8217;s friends who were the wrongdoers here. So it is a very bizarre thing to try to hang your hat on, as a new allegation.</blockquote>
On top of which, Stier, who they refer to as this kind of &#8230; well-respected guy — he runs a nonprofit and &#8230; oh, he was a well-respected man — he was also on Bill Clinton&#8217;s legal team when they were defending him against charges of sexual malfeasance with Monica Lewinsky. Stier is on that legal team, and on the other team against him: Brett Kavanaugh.
So they&#8217;ve got these two reporters, one of whom was involved with trying to take down Kavanaugh. They&#8217;ve got a source who isn&#8217;t talking to them, who was on the Bill Clinton team against Brett Kavanaugh. Plus, it wasn&#8217;t even from the source. It was two people, two aides, telling them that the source said that this happened at a party to a woman who doesn&#8217;t remember it. I mean, this is something you scrawl on a bathroom wall — this is not a news story that should make it into some place supposedly as terrific a journalistic venue as The New York Times.
<a href="https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-andrew-klavan-show/id1045171376?mt=2">Listen to full episodes of “The Andrew Klavan Show” on iTunes. </a>
<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/podcasts/show/andrew-klavan-show">Watch “The Andrew Klavan Show” on-demand!</a>

judge_k.jpg

KLAVAN: The NYT Implodes After Declaring War On Kavanaugh

A new book written by two New York Times journalists, an excerpt of which has sparked a media firestorm and much <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/51857/nyt-tries-answer-questions-kavanaugh-report-james-barrett">criticism</a> directed at the paper, contains details that CBS describes as the &#8220;real bombshell&#8221; the Times&#8217; initial report missed. The long-time &#8220;close friend&#8221; of Christine Blasey Ford, who Ford named as a potential witness to the alleged sexual assault by Brett Kavanaugh back in high school, not only says she does not believe Ford&#8217;s accusation, but told the FBI that allies of Ford threatened her with a smear campaign to change her story.
Leland Keyser, a long-time &#8220;close friend&#8221; of Ford, is one of four people Ford named as supposedly being at the alleged party where she said Kavanaugh tried to force himself on her. In its report Monday, CBS Evening News notes that with Keyser&#8217;s first public statements on her friend&#8217;s allegations, which she gave in an interview with Times reporters Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, all four of the people Ford claims were at the party now flatly deny that it ever happened.
As The Daily Wire reported Monday, Keyser also says that Ford&#8217;s allies attempted to pressure her to change the story, telling the FBI that those allies even threatened to mount a smear campaign against her if she didn&#8217;t — a claim previously revealed by Mollie Hemingway and Carrie Severino in their book, &#8220;<a href="https://www.amazon.com/Justice-Trial-Kavanaugh-Confirmation-Supreme/dp/1621579832/ref=asc_df_1621579832/?tag=hyprod-20&amp;linkCode=df0&amp;hvadid=366299517591&amp;hvpos=1o1&amp;hvnetw=g&amp;hvrand=12984476754283352462&amp;hvpone=&amp;hvptwo=&amp;hvqmt=&amp;hvdev=c&amp;hvdvcmdl=&amp;hvlocint=&amp;hvlocphy=1022764&amp;hvtargid=pla-783566544414&amp;psc=1&amp;tag=&amp;ref=&amp;adgrpid=79033899791&amp;hvpone=&amp;hvptwo=&amp;hvadid=366299517591&amp;hvpos=1o1&amp;hvnetw=g&amp;hvrand=12984476754283352462&amp;hvqmt=&amp;hvdev=c&amp;hvdvcmdl=&amp;hvlocint=&amp;hvlocphy=1022764&amp;hvtargid=pla-783566544414">Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Supreme Court</a>.&#8221;
In a tweet Monday promoting the CBS report, CBS&#8217;s Jan Crawford underscored the &#8220;real bombshell&#8221; highighted by the network (h/t <a href="https://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2019/09/17/real-bombshell-cbs-news-hits-nyt-kavanaugh-story-focus-witness-tampering/">Ed Morrissey</a>): &#8220;We report tonight the real bombshell: Christine Ford’s close HS friend (who Ford says was at the party when Kavanaugh allegedly assaulted her) said Ford’s story is not believable and told the FBI Ford’s allies pressured her, threatened her with a smear campaign to say otherwise.&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">A new sexual misconduct allegation against SCOTUS Justice Brett Kavanaugh fueled impeachment calls from Democratic presidential candidates; former Yale classmates claim he exposed himself to a woman at a college party, <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@nytimes</a> reports.
Here&#8217;s <a href="https://twitter.com/JanCBS?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@JanCBS</a> <a href="https://t.co/HcfNV8jqzT">https://t.co/HcfNV8jqzT</a> <a href="https://t.co/999JwfsIMz">pic.twitter.com/999JwfsIMz</a>
— CBS Evening News (@CBSEveningNews) <a href="https://twitter.com/CBSEveningNews/status/1173729651199549446?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 16, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">We report tonight the real bombshell: Christine Ford’s close HS friend (who Ford says was at the party when Kavanaugh allegedly assaulted her) said Ford’s story is not believable and told the FBI Ford’s allies pressured her, threatened her with a smear campaign to say otherwise <a href="https://t.co/GQhBTXHcze">https://t.co/GQhBTXHcze</a>
— Jan Crawford (@JanCBS) <a href="https://twitter.com/JanCBS/status/1173781504767483905?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
As <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/51819/son-witness-who-denied-blasey-fords-kavanaugh-amanda-prestigiacomo">The Daily Wire</a> reported Monday, Hemingway and Severino&#8217;s book, which was published in July but largely ignored by the media, unlike the new Times reporters&#8217; book, referenced the alleged attempt to pressure Keyser. In a report for The Federalist Monday, <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/15/new-book-christine-blasey-fords-friend-leland-keyser-doesnt-believe/">Hemingway</a> summarized the revelations in their book that the Times reporters confirmed and elaborated upon:
<blockquote>The authors also acknowledge what had previously been reported in &#8220;Justice on Trial,&#8221; about the efforts of mutual friends to get her to change her testimony to be more supportive of Blasey Ford. The reporters say that some of Blasey Ford’s friends “had grown frustrated with Keyser. Her comments about the alleged Kavanaugh incident had been too limited, some of them felt, and did not help their friend&#8217;s case. Surely, given what a close friend Keyser had been, she could say more to substantiate Ford’s testimony and general veracity, even if she could not corroborate Ford’s more specific memories.&#8221;
A group text was formed in which friends such as Cheryl Amitay and Lulu Gonella discussed how to get her to say something more helpful to the cause. An unnamed man on the text suggested that they defame her as an addict. Keyser has been in recovery for some time, as her friends know and as has previously been reported.
Amitay answered, &#8220;Leland is a major stumbling block.&#8221; While asserting she didn&#8217;t want her to make anything up out of whole cloth, she offered ideas for things that could sound supportive of Ford’s story, such as that she’d been in similar situations with Blasey Ford that summer.
&#8220;I was told behind the scenes that certain things could be spread about me if I didn&#8217;t comply,&#8221; Keyser told the reporters, a stunning admission of the pressure to which she was subjected to by Blasey Ford’s allies.</blockquote>
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/51819/son-witness-who-denied-blasey-fords-kavanaugh-amanda-prestigiacomo">Son Of ‘Witness’ Who Denied Blasey Ford’s Kavanaugh Assault Claim Speaks Out: Pressured To Lie By Blasey Ford Allies</a>
<div>
<div></div>
</div>

