Advertisements
Robin Pogrebin (left) and Kate Kelly (right) are the authors of a book about the Yale years of Kavanaugh. They describe the claim - that he put his penis in the hand of a woman when she was drunk - and the fact that she doesn't remember and chose not to talk about it

The New York Times journalists behind a tricky article about a new sexual misconduct claim against Brett Kavanaugh suggested Monday that their editors removed the fact that the alleged victim did not remember the attack in the rush of the editing process.

Advertisements

Kate Kelly and Robin Pogrebin are the authors of the new book describing the allegation for the first time.

They describe how Kavanaugh was reported to the FBI before he was confirmed as a Supreme Court in October last year by Max Stier, a former classmate who claimed to have put his penis in the hand of a woman when she was drunk in a dormitory. Justice.

A fragment of the book was uploaded to the NYT website in the early hours of Sunday morning that included the allegation, but omitted the fact that the allegedly woman did not remember and did not think about the incident wanted to talk.

On Monday it turned out that the two – working at the culture counter and the Wall Street counter – originally threw the scoop for the NYT news department, but the editors did not believe this justified a story.

They finally threw it at Sunday Review, where the excerpt was published over the weekend.

Robin Pogrebin (left) and Kate Kelly (right) are the authors of a book about the Yale years of Kavanaugh. They describe the claim - that he put his penis in the hand of a woman when she was drunk - and the fact that she doesn't remember and chose not to talk about it

Advertisements

Robin Pogrebin (left) and Kate Kelly (right) are the authors of a book about the Yale years of Kavanaugh. They describe the claim – that he put his penis in the hand of a woman when she was drunk – and the fact that she doesn't remember and chose not to talk about it

This was the Editors & # 39; Note that was added to the story on Sunday, hours after it went online

This was the Editors & # 39; Note that was added to the story on Sunday, hours after it went online

This was the Editors & # 39; Note that was added to the story on Sunday, hours after it went online

The woman at the heart of the accusation never came forward and Stier, who reported this to the FBI, also disagreed with Pogrebin or Kelly. They based their reporting on unnamed law enforcement officials who told them he had reported it.

In an interview on MSNBC on Monday evening they said that their original version of the excerpt contained the reservation that the woman did not remember, but that the editors removed it when she removed the woman's name.

Despite the fact that she refused to speak with them in the report and never put forward the accusation herself, Pogrebin and Kelly put her name at the top of a chapter of their book.

& # 39; What actually happened was that we had her name, and the Times usually doesn't include the victim's name. I think the editors thought it was probably better to delete her name and when deleting her name, they deleted the other reference to the fact that she didn't remember.

Advertisements

& # 39; I think it was just some sort of editing done in the hurry of the editing process to close the section, & # 39; said Pogrebin, a culture reporter, Monday evening.

They also said they were part of the decision to change the story later to include the most important information.

Kelly is a Wall Street reporter

Kelly is a Wall Street reporter

Pogrebin is a culture reporter

Pogrebin is a culture reporter

Kelly is a Wall Street reporter and Pogrebin works at the culture desk. They threw their & # 39; scoop & # 39; to the news department but were rejected and brought their book to the Sunday Review instead

Kavanaugh, who strongly denied all previous allegations against him, did not comment
Advertisements

Kavanaugh, who strongly denied all previous allegations against him, did not comment

Kavanaugh, who strongly denied all previous allegations against him, did not comment

& # 39; We felt that there was so much heat, that there is so much – everyone has grasped various aspects of this that we certainly did not want it to be a problem anymore and it was certainly never our intention to do it in any way. also mislead.

& # 39; We wanted to tell as full a story as possible & # 39 ;, Pogrebin added.

TIME LINE

1983: Kavanaugh registers with Yale

Advertisements

1987: Kavanaugh graduates from Yale student, studies law

July 2018: Kavanaugh is nominated to the Supreme Court by Trump

September 2018: Dr. Christine Blasey Ford publicly describes an alleged incident in an article in The Washington Post where she says he sexually abused her in college

A week later, the story of Deborah Ramirez appeared in the New Yorker.

Days later Julie Swetnick claims in a letter to the House Commission that she was at a party with him where she was drugged and gang raped.

Advertisements

She has not identified her attacker.

September 27 and 28: The hearings

October 2nd: Senator Christopher A. Coons (D-Del.) Wrote to FBI director Christopher A. Wray and said that Max Stier came to him with the new claim

October 6, 2018: Kavanaugh has been confirmed

September 2019: New York Times journalists Kate Kelly and Robin Pogrebin publish their book

Kelly said the book should never be about the new claim and that it is more focused on the & # 39; experience & # 39; from Deborah Ramirez, another prosecutor who says that Kavanaugh pushed his penis into her face

& # 39; That excerpt we wrote in the Times was an adaptation of what we have just described in our book.

& # 39; It really focuses on Debora Ramirez's experience as we understand it after Robin has spent quite some time with her, why the incident she claimed to have occurred with Kavanaugh hit her so hard that she got a fish out of it water felt that year in Yale … that was the focus of the piece.

& # 39; We have included the additional details about this other, not yet reported incident because it seemed relevant to what we were talking about.

Advertisements

& # 39; It was a somewhat similar incident, & # 39; Kelly said.

On Sunday afternoon, the Times changed its online article to say that the most important information was omitted.

But it had already caused a furious line and claims that the details were intentionally omitted because it weakened the accusation.

The newspaper is notoriously anti-Trump and as he nominated Kavanaugh for the Supreme Court, the president interpreted the controversy as an excuse to attack him and his administration.

He encouraged Kavanaugh to prosecute the newspaper for defamation and called it a & # 39; shame & # 39; that the story was ever published.

Advertisements

During a meeting on Monday evening, he called on everyone involved to resign.

& # 39; I call for the resignation of everyone at the New York Times involved in the Kavanaugh smear, & # 39; he said.

President Trump said that Kavanaugh should start accusing & # 39; people for defamation & # 39; after the NYT had updated its story on Sunday

President Trump said that Kavanaugh should start accusing & # 39; people for defamation & # 39; after the NYT had updated its story on Sunday

President Trump said that Kavanaugh should start accusing & # 39; people for defamation & # 39; after the NYT had updated its story on Sunday

Vanity Fair reported Monday that the two journalists were scooping their & # 39; scoop & # 39; threw the news department of the Times, but the editors didn't pick them up because there wasn't enough & # 39; juice & # 39; on.

WHO ARE NEW YORK JOURNALISTS DURING THE BOOK?

Advertisements

Robin Pogrebin

Pogrebin is described by the newspaper as & # 39; a reporter at the Culture Desk, where she covers cultural institutions, the art world, architecture and other topics & # 39 ;.

As the line unfolded on Saturday, she proudly tweeted about how news coverage had led to calls from senior Democrats for Kavanaugh to resign.

She also tweeted that the president had tweeted about the story three times, but did not repeat what he had said. He called the report a & # 39; shame & # 39 ;.

Kate Kelly

Kelly is a Wall Street reporter who writes about & # 39; his political influence and inner work & # 39 ;.

They spent 10 months interviewing people to support Ramirez's claims about Kavanaugh for their book.

They also spent Sunday retweeting praise for their book, including a review that it & # 39; careful and balanced & # 39; called.

Kelly and Pogrebin previously worked at the New York Observer.

By running it in the Review section, they found that it would be presented more as an opinion and less as hard news.

However, it was published on the Sunday Review News Analysis website.

& # 39; In today's journalistic world, the conversation is a little irrelevant, because for most people reading the New York Times online or on their phones, it doesn't matter.

& # 39; It's all the same. Your average reader will not really know or care.

& # 39; They played it pretty big, and I have to tell you: when I first read it, I had no idea it was in the Review. I tapped a link and at the top was & # 39; News Analysis & # 39 ;.

& # 39; And I didn't know it was a book adaptation either, because I didn't even come to the end. I understand the activists' point of view. They want the Times to promote their agenda, but that is not the Times' job, & said a former senior employee.

The Washington Post also revealed that it had heard about Bull's accusation last year, but chose not to tell a story based on a lack of information.

The reporters were not directly approached by Taurus, but by two intermediaries who & # 39; on his behalf & # 39; worked.

They did not disclose his name.

Bull went to Yale with Kavanaugh and was pitted against him & # 39; in the 1994 Whitewater investigation into then President Clinton.

Kavanaugh collaborated with researcher Kenneth Starr and Taurus was one of Clinton's lawyers.

Now Taurus works for the non-partisan Partnership for the public service.

. (TagsToTranslate) Dailymail (t) news