The latest media frenzy over another allegation of years-old sexual misconduct on the part of Supreme Court Associate Justice Brett Kavanaugh may have left a lot of people with the impression that a new accuser had recently come forward. That is not the case. The allegation is at least a year old, and both the FBI and congressional Democrats were already aware of it.
Now, The New York Times has revised a previously deceptive article about the allegation to include the not insignificant fact that the supposed victim refused to be interviewed and, according to several of her friends, does not recall the alleged incident.
New York Times Hits Another Low
The original article, published September 14, was authored by Times reporters Robin Pogebrin and Kate Kelly to push their upcoming book The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation. Realizing it had been busted for publishing what was obviously a dishonest hit-piece about Kavanaugh – a man who the left has been hell-bent on destroying from the moment he was nominated for the nation’s highest court – the paper updated the story on September 15.
Too late, though: This is just one more nail in the coffin of The Grey Lady’s credibility. It also exposes this new assault on Kavanaugh for what it is: a politically-motivated smear, the ultimate aim of which is to prevent the Supreme Court issuing opinions influenced by conservative or originalist thought – particularly on the subject of abortion.
This latest accusation was brought to the attention of the FBI and Democrats in Congress by an attorney named Max Stier. At the time, neither the FBI nor Democrat senators considered the allegation worth pursuing since there were no corroborating witnesses and no other evidence.
Clinton-Connected Lawyer Behind Allegation
It is certainly relevant to note that Stier – who claims to have witnessed the alleged incident at a party attended by Yale students – is a Democrat operative. He was a member of former President Bill Clinton’s defense team during the Whitewater investigation (and it is also worth noting that Kavanaugh was on the other side of that investigation), and he is married to an Obama-appointed federal judge. Like the woman at the center of the allegation, Stier declined to be interviewed.
A lot of people who would love to see Kavanaugh removed from the Supreme Court have touted Stier’s supposedly impeccable reputation for objectivity and honesty. Another attorney by the name of Michael Avenatti also once enjoyed such adulation while he crusaded against President Donald Trump. Stier has also worked with David Kendall, an attorney who later defended Hillary Clinton during the FBI investigation into her mishandling of classified information.
Dem Candidates’ Embarrassing Pile-On
Meanwhile, several Democratic Party 2020 candidates immediately used the inaccurate Times article to call for Kavanaugh’s impeachment: Among them, failed senatorial candidate Robert O’Rourke, California Senator Kamala Harris, Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren, and former HUD secretary Julian Castro.
This jumping to a conclusion without examining the facts behind the story and – yet again – the complete disregard for the concept of “innocent until proven guilty” should be concerning to those Americans who will choose who sits in the Oval Office come January 2021.
The lack of judgment and restraint shown by these candidates, only because they so hate Trump-appointed Kavanaugh, flag them as being very unwise – perhaps even dangerous – choices for the future Commander-in-Chief. One of them may be chosen to challenge Trump in 2020, and then, of course, the voters will decide. But judgment, temperament, and mental capacity were raised as factors by Trump’s opponents, just as they should be seen as factors in choosing any president. Warren, Harris, O’Rourke, Castro, and others have been caught lacking in these attributes.
Continuing to persecute Kavanaugh could have been a winning election strategy only if any of the allegations against him were credible. The timing of this recent kerfuffle is no accident: This is about whipping the Democratic Party base into a frenzy of fear over the state of the Supreme Court, thereby ensuring enthusiastic turnout at the polls. Given the blatantly partisan nature of the Kavanaugh accusations, they are unlikely to be mentioned by Democrats beyond the party’s 2020 convention but Republicans, if they are smart, will continue to remind America of this witch-hunt throughout the coming election year.