christine_blasey_ford_gi.jpg

CBS: ‘Real Bombshell’ On Kavanaugh Is Ford’s Allies Pressuring, Threatening Key Witness

Christine Blasey Ford

The New York Times is taking serious heat from all sides for publishing a disastrous Opinion section article this past weekend that alleges U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh forced his penis into the hand of a female student at Yale back in the 1980s. The article completely omits the fact that the alleged victim does not even remember the alleged event.
Over at <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/16/media/new-york-times-kavanaugh/index.html">CNN Business</a>, Oliver Darcy writes that The New York Times completely &#8220;fumbled a high-profile story&#8221; that embarrassed the Times&#8217; opinion editor, James Bennet.
&#8220;It was the latest in a series of high-profile blunders that has caused embarrassment to James Bennet since he was appointed in 2016 as the editor overseeing The Times&#8217; Opinion section,&#8221; writes Darcy. &#8220;Bennet&#8217;s tenure has been marked with several mishaps that have generated controversy, drawn criticism, and spurred at least one lawsuit &#8230; While the Opinion section has unquestionably produced strong work in the years since Bennet took over, it has also been culpable for some of the biggest journalistic black eyes at The Times during that period.&#8221;
Despite that, a spokesperson for the Times defended Bennet&#8217;s decision to publish the piece that said nothing about the fact the alleged victim had no recollection of a sexual assault occurring.
&#8220;Opinion produces powerful journalism that makes a difference in people&#8217;s lives from the ground-breaking, on-going Privacy Project to an editorial series on laws that value a fetus over the life of the mother, to an on-camera essay by Alysia Montaño that resulted in a number of companies changing their contracts with female athletes to protect women during and after pregnancy,&#8221; the spokesperson for the Times told CNN Business. &#8220;The diversity and quality of this work is being embraced not just by readers but by professional peers.&#8221;
Even CNN&#8217;s Brian Stelter, the same host who once allowed a psychologist to claim that President Trump is worse than Stalin or Hitler, <a href="https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/media-question-new-york-times-blunder/">called out the Times</a> for such a glaring mistake.
&#8220;Times turmoil,&#8221; read the headline to Stelter&#8217;s morning media newsletter, in which he advised the newspaper to &#8220;take disciplinary action in the wake of this embarrassing episode.&#8221;
&#8220;It is certainly possible, I’m told by a plugged-in staffer, as the newspaper reviews a glaring omission in its original story about the book and an offensive tweet about the story,&#8221; said Stelter.
Over at <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2019/09/16/new-york-timess-rocky-kavanaugh-weekend/">The Washington Post</a>, Erik Wemple said that the Times has some &#8220;explaining to do.&#8221;
&#8220;The roar from the Internet left the New York Times with some explaining to do. How did this piece land in the Sunday Review section? What was going on here?&#8221;
&#8220;That’s a grievous omission, one that could account for some of the outrage following initial publication of the piece,&#8221; continued Wemple.
Joe Scarborough of MSNBC <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/51872/joe-scarborough-blasts-kamala-harris-pushing-paul-bois">has been equally critical</a> of the Times for publishing the Opinion piece while omitting key facts. &#8220;I could not believe The New York Times would write this piece without that information contained in it. Are you surprised 24 hours &#8230; went by before they clarified that fact?&#8221; he said on Monday.

