Is it possible Democrats can even surprise New York Times reporters?
When The Times published an unforgivably flawed excerpt of a book about Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh over the weekend, the clown car of Democrats seeking their party’s presidential nomination leaped almost as one to use it to demand Kavanaugh’s immediate impeachment.
In the Pavlovian politics of the modern Democratic Party, the reaction was entirely predictable – except, apparently to two women who played a significant role in the story.
In an interview with the Yahoo podcast “Skullduggery” — hosted by news veterans Michael Isikoff and Daniel Klaidman — Times reporters Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly seemed not to have expected that Democrats seeking the presidency would snatch at any chance to assail Kavanaugh.
The two reporters are co-authors of the already controversial book “The Education of Brett Kavanaugh.” They might have spent the past year working under that title, but it doesn’t sound like they learned a thing — at least when it comes to Democratic dishonesty.
The excerpt of their book contained a story as thinly sourced and frankly unbelievable as the tale told by Kavanaugh’s chief accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, during a confirmation process that riveted the nation last year.
The Times reporters seem to have never expected that the exact same players who disgraced themselves and their party last year — Sens. Cory Booker and Kamala Harris, for example – would disgrace themselves and American politics again this year when given the same opportunity.
“It’s dismaying to see the rush to judgment,” Kelly said, according to Isikoff’s account of the interview.
“We definitely have been grappling with it for sure,” Pogrebin said, Isikoff wrote.
“There was a sense going into this that nuance doesn’t make headlines, … that people were going to pull stuff out. … People saw what they wanted to see before learning any of the facts, or didn’t even make much of an effort to pay attention to the facts.”
The authors of the Kavanaugh book decry “rush to judgment” by Dems calling for his impeachment based on their reporting. Say their book is more nuanced than initial flawed article in @nytimes revealed. @rpogrebin @katekelly @skullduggerypod https://t.co/V1a0FGIumC
— Michael Isikoff (@Isikoff) September 18, 2019
The analogy is way overused, but Kelly’s calling the rush to judgment “dismaying” is about as believable as Claude Rains’ discovering gambling in Rick’s Café Américain.
No one with eyes and ears could have been “shocked, shocked” that an inflammatory, defamatory, uncorroborated accusation against an otherwise blemishless Brett Kavanaugh would drive Democrats into making completely unsupportable demands.
After all, it’s not like Democrats didn’t do exactly the same thing under exactly the same circumstances last year.
That’s because there’s a real goal in mind.
As Debra Katz, an attorney for Blasey Ford, admitted during an April speech that became public earlier this month, the fight about Kavanaugh was really about the future of the abortion regime in the United States.
“He will always have an asterisk next to his name. When he takes a scalpel to Roe v. Wade, we will know who he is, we know his character, and we know what motivates him, and that is important; it is important that we know, and that is part of what motivated Christine,” Katz said.
Those words should never be forgotten.
As long as Democrats cling to the judicial and moral monstrosity of the Roe v. Wade decision, they’re going to attack anything and anyone who threatens it with demonic fury — and Kavanaugh is just the best example at the moment.
Whatever else they may be, Mesdames Pogrebin and Kelly aren’t stupid — no one gets a job in The Times newsroom without a functioning intellect. So it’s more than passing strange to think they might have not completely expected that Democratic presidential contenders heading into the 2020 election would overreact to even a hint that Kavanaugh might have been the monster Democrats and the media have been pretending he was all this time.
The country is going through strange times, all right, but not so strange that Democrats can surprise New York Times reporters by behaving irrationally.
It’s what they do.
And every American going to the polls next November needs to remember that.
Truth and Accuracy
We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.