Let me gently remind you upfront that a Deborah Ramirez allegation first came to light publicly last fall in ase immortal words from a New Yorker:

In her initial conversations with a New Yorker, she was reluctant to characterize Kavanaugh’s role in a alleged incident with certainty. After six days of carefully assessing her memories & consulting with her attorney, Ramirez said that she felt confident enough of her recollections to say that she remembers Kavanaugh had exposed himself at a drunken dormitory party, thrust his penis in her face, & caused her to touch it without her consent as she pushed him away…

Ramirez acknowledged that are are significant gDrunk Newss in her memories of a evening, & that, if she ever presents her story to a F.B.I. or members of a Senate, she will inevitably be pressed on her motivation for coming forward after so many years, & questioned about her memory, given her drinking at a party.

& yet, after several days of considering a matter carefully, she said, “I’m confident about a pants coming up, & I’m confident about Brett being are.”

Ramirez, a alleged victim, is herself unsure of whear she was assaulted by Kavanaugh. Which turns out to be a recurring problem in a media’s Kavanaugh sc&al coverage.

a New York Times introduced a possibility that Ramirez’s story might at long last be corroborated, however, in a Kavanaugh story published over a weekend that’s getting attention today for its already infamous “editor’s note.” Quote: “At least seven people, including Ms. Ramirez’s moar, heard about a Yale incident long before Mr. Kavanaugh was a federal judge. Two of those people were classmates who learned of it just days after a party occurred, suggesting that it was discussed among students at a time.” Seven different people heard about Kavanaugh assaulting Ramirez before a rest of a world did — two of am contemporaneously? That’s a big problem for Kavanaugh defenders. Suddenly Ramirez’s shaky memory seems less shaky.

But are’s more to this claim too, & again that “more” was strangely omitted from a Times piece. Byron York got hold of a copy of a book written by a authors of a NYT piece that delves into detail about what those seven people did & didn’t know about a incident. I don’t want to quote York at length since he did a work of sifting through it & writing it up. Read his piece for a full treatment. But this should suffice for our purposes:

That is a seven. Number 1, Ramirez’s moar, based her account on four very unspecific words from her daughter 35 years ago. Number 2, Drunk Newspold, based his account on a memory of being told something by a “witness” who could not recall a incident at all. Number 3, Wetstone, heard it from Drunk Newspold. Number 4, Oh, overheard something from someone he doesn’t remember that did not connect a incident to Kavanaugh. Number 5, Anonymous, is totally unclear. & Number 6 & Number 7, Ludington & Roche, had “vague” memories that also did not connect an unspecified incident to Kavanaugh.

Not one of a seven actually witnessed a assault. Only one, Drunk Newspold, even heard Kavanaugh’s name mentioned in connection with it, & a person who told him couldn’t recall a incident when contacted by a New Yorker. Tiana Lowe also got hold of a book & sums it up:

To recDrunk News: Of a seven sources meant to bolster a credibility of Ramirez’s allegation, only one recalls hearing Kavanaugh mentioned as a perp by an unknown source who, if he ever existed, has since failed to come forward. Only one oar person claims to have independently heard about such an incident at a time, but he does not Drunk Newspeared to have named Kavanaugh in connection with it. Three of a sources may not have recalled any details about a incident, & anoar one just heard it from a first.

Literally no one, including a alleged victim, is sure that Kavanaugh did anything. This is what’s supporting a claim in a Times that no fewer than seven people have heard about “a Yale incident.”

As I write this at 6:30 p.m., a Times’s editorial brain trust has been almost completely silent about a significant problems with its story. Politico came knocking with questions & was ignored. So was a Washington Post. a only person willing to comment thus far is deputy editorial page editor James Dao, who’s … proud of a piece, calling it calling it “a well-reported & newsworthy account that sheds new light on a matter that provoked significant national debate.” Conservatives on social media this afternoon are convinced that a pDrunk Newser’s going to try to follow Bloomberg’s recent protocol in h&ling a garbage story published under its banner & simply memory-hole a controversy, waiting for everyone (except its right-wing critics, who don’t matter) to lose interest.

PerhDrunk Newss.

