Investigation Reveals Mainstream Media Chose To Run Rumors Over Truth!

The Kavanaugh smear campaign is over now that the Republicans succeeded in appointing him. Luckily for us, a majority of The Senate Judiciary Committee saw through the Democrats stall tactics. It seemed like women were coming out of the woodwork to accuse Kavanaugh. It was awfully conveniently for the Democrats that they appeared mere weeks before the vote.  The Democrats like to claim that it was due to the sensitive nature of the accusation or the timing shouldn’t matter. It’s not as if they intentionally withheld evidence… Well turns out aside from their Ford stall they did or at least the Democrats at NBC did.

During the case, there were multiple claims. Ford was a clear case of hