judge brett kavanaugh

Columnist Connor Bahr argues that The New York Times' recent article released misinformation regarding a new sexual misconduct accusation made against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. Bahr thinks the Times should be punished for this.

Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh. By now, most of you know who he is. Kavanaugh was first accused of sexual misconduct in late 2018 when Christine Ford testified against him before a judiciary committee, but he was eventually sworn into the Supreme Court when her accusations fell apart. Almost exactly a year later, The New York Times released an article accusing Kavanaugh of more sexual misconduct.

The only problem with this new accusation is that almost all of the “evidence” the Times claims to have can not be corroborated. The article apparently got its information from a book that was written by two Times reporters.

The book claims that a former classmate of Kavanaugh’s, Max Stier, went to the FBI when Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing was in progress to report another incident. However, Max Stier reportedly will not talk about the incident or the accusation. The only way the authors of the book know about this accusation is through Stier’s friends’ accounts of what happened.

On top of this, other witnesses have come forward and claimed to have been at the same party and say it never happened.

As soon as the article ran, many candidates at the forefront of the Democratic Party called for Kavanaugh’s impeachment, such as Beto O’ Rourke, Kamala Harris and Elizabeth Warren. Julian Castro even called for an investigation into the Department of Justice and Kamala Harris called his election process a sham.

All of the uncorroborated evidence may look bad for the Times, but when it came out it was just an opinion piece that wasn’t supported too well. The real scandal of this story is what came next.

Soon after the article broke, it was revealed that the Times had left out crucial information — that the victim said she never remembered it happening. This information was supposedly part of the book but for some reason was left out of the article published by the Times.

This is blatant propagation of misinformation. It is clear to me that the authors of the article left out crucial information because if that information had been in the article, it would have been worthless. These authors cared more about plugging a book and smearing Kavanaugh than they did about reporting truthfully. There is no way that throughout the number of people who needed to read the article before release, there wasn’t a single one who noticed the missing piece.

I believe this event says a lot about the Times. I can not say for certain whether this malpractice was done simply to gain easy advertising for the book or if it was another attempt to bring down Kavanaugh, but either one is a misuse of the platform the Times provides for their writers, and the world has noticed. Even other left-leaning outlets like CNN and USA Today have written scathing articles about the blunder.

This blunder should not be allowed to go unpunished. What kind of world are we living in if we can’t expect news outlets to present a full, factual view on the story or to provide evidence for accusations of sexual misconduct against a Supreme Court justice?

Opinion Policies

Opinions expressed in columns and letters are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the Daily or organizations with which the author(s) are associated. 

Feedback policy: The Daily encourages discussion but does not guarantee its publication. We reserve the right to edit or reject any letter or online feedback. The goal of the opinion section is to spark civil public discourse by publishing opinions based on facts that articulate an argument. The merit of a piece's ability to further public discourse, among other factors, will be considered when determining if a piece is publication worthy. 

Letter to the Editor Submission Link

(3) comments

Daniel Bell

The "world" you are referring to is one with a free press. There is no expectation of perfection. The thought of punishing the press for something that is not illegal, whether you like it or not, is not consistent with a free and open democracy. That said, YOU are welcome to "punish" them by not giving them money or attention and instead relying on other sources (plural) for information. Your are also free to write an opinion piece which another free press may decide to publish whether I like it or not. Ironic, isn't it? Christine Blasey Ford's testimony may have "(fallen) apart", I am not certain, yet while your opinion was flawed from the start I still respect it.

Staff
Connor Bahr

It could be said that what the Times did WAS illegal. There is an argument to be made that the Times intentionally left out information in the article to slander Kavanaugh, which could be considered libel. That being said, the "punish" I was referring to was the public becoming more skeptical of what the time posts and perhaps, as you said, not give the Times business. As for your last point, I'm not sure what you are referring to when you say that my opinion was flawed from the start?

-CB

Steve Gregg

Christine Blasey Ford named her long time friend, Leland Keyser, as one of the witnesses to the alleged incident with Kavanaugh. Keyser remembers no such party, has never met Kavanaugh, does not see how such an incident could have happened, and says she does not believe Ford's story. None of the other girlfriends Ford named backs up her story. Keyser has had numerous surgeries, becoming addicted to pain killers in the process. Ford's liberal friends threatened to out her addiction if she did not support Ford's accusations. That's how dirty the evil liberals play.



The FBI reports that thousands of women accused Kavanaugh of harassment, a number preposterous on its face. Thousands mean at least two thousand women accused him of harassment. The FBI investigated them and none were legitimate. When they interviewed one accuser, the agents pointed out that she and Kavanaugh had never been in the same city in their lives. She admitted she made it up because she just hated Kavanaugh.



The fact is that liberal women will lie by the thousands to take down anyone who disagrees with their politics. You can trust nothing they say. You should never vote for anyone who plays such dirty politics. You should never give them power over you.

Welcome to the discussion.

Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.