New York Times revises story on Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh
An editor's note corrects a glaring omission in the accusation against Brett Kavanaugh that touched off a political firestorm; Fox News media analyst Howard Kurtz reports.
"Boy, y’all want power. God, I hope you never get it."
Those were the exasperated words of Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., after witnessing one of the most corrupt political hit jobs ever deployed in Washington.
Brett Kavanaugh had passed six FBI background checks in his ascent to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. He had a sterling reputation, a family man who gave back to his community. He was never accused of the slightest amount of wrongdoing.
TREY GOWDY HAMMERS DEMS FOR WANTING TO GIVE KAVANAUGH THE 'POLITICAL DEATH PENALTY'
That is, of course, until the eleventh hour of his confirmation to the Supreme Court. Suddenly he was branded an attempted rapist who ran “train rape” parties in high school. There was no corroborating evidence, the accuser could not name the time, date, place, let alone the year of the first alleged incident. Yet Democrats weaponized the allegation after sitting on it for weeks to try to derail his nomination, by any means necessary.
Democratic hopefuls for president led this charge. Now they are doing it again.
After ignoring countless new revelations that undercut the Kavanaugh media revealed in Mollie Hemingway and Carrie Severino’s bestselling book, "Justice on Trial," members of the media are out with a fresh smear against the Supreme Court justice.
The only problem: the latest “bombshell” involves an accusation not actually made by an accuser, but by a Clinton attorney who has sparred against Kavanaugh for decades.
The New York Times was forced to correct its story, taken from a forthcoming anti-Kavanaugh book, by pointing out the alleged victim did not accuse Kavanaugh of any wrongdoing and “does not recall the incident.”
More from Opinion
Minor detail. Nevertheless, Democratic candidates Elizabeth Warren, Kamala Harris, Bernie Sanders, Pete Buttigieg, Beto O’Rourke, and Julián Castro called for investigations and the removal of the man Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg credits for increasing the number of female law clerks to a record high, based on allegations with no corroboration.
CLICK HERE TO SIGN UP FOR OUR OPINION NEWSLETTER
Using unverified claims to launch political witch hunts. Sound familiar?
If Democrats return to power, we know exactly what to expect. They repeatedly launch smears against their opponents with little facts. Sens. Cory Booker and Harris called the Jussie Smollett hate crime hoax a “modern-day lynching,” before having to embarrassingly backtrack.
As California attorney general, Harris launched a raid on a pro-life activist’s apartment. Even CNN had to call out Harris and Warren for smearing an innocent man to score political points when they falsely claimed Michael Brown was “murdered.”
The latest smear stems from The New York Times’ attempt to boost the credibility of Deborah Ramirez, the second Kavanaugh accuser. They claim Ramirez, as a white student from Connecticut, did not “fit in with the privileged kids” while attending Yale.
In their sanctimony, Democrats believe the worst about their political opponents without regard for the evidence. "Innocent until proven guilty" no longer applies. Republicans are guilty of whatever Democrats accuse them of, and when the evidence comes up short, we are still "not exonerated."
Recall at the time of the Kavanaugh confirmation the Ramirez allegation was so thin The New York Times passed on the story. The paper “interviewed several dozen people” trying to corroborate the account and found nothing.
In what was a new low for the media (there have been many more since), the New Yorker published the allegation anyway, despite no evidence and admitting Ramirez, a registered Democrat and self-described “social justice” activist, had “gaps” in her memory and could not say it was Kavanaugh “with certainty.” Ramirez decided to accuse Kavanaugh after “six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney.”
The intention was obvious. We had seen this movie before. Democrats would throw any allegation — no matter how flimsy — at Kavanaugh and see what stuck. They even used patently absurd claims from disgraced lawyer Michael Avenatti and his client Julie Swetnik, who were subsequently referred for criminal prosecution for lying to Congress.
What happens when Democrats shoot from the hip and accuse their political opponents of wrongdoing without any verifiable facts?
They've launched investigations based off a highly suspect document produced by a biased source and paid for by their own party to accuse our president of treason. They weaponized law enforcement agencies to spy on their political opponents and accused a duly elected president of being a Russian asset in a fantastical plot to steal the election. Even now, three years and $32 million later, Democrats have refused to accept the results of the Mueller investigation.
In their sanctimony, Democrats believe the worst about their political opponents without regard for the evidence. "Innocent until proven guilty" no longer applies. Republicans are guilty of whatever Democrats accuse them of, and when the evidence comes up short, we are still "not exonerated."
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
Democrats never wait for the full picture, let alone concrete evidence. They throw out norms, they leak, they smear, they launch partisan investigations, and they weaponize government against their opponents.
Democrats have proven again and again they cannot be trusted with the most powerful law enforcement agencies in the world. Boy, they want power. We cannot let them get it.