The would be hit on Justice Kavanaugh over at The New York Times continues to implode without haste. We’ve already seen them make corrections after omitting key details about a supposed witness. They also reported an allegation without bothering to note that the alleged victim doesn’t even have memory of it happening. In other words, they ran a rehash of discredited accusations from Debra Ramirez while tacking on an even less credible, third hand claim from Bill Clinton’s former lawyer.
Now, we are starting to find out just how biased the Times was being in their reporting of this story. CBS News went on record late last night with a major revelation that further destroys Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations against Kavanaugh. Note that Mollie Hemingway put this in her book way back in July as well. She deserves the primary credit.
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 https://t.co/GQhBTXHcze
— Jan Crawford (@JanCBS) September 17, 2019
That’s pretty big news as it turns Ford’s claim on its head. Not only did her “witness” not recall the incident, she didn’t feel it was believable. Worse, Ford’s allies stepped in to try to pressure her to change her story to help complete the take down of Kavanaugh.
Ford, her lawyers, and the Democrats who facilitated the smear were acting with no regards for truth or ethics. They had one goal and that was to blow up Kavanaugh’s nomination. It’s troubling to think of just how close they claim to succeeding.
But here’s the kicker. After CBS reported that, the Times’ Maggie Haberman decided to jump on Twitter and snark that they had the information too.
that information was also said to the same NYT reporters https://t.co/86yArtDf96
— Maggie Haberman (@maggieNYT) September 17, 2019
Well, ok then Maggie. Why wasn’t it reported?
Weird that it was in their book but left out of their big article! https://t.co/cmckcusZL2
— Peter J. Hasson (@peterjhasson) September 17, 2019
love to act indignant when a competing newsroom exercises better editorial judgment
— T. Becket Adams (@BecketAdams) September 17, 2019
Even though the information was in the book itself, which the article in question was based on, the “reporters” minimized it and presented a different picture anyway.
Not just downplayed, but dismissed in favor of their "gut" feeling that the incident with no evidence happened.
— Mollie (@MZHemingway) September 17, 2019
To summarize, the Times had information that Ford’s account was essentially nuked and discredited. Instead of running that as the lead story delved from this garbage book, they reran old allegations and included a new one which lacked any credibility at all, to the point where even the alleged victim has no recollection of it.
Are we supposed to believe that was just an honest editorial decision? Come on. The authors of this book were so partisan, so wrapped up in their own narrative that they did everything they could to frame things in a way to hurt Kavanaugh. It just so happens that they did such an awful job at it that their claims fell apart within hours.
The Times has no credibility left. I’m tired of some on the right insisting we can’t just dump these outlets wholesale. What have they done to earn anyone’s trust at this point? Let this also be a reminder of just how far the left and their enablers in the media are willing to go to take down Republican interests. There are no lines they won’t cross and this was just a preview of what we are going to see in 2020. You can bet they’ve got a whole (new) dossier cooked up to run against Trump and the press will be right there to dutifully regurgitate the talking points without questioning their validity.
Enjoying the read? Please visit my archive and check out some of my latest articles.
I’ve got a new twitter! Please help by following @bonchieredstate.