kavanaugh.jpg

CNN, WaPo Admit NYT Has A Big Egg On Its Face After Kavanaugh Debacle

Washington Post

On Tuesday, the women of “The View” hammered New York Times reporters Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly for elevating an unsubstantiated accusation against U.S. Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in its Sunday Review section that excluded the vital detail that the alleged victim did not recall the incident in question. Only after the Times was called out for the omission did it update with the significant correction.
During the questioning by the co-hosts, Pogrebin and Kelly again deflected blame to their editors and made key concessions regarding their credibility. Pogrebin also copped to writing an infamous now-deleted tweet posted by the Times about Mr. Kavanaugh’s genitalia.
“The New York Times’ ran an excerpt of your book over the weekend in the opinion section that included a new allegation of sexual misconduct against Brett Kavanaugh. But you guys left out a key detail; the alleged victim — who you name by name in the book, but you’re not gonna name her here on the show — ‘refused to discuss the incident’ and ‘several of her friends said [that she doesn’t] recall it happening,’” McCain laid into the reporters.
“I think this is sort of Ground Zero for why so many people mistrust the media, why The New York Times has the nickname ‘The New York Slimes’ from many people in conservative circles,” continued McCain. “The Times actually had to run an editors’ note following up. How did this vital fact get left out?”
Kelly claimed “there was no desire to withhold vital information from our readers,” citing that the book included the detail initially omitted from the opinion piece. “We had to edit for length and clarity,” she rationalized.
The Times reporter then shifted blame to her editors. “During the editing process there was an oversight, and this key detail about the fact that the woman herself has told friends that she doesn’t remember and has not wanted to talk about it got cut,” she said.
“It was an oversight and the Times corrected it and, uh, we’re very sorry that that happened,” Kelly added.
McCain then pressed the reporters as to why they used the alleged victim’s name in their book despite the fact that the woman did not want her name revealed.
“I understand that the woman didn’t want her name out publicly,” the co-host told the reporters. “If not, why is her name in the book?”
“Her name is in the book because we think it’s relevant information,” Kelly unapologetically stated.
Kelly noted that former Kavanaugh classmate Max Stier provided the name. McCain again chimed in: “He’s a Clintonite, right?”
“He did, I understand, work for <a href="https://www.law.com/nationallawjournal/almID/1202762936597/?slreturn=20190817132007">Williams and Connolly</a>,” confessed Kelly.
“Why wasn’t that in the piece, if we’re talking about credibility?” co-host Abby Huntsman pressed.
“Right, uh, I understand it’s relevant background,” conceded Kelly. “We didn’t see all of that context to be necessary,” she added, “but I understand why you’re bringing it up and I think it’s fair.”
McCain also inquired about Kelly and Pogrebin “throwing The New York Times opinion editorial board under the bus.”
“In my experience, I get the final say,” McCain said of the opinion pieces she’s written for the Times. “So, where was the disconnect there?” she asked the reporters.
Kelly said the editing process is “a team effort [and] there was just an oversight here.”
“Did you guys just miss it?” pressed co-host Sunny Hostin. “Did you miss that that was so important? You are the authors of the book, did you just miss it … in The New York Times opinion piece?”
“I think actually the way it happened was the Times was concerned about naming her. … In that sentence there has her name, it also had that she didn’t remember it,” Pogrebin said, claiming that when they removed the sentence, they accidentally omitted the most vital detail of the claim.
“Did you read it right before it went to print?” Hostin continued her questioning.
“Ya know, we thought we did,” responded Pogrebin. “And as soon as we realized it, we corrected it,” she claimed.
During the interview, Pogrebin <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/51801/new-york-times-deletes-tweet-about-brett-amanda-prestigiacomo">confessed</a> to crafting a controversial tweet about Justice Kavanaugh’s “penis.” The tweet, which was later deleted and disavowed by the Times, read: “Having a penis thrust in your face at a drunken dorm party may seem like harmless fun. But when Brett Kavanaugh did it to her, Deborah Ramirez says, it confirmed that she didn&#8217;t belong at Yale in the first place.”
WATCH:
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">“There was no desire to withhold important information from our readers.”
‘Education of Brett Kavanaugh’ authors <a href="https://twitter.com/rpogrebin?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@rpogrebin</a> and <a href="https://twitter.com/katekelly?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@katekelly</a> discuss their controversial ‘NY Times’ opinion piece, saying missing detail was an “oversight” in editing process. <a href="https://t.co/9fsGnMW6QO">https://t.co/9fsGnMW6QO</a> <a href="https://t.co/kax2P98csZ">pic.twitter.com/kax2P98csZ</a>
— The View (@TheView) <a href="https://twitter.com/TheView/status/1174003065529102336?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/51801/new-york-times-deletes-tweet-about-brett-amanda-prestigiacomo">New York Times Deletes Tweet About Brett Kavanaugh’s ‘Penis’</a>

&#8220;The View&#8221;

WATCH: Ladies Of ‘The View’ Hammer New York Times Reporters Over Bungled Kavanaugh Smear

