The New York Times runs an uncorroborated, single-source, decades-old, piece of gossip about now-Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh at a college party. The woman in question won’t talk, and her friends say she has no recollection of the alleged incident. After the “grey lady” once again shows her seamy side, should the “paper of record” be sold at the supermarket checkout next to the National Enquirer?
Once again we point out that the Left plays dirty. They will lie, cheat and slander to gain or keep power.
The far-left New York Times has been shamed into adding a humiliating “correction” to its latest and now-debunked smear of Associate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
The correction admits a fairly, somewhat, kinda, sorta, maybe important piece of information about how Kavanaugh’s alleged “victim” refused to talk to the Times and doesn’t remember the alleged “assault.”
Prior to publishing the smear, the Times knew this fact and still chose to deliberately hide it from the public. And we all know why… It proves the whole story is fake news.
Did you catch that?
Did you catch what the New York Times is now admitting…?
Let me repeat it for the CNN-impaired:
Brett Kavanaugh’s alleged victim doesn’t recall being an alleged victim.
The “victim” doesn’t remember the assault.
The “victim” doesn’t remember being sexually assaulted.
She doesn’t remember it happening.
And the New York Times not only went ahead and reported the story as credible, the New York Times hid that information from its readers.
On Saturday, the failing New York Times published a piece claiming it had found a new Kavanaugh accuser. Here’s the bombshell portion:
We also uncovered a previously unreported story about Mr. Kavanaugh in his freshman year that echoes Ms. [Deborah] 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. Mr. Stier, who runs a nonprofit organization in Washington, notified senators and the F.B.I. about this account, but the F.B.I. did not investigate and Mr. Stier has declined to discuss it publicly. (We corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier.)
But what the Times didn’t tell its readers is that the alleged victim of this alleged assault, the very person into whose alleged hand the alleged penis was allegedly thrust, does not recall anything about the penis incident and does not want to talk to the media.
Does that piece of information not seem somewhat pertinent to the story? And when I say “pertinent,” I of course mean “the story is totally bogus and never should have been published.”
This now-debunked bombshell is based on an upcoming book by two New York Times reporters. In the book, they do admit the alleged victim does not remember the assault. But still, knowing this, the Times deliberately left that information — the only information that matters — out of its bombshell.
And the only reason we know the Times withheld this information is because the Times got caught.
Thankfully, and the Times obviously didn’t expect this, a few conservatives received an advanced copy of the book; they located this pertinent fact and blew it up on social media. This is the only reason why, after 36 hours of attempting to deceive the public, the Times grudgingly added the following correction Sunday evening:
Editors’ Note: An earlier version of this article, which was adapted from a forthcoming book, did not include one element of the book’s account regarding as 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 the female student declined to be interviewed and fr8iends say that she does not recall the incident. That information has been added to the article.
The updated story reads like this and even the update is a lie…
(We corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier; the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say she does not recall the episode.)
It’s worth pointing out Max Stier is a Democrat operative, a former attorney for the Clintons, and who also refused to talk to the Times.
Finally, when the Times claims in its update that it “corroborated the story” that’s a lie. All the Times did was talk to a couple of people who say Stier told them about a sexual assault that the victim doesn’t even recall happening. That’s not corroboration, that’s “hearsay.”
Since this is the new standard of journalism, I have something to report…
I am deeply ashamed to admit it, but I honestly don’t remember New York Times Executive Editor Dean Baquet sexually assaulting me.
Here’s my headline:
I Do Not Remember Dean Baquet Sexually Assaulting Me
So a Democrat operative is running around claiming he witnessed an assault that the victim herself cannot remember, but even he is not talking to the Times about it — Gee, I wonder why?
Anyway, I honestly don’t remember Dean Baquet sexually assaulting me. How can I deny something when I don’t have any memory of it ever happening?
Feel free to quote me on that.