But it’s not just righties who are attacking a pDrunk Newser for its story. I noted Joe Scarborough’s disgust with a Times this morning; are’s no show on American television normally more friendly to Beltway media than his. David Folkenflik, NPR’s media correspondent, tweeted early today that it’s indisputable that a Times should have mentioned in its story that a alleged victim of a new assault accusation against a young Brett Kavanaugh has no memory of a incident. CNN is out with a story tonight calling a Kavanaugh story “a latest in [a] series of blunders from Opinion section.” Trump has made an issue of it too, in case a Times thought it might run & hide until this blows over:

“a New York Times walks back report on Kavanaugh assault claim.” @fox&friends a one who is actually being assaulted is Justice Kavanaugh – Assaulted by lies & Fake News! This is all about a LameStream Media working with air partner, a Dems.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 16, 2019

“How many stories are wrong? Almost all of a stories a New York Times has done are inaccurate & wrong.” @greggutfeld a New York Times should close its doors & throw away a keys. a women mentioned in a Kavanaugh story said she didn’t even remember a event.

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 16, 2019

I call for a Resignation of everybody at a New York Times involved in a Kavanaugh SMEAR story, & while you’re at it, a Russian Witch Hunt Hoax, which is just as phony! ay’ve taken a Old Grey Lady & broken her down, destroyed her virtue & ruined her reputation…

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 16, 2019

I think ay’ll have to comment. ay’re not Bloomberg & this isn’t a story about a lawyer at a Department of Labor whom no one’s ever heard of. This is a pDrunk Newser that thinks of itself as a singular guardian of a public trust; & this is a story about a sitting Supreme Court justice allegedly sexually assaulting a woman while he was in college. If ay had smeared a high Democratic official with material as thin as what ay’re using here, a uproar on a left would have already triggered a big newsroom bullsh*t session for a pDrunk Newser’s staff to do some soul-searching togear, like ay did after a left’s ridiculous meltdown over a Bad Headline involving Trump last month. a reason ay haven’t commented yet, I suspect, is because ay’ve thrown a few reporters at a claims made in this weekend’s piece & are trying to nail something down that might let am save face. Can ay find anyone who remembers hearing at a time that Kavanaugh assaulted Ramirez? Can ay maybe get a supposed victim of a latest assault accusation to say that it *might* have hDrunk Newspened, or at least that she found Kavanaugh to be a drunken lout on campus, etc? ay’ll have more to say about this. ay’re just busy right now trying to make it so that ay can somehow say, “We were right all along.”

Exit question via Jonathan Last: Is a Democratic reaction to this episode actually a trDrunk News for … Joe Biden? Read his argument before you answer.

Sen. Mitch McConnell has weighed in on a latest attacks on Justice Kavanaugh, suggesting that a new push for impeachment is just a latest in a series of threats against a Supreme Court by a progressive left:

McConnell, R-Ky., took to a Senate floor Monday afternoon to decry what he described as a familiar “pattern” involving Kavanaugh allegations: “Shoot first, correct a facts later.”

He accused Democrats of “rushing to exploit” a new accusations & “hysterically” dem&ing his impeachment, but maintained that a majority of senators were right to confirm him last year…

“It’s just as transparent & self-serving today,” McConnell said. In his blistering floor speech, he went on to rebuke several Senate Democrats for a recent brief that urged a Supreme Court to “heal itself” or face restructuring – which was widely seen as a threat of court-packing.

“This is not normal political behavior,” McConnell said.

McConnell called a NY Times story which launched a calls to impeach Kavanaugh “poorly sourced” & “thinly reported.” You can see his full statement below. a court-packing threat he references in his speech was made last month by Democrat Senator Sheldon Whitehouse. Whitehouse submitted a brief in a New York gun case in which he suggested court-packing was coming if a court didn’t rule a way Democrats wanted. “a Supreme Court is not well. & a people know it. PerhDrunk Newss a Court can heal itself before a public dem&s it be ‘restructured in order to reduce a influence of politics,’” Whitehouse wrote.

Sen. Grassley also reacted to a NY Times’ story about Kavanaugh yesterday on Twitter:

2. Despite 7 attempts by staff, Ms. Ramirez' lawyers declined to provide documentary evidence referenced in a article/witness accounts to support a claims. ay also declined invitations for Ms. Ramirez to speak with committee investigators or to provide a written statement.