Meghan McCain

The View

In a wide-ranging report for <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/09/turmoil-engulfs-the-times-over-kavanaugh-debacle">Vanity Fair</a> chronicling the &#8220;turmoil&#8221; now &#8220;engulfing&#8221; The New York Times in the wake of its decision to print an excerpt of a book detailing an additional, unproven sexual assault allegation against now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, journalist Joe Pompeo reveals that the NYT&#8217;s news division turned down the exposé, leaving the book&#8217;s authors to deliver their scoop to the opinion pages.
Reporters Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly &#8220;initially pitched their reporting to the news side,&#8221; hoping for a front page, above-the-fold story that would embroil Kavanaugh, yet again, in a high-profile controversy, but The New York Times news editors &#8220;felt that there wasn’t enough juice to warrant a story there, let alone a big page-one treatment&#8221; — the kind leftists have been hoping for, Vanity Fair admits, since Kavanaugh was confirmed to the bench.
Instead, Pogrebin and Kelly were told to pitch an excerpt from their forthcoming book, delving into claims made against Kavanaugh by a woman named Deborah Ramirez, to the opinion-editorial side, where they could hope to see some of the juiciest parts of their report in print, but without the same level of scrutiny the Times reserves for its news section.
As Vanity Fair ultimately points out, The New York Times likely knew that the average reader wouldn&#8217;t take note of where the story first appeared, particularly if they get their news primarily from the Internet. When the &#8220;story&#8221; broke, it wasn&#8217;t clear that Pogrebin and Kelly&#8217;s scoop was actually in the opinion section, or even that it was excerpted from a forthcoming tome, and the lack of information allowed interested parties to run with the claims.
Ultimately, the gamble backfired. The excerpt, printed in the Times, left out key details, including that the woman at the center of the alleged incident doesn&#8217;t remember it happening and that the man who fed the story to the Times reporters — a longtime Democratic operative who faced off against Kavanaugh during the Clinton impeachment hearings — also fed the story to Congressional investigators during the Kavanaugh hearings, only to have it dismissed out of hand by the FBI and the Senate Judiciary Committee when they could find no evidence the incident ever happened.
Vanity Fair also mentions that other news organizations, including <a href="https://beta.washingtonpost.com/politics/senator-says-fbi-did-not-investigate-allegation-against-kavanaugh/2019/09/16/a881f584-d883-11e9-adff-79254db7f766_story.html">The Washington Post</a>, were already aware of the allegation and had passed on printing it because the woman Max Stier named as Kavanaugh&#8217;s &#8220;victim&#8221; had no memory of the party or being the subject of Kavanaugh and his friends&#8217; advances, and no one besides Stier could corroborate the story. On Monday, the Post admitted that they&#8217;d passed on the scoop &#8220;in part because the intermediaries declined to identify the alleged witness and because the woman who was said to be involved declined to comment.&#8221;
Pogrebin and Kelly&#8217;s story gets around the corroboration point by suggesting that Stier directed them to several people who could verify his story — but those people verified that Stier had raised his concerns with Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee, not that Stier&#8217;s story was true.
As the Daily Wire reported earlier Tuesday morning, The New York Times is now facing more questions over how the excerpt got published — and specifically how it got published missing key details about who remembered the incident actually happening. In an interview Monday night, Pogrebin and Kelly claimed that they submitted the full excerpt from their book to the Times opinion editors and that the editors — not the authors — removed those key details.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/51857/nyt-tries-answer-questions-kavanaugh-report-james-barrett">NYT Tries To Answer Questions On Kavanaugh Report Debacle, Raises More Questions</a>

neil_gorsuch_brett_kavanaugh_gi.jpg

REPORT: NYT News Department, Washington Post Turned Down Kavanaugh &#8216;Scoop&#8217; Over Lack Of Evidence

After The New York Times published a &#8220;bombshell&#8221; report that supposedly nailed Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh for sexual misconduct, Mollie Hemingway was among the first to question the story.
In a new book, &#8220;The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation,&#8221; two New York Times reporters write about Max Stier, who worked with lawyers of Bill Clinton handling the accusation that Clinton had exposed himself to a woman in a hotel room. ​Stier told the writers he saw fellow Yale student Kavanaugh drop his pants and other people at a college party put Kavanaugh’s penis into the hands of a classmate.
Hemingway, an editor at The Federalist, wrote that day on Twitter: &#8220;The book notes, quietly, that the woman Max Stier named as having been supposedly victimized by Kavanaugh and friends denies any memory of the alleged event. Seems, I don&#8217;t know, significant.&#8221;
The author of &#8220;Justice on Trial: The Kavanaugh Confirmation and the Future of the Supreme Court,&#8221; Hemingway appeared Tuesday on Fox News, where she once again shredded the problematic New York Times story.
&#8220;I recently wrote a book on the Kavanaugh confirmation&#8230; we interviewed more than 100 people. We got all of our facts right,&#8221; she said on &#8220;Fox &amp; Friends.&#8221; &#8220;We didn&#8217;t traffic in gossip. And we told the accurate story of what happened. So I know it can be done. And there&#8217;s no excuse for how they did this.&#8221;
After outrage over the omission, The Times was forced to print a correction. &#8220;An earlier version of this article, which was adapted from a forthcoming book, did not include one element of the book’s account regarding an assertion by a Yale classmate that friends of Brett Kavanaugh pushed his penis into the hand of a female student at a drunken dorm party,&#8221; the Times explains in the correction. &#8220;The book reports that the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say that she does not recall the incident. That information has been added to the article.&#8221;
But Hemingway said the &#8220;error&#8221; should never have occurred.
&#8220;I knew that they had left out the most important piece of information and they should&#8217;ve included it in their story,&#8221; Hemingway told Fox News. &#8220;There&#8217;s no defense for not including the fact that their supposed allegation against Kavanaugh was based on a false premise. The woman involved said she had no recollection of it.&#8221;
The two writers of the new book, Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, appeared on MSNBC&#8217;s &#8220;The Last Word&#8221; on Monday and claimed that they included the fact that the alleged victim does not remember the incident in the article, but that Times&#8217; editors removed it.
Pogrebin said that editors removed the woman&#8217;s name, and &#8220;in removing her name, they removed the other reference to the fact that she didn&#8217;t remember it.&#8221;
But Hemingway said the reporters have continued to talk about the allegation without mentioning that the alleged victim remembers nothing.
&#8220;I do agree that the editors are also responsible. It shouldn&#8217;t just be the reporters. But really, the entire institution is to blame,&#8221; Hemingway said. &#8220;Having said that, in an NPR interview that aired yesterday, these reporters did the exact same thing. They made it sound like they had a credible story about a woman and they hid the fact that the woman denied it ever happened.&#8221;
&#8220;You cannot blame that on editors,&#8221; she continued. &#8220;It&#8217;s an hour-long interview &#8212; plenty of time to discuss it.&#8221;
Hemingway also said people need to demand a stop to what she called a &#8220;smear&#8221; campaign.
&#8220;The media keep being allowed to continue in this smear campaign. I think decent people, regardless of their politics, are just looking at this and saying &#8216;Is there no end to this? When will they stop?'&#8221; she said.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/51857/nyt-tries-answer-questions-kavanaugh-report-james-barrett">NYT Tries To Answer Questions On Kavanaugh Report Debacle, Raises More Questions</a>

