NYT deliberately buries critical facts in its reporting on Kavanaugh, proving yet again the NYT is the propaganda arm of the DNC
by: JD Heyes
NaturalNews.com
Tuesday, September 25, 2018
The examples of journalistic malpractice and political deference to the far-Left Democratic Party by The New York Times continue to mount, as the paper’s coverage of the sexual assault allegations against Supreme Court nominee Judge Brett Kavanaugh proves.
The Times was an early arrival to the story, publishing every breathless claim made against the nominee as though they were gospel, with very little context and virtually no balance. Reading the Times’ stories gave one the impression that a) its editors and reporters had already declared Kavanaugh guilty; and b) there wasn’t even a hint of suggestion that the accusations from the two women were ‘timed’ to wreck the judge’s confirmation, given that it was a certainty after days of Democrat-generated chaos at the Senate Judiciary Committee’s confirmation hearings.
Now, it seems, the paper has been caught burying key details and facts regarding Kavanaugh, again with an eye toward helping like-minded Democrats tank his reputation and his nomination.
As The Daily Wire notes, the Times on Monday published a story alleging that Kavanaugh made reference in one of his high school yearbooks that turned out to be “hurtful” to a girl who was the subject of an inside joke between the judge and some of his high school football teammates.
“Among the reminiscences about sports and booze is a mysterious entry: ‘Renate Alumnus,’” the Times reported, adding that it was a “mysterious” reference to a girl, Renate Schroeder – now Renate Schroeder Dolphin, whom some of the players once spoke about disrespectfully.
Kavanaugh and four other Georgetown Prep School classmates explained that “Renate Alumni” was a term they used innocently in reference to having gone on a date with her at some point.
Stop the presses. Yuuuuge scandal. (Related: White House SLAMS new Kavanaugh sex abuse allegations; pushes back with DETAILED rebuttal.)
Or not. As The Federalist’s Mollie Hemingway noted in a column following the report, the ‘paper of record’ “hid multiple problems with its claims, including that it was sourced to a rabidly anti-Trump politician in Maryland and his associate.”
The NY Times is no longer credible
The Rest…HERE