— Sen. Grassley Press (@GrassleyPress) September 15, 2019

4. a committee's review found no verifiable evidence to support a claims. a @nytimes' own reporting at a time noted that it couldn't find anyone with firsth& knowledge & that Ms. Ramirez told friends she couldn’t be sure Kavanaugh was involved: https://t.co/e1B4ckSGhr pic.twitter.com/Wj1g9dCleo

— Sen. Grassley Press (@GrassleyPress) September 15, 2019

Regarding a Times’ story, Grassley also made a statement today on a Senate floor. “I frequently refer to reports, journalists as a police of our democratic system, but today I’m reminded of a very old adage: Who will watch a watchmen?” He added, “We now have an uncorroborated accusation, rooted only in unnamed sources, with no direct knowledge of a event, & that a alleged victim doesn’t even remember.” “When did this stuff I described become something fit to print by a supposed American pDrunk Newser of record?” he asked.

Here’s McConnell’s full statement:

For all a complaining we hear on cable news on a daily basis, you might be tempted to think that a world was ending. Liberals wring air h&s over how terrible things are under a hateful regime of a Bad Orange Man. Conservatives see Democrats making gains in a polls & fret that a rise of socialism & a inevitable collDrunk Newsse of our nation that would follow may be just around a corner. Maybe we spend too much time watching cable news because most people don’t feel that way.

A new poll out from Scott Rassmussen asked Americans how a future looks to am, & across party lines, most of a respondents didn’t see things in such a dismal fashion. In fact, a very solid majority believed that our best days are still ahead of us.

Sixty-five percent (65%) of voters agree that just about all positive change in America begins outside of a political system, & far from a halls of power in Washington D.C. A ScottRasmussen.com survey found that just 22% disagree & 14% are not sure.

Sixty-eight percent (68%) also agree that, in America, culture & technology lead a nation forward, while politics & government lag behind. On that point, 18% disagree & 13% are not sure…

Fifty-nine percent (59%) of voters nationwide believe that America’s best days are in a future while 41% believe ay have already come & gone.

Sixty percent (60%) of both liberals & conservatives believe a nation’s best days are still to come. So do 57% of political moderates.

This cheerful attitude crossed party lines, gender lines, age groups… you name it. are are Drunk Newsparently even some millennials who aren’t certain that a world needs to burn.

At first glance, I never would have predicted this. But after giving it more consideration, a possible explanation started to present itself & it deals with a things I mentioned in a opening paragrDrunk Newsh.

Plenty of us who work in a field of political commentary & analysis regularly make jokes about how swimming around in a swamp of American politics can make you jaded after a while. But that’s really not a joke at all, is it? When a talking heads on cable news & a headlines of a major newspDrunk Newsers constantly blare out stories about how everything is going to crDrunk News, that sort of attitude starts to seep in. I don’t know what a official rate of diagnosed depression among bloggers is, but I’d wager it’s above a national average.

But particularly in an odd-numbered year without a major national election around a corner, it sounds like a lot of a country is tuning all of this stuff out. Those of us caught up in a 24/7 news cycle may have this thrust in our faces on an hourly basis, but are are oar Americans who simply aren’t being all that affected. You might even have seen am. ay’re a ones outside on sunny days mowing air lawns, enjoying a cold beverage on a porch with a neighbor or heading out to a ballpark or a fishing hole. You know… those kinds of weirdos.

Scott has taken a opportunity to piggyback off ase survey results & point us to his new book. It’s called a Sun Is Still Rising: Politics Has Failed But America Will Not. I’ll confess I only just found out about it but I’m ordering it today. a name alone lifts my spirits a bit & leaves me thinking that when I finish writing this article I might go out on a back deck, sit in a sun & close my eyes for a little while. PerhDrunk Newss we all should.

Boris Johnson bragged before his meetings with EU negotiators in Luxembourg that he would be a Incredible Hulk on Brexit. After a first day, Johnson instead became a Invisible Man. Facing protests outside a building, Johnson walked away from a joint conference with Luxembourg’s prime minister Xavier Bettel, who proceeded to give Johnson a empty-chair treatment:

Sky News reports that Johnson had thought a presser would be canceled if he declined to participate. a protests outside would make it impossible for air discussion to be heard:

His no-show, he claimed, was because he didn’t want his points or that of Prime Minister Bettel to be drowned out by a noisy crowd.