bk_2.jpg

Hemingway Accuses NYT Of Hiding Facts, Using ‘Gossip’ To Smear Kavanaugh

The New York Times is getting hammered from both the Right and the Left over its decision to publish yet another unsubstantiated accusation against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in its Sunday Review section that initially excluded significant information undermining the claim, while also posting a now infamous tweet it quickly deleted. Amid the mounting questions over the Times&#8217; handling of the story and the tweet, one of the editors of the paper attempted to provide some answers, but ended up only raising more questions.
In an article adapted from their new book on Kavanaugh, two New York Times journalists, Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, include a previously unreported claim by Max Stier, a Yale classmate of both Kavanaugh and Deborah Ramirez, the woman who famously made the second unproven claim against Kavanaugh during his confirmation process that he once thrust his exposed penis at her during a party.
&#8220;We also uncovered a previously unreported story about Mr. Kavanaugh in his freshman year that echoes Ms. Ramirez’s allegation,&#8221; Pogrebin and Kelly write. &#8220;A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student.&#8221;
But after being called out for leaving out key exculpatory information included in their book, the Times issued a <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/51805/breaking-new-york-times-adds-correction-kavanaugh-ryan-saavedra">correction</a> revealing that the alleged victim in Stier&#8217;s claim declined to be interviewed and that her friends &#8220;say that she does not recall the incident&#8221;:
<blockquote>An earlier version of this article, which was adapted from a forthcoming book, did not include one element of the book&#8217;s account regarding an assertion by a Yale classmate that friends of Brett Kavanaugh pushed his penis into the hand of a female student at a drunken dorm party. The book reports that the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say that she does not recall the incident. That information has been added to the article.</blockquote>
In an attempt to stem the tide of criticism for its mishandling of the story, the Times asked Deputy Editorial Page Editor James Dao to <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/16/reader-center/brett-kavanaugh-accusation-yale.html">answer</a> a few select questions from readers. Not included among the questions was even a single reference to the failure of the Times to initially include the information undermining the allegation. While Dao somehow doesn&#8217;t address the biggest criticism from the Right, he does address the criticism from the Left about why the allegation was initially broken in the Review section rather than the news, but, according to a Vanity Fair report, Dao may not have given the full story.
While Dao isn&#8217;t forced to answer any questions about the Times&#8217; failure to initially include information about the alleged victim&#8217;s friends saying she doesn&#8217;t recall the alleged incident, Dao was pressed on why the unsubstantiated claim was published at all. Here&#8217;s the question and answer:
<blockquote>Some readers have argued that the latest accusation against Mr. Kavanaugh was too weak to appear in The Times. Given that the woman who was said to be involved in the incident refused to be interviewed, and her friends have said she doesn’t remember what happened, why did you include that accusation in the essay? 
DAO: The essay included a previously unreported claim that friends pushed Mr. Kavanaugh’s penis into the hand of a female Yale student during a dorm party with drunken classmates. During the authors’ investigation, they learned that a classmate, Max Stier, witnessed the event and later reported it to senators and to the F.B.I. The authors corroborated his story with two government officials, who said they found it credible. Based on that corroboration, we felt mentioning the claim as one part of a broader essay was warranted.</blockquote>
Pogrebin and Kelly have since <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/51856/new-detail-emerges-new-york-times-smear-brett-ryan-saavedra">told MSNBC</a> that they actually did include the reference to the denial by the alleged victim&#8217;s friends, but that an editor initially cut it out. Dao also makes no mention of this.
In his response, Dao is also repeating a potentially misleading claim in the report that they &#8220;corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier.&#8221; As the <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/new-kavanaugh-allegation-comes-from-clinton-defense-lawyer">Washington Examiner</a> notes, &#8220;that appears to be a corroboration that Stier had made this claim, not corroboration from any other witnesses to the incident or from the alleged victim herself.&#8221;
Asked why the &#8220;bombshell&#8221; claim was published in the Review section, which is part of the Opinion Desk, rather than than the news section, Dao said it is &#8220;not unusual for essays in the Review to break news.&#8221; But according to <a href="https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2019/09/turmoil-engulfs-the-times-over-kavanaugh-debacle">Vanity Fair</a>, that&#8217;s not the full story. Kelly and Pogrebin, sources told the outlet, initially pitched their scoop to the news side, but editors felt there &#8220;wasn&#8217;t enough juice to warrant a story there&#8221;:
