Former senator and vice president Joe Biden is officially running for president, and once again went to Anita Hill in its front-page story Friday, “Biden’s ‘Regret’ For Hill’s Pain Fails to Soothe.” Hill is seen by the press as a victim of both Clarence Thomas and the all-white, all-male Senate Judiciary Committee. She made regular appearances in the paper during the Brett Kavanaugh hearings, and been given a fresh life with Biden’s presidential announcement: "....Ms. Hill says the call from Mr. Biden left her feeling deeply unsatisfied."
Former Vice President Joe Biden was on The View Friday where he was pressed by the hosts, from the left, over his treatment of Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas hearings. The hosts begged him to apologize to Hill, and the women who accused him of inappropriate touching and kissing. Considering these are the two biggest issues facing his presidential campaign so far, you would think he’d have his answers more prepared. Still, Biden struggled to answer each question as he tried to defend his behavior instead of apologizing.
Tina Brown, the feminist former editor of Newsweek, The New Yorker, and Vanity Fair, appeared on MSNBC Live with Stephanie Ruhle on Tuesday morning to tell Joe Biden his career is over. “Joe Biden comes from the sort of crustacean era of gender relations, let’s face it,” she said.
Former Vice President Joe Biden is expected to announce a run for president some time in April and has been testing the waters and smoothing over rough spots in his past. As part of that effort Tuesday night, he made yet another public apology to Anita Hill, the law clerk who falsely accused Justice Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment. The apology drew the attention of the CBS Evening News, who highlighted it Wednesday.
As Joe Biden is nearing closer to announcing his 2020 run for president, the left’s demanding he apologize for how he “mishandled” Clarence Thomas’s accuser Anita Hill during Thomas's confirmation hearing in 1991. The View hosts disagreed over whether an apology was needed, but everyone could agree that this was all Trump’s fault.
Both Singer/songwriter Katy Perry and Clarence Thomas’ accuser Anita Hill will be honored at yet another political awards show next month. The idea of the this probably gets people wondering: “For what? Being fraudulent political hacks?”
Nina Totenberg, National Public Radio's legal affairs correspondent, talked to Grant Reeher on public radio station WRVO, warning about the Supreme Court’s threat to abortion rights, criticizing the hearing performance of Brett Kavanaugh, and denying her outlet’s liberal bias. The NPR member station, which serves New York state from the campus of SUNY-Oswego, posted on Friday some transcribed highlights from Reeher’s half-hour interview with Totenberg, whose liberal bona fides are well-established on NewsBusters.
New York Times’ Susan Chira, a “senior correspondent and editor on gender issues,” interviewed Anita Hill for some reason for Friday’s paper, “Hill Reflects: ‘Clearly the Tide Has Not Turned.’” Hill is seen by the press as a victim of both Clarence Thomas and the all-white, all-male Senate Judiciary Committee who brutally questioned her and has achieved secular sainthood, so there are never any inconvenient questions. Interviewing and citing Hill in the aftermath of sexual allegations against Republicans is a regular thing at the paper now. This one is keyed to the accusations hurled against now-Judge Brett Kavanaugh, whom the paper promises “we’re still investigating.”
The Brett Kavanaugh saga has really lit a feminist fire at New York magazine, whose “Women in Power” series of interviews with prominent women (liberal activists, liberal politicians, and liberal journalist Andrea Mitchell) was published in an online series and compiled in the October 15-29 print issue. Unsurprisingly Anita Hill held the lead slot of the massive feature. The headline trumpeted “Anita Hill Won, Even Though She Lost.” Linda Sarsour, the media-celebrated Muslim “feminist."
Journalists sometimes ignore facts and evidence in order to promote an ideological narrative. For example, journalists peddled the Duke Lacrosse and University of Virginia rape hoaxes even after they were debunked. They also continue to distort the facts about a 1991 Supreme Court nomination, in which the FBI and members of the U.S. Senate rejected as unfounded claims that Judge Clarence Thomas said sexually offensive things to Anita Hill.
Rounding up New York Times coverage of the Kavanaugh saga from Saturday: It had the gall to issue a front-page fact-check on only one side of Thursday’s gripping Supreme Court testimony, in “At Points, a Judge’s Defense Misleads and Veers Off Course.” Needless to say, Christine Blasey Ford didn’t get one. The paper’s “gender editor” Jessica Bennett also took a crack at the case on Saturday, bemoaning how unfair the process was on Blasey Ford. “Witness Walking a ‘Tight Rope’ of Testifying While Female.” And Anita Hill made an unsurprising appearance.
The New York Times editorial page on Friday joined the paper's news pages in criticizing Brett Kavanaugh’s “angry” tone in defending himself against uncorroborated assault allegations during his Senate Judiciary Committee testimony on Thursday. And former executive editor Jill Abramson doesn't seem to know what “corroborating evidence" means.