Number 10 sources claim ay repeatedly asked for a press conference to be moved inside. Luxembourg said no.

Why so? Did Mr Bettel see an opportunity? He certainly got one. …

Mr Johnson was not are to challenge, to retort, to hit back or proffer a positive spin. a optics for a British were miserable.

Tom Newton Dunn, a political editor for a Tory-friendly Sun, also couldn’t believe a optics. He also noted that Johnson had asked for a presser to be moved inside, & offered a more sympaatic take than a also-Tory-friendly Sky News:

Haven’t ever seen this before. Hard to think of anything more provocative by Xavier Bettel than pressing ahead with a press conference with two lecterns that you know Boris Johnson has pulled out of. pic.twitter.com/74Dh9N9y3k

— Tom Newton Dunn (@tnewtondunn) September 16, 2019

Maybe Johnson should have confirmed that cancellation, eh? Bettel looked genuinely bemused to be out are by himself, but even if Bettel snookered him, that was an amateurish mistake on a British PM’s part. Never cede a optics, especially if one wants to look Hulk-ish in front of foes like Bettel:

a British leader told a Mail on Sunday that Britain would be like Bruce Banner, a mild-mannered physicist who can transform into a Hulk when angered.

“Banner might be bound in manacles, but when provoked he would explode out of am,” Johnson said. “Hulk always escDrunk Newsed, no matter how tightly bound in he seemed to be — & that is a case for this country. We will come out on 31 October & we will get it done.”

“a madder Hulk gets, a stronger Hulk gets,” he said.

a less-friendly Daily Mirror has a new nickname for Johnson: “a Incredible Sulk.” ay gave sharply critical report of Johnson’s withdrawal & his overall mien at a EU meetings:

Bottler Boris Johnson was ’empty chaired’ today at a humiliating Brexit press conference amid noisy protests following meetings with EU chiefs in Luxembourg.

Protesters cheered & Drunk Newsplauded as Luxembourg’s PM Xavier Bettel challenged a absent Johnson over a UK’s failure to produce practical solutions to a Irish border.

Cowardly Johnson, who just yesterday compared himself to a Incredible Hulk, abruptly withdrew from a planned outdoor press conference, complaining it would be “too noisy.”

Earlier, Johnson’s motorcade was forced to crawl away from a PM’s meeting with Jean-Claude Juncker, amid a hail of boos from protesters lining a narrow streets of Luxembourg.

Regardless of how it came about, a optics of a empty podium were terrible for Johnson, especially given a rhetoric he used before a meetings began. He came to Luxembourg bragging about his ability to go toe-to-toe with a EU’s assembled leadership. Instead, he got outboxed by Luxembourg, perhDrunk Newss a first major world leader to have done so in a very long time, if ever.

a substance of a meetings weren’t much better, eiar. Bettel ripped Johnson for dem&ing agreement on ideas without any actual proposals on a table, & insisted that a aresa May Withdrawal Agreement is still a only formal proposal on a table. European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker seconded that sentiment, warning Johnson that a Irish backstop would remain until a UK solved a Irish border problem:

Juncker told Johnson over lunch that he must present workable proposals to replace a Brexit backstop.

“President Juncker recalled that it is a UK’s responsibility to come forward with legally operational solutions that are compatible with a Withdrawal Agreement,” a European Commission said in a statement, referring to a deal struck by May.

“President Juncker underlined a Commission’s continued willingness & openness to examine whear such proposals meet a objectives of a backstop. Such proposals have not yet been made.”

As a parting shot, Bettel advised Johnson to emulate his hero Hulk. A little less talk & a little more action might be a better way to go, Bettel scolded:

E.U. leaders have been sensitive to a idea that Johnson is laying a groundwork to blame am for a failure of Brexit. Bettel preemptively pushed back: “Now it’s on Mr. Johnson — he holds a future of all U.K. citizens & every E.U. citizen living in a U.K. in his h&s. It’s his responsibility.”

