NY Times bombshell report blows up in their face. Again

[grasping the after wind]

The New York Times has rolled out a story based upon one person's uncorroborated accusations as if it were a reliable news piece that had some semblance of actual journalism connected to it. It is partisan political propaganda not journalism. The NYT no longer deserves to be called a newspaper as it no longer engages in journalism. They actually lamely tried to claim that Stier was corroborated by having people say that they heard Stier tell them what they told the NYT political activist that wrote the piece. Corroboration should be made of sterner stuff. Like perhaps another person that witnessed what Stier claims to have seen or maybe the woman that he alleges the incident happened to actually remembering that it happened? A few unnamed "officials" saying Stier told them the same story is hardly corroboration.

 

[iluvatar5150]

If only right-wing media received this much scrutiny when it pushed a bogus story...

 

[grasping the after wind]

If only right-wing media received this much scrutiny when it pushed a bogus story...

What's stopping you? Could it be a lack of bogus stories from the right?

 

[iluvatar5150]

What's stopping you? Could it be a lack of bogus stories from the right?

lolol

no

Allow me to be more specific: "If only right-wing media received this much scrutiny from conservatives when it pushed a bogus story..."


Seth Rich, widespread voter fraud, Pizzagate, Obama's birth certificate, Trump's crowd size... Right-wing media is a cesspool of dishonesty and crazy conspiracy theories and it's a regular occurrence to come on this board and find all manner of right-wing falsehoods being pushed by some of the same people now complaining about the NYT. I even had people arguing with me that Trump was right about that hurricane barreling down on Alabama.

 

[jgarden]

I'm not a big Kavanaugh fan. Kavanaugh was a Republican establishment pick whose name was not even on Trump's list of potential appointees.

That said, Kavanaugh hasn't been convicted of anything. There is no real evidence incriminating Kavanaugh. We even have the article today that Christine Blasey Ford's so-called corroborating witness was threatened if she failed to corroborate Ford's allegations. That's not right. In fact, it's arguably worse than anything Kavanaugh is accused of ... and apparently is not a mere allegation ... but confirmed FACT.

Surely the Republicans could have found another suitable candidate, like Neil Gorsuch, without the "baggage" of Kavanaugh!

Time and time again Trump impulsively picks candidates and then gets "burned" because his Administration fails to spent the time to properly "vet" them for possible problems!

Gorsuch was probably not properly vetted either, they lucked out with him but "bombed" with Kavanaugh!

 

[Belk]

The New York Times has rolled out a story based upon one person's uncorroborated accusations as if it were a reliable news piece that had some semblance of actual journalism connected to it. It is partisan political propaganda not journalism. The NYT no longer deserves to be called a newspaper as it no longer engages in journalism. They actually lamely tried to claim that Stier was corroborated by having people say that they heard Stier tell them what they told the NYT political activist that wrote the piece. Corroboration should be made of sterner stuff. Like perhaps another person that witnessed what Stier claims to have seen or maybe the woman that he alleges the incident happened to actually remembering that it happened? A few unnamed "officials" saying Stier told them the same story is hardly corroboration.

Did you read the article? It was corroborated.

Ms. Ramirez’s story could be more fully corroborated. During his Senate testimony, Mr. Kavanaugh said that if the incident Ms. Ramirez described had occurred, it would have been “the talk of campus.” Our reporting suggests that it was.

At least seven people, including Ms. Ramirez’s mother, heard about the Yale incident long before Mr. Kavanaugh was a federal judge. Two of those people were classmates who learned of it just days after the party occurred, suggesting that it was discussed among students at the time.

 

[NightHawkeye]

Surely the Republicans could have found another suitable candidate, like Neil Gorsuch, without the "baggage" of Kavanaugh!

Time and time again Trump impulsively picks candidates and then gets "burned" because his Administration fails to spent the time to properly "vet" them for possible problems!

Gorsuch was probably not properly vetted either, they lucked out with him but "bombed" with Kavanaugh!

I don't think luck had anything to do with Gorsuch's confirmation. The left just wasn't ready to fall on their swords over his nomination because it wouldn't change anything about the court.

Kavanaugh, on the other hand, was much more serious matter to the left. He represented the swing vote on the court and his confirmation came too soon after Gorsuch was confirmed. The left would have attacked anyone Trump had nominated.

If Ruth Bader Ginsburg gets replaced by Trump, whoever is chosen will likely endure as much vitriol as Kavanaugh did ... or more if Democrats remain in the minority in the Senate.

 

[grasping the after wind]

lolol

no

Allow me to be more specific: "If only right-wing media received this much scrutiny from conservatives when it pushed a bogus story..."

Show me a bogus right wing story to scrutinize and I will. I would surely like to see the same from the fans of the left wing media . However, it seems to me that those fans, as evidenced in this thread, will defend that media faithfully pretending that it is unbiased and objective no matter how obviously bogus a story might be or how journalistically unprofessional the writer and editors prove themselves to be.

 

[Albion]

1) Where was "Albion's" self-righteous indignation when Trump spent 5 years trying to undermine Obama's authority to serve in the White House by questioning his country of birth!

If that were true, perhaps Albion would have challenged it.

Kavanaugh had been properly "vetted," an alien concept in the Trump Administration, the Republicans could have avoided this controversy with a better candidate.

That's also false. Kavanaugh was no surprise. He was
highly regarded, very experienced, and he had been the subject of the speculation that preceded the president's nomination..

