Article

2019-09-17 Home Front: Politix

New York Times excoriated for omitting bombshell Kavanaugh details

*Snicker* Never were consequences more deserved.

[WASHINGTONEXAMINER] The New York Times

...which still proudly displays Walter Duranty's Pulitzer prize...
has been excoriated after publishing new allegations of sexual misconduct against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh only to later add a bombshell update that undercuts the entire piece.

The Saturday evening report was adapted from an upcoming book by news hounds Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly titled The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation, due out this week.

Their report details an alleged incident that occurred during Kavanaugh's time at Yale University. One of his classmates, Max Stier, said he witnessed Kavanaugh make inappropriate sexual contact with a female student.

In the updated version of the article, the following passage was added, "The female student declined to be interviewed and friends say she does not recall the episode."

"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. 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," it continued.

The update, which many viewed as evidence that exonerates Kavanaugh, caused significant blowback for the outlet.

Kavanaugh faced similar allegations during the lead up to his confirmation to the Supreme Court. Three separate allegations became public during that time period. Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, who accused Kavanaugh of sexually assaulting her in 1982, testified in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee, as did Kavanaugh.

Posted by Fred 2019-09-17 00:00|| || Front Page|| [13 views ] Top

#1 At what point does this pass into the territory of reckless disregard with malicious intent?

They knew that this was not corroborated: it's their own journalists' book, which the NYT reviewed.

They knew that pumping up this story would feed other news organizations' hunger for slander, and that it would be picked up and run with by the Dem presidential candidates and possibly become fodder for impeachment talk.

They have obviously, clearly shown malice toward Kavanaugh from day one, slamming and smearing him relentlessly with baseless attacks on his character, his manner and demeanor, even his background.

When will this country's defamation lawyers step up and start suing this gutter press - formerly known as the "paper of record" - out of existence?

Posted by Lex 2019-09-17 01:07|| 2019-09-17 01:07|| Front Page Top

#2 When will this country's defamation lawyers step up and start suing this gutter press - formerly known as the "paper of record" - out of existence?

When will parents start suing schools for pushing LGBTQ propaganda on their kinds, and not pushing math and English?

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2019-09-17 01:12|| 2019-09-17 01:12|| Front Page Top

#3 "kinds" --> "kids"

Posted by g(r)omgoru 2019-09-17 01:13|| 2019-09-17 01:13|| Front Page Top

#4 They have obviously, clearly shown malice toward Kavanaugh from day one, slamming and smearing him relentlessly with baseless attacks on his character, his manner and demeanor, even his background.

In a just world, every one of them should be shot; I'd settle for firings and a lifetime of mockery and shame, if they were they capable of the latter.

Posted by Raj 2019-09-17 01:40|| 2019-09-17 01:40|| Front Page Top

#5 Bird cage liner (and that's being cruel to the bird).

Posted by Procopius2k 2019-09-17 07:18|| 2019-09-17 07:18|| Front Page Top

#6 The old Tobasco tagline: "You can tell a restrauntuer by the condiments he keeps." As soon as someone mentions the New York Slimes the conversation is over.

Posted by M. Murcek 2019-09-17 09:31|| 2019-09-17 09:31|| Front Page Top

#7 $500,000,000.00 Soros funded, Clintom backed dark money group oschestrating the smear. That is the amount a libel suit should be for x 3 for punative damages.

Posted by Varmint Splat1454 2019-09-17 12:46|| 2019-09-17 12:46|| Front Page Top

#8 Doesn't matter if it's retracted or corrected, millions will just believe the original article.

Posted by Glenmore 2019-09-17 17:18|| 2019-09-17 17:18|| Front Page Top

07:00 Besoeker
06:10 Besoeker
06:09 NN2N1
05:59 Besoeker
05:49 NN2N1
05:49 Frank G
05:38 Richard+Aubrey
05:37 Frank G
05:33 Besoeker
05:30 Grom the Reflective
05:27 Besoeker
04:32 Bobby
02:43 Elmaper+McGurque1612
02:40 Elmaper+McGurque1612
01:38 Grom the Reflective
00:17 EMS Artifact