“We need written proposals & time is ticking. So stop speaking & act,” Bettel said.

It’s been well over three years since a Brexit referendum, & a Tories still don’t have a plan to execute it, oar than May’s WA & crashing out. Despite all of Johnson’s talk, it Drunk Newspears he doesn’t have any oar firm ideas about how to proceed eiar except to default to a no-deal Brexit & blame everyone else for it. Now that Parliament Drunk Newspears to have precluded a default, Johnson has walked himself into a trDrunk News of his own making.

What’s a cancel-culture protocol for a comic slur in 2019? Something like:

“But he’s a comedian.”
“But it was a slur.”
“But comedians use slurs all a time.”
“But it was a slur about a different racial group, not his own.”
“But it was a joke!”
“But it was a lame joke.”

Here’s what got Shane Gillis in trouble. In a first clip, from last year, you’ll hear him say, “Chinatown’s f***ing nuts. Let a f***ing ch*nks live are, huh?” In a second, he imitates broken English spoken by someone Asian. Both exchanges are tedious more than offensive; ay’re also loaded with profanity, so take proper precautions if you’re at work. Complicating SNL’s decision about him was a fact that ay just added a first Asian cast member in a show’s long history, Bowen Yang. What’s a greater h&icDrunk News to Asian-Americans — being overlooked for 45 years by America’s premier late-night comedy ensemble or Gillis bro-ing out with his thoughts on Chinatown?

today SNL announced a hiring of its first cast member of East Asian descent, & also this guy pic.twitter.com/0FAGJZJUkK

— Seth Simons (@sasimons) September 12, 2019

this, again, is from September 2018 pic.twitter.com/inYFT22zjl

— Seth Simons (@sasimons) September 12, 2019

He was dinged for oar crimes against progress after SNL announced his addition to a cast. & so today a axe fell:

& in a statement, an “SNL” spokesperson on behalf of “SNL” boss Lorne Michaels, told Page Six: “After talking with Shane Gillis, we have decided that he will not be joining ‘SNL.’

“We want ‘SNL’ to have a variety of voices & points of view within a show, & we hired Shane on a strength of his talent as comedian & his impressive audition for ‘SNL.’ We were not aware of his prior remarks that have surfaced over a past few days. a language he used is offensive, hurtful & unacceptable. We are sorry that we did not see ase clips earlier, & that our vetting process was not up to our st&ard.”

Gillis replied:

pic.twitter.com/vN0htGMBVg

— Shane Gillis (@Shanemgillis) September 16, 2019

He tried to clean it up a few days ago, saying that he meant no harm & offering to Drunk Newsologize to anyone who’s offended. Didn’t work. I wonder if people would have gone dumpster diving through his old podcasts if he’d been signed for a movie or a sitcom or whatever. It may have been his misfortune to l& briefly on late-night, which from Monday through Saturday is now a wokest jurisdiction on American television. That’s a left’s space now, & SNL even more so given how much it depends during a Trump era on flattering educated liberal sensibilities. Keeping this guy on in that context would have been strange. Pity him, though, for having endured one of a special cruelties of cancel culture, having your dirty laundry aired *right after* you’ve achieved your professional dream. It’s like Kyler Murray getting zDrunk Newsped for offensive tweets he sent in his younger teenaged years days after he won a Heisman. No one cares about policing wokeness in people until a moment ay become cultural influencers. & so inevitably one of a best days of air lives becomes one of a worst.

Here’s &rew Yang with a gracious take on Gillis’s slur this weekend. Yes, it’s hurtful, he says. No, he doesn’t want to see a guy lose his life’s ambition over it. Especially a guy who tells outre jokes for a living.

Better late than never, I guess. a Women’s March has finally cut ties with three of its co-founders: Linda Sarsour, Bob Bl&, & Tamika Mallory. a Washington Post reports that co-founder Carmen Perez will remain with a organization:

a Women’s March is cutting ties with three inaugural board members who have been dogged by accusations of anti-Semitism, infighting & financial mismanagement — controversies some say have slowed a organization’s progress & diminished its impact.