<blockquote>People familiar with how things went down told me that Kelly and Pogrebin initially pitched their scoop to the news side, but the top editors ultimately felt that there wasn’t enough juice to warrant a story there, let alone a big page-one treatment (the type many lefties would have been salivating for). Instead, Pogrebin and Kelly were told that they could pitch the Review, which is entirely independent of the News department. I asked for clarification as to what about the story wasn’t News-pages-worthy, but the Times declined to comment, as did Kelly and Pogrebin.</blockquote>
Dao was also asked about the decision to post the quickly <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/51801/new-york-times-deletes-tweet-about-brett-amanda-prestigiacomo">deleted tweet</a> that assumed Kavanaugh&#8217;s guilt based on an uncorroborated claim, which read: &#8220;Having a penis thrust in your face at a drunken dorm party may seem like harmless fun. But when Brett Kavanaugh did it to her, Deborah Ramirez says, it confirmed that she didn&#8217;t belong at Yale in the first place.&#8221; Dao responded with a vague non-answer, stating simply that while they have &#8220;a process for writing and editing social media copy,&#8221; in this case, &#8220;the process was not followed properly, resulting in a tweet that fell well below our standards.&#8221;
During an appearance on &#8220;The View&#8221; Monday, Pogrebin admitted to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/51871/author-anti-kavanaugh-book-wrote-offensive-nyt-ashe-schow">writing the tweet herself</a>.
Also left out of the Times&#8217; story is any mention of Stier&#8217;s role as a Bill Clinton defense attorney. Stier has run a nonpartisan nonprofit for two decades but also once served as one of Clinton&#8217;s defense lawyers in his impeachment trial. The <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/new-kavanaugh-allegation-comes-from-clinton-defense-lawyer">Washington Examiner</a> provides more details:
<blockquote>While Kavanaugh worked on independent counsel Ken Starr’s <a href="https://www.npr.org/2018/08/17/639670928/brett-kavanaughs-role-in-the-starr-investigation-and-how-it-shaped-him" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">lengthy and contentious investigation</a> into President Bill Clinton, ultimately <a href="https://www.lawfareblog.com/brett-kavanaugh-and-starr-report-how-our-office-drafted-impeachment-referral" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">helping author the Starr Report</a> and its impeachment referral, Stier worked on Clinton’s <a href="https://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/08/counsel.report/" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">impeachment defense team</a> and helped the embattled president <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/whtext011399.htm" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">fight charges of perjury</a> flowing from his false denials about an affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky.</blockquote>
The Examiner points out some other key details that have gone largely unreported:
<blockquote>Pogrebin and Kelly also claimed in their essay that Stier &#8220;notified senators and the F.B.I. about this account, but the F.B.I. did not investigate.&#8221; Staffers for Sen. Chuck Grassley, then-chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee directly overseeing the Kavanaugh confirmation, told the Washington Examiner that Stier <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/sen-chuck-grassley-never-even-received-the-latest-kavanaugh-allegation" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">never informed them</a> about this allegation. The <a href="https://beta.washingtonpost.com/politics/senator-says-fbi-did-not-investigate-allegation-against-kavanaugh/2019/09/16/a881f584-d883-11e9-adff-79254db7f766_story.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">Washington Post</a> reported Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware, sent the allegation to FBI Director Christopher Wray. But Grassley’s office said <a href="https://beta.washingtonpost.com/politics/senator-says-fbi-did-not-investigate-allegation-against-kavanaugh/2019/09/16/a881f584-d883-11e9-adff-79254db7f766_story.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer">it had not been made aware</a> of the specifics of the claim.</blockquote>
Another detail mentioned in Kelly and Pogrebin&#8217;s book that didn&#8217;t make it into the Times report is Christine Blasey Ford&#8217;s long-time friend, Leland Keyser, saying she doesn&#8217;t believe her friend&#8217;s claim.
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/51811/christine-blasey-fords-friend-doesnt-believe-her-joseph-curl">Christine Blasey Ford’s Friend Doesn’t Believe Her On Kavanaugh Accusation, Says New Book</a>
This article has been revised for clarity and to include the update that Pogrebin said she wrote the since-deleted tweet herself.

