The NYT News Department and The Washington Post Both Turned Down That Kavanaugh ‘Scoop’

Ashley (Kimber)

Not EVERYONE at the New York Times is a COMPLETE moron… but they’re certainly sneaky.

A new report by Vanity Fair reveals that the fine folks at the NYT News Department knew those new Kavanaugh allegations were NOT printable.

(So did the Washington Post, for the record.)

Why? Because it’s COMPLETELY AND TOTALLY UNSUBSTANTIATED BULLCRAP.

So, after getting the ax for the “news” pages, the new Kavanaugh allegations were relegated to the “opinion” pages… knowing FULL well no one would notice.

According to Daily Wire:

Reporters Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly “initially pitched their reporting to the news side,” hoping for a front page, above-the-fold story that would embroil Kavanaugh, yet again, in a high-profile controversy, but the New York Times news editors “felt that there wasn’t enough juice to warrant a story there, let alone a big page-one treatment” — the kind leftists have been hoping for, Vanity Fair admits, since Kavanaugh was confirmed to the bench.

Instead, Pogrebin and Kelly were told to pitch an excerpt from their forthcoming book, delving into claims made against Kavanaugh by a woman named Deborah Ramirez, to the opinion-editorial side, where they could hope to see some of the juiciest parts of their report in print, but without the same level of scrutiny the Times reserves for its news section.

So THIS was their loophole? REALLY?!

“We don’t feel comfortable printing it because NOTHING confirms this is true – so call it an OPINION and run with it!”

Unbelievable.

“I don’t LIKE Brett Kavanagh” is an OPINION. “Brett Kavanaugh RAPED someone” is NOT. THIS IS NOT HARD.

As Vanity Fair ultimately points out, the New York Times likely knew that the average reader wouldn’t take note of where the story first appeared, particularly if they get their news primarily from the Internet. When the “story” broke, it wasn’t clear that Pogrebin and Kelly’s scoop was actually in the opinion section, or even that it was excerpted from a forthcoming tome, and the lack of information allowed interested parties to run with the claims.

Sick.

This is legitimately sick.

Vanity Fair also mentions that other news organizations, including The Washington Post, were already aware of the allegation and had passed on printing it because the woman Max Stier named as Kavanaugh’s “victim” had no memory of the party or being the subject of Kavanaugh and his friends’ advances, and no one besides Stier could corroborate the story. On Monday, the Post admitted that they’d passed on the scoop “in part because the intermediaries declined to identify the alleged witness and because the woman who was said to be involved declined to comment.”

Pogrebin and Kelly’s story gets around the corroboration point by suggesting that Stier directed them to several people who could verify his story — but those people verified that Stier had raised his concerns with Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Committee, not that Stier’s story was true.

Ladies and Gentlemen… THIS is the state of American Media.

And they wonder why they get called THE ENEMY OF THE PEOPLE?!

Got a story you'd like to submit for possible publication by the Chicks? Submit your article to [email protected]