As details emerge in the New York Times Kavanaugh scandal, it's very clear the NYT repeatedly made serious errors Blatant Sleaze On September 14, the New York Times resurrected unsubstantiated and graphic rumors about Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in a purposeful smear article Brett Kavanaugh Fit In With the Privileged Kids. She Did Not. The article was by disgraced NYT authors Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly to promote their upcoming book “The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation.” I do not normally report on sleaze but to understand what the NYT did, I have to. Here is one controversial paragraph. "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
Mike Shedlock considers the following as important: Global Economics
This could be interesting, too:
Mike Shedlock writes Millennials Screwed Again, This Time on Unemployment
Mike Shedlock writes Heaven Help Us if Unemployment Follows the Path of the Great Recession
Mike Shedlock writes Yet Another Fed President Supports More Free Money and a Covid Lockdown
Mike Shedlock writes Senator Sasse Blasts Trump’s Executive Orders as “Unconstitutional Slop”
On September 14, the New York Times resurrected unsubstantiated and graphic rumors about Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh in a purposeful smear article Brett Kavanaugh Fit In With the Privileged Kids. She Did Not.
The article was by disgraced NYT authors Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly to promote their upcoming book “The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation.”
I do not normally report on sleaze but to understand what the NYT did, I have to.
Here is one controversial paragraph.
"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."
The NYT later added this correction.
"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."
That's one hell of a correction don't you think?
Making matters worse for itself, The NYT came out and blamed it all on an "editing error".
Reporters Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly said in an interview on MSNBC that they wrote in the draft of their Sunday Review piece that a woman who Kavanaugh was said to have exposed himself to while a student at Yale had told others she had no recollection of the alleged incident.
Their editors, they say, removed the reference. “It was just sort of. . . in the haste of the editing process,” said Pogrebin.
The editor responsible for editing the Kavanaugh piece, Times Deputy Editorial Page Editor James Dao addressed select questions about the piece on a Times “Bulletin Board” posted on Monday and updated Tuesday. But he did not address why the information about the woman’s recollection was removed from the story.
Dao declined a POLITICO request for comment.
“We certainly never intended to mislead in any way,” Pogrebin said in discussing the editor’s note on MSNBC. “We wanted to give as full a story as possible.”
I know bullshit when I see it. The whole story is bullshit. On second thought, make that half bullshit (I will explain in a moment).
Since when do you post unsubstantiated sleaze of this nature when the people allegedly involved do not remember the incident?
Someone shoved a penis in my face and I don't remember.
Here's the believable part: “We wanted to give as full a story as possible.”
Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly want to sell books and sleaze sells.
Of course they wanted as "full a story as possible" and the more bullshit the better.
Entire Book Unravels
Zerohedge fills in the remaining pieces in his take As Kavanaugh Smear Unravels, Original Accuser's 'Witness' Now Doubts Story
As the left-wing smear against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh continues to unravel amid a journalistic malpractice scandal at the New York Times, original Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford's "lifelong friend" and alleged witness now doubts her story.
Keyser - who said she was pressured by Ford's ex-FBI buddy to lie and say that she didn't remember the party instead of saying that it never happened - originally said through her attorney that she "does not refute Dr. Ford's account," however "the simple and unchangeable truth is that she is unable to corroborate it because she has no recollection of the incident in question."
"I was told behind the scenes that certain things could spread about me if I didn't comply," Keyser told the Times journos - who felt it wasn't notable enough for their smear article.
Now, Keyser says she doesn't believe Ford's story at all.
"We spoke multiple times to Keyser, who also said that she didn’t recall that get-together or others like it," wrote Pogrebin and Kelly in their new book, The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation (yet another item that didn't make it into their inflammatory Times article). "In fact, she challenged Ford’s accuracy."
Editors Should Be Fired
At a minimum, the editors responsible should be fired. They are corrupt, incompetent, or both.
Anyone at the NYT defending the editors should also be fired.
NYT Pours On the Bullshit
NYT opinion columnist Jamelle Bouie says Mad About Kavanaugh and Gorsuch? The Best Way to Get Even Is to Pack the Court.
So what should Democrats do? They should play hardball back. Congress, according to the Judiciary Act of 1789, decides the number of judges. It’s been 150 years since it changed the size of the Supreme Court. I think it’s time to revisit the issue. Should Democrats win that trifecta, they should expand and yes, pack, the Supreme Court. Add two additional seats to account for the extraordinary circumstances surrounding the Gorsuch and Kavanaugh nominations.
To post that article in the wake of blatant errors adds fat to the fire.
It's also asinine.
The fact of the matter is Republicans control the Senate and Trump gets to make the nominees.
Even assuming that changes, all it would do is encourage Republicans to counter the next time they are in charge.
The court is supposed to be nonpolitical.
In that regard, Trump made two excellent choices. He could easily have appointed two far-right choices but didn't.
Some of my own readers incorrectly accused me of TDS (Trump Derangement Syndrome).
The notion is absurd. I am a free market, anti-war Libertarian.
When Trump strays from either, I criticize.
Here, Trump is correct.
Instead of admitting how stupid they were, Democrat presidential nominees want a Kavanaugh impeachment.
The people in charge of this fiasco at the NYT should be fired.
Mike "Mish" Shedlock