new_york_times_kavanaugh_gi.jpg

NYT Tries To Answer Questions On Kavanaugh Report Debacle, Raises More Questions

President Donald Trump called for everyone at The New York Times who was involved in the smear of Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh to resign on Monday, saying that the newspaper can never recover from the countless things that it has done that have damaged its reputation.
Trump&#8217;s demand comes after The New York Times published a highly deceptive report based on a new book that alleged that Kavanaugh was potentially involved in a sexual assault. The New York Times&#8217; report excluded key information about the alleged incident that cast serious doubt about whether it even happened. The most explosive piece of information left out of The New York Times&#8217; report was the fact that the victim allegedly has no memory of the event even happening.
&#8220;I call for the Resignation of everybody at The New York Times involved in the Kavanaugh SMEAR story, and while you&#8217;re at it, the Russian Witch Hunt Hoax, which is just as phony!&#8221; Trump tweeted. &#8220;They&#8217;ve taken the Old Grey Lady and broken her down, destroyed her virtue and ruined her reputation. She can never recover, and will never return to Greatness, under current Management. The Times is DEAD, long live The New York Times!&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">&#8230; She can never recover, and will never return to Greatness, under current Management. The Times is DEAD, long live The New York Times!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1173728490618671106?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 16, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
In a separate tweet, Trump quoted Fox News host Greg Gutfeld, who asked: &#8220;How many stories are wrong? Almost all of the stories the New York Times has done are inaccurate and wrong.&#8221;
&#8220;The New York Times should close its doors and throw away the keys,&#8221; Trump added. &#8220;The women mentioned in the Kavanaugh story said she didn&#8217;t even remember the event.&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">&#8220;How many stories are wrong? Almost all of the stories the New York Times has done are inaccurate and wrong.&#8221; <a href="https://twitter.com/greggutfeld?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@greggutfeld</a> The New York Times should close its doors and throw away the keys. The women mentioned in the Kavanaugh story said she didn&#8217;t even remember the event.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1173706388960239616?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 16, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Earlier in the day, Trump quoted someone from Fox News&#8217; &#8220;Fox &amp; Friends,&#8221; writing: “The New York Times walks back report on Kavanaugh assault claim.&#8221;
&#8220;The one who is actually being assaulted is Justice Kavanaugh — Assaulted by lies and Fake News!&#8221; Trump added. &#8220;This is all about the LameStream Media working with their partner, the Dems.&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">&#8220;The New York Times walks back report on Kavanaugh assault claim.&#8221; <a href="https://twitter.com/foxandfriends?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@foxandfriends</a> The one who is actually being assaulted is Justice Kavanaugh — Assaulted by lies and Fake News! This is all about the LameStream Media working with their partner, the Dems.
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1173568871481171974?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 16, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Trump also hammered the newspaper on Sunday, writing: &#8220;Brett Kavanaugh should start suing people for libel, or the Justice Department should come to his rescue. The lies being told about him are unbelievable. False Accusations without recrimination. When does it stop? They are trying to influence his opinions. Can&#8217;t let that happen!&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Brett Kavanaugh should start suing people for libel, or the Justice Department should come to his rescue. The lies being told about him are unbelievable. False Accusations without recrimination. When does it stop? They are trying to influence his opinions. Can&#8217;t let that happen!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1173231877181857795?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 15, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
Trump added: &#8220;Can&#8217;t let Brett Kavanaugh give Radical Left Democrat (Liberal Plus) Opinions based on threats of Impeaching him over made up stories (sound familiar?), false allegations, and lies. This is the game they play. Fake and Corrupt News is working overtime! #ProtectKavanaugh&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">Can&#8217;t let Brett Kavanaugh give Radical Left Democrat (Liberal Plus) Opinions based on threats of Impeaching him over made up stories (sound familiar?), false allegations, and lies. This is the game they play. Fake and Corrupt News is working overtime! <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/ProtectKavanaugh?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#ProtectKavanaugh</a>
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1173297587773947920?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 15, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
</div>
Republican leaders slammed the bogus report and the reaction that Democrats had to it as they immediately rushed to politicize it.
&#8220;Over the last couple of days, leading Democrats have tried to grab on to yet another poorly sourced, thinly reported, unsubstantiated allegation against Justice Brett Kavanaugh,&#8221; Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell said. &#8220;Little things like facts and evidence didn&#8217;t stop Democrats from rushing to exploit this. Even as the media was trying to backpedal, a number of the Democratic presidential candidates were hysterically calling for Justice Kavanaugh to be impeached.&#8221;
&#8220;It would be a mistake to dismiss this as a bad case of sour grapes. This is not just a left-wing obsession with one man. It&#8217;s part of a deliberate effort to attack judicial independence,&#8221; McConnell added. &#8220;When you&#8217;re this willing to launch unhinged personal attacks, you reveal a whole lot more about your own radicalism than about the men and women you target.&#8221;
Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham (R-SC) tweeted: &#8220;As Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, I promise you Justice Kavanaugh will not be impeached over these scurrilous accusations.&#8221;
&#8220;What have we learned the last few days? * The @nytimes writes first, verifies later. * Republicans are presumed to be &#8216;guilty.&#8217; * Democratic presidential candidates are willing to ruin Justice Kavanaugh&#8217;s life for political gain. All very sad,&#8221; Graham continued. &#8220;The latest attacks leveled against Brett Kavanaugh are beyond the pale. My heart goes out to Justice Kavanaugh&#8217;s family for being forced to endure this ridiculous treatment once again.&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">The latest attacks leveled against Brett Kavanaugh are beyond the pale.
My heart goes out to Justice Kavanaugh&#8217;s family for being forced to endure this ridiculous treatment once again.
— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) <a href="https://twitter.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/1173674781192966145?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 16, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>

trump.jpg

Trump Makes Major Demand Of Everyone Involved In Kavanaugh Smear At The New York Times