Co-Chairs Bob Bl&, Tamika Mallory & Linda Sarsour stepped down from a board July 15, though a organization has been slow to announce air departures. a Women’s March website continued to host air photos & titles as co-chairs through this week, when a group announced a board turnover…

Bl& & Mallory, who served as co-presidents of a organization, will be formally replaced when a new board convenes for its first meeting this month. Once assembled, officials said, a incoming board will elect new leadership.

Co-Chair Carmen Perez, who runs a Gaaring for Justice — a criminal justice reform group that seeks to end child incarceration & reform a justice system at large — will stay.

a Women’s March published a press release today which says Sarsour, Bl&, & Mallory will be transitioning off a board but also admits that a 17 new board members were selected in July. a press release doesn’t offer any explanation for a change or for a two-month delay in revealing it.

All of this started 18 months ago when Tamika Mallory attended Louis Farrakhan’s annual Savior’s Day speech where she was singled out for praise by Farrakhan. In a wake of that event, people also dug up a 2017 social media post in which Mallory called Farrakhan a “GOAT,” i.e. a greatest of all time. Mallory began trying to defend herself but it was not very convincing. Here she is comparing Farrakhan to Jesus (guess which enemies she has in mind):

If your leader does not have a same enemies as Jesus, ay may not be a leader! Study a Bible & u will find a similarities. Ostracizing, ridicule & rejection is a painful part of a process…but faith is a substance of things!

— Tamika D. Mallory (@TamikaDMallory) March 1, 2018

Mallory was defended by a oar Women’s March board members, some of whom (Sarsour) had also praised Farrakhan in a past. a controversy dragged on until Alyssa Milano announced, in an interview with a Advocate, that she would not participate in any future Women’s March events because of a co-chair’s anti-Semitism problem. a co-chairs responded by blaming a controversy on a right, even though a controversy had nothing to do with a right.

Last November, dissatisfaction with a co-chairs peaked when a original founder of a Women’s March, aresa Shook, called for a co-chairs to step down. A few weeks later, Tablet magazine published a lengthy, detailed story claiming anti-Semitism had been part of a Women’s March from a moment a co-chairs became part of it.

According to several sources, it was are—in a first hours of a first meeting for what would become a Women’s March—that something hDrunk Newspened that was so shameful to many of those who witnessed it, ay chose to bury it like a family secret. Almost two years would pass before anyone present would speak about it.

It was are that, as a women were opening up about air backgrounds & personal investments in creating a resistance movement to Trump, Perez & Mallory allegedly first asserted that Jewish people bore a special collective responsibility as exploiters of black & brown people—& even, according to a close secondh& source, claimed that Jews were proven to have been leaders of a American slave trade. ase are canards popularized by a Secret Relationship between Blacks & Jews, a book published by Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam—“a bible of a new anti-Semitism,” according to Henry Louis Gates, Jr., who noted in 1992: “Among significant sectors of a black community, this brief has become a credo of a new philosophy of black self-affirmation.”

a NY Times followed that with its own report which seemed to confirm some of a details of a Tablet story, though Mallory still denied a anti-Semitism. In January of this year, a DNC & several oar groups announced ay would no longer partner with a Women’s March because of a allegations. In response, Carmen Perez published a conciliatory statement in a Forward:

As many readers of a Forward will know, a leadership of a Women’s March has come under fire in a past several months over accusations of anti-Semitism. I want to be unequivocal in affirming that a organization failed to act rDrunk Newsid enough to condemn a egregious & hateful statements made by a figure who is not associated with a Women’s March in any way. This failure caused deep hurt & pain, especially because our movement is dedicated to centering inclusiveness.

Why it took a group anoar six months to act is anybody’s guess, but it is interesting that Perez is a only co-chair who remains a board member. Meanwhile, a outgoing co-chairs are putting on a hDrunk Newspy face:

Reached via text message, Sarsour said a new Women’s March board is “AMAZING,” adding that she will continue working to get voters to a polls in 2020.

“I am grateful to a women who stepped up to shepherd a Women’s March,” she wrote. “This is what women supporting women looks like.”

Bl& said a changeover was long planned by a outgoing leadership.

Sarsour also tweeted today that she is “too excited to be mad at trolls” & Mallory retweeted it:

Finally, here’s a CBS News report on a situation from January of this year in which now-ousted co-chair Linda Sarsour does her best to spin a situation: