The New York Times’ Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, the two hoaxstresses behind the latest round of smears against Brett Kavanaugh, are blaming everyone but their lying selves for all the dishonesty in their Saturday report.
On Saturday, Pogrebin and Kelly published (I don’t link fake news) a now-debunked smear of Associate Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh, that included at least six breathtaking pieces of fake news:
1) Seven people back up Democrat-activist Deborah Ramirez’s assault claim against Kavanaugh — This is a lie.
2) A new Kavanaugh victim has been found — This is a lie.
3) A source for this “new victim” is Max Stier, a non-partisan, much respected mover and shaker in D.C. — This is a lie.
4) The new victim’s assault allegation has been “corroborated” — This is a lie.
5) It can be fun to have a penis thrust in your face at a party — Whuh?
6) A lie of omission in not featuring the true scoop from their upcoming book, the one where we learn that a close friend of Kavanaugh-accuser Christine Blasey Ford (who’s story has been completely debunked) said she has no confidence in Ford’s story. This friend is Leland Keyser, the woman Ford named as a witness.
Now that each of these has been debunked, the hideous Pogrebin and Kelly, who have a Kavanaugh book coming out (that I will not promote with a link or title), are running around like the lying freaks they are, trying to blame everyone else for this fake news catastrophe.
Let’s start with the tweet, which is just beyond the beyond.
The now-deleted tweet was published by the official New York Times Opinion account Saturday and said, “Having a penis thrust in your face at a drunken dorm party may seem like harmless fun. But when Brett Kavanaugh did it to her, Deborah Ramirez says, it confirmed that she didn’t belong at Yale in the first place.”
On what planet is having a penis thrust in your face at a party “harmless fun?”
A thoroughly embarrassed Times deleted the tweet and apologized, saying it was “clearly inappropriate and offensive. We apologize for it and are reviewing the decision-making with those involved.”
Gee, ya think?
The far-left Politico reports that it was “Pogrebin [who] wrote the offensive tweet, which should have been vetted before it was posted.”
“It was really neglectful,” the insider told Politico. “There were serious errors made along the way.”
And while Pogrebin does admit she wrote that tweet about how it can be fun to have someone thrust their penis in your face at a party (remind me to never attend one of her parties), she’s still blaming the Times for it.
“The social media team decides whether to send them out, they usually edit them or change them,” she told WMAL Tuesday morning.
But that’s only one time the hoaxstresses threw their employer under the bus. Get this…
They also claim it was the Times that removed the vital information about how this “new” Kavanaugh victim does not remember being a victim. Here’s what they told MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell Monday night:
“In your draft, did it include those words that have since been added to the article?” O’Donnell said.
Both Kelly and Pogrebin replied, “It did.”
O’Donnell followed up, “So somewhere in the editing process, those words were dropped?”
“It was in editing, done in haste in the editing process — as you know for closing the section,” Pogrebin replied. “I think what happened, actually, was we had her name and, you know, the Times doesn’t usually include the name of the victim. And so I think in this case the editors felt like maybe it was probably better to remove it. And in removing her name, they removed the other reference to the fact that she didn’t remember it.”
Additionally, when asked by WMAL Tuesday morning why their weekend story did not “feature the bigger scoop that Leland Keyser stated on the record that she had no confidence in Dr. Ford’s story,” under the bus the Times went again: “I can’t necessarily speak for the editorial decision making of the New York Times,” they told WMAL.
And while the hoaxstresses cannot provide a good answer for why they lied about Max Stier, they at least refrain from throwing the Times under the bus on this one.
In their fake news story, Pogrebin and Kelly tell us Stier is a bi-partisan guy, a “respected thought-leader” who runs a D.C. non-profit.
This is a lie.
The truth is that Stier is a Democrat partisan, and not only a former attorney for the Clintons, he and Kavanaugh were pitted against one another when Kavanaugh worked for Independent Counsel Kenneth Starr in the 90s.
The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway said [emphasis added]:
The only supposedly new claim made in the book isn’t new and comes from Democrat attorney Max Stier, a Yale classmate of Kavanaugh’s with whom he has a long and contentious history. In the words of the Yale Daily News, they were “pitted” against each other during the Whitewater investigation in the 1990s when Kavanaugh worked for Independent Counsel Ken Starr. Stier defended President Bill Clinton, whose legal troubles began when a woman accused him of exposing himself to her in hotel room she had been brought to. Clinton later settled with the woman for $850,000 and, due to a contempt of court citation for misleading testimony, ended up losing his law license for five years. Stier worked closely with David Kendall, who went on to defend Hillary Clinton against allegations of illegally handling classified information. Kavanaugh’s reference to his opponents being motivated by “revenge on behalf of the Clintons” met with befuddlement by liberal media, despite the surprisingly large number of Clinton-affiliated attorneys who kept popping up during his confirmation hearings.
As for why they didn’t tell readers about Stier’s partisan background and acrimonious relationship with Kavanaugh, and instead made him sound like a bipartisan saint, Pogrebin and Kelly tried to float this turd on WMAL, saying, “Right now, the organization he leads is a non-partisan, bi-partisan organization.”
Indefensible. A totally indefensible lie of omission. No legitimate journalist — heck, no decent person, would hide this history between Stier and Kavanaugh.
Anyway, there is no “new victim” because the woman Pogrebin and Kelly claim as their new victim says she does not remember being a victim. Therefore there can be no “corroboration” of her story because 1) she says she doesn’t recall it and 2) Pogrebin and Kelly could not get Stier to speak with them. All their information came from people who say they heard the story from Stier, which is nothing close to corroboration.
Finally, there are not seven people who back up Deborah Ramirez’s claim that Kavanaugh shoved his penis in her face during a drunken dorm party in 1983. For 35 years, Ramirez herself didn’t know who did it, and the seven so-called sources backing her up are laughably passing on second and even third-hand gossip, or only remember that something happened to Ramirez at Yale, or that someone told them something happened, but can’t say who told them or what it was.
Although both supposed assaults involving Kavanaugh’s Yale-era penis allegedly happened at parties, there is not a single witness who saw this happen. NOT ONE. But Kavanaugh does have witnesses who say IT DID NOT HAPPEN.
What’s more, one victim doesn’t remember it and another couldn’t remember it was Kavanaugh until he was nominated to sit on the Supreme Court.
Follow John Nolte on Twitter @NolteNC. Follow his Facebook Page here.
COMMENTS
Please let us know if you're having issues with commenting.