The Other McCain

"One should either write ruthlessly what one believes to be the truth, or else shut up." — Arthur Koestler

The Ramirez Smear Against Kavanaugh Exposes the Desperation of Democrats

Posted on | September 24, 2018 | 5 Comments

 

“This is a smear, plain and simple,” Judge Brett Kavanaugh said in response to the implausible claim by former Yale classmate Deborah Ramirez. It is remarkable — and a frightening testimony to the ongoing destruction of journalism standards — that the New Yorker was willing to publish this claim despite the fact that Ronan Farrow and Jane Meyer could find zero substantiation for Ramirez’s fable:

The New Yorker has not confirmed with other eyewitnesses that Kavanaugh was present at the party. The magazine contacted several dozen classmates of Ramirez and Kavanaugh regarding the incident. Many did not respond to interview requests; others declined to comment, or said they did not attend or remember the party. . . .
One of the male classmates who Ramirez said egged on Kavanaugh denied any memory of the party. “I don’t think Brett would flash himself to Debbie, or anyone, for that matter,” he said. Asked why he thought Ramirez was making the allegation, he responded, “I have no idea.” The other male classmate who Ramirez said was involved in the incident commented, “I have zero recollection.”
In a statement, two of those male classmates who Ramirez alleged were involved in the incident, the wife of a third male student she said was involved, and three other classmates, Dino Ewing, Louisa Garry, and Dan Murphy, disputed Ramirez’s account of events: “We were the people closest to Brett Kavanaugh during his first year at Yale. He was a roommate to some of us, and we spent a great deal of time with him, including in the dorm where this incident allegedly took place. Some of us were also friends with Debbie Ramirez during and after her time at Yale. We can say with confidence that if the incident Debbie alleges ever occurred, we would have seen or heard about it—and we did not. The behavior she describes would be completely out of character for Brett. In addition, some of us knew Debbie long after Yale, and she never described this incident until Brett’s Supreme Court nomination was pending. Editors from the New Yorker contacted some of us because we are the people who would know the truth, and we told them that we never saw or heard about this.”
The former friend who was married to the male classmate alleged to be involved, and who signed the statement, said of Ramirez, “This is a woman I was best friends with. We shared intimate details of our lives. And I was never told this story by her, or by anyone else. It never came up. I didn’t see it; I never heard of it happening.” She said she hadn’t spoken with Ramirez for about ten years, but that the two women had been close all through college, and Kavanaugh had remained part of what she called their “larger social circle.”

The former friend suggests the accuser’s obvious motive to lie:

In an initial conversation with The New Yorker, she suggested that Ramirez may have been politically motivated. Later, she said that she did not know if this was the case.
Ramirez is a registered Democrat, but said that her decision to speak out was not politically motivated and, regarding her views, that she “works toward human rights, social justice, and social change.”

Translation: “I’m a Bolsehvik.”

What’s really happening here? It’s very simple: Democrats and the media (but I repeat myself) decided to stop Kavanaugh by any means necessary. Once the unsubstantiated tale by Christine Blasey Ford was pronounced “credible” (because any accusation against Kavanaugh is “credible,” when that word becomes a synonym for politically useful) this was a signal to anyone else who wanted to make such a claim that they would be praised as a heroic “survivor of sexual assault” and treated favorably by the media for joining the pile-on. When Judge Kavanaugh calls this story “a smear, plain and simple,” he is describing not only Debrorah Ramirez’s fabricated tale, but also the decision of the New Yorker to publish it, which they never would do if it were aimed at a Democrat.

This is pure partisan politics, part of a carefully orchestrated campaign by Democrats to win the midterm elections. Nov. 6 is coming.

Like I keep saying, people need to wake the hell up.



 

Category: Media Bias, Supreme Court

Comments

5 Responses to “The Ramirez Smear Against Kavanaugh Exposes the Desperation of Democrats”

  1. A Steaming Pile of Bad Journalism : The Other McCain
    September 24th, 2018 @ 6:58 pm

    […] most important fact about the Deborah Ramirez story in the New Yorker is that the same story was rejected by the New York Times, which spent a week chasing the story, […]

  2. Kavanaugh: Into the Twilight Zone – Freedom's Back
    September 27th, 2018 @ 1:45 am

    […] midterm elections. The details of the accusations against Judge Kavanaugh — including a Yale classmate’s tale, for which the New Yorker reported it could find no corroborating witnesses, and which the New […]

  3. Kavanaugh: Into the Twilight Zone – The Deplorable Patriots
    September 27th, 2018 @ 2:08 am

    […] midterm elections. The details of the accusations against Judge Kavanaugh — including a Yale classmate’s tale, for which the New Yorker reported it could find no corroborating witnesses, and which the New […]

  4. Kavanaugh: Into the Twilight Zone
    September 27th, 2018 @ 5:05 am

    […] upcoming midterm elections. The details of the accusations against Judge Kavanaugh — including a Yale classmate’s tale, for which the New Yorker reported it could find no corroborating witnesses, and which the New […]

  5. Kavanaugh: Into the Twilight Zone – The Conservative Insider
    September 27th, 2018 @ 9:03 pm

    […] midterm elections. The details of the accusations against Judge Kavanaugh — including a Yale classmate’s tale, for which the New Yorker reported it could find no corroborating witnesses, and which the New […]