Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Believe All Women? An Easter Morning NYT News Dump
After a random party we’re not even sure happened, or that he went to if it did, we saw the absolute destruction of Brett Kavanaugh’s reputation. The esteemed Mollie Hemingway literally wrote the book on it, and it is a must-read for anyone looking to understand how the media coordinated the assassination attempt on the future Supreme Court Justice’s reputation. With that in mind, the New York Times’ coverage of allegations against the presumptive Democratic nominee, Joe Biden, is even more galling.
If you are really observant, you can detect a subtle difference in the way that the New York Times attempted to destroy and defame Brett Kavanaugh with no evidence and how they move to protect Joe Biden from a former employee's accusation. https://t.co/XR7Jz7HW9h
— Mollie (@MZHemingway) April 12, 2020
We were told to believe all women; that refusing to do so was akin to revictimizing them. And now?
This is art. pic.twitter.com/Ptk0KZsrZn
— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) April 12, 2020
There is no pattern of sexual misconduct… besides the already established pattern, of course. But that couldn’t stay up, and so, the Times edited it out of the story.
Before & Afterhttps://t.co/lYL58hK3UIhttps://t.co/OWTtwoTna2 pic.twitter.com/iXaNeMM1bc
— JERRY DUNLEAVY (@JerryDunleavy) April 12, 2020
It was never about protecting women, not for the activist press, nor for the activists. One of the center-stage players in the Kavanaugh drama, actress Alyssa Milano. And like the Times, now that “Believe All Women” has become inconvenient, she’s singing a far different tune.
I believe, along with many others in this space, that accusations need to be investigated with due process for the accused. This is the only way for the movement to work & create the change we are fighting for.
Anything less puts the entire movement and women’s equality at risk.
— Alyssa Milano (@Alyssa_Milano) April 6, 2020
How much of the #MeToo movement was actually real? As the Biden campaign ramps up, we’re about to find out.
Published in General
I think part of the Me Too movement was a plan to take down Trump. The Left even sacrificed one of their own politicians to take that excuse away from Trump. Unfortunately for them, the big names taken down were theirs.
It’s sad but not unexpected to see them discovering due process when it’s Biden and not Kavanaugh.
A joyous aside is the knowledge that a big portion of people know the hash mark as the pound sign. That’s what I think when I see #MeToo.
Bethany,
Pardon me but I find Alyssa Milano’s discovery of Due Process to be akin to Madame Defarge giving a lecture on A Theory of Justice. Even Hercules couldn’t completely clean out the Stygian stables after Milano had visited.
Regards,
Jim
About as much as is real of any movement which, although it might have started out to expose genuine abuses (I’m not even sure about that, see following), becomes inwardly-focused and all about “my own special story” to the exclusion of everything else. They’re not interested in the welfare of all women; if they were, they’d be doing something about human trafficking or honor killings in the United States. Since they’re not victims of human trafficking or honor killings, though, very few of them are interested in getting their hands dirty there. All they’re interested in is grandstanding for their fifteen seconds of fame, on behalf of a “cause” in which they and their friends can claim a starring role. When the alleged perpetrator, or the alleged victim, isn’t their friend, they sing an entirely different song.
I agree with this.
None of us on the right has been able to accuse the left of consistency.
Please remember that on the NY Times, journalism is dead. Long live propaganda!
This is sort of a more time-compressed re-run of the same hypocrisy shown back in the 1990 following the Dems’ decision to weaponize sexual harassment at the Clarence Thomas hearings. The Times and other outlets were quick to declare 1992 as “The Year of the Women” in politics, as an effort to get more liberal Democrat women elected to office while at the same time brushing aside any allegations made against the guy at the top of the Dems’ ’92 ticket, based pretty much on Hillary’s say-so (as if Hillary was going to rat out her husband and try to gain ultimate power based on her own sparkling personality).
That was followed in 1993 by the successful effort to oust Bob Packwood from his Oregon Senate seat based on sexual harassment claims, and despite the fact Packwood was considered one of the biggest RINOs in the Senate (John McCain should have remembered this treatment in the run-up to the 2008 election, and he would have been less gobsmacked over the Times going after him with a libelous story). After Packwood’s ouster, you then had the 4 1/2 year gap before the Lewinsky allegations came around, which ended up with feminists like Glordia Steinhem penning her Times op-ed granting Clinton “one free grope”, along with the infamous Nina Burleigh piece in Time which pretty much said she not only didn’t care about the allegations, she’d do the same thing Monica did in the Oval Office if Clinton protected abortion rights.
So the actions with Biden here aren’t blazing any new trails, but just following in the path of situational media outrage on sexual harassment that was blazed 20-30 years ago. The fact that it didn’t work with Trump and the Billy Bush tape NBC sat on during the primaries shows that more and more people realize the outrage is situational and tilted in one direction — Biden’s biggest problem though may not be that Trump supporters are noting the bias, but that Bernie’s supporters see it, too.
It’s comforting to have yet more documentation to cite to people to explain why I don’t believe anything the New York Times says.
So the NY Times calls a Code Red during the Kavanaugh hearings even though there was no evidence, then or now, that Kavanaugh and Ford had ever met, but we can stand down when someone, for whom there is actual proof they knew Biden and told others of the incident at the time, makes an accusation against him? On the other hand, I can see the point the Times is making – Kavanaugh was in high school at the time and should have known better, while Biden was a United States Senator and it would be unfair to hold him to contemporary standards of conduct.
Shorter NYT: we hold high school students to a higher standard that Democrat Senators.
Is anyone shocked by this? Anyone? If so, you haven’t been paying attention.
I’m shocked they’re so transparent about it.
Remember with the media universe now so split between news and entertainment sources, media people and execs at the Times, the TV networks and elsewhere have decided to target core audiences of progressive readers and viewers, in hopes of retaining their loyalty while telling advertisers the lower circulation and viewing numbers are the new normal (which was a point Rob Long made two years ago to explain why the success of Roseanne’s reboot with her Trump support was so unnerving for the networks — they told their advertisers they couldn’t get the type of ratings that show got before she self-destructed, so just settle for niche audiences).
The annoying part is while the Times is targeting only a niche audience of upper-middle class urban progressives, they (and the networks like CNN) are still trying to claim they are attempting to be unbiased and attract the full spectrum of readers and viewers. It’s the attempts to deny what they’re doing that’s the irritating part.