3) If the Democrats were just inventing ways to harass Kavanaugh, why would they not extend their attacks to include Trump's other male Supreme Court nominee, Neil Gorsuch?

The answer to that is well-known. Gorsuch did not change the balance of liberal vs. conservative justices, but Kavanaugh was thought to be the fifth vote for a reliable conservative majority.

4) The fact that the treatment of Gorsuch stands in marked contrast to that of Kavanaugh strongly suggests that the problem lies with the Judge and not the Democrats!

See item 3.

 

[Hank77]

Kavanaugh was part of Ken Starr's impeachment prosecution team.

Max Stier was on the Clinton defense team. Kavanaugh was on the prosecuting team.

If you think defense attorneys and prosecutors hold grudges against each other I guess you could make a case.

Kavanaugh was also on Starr's team that investigated the Vincent Foster death for the 5th time. They investigated that for 3 yrs. and determined it was a suicide and the Clintons had nothing to do with it.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

Did you read the article? It was corroborated.

If we're being 100% fair, there were two incidents outlined in the article. The incident that Stier reported involved a different woman who refused to be interviewed by the authors and was never approached by the FBI (as far as anyone can determine, they did nothing to investigate Stier's report). Her friends claim that she has no memory of the incident. This is the incident that NHE is fixated on - you could be forgiven for missing it, as it occupies just a paragraph and a half of the article.

 

[NightHawkeye]

Her friends claim that she has no memory of the incident. This is the incident that NHE is fixated on - you could be forgiven for missing it, as it occupies just a paragraph and a half of the article.

It's not just her friends, she herself has spoken out recently as well. She simply held back a little while seeking support from friends and family before speaking out.

She claims no memory of any such incident as described by the New York Times.

If you have another alleged incident you wish to discuss, please lay it out for us.

 

[Hank77]

I'm not a big Kavanaugh fan. Kavanaugh was a Republican establishment pick whose name was not even on Trump's list of potential appointees.

That said, Kavanaugh hasn't been convicted of anything. There is no real evidence incriminating Kavanaugh. We even have the article today that Christine Blasey Ford's so-called corroborating witness was threatened if she failed to corroborate Ford's allegations. That's not right. In fact, it's arguably worse than anything Kavanaugh is accused of ... and apparently is not a mere allegation ... but confirmed FACT.

Which article is that?

 

[NightHawkeye]

Which article is that?

I don't remember which news outlet ... and I don't link to sexually explicit articles. Search Google if you're interested. Use advanced search over the past 24 hours. It may be two days old by now.

 

[Hank77]

The New York Times has rolled out a story based upon one person's uncorroborated accusations as if it were a reliable news piece that had some semblance of actual journalism connected to it. It is partisan political propaganda not journalism. The NYT no longer deserves to be called a newspaper as it no longer engages in journalism. They actually lamely tried to claim that Stier was corroborated by having people say that they heard Stier tell them what they told the NYT political activist that wrote the piece. Corroboration should be made of sterner stuff. Like perhaps another person that witnessed what Stier claims to have seen or maybe the woman that he alleges the incident happened to actually remembering that it happened? A few unnamed "officials" saying Stier told them the same story is hardly corroboration.

Max Strien statement was in a book/? and they talked to two other people who said "yes, Max said that." At least that is what I understood. I don't think they were saying that those statements were corroboration that the incident actually happened.

 

[Hank77]

lolol

no

Allow me to be more specific: "If only right-wing media received this much scrutiny from conservatives when it pushed a bogus story..."


Seth Rich, widespread voter fraud, Pizzagate, Obama's birth certificate, Trump's crowd size... Right-wing media is a cesspool of dishonesty and crazy conspiracy theories and it's a regular occurrence to come on this board and find all manner of right-wing falsehoods being pushed by some of the same people now complaining about the NYT. I even had people arguing with me that Trump was right about that hurricane barreling down on Alabama.

Seth Rich's parents are suing FOX for their part in pushing that conspiracy theory.

 

[Hank77]

I don't think luck had anything to do with Gorsuch's confirmation. The left just wasn't ready to fall on their swords over his nomination because it wouldn't change anything about the court.

Kavanaugh, on the other hand, was much more serious matter to the left. He represented the swing vote on the court and his confirmation came too soon after Gorsuch was confirmed. The left would have attacked anyone Trump had nominated.

If Ruth Bader Ginsburg gets replaced by Trump, whoever is chosen will likely endure as much vitriol as Kavanaugh did ... or more if Democrats remain in the minority in the Senate.

They would have been all over Gorsuch after what the Reps. pulled with Garland. You can bet they vetted him every which way.
Surely they knew that there could easily be more than one justice to be replaced.

 

[Hank77]

It's not just her friends, she herself has spoken out recently as well. She simply held back a little while seeking support from friends and family before speaking out.

I goggled this but I can't find anything about this. What's you source?

 

[Hank77]

I don't remember which news outlet ... and I don't link to sexually explicit articles. Search Google if you're interested. Use advanced search over the past 24 hours. It may be two days old by now.

Found a few articles that say she was pressured to lie basically. Good for her she didn't. I remember her as saying she doesn't remember anything like that or being at that gathering.
It's really bad to ask someone to lie especially when they could be committing a crime if they do. It's even worse to threaten them.

 

[Ana the Ist]

OK NHE, let's check the credibility of the messenger.





Looks like you are incorrect. The named victim is quoted in the article and does not disavow any of the incident.



Oddly enough, it is not the NYT who's credibility I am questioning.

I think you got allegations mixed up.