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.
Friday morning’s CNN Newsroom couldn’t help but be in awe of a handful of female protesters who cornered Republican Senator Jeff Flake (AZ) as he boarded an elevator to attend a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing on Supreme Court pick Brett Kavanaugh. The takes were so hot that senior political analyst David Gergen wondered if Flake’s refusal to change his mind about Kavanaugh signaled that white Republican men truly understand the anguish of sexual misconduct (despite Kavanaugh’s vehement denials).
Going into Thursday’s show trial, the liberal media were hopeful that the testimony of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford and speeches from Democratic Senators would get the public against Judge Brett Kavanaugh. But Ford’s perplexing lapses in memory, dubious collusion with Democratic Senators, and Kavanaugh’s own impassioned defense had put their hopes in jeopardy. So much so, that NBC Nightly News closed out the program by lamenting that “tribal politics” would keep us from seeing the hearing in the same way.
Even before accuser Christine Blasey Ford finished testifying on Thursday in Washington, D.C., about sexual assault charges against Judge Brett Kavanaugh, a reporter with the Associated Press found a way to kill the time while waiting for something significant to happen. Reporter Calvin Woodward wrote an article asking AP readers: “Will the Kavanaugh-Ford Hearing Be a Where-Were-You Moment?”
The front page of the New York Times Sunday Review confirms it's now a bulletin board for the revolution-minded angry left. Michelle Alexander’s debut column used the accusation against Brett Kavanaugh as a hook for a loosely formatted shout-out to a hodge-podge of left-wing causes loosely lied to the anti-Trump “resistance." Meanwhile, Jennifer Weiner focused her ire solely at the patriarchy in “The Patriarchy Will Always Have Its Revenge.” The text box was eyebrow-raising: “I want to burn the frat house of America to the ground.”
New York Times reporter Kate Zernike made Saturday’s front page with her take on how Christine Blasey's allegation against Brett Kavanaugh is playing with the public: “Swing District Supports Her, But Gingerly,” from Doylestown, Pa. Zernike was struck that no one she talked to brought up Anita Hill -- but what about Bill Clinton, Hillary’s husband? Bizarrely, Zernike skipped Clinton and reached all the way back to President Ronald Reagan for blame.
Anita Hill, perennially painted as the “Rosa Parks of sexual harassment” by the national press, is back on the scene as the media push the unproven teenage-groping accusations against Brett Kavanaugh. The New York Times asked her to write an op-ed on how we can get these next Kavanaugh hearings “right.” Asking Anita Hill how to get a fairer congressional hearing is like asking Janet Cooke how to get better newspaper reporting.
During a live interview with former Vice President Joe Biden on Friday’s Today show, co-host Craig Melvin invited the former Judiciary Committee Chairman to advise the Senate on how to handle a potential hearing with Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser, Christine Blasey Ford. In his response, Biden was given free rein to blast Republicans for trying to “character assassinate” Clarence Thomas accuser Anita Hill and even compared the claims against Kavanaugh to a graphic movie rape scene.
On Thursday morning, as the broadcast networks all seized on Democratic demands for an FBI investigation into Christine Blasey Ford’s sexual assault claims against Brett Kavanaugh, reporters on NBC, ABC, and CBS were quick to point to the Bureau’s investigation of Anita Hill’s sexual harassment claims against Clarence Thomas in 1991. However, none of the supposed journalists could seem to remember that the outcome of that inquiry was inconclusive.
After last-minute accusations against Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, Anita Hill is back in the spotlight, and Boston Globe reporter Stephanie Ebbert got prime front-page space Wednesday for an incredibly fawning interview of Hill, who accused her boss Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment near the end of his Supreme Court confirmation hearings in 1991. Ebbert’s story is headlined like a lament, and both the headline and the story itself assume the guilt of both Thomas and Kavanaugh, who each happen to be conservative Republican nominees: “Happening again? Hill’s not surprised.”
During an exclusive softball interview with Anita Hill on Wednesday’s Good Morning America, co-host George Stephanopoulos teed her up to accuse Senate Republicans of trying to intimidate or “destroy” Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser by inviting Christine Blasey Ford to testify at a Judiciary Committee hearing on Monday.
ABC News political analyst and former George W. Bush campaign official Matthew Dowd decided not to wait until Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and accuser Christine Blasey Ford testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee. Instead, Dowd not only hammered the current nominee, but he also reached all the way back to 1991 and stated that Clarence Thomas has at least one thing in common with Kavanaugh: They’re both “sexual predators.”