Former New York Times editorial board member Adam Cohen, who once served as lawyer for the discredited Southern Poverty Law Center, reviewed Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus’s book on the Brett Kavanaugh nomination. (The book’s title gives the slant away: “Supreme Ambition -- Brett Kavanaugh and the Conservative Takeover.”) Cohen’s review unloaded a cheap shot in the text box: “‘If you had asked me who was the biggest drinker in our class I would have said Brett,” one classmate said.” Anonymous hearsay? Now there’s some hard evidence for you. Down the memory hole: Any mention of the paper’s own botched, biased Kavanaugh investigation.



On the front page of Saturday’s New York Times, reporter Catie Edmondson concerned herself with Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who is evidently being dragooned into defending President Trump against impeachment the way he stuck up for Judge Brett Kavanaugh: “Prodded by the Right, Graham Joins the Impeachment Battle.” Judging by her choice of adjectives in these passages, Edmondson has not gotten over Kavanaugh’s success in earning a seat on the Supreme Court.



Before focusing on liberal media bias and their disdain for those in flyover country and not within their bubbles, Fox News Channel host Tucker Carlson and former FNC host Megyn Kelly dove Wednesday night into the ongoing train wreck that is Kelly’s other former employer (NBC News) with their alleged coverups of sexual misconduct. 



It was just this time about a year ago that liberals in the media started to realize that Brett Kavanaugh would be confirmed to the Supreme Court. In fact, on October 5, 2018, MSNBC’s Chris Hayes realized, on-air, that such a thing would happen. MSNBC’s Ali Velshi broke into coverage to explain that Democrat Joe Manchin would vote yes: “We have breaking news now. Senator Joe Manchin, who did not want to be the deciding vote on this, has announced he will support.” Hayes sputtered, “He’s a yes?” The host then bowed his head in amazement.



Stop me if you’ve heard this one: A nominee for a seat on the U.S. Supreme Court is about to be confirmed when suddenly, women start appearing out of nowhere to accuse him of engaging in unwilling sexual escapades with them. That scenario took place last year, but the bad feelings generated by participants in the incident has led to yet another book on the matter, The Education of Brett Kavanaugh, which received enthusiastic, wall-to-wall coverage throughout the mainstream media -- but nevertheless failed to sell well during its first week on sale.



The Education of Brett Kavanuagh's disparate treatment of the dueling testimonies of Christine Blasey Ford and Brett Kavanaugh was striking. Ford's appearance before the Senate Judiciary Committee was a “master class in authenticity and simplicity." The book downplayed the lack of specificity of Blasey’s account, laughably suggesting Blasey had her assault accusation narrowed down to “a conceivable location and time period." They event went after Ford's friend Leland Keyser for daring to doubt Ford's account: “But Keyser’s skepticism was structured on some erroneous or irrelevant tent poles...Keyser’s memory might be affected by her struggles with alcohol and other substances.”



One of the revelations from the character assassination attempt of Justice Brett Kavanaugh by The New York Times was that Leland Keyser, an alleged witness to the allegations of Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, was viciously pressured by Blasey Ford’s allies to back up the claims unless she wanted to be discredited with her past history of drug abuse. Well, one of the reporters behind the hit piece did the work for Team Blasey Ford in an appearance on CNN’s so-called “Reliable Sources” and slimed Keyser’s rebuttal.



It was not quite a year ago that the riveting hearing took place pitting the dueling testimonies of Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh and Christine Blasey Ford. New York Times reporter Robin Pogrebin parlayed her slanted reporting on the case and her Yale connection into a book deal with fellow reporter Kate Kelly. Both reporters contributed slanted anti-Kavanaugh reporting during the controversy, and retained the same tone for the book, The Education of Brett KavanaughAn Investigation.



Our friend Mark Hemingway at Real Clear Investigations tweeted about a disturbing article at VICE.com half-lionizing Aileen Wuornos, the hooker-turned-serial killer. The title was "How Serial Killer Aileen Wuornos Became a Cult Hero: To her fans, Wuornos's story offers a powerful example of a survivor who defies the respectability politics of victimhood." The article really went off the rails when writer Sofia Barrett-Ibarria suggested Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh should meet a violent end like the prey of Wuornos



As The New York Times goes into damage control mode following their erroneous Justice Kavanagh hit piece, former Times executive editor Jill Abramson appeared on Fox’s Outnumbered Overtime on Wednesday in an attempt to excuse the paper for leaving key exculpatory evidence out of the initial article. Abramson tried to claim "no one has challenged the basic accuracy of the story that they published." Yes, they have! 



In Thursday’s installment of The Hill’s “Rising,” chief Washington correspondent Saagar Enjeti lit up New York Times reporters Kate Kelly and Robin Pogrebin for their smear campaign against Justice Brett Kavanaugh, and grilled them on their obfuscation of exculpatory facts.



The crass, horribly annoying TBS host Samantha Bee was back at it Wednesday night, expressing dismay that Brett Kavanaugh remains on the Supreme Court while showering praise on the horribly biased and factually challenged New York Times reporters Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly for supposedly unearthing claims from “highly credible” Kavanaugh accusers. Along the way, she threw in insults about Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) being both a “bitch” and a frog eating flies, but that’s rather mild compared to some of her past statements.