Posted on 09/16/2019 8:10:33 PM PDT by bitt
The New York Times had a significant story to tell about Brett Kavanaugh. It’s this: In a new book, the Times reporters produced new evidence that profoundly undermined the central claims against Kavanaugh. Leland Keyser — Christine Blasey Ford’s friend and the person Ford herself testified was also at the party where Ford claimed Kavanaugh assaulted her — has stated on the record that she doesn’t have “any confidence” in Ford’s story.
Not only does she not recall the specific party at issue, she doesn’t recall “any others like it.” Moreover, Keyser maintains this recollection in spite of a determined effort by old friends to get her to change her testimony — a pressure campaign that Keyser admirably resisted.
But that’s not the story the New York Times chose to tell. Instead, this weekend it ran an extended piece that breathlessly asserts that there exists a new claim against Kavanaugh. The original story reported that a man named Max Stier alleged that “friends” pushed Kavanaugh’s penis into the hand of a female student. Hours later — only after Democrats issued furious denunciations of Kavanaugh — did the Times add a rather significant editor’s note. The female student “declined to be interviewed,” and her “friends say that she does not recall the incident.”
In other words, “Never mind.” But even that editor’s note is incomplete. It turns out that Max Stier served as one of Bill Clinton’s lawyers during the Starr investigation, a fact that’s at least relevant to the existence of partisan bias.
The New York Times’s disgraceful weekend performance is a reminder that the media performed abysmally during the Kavanaugh confirmation process. Ronan Farrow had accumulated an enormous amount of capital reporting thoroughly researched and well-corroborated claims of sexual abuse that helped launch the #MeToo movement. ..
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
p
Lies, lies, lies!
Hasn’t the Supreme Court basically ruled that the press has full license to smear public figures without being held responsible, on the basis that they are exercising their first amendment rights?
I wonder if the Supremes might revisit that opinion, now that it is one of their own being smeared.
Personally, I think the press should be held fully accountable for publishing and spreading lies.
We gotta fight. Who’s in?
Good to see you back in action!
Not only does she not recall the specific party at issue, she doesn’t recall “any others like it.” Moreover, Keyser maintains this recollection in spite of a determined effort by old friends to get her to change her testimony — a pressure campaign that Keyser admirably resisted.
***********************************************************
I made a small contribution to the Gofundme campaign for Keyser who has paid a high price for her integrity.
https://www.gofundme.com/f/help-leland-keyser
Where in the Constitution is the government empowered to hold the press "fully accountable for publishing and spreading lies"? The fact of the matter is that the press isn't required to be truthful. If the Founders wanted it so, they'd have written that into the First Amendment.
This is a cost of a free society.
This is NOT a mistake. We might not like the New York Times - but real journalists work there - and they know better. This misdirection - this lie - this smear - was done on purpose.
Lies, total lies. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wuv4f-AmKE4
Count me in. When and where?
Thanks for the link. I just made a contribution too.
Why have we not heard from Feinstein?
I agree and I hope they do revisit that stupid opinion.
The Constitution never protected libel and slander. An activist Court in the 60s invented a new “right” for the press.
Libel was subject to both criminal and civil penalties before Brennan gutted those laws.
He’s getting Re-Borked
More like a virtual lynching like they did Thomas.
I’m really disappointed that an accused serial homosexual pedophile and purported child sex trafficker like Max Stier could make these sleazy insinuations against our President...
heeeeheee!
I posted this earlier on another thread about this.
It bears repeating.
I hate to be crude but given the details of this story it needs to be asked:
For this to have been true, just how well hung is Justice Kavanaugh? According to the story, he drops trousers, somebody grabs his johnson and places it in a girls hand.
Does anybody but me see an issue with the logistics of that? Unless the girl was standing chest to chest with Justice Kavanaugh what is described is simply impossible unless he is literally, LITERALLY hung like a water hose.
I’ve been in my share of athletic locker rooms and shower facilities when I was a triathlete. I’ve seen several hundred naked men in such circumstances. I have never seen any man with a tally-wacker long enough have someone do that.
This literally cannot be true unless the judge is in the Guinness Book of Records.
This story is simply a lie.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.