Over the weekend, the <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2019/09/14/sunday-review/brett-kavanaugh-deborah-ramirez-yale.html">New York Times</a> relitigated the Kavanaugh sexual misconduct allegations by publishing a book excerpt from &#8220;The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation.&#8221; A portion of the book excerpt, which focuses on the experience of Kavanaugh&#8217;s Yale classmate Deborah Ramirez, can be read below:
<blockquote>At Yale, she encountered students from more worldly backgrounds. Many were affluent and had attended elite private high schools. They also had experience with drinking and sexual behavior that Ms. Ramirez — who had not intended to be intimate with a man until her wedding night — lacked.
During the winter of her freshman year, a drunken dormitory party unsettled her deeply. She and some classmates had been drinking heavily when, she says, a freshman named Brett Kavanaugh pulled down his pants and thrust his penis at her, prompting her to swat it away and inadvertently touch it. Some of the onlookers, who had been passing around a fake penis earlier in the evening, laughed. &#8230;
We also uncovered a previously unreported story about Mr. Kavanaugh in his freshman year that echoes Ms. Ramirez’s allegation. A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student.</blockquote>
But shortly after the NYT published the excerpt as an article, Mollie Hemingway, a writer at the <a href="https://thefederalist.com/2019/09/15/alleged-victim-in-new-york-times-kavanaugh-story-doesnt-remember-incident/">Federalist</a>, announced she had received a copy of the upcoming book and discovered that the New York Times excerpt omitted the fact that the alleged second victim, Tracy Harmon Joyce, didn&#8217;t actually recall the incident happening. The Times later issued a correction at the bottom of the article, clarifying that she &#8220;declined to be interviewed and friends say that she does not recall the incident.&#8221;
According to Hemingway, the basis for the recently published allegations came from attorney Max Stier, another one of Kavanaugh&#8217;s Yale classmates. As Hemingway writes:
<blockquote>Stier worked closely with David Kendall, who went on to defend Hillary Clinton against allegations of illegally handling classified information. Kavanaugh&#8217;s reference to his opponents being motivated by &#8220;revenge on behalf of the Clintons&#8221; met with befuddlement by liberal media, despite the surprisingly large number of Clinton-affiliated attorneys who kept popping up during his confirmation hearings.
In any case, Stier&#8217;s claim, which even two Democratic senators&#8217; offices didn&#8217;t find particularly worthwhile, was that he had seen an inebriated Kavanaugh, pants-down, at a freshman-year party. Stier&#8217;s claim to the staffers, we&#8217;re told, was that other people at the party put Kavanaugh&#8217;s genitalia into the hands of a classmate. Another unnamed person alleged said that he or she might have remembered hearing that the female student had transferred out of her college because of Kavanaugh, &#8220;though exactly why was unclear.&#8221;</blockquote>
Even as the fresh accusations have been discredited, Democratic presidential candidates have begun calling for Kavanaugh&#8217;s impeachment, including Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA).
&#8220;Last year the Kavanaugh nomination was rammed through the Senate without a thorough examination of the allegations against him,&#8221; wrote Warren on Twitter. &#8220;Confirmation is not exoneration, and these newest revelations are disturbing. Like the man who appointed him, Kavanaugh should be impeached.&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">Last year the Kavanaugh nomination was rammed through the Senate without a thorough examination of the allegations against him. Confirmation is not exoneration, and these newest revelations are disturbing. Like the man who appointed him, Kavanaugh should be impeached.
— Elizabeth Warren (@ewarren) <a href="https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1173290967773982722?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 15, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
But Senator Lindsey Graham (R-SC), who is chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, was having none of it. Monday afternoon, Graham announced on Twitter &#8220;Kavanaugh will not be impeached over these scurrilous accusations.&#8221;
Graham continued, opining that the only new information we&#8217;ve learned in the last few days is that, at the NYT, &#8220;Republicans are presumed to be &#8216;guilty'&#8221; and that the news agency &#8220;writes first&#8221; and &#8220;verifies later.&#8221; Graham also scolded the Democratic presidential candidates for being &#8220;willing to ruin Justice Kavanaugh&#8217;s life for political gain,&#8221; and called the latest attacks &#8220;beyond the pale.&#8221;
<div class="embed tweet"></div>
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">What have we learned the last few days?
* The <a href="https://twitter.com/nytimes?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@nytimes</a> writes first, verifies later.
* Republicans are presumed to be “guilty.”
* Democratic presidential candidates are willing to ruin Justice Kavanaugh&#8217;s life for political gain.
All very sad.
— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) <a href="https://twitter.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/1173674541647876101?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 16, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
<div class="embed tweet">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">The latest attacks leveled against Brett Kavanaugh are beyond the pale.
My heart goes out to Justice Kavanaugh&#8217;s family for being forced to endure this ridiculous treatment once again.
— Lindsey Graham (@LindseyGrahamSC) <a href="https://twitter.com/LindseyGrahamSC/status/1173674781192966145?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 16, 2019</a></blockquote>
</div>
During the embattled confirmation last year, Graham famously questioned the integrity of the confirmation process and the willingness of the Democratic senators to ruin Kavanaugh&#8217;s life.
&#8220;What you want to do is destroy this guy&#8217;s life, hold this seat open, and hope you win in 2020,&#8221; Graham shouted to Democratic senators in the chamber, reported CNN. &#8220;To my Republican colleagues, if you vote &#8216;no&#8217;, you&#8217;re legitimizing the most despicable thing that I have seen in my time in politics.&#8221;
As <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2018/09/28/politics/lindsey-graham-donald-trump-brett-kavanaugh/index.html">CNN</a> Editor-at-Large Chris Cizzilla noted:
<blockquote>The reaction to Graham speaks to the bitter divisions within the country. For Republicans, his words were the highlight of the hearing. For Democrats, the low light.
What is beyond debate is that prior to Graham&#8217;s speech, Kavanaugh&#8217;s chances were fading. After it, they look to be at least 50-50, particularly with Sen. Jeff Flake, R-Arizona, announcing that he is voting for Kavanaugh&#8217;s nomination in the Judiciary Committee later Friday afternoon.
All of which means that if Kavanaugh winds up on the Supreme Court, he&#8217;s got Lindsey Graham to thank for it — maybe more than anyone else.</blockquote>
Correction: A previous version of this article mistakenly stated Ramirez did not recall the alleged incident instead of Harmon Joyce. It has been revised to correct the mistake and include more context from the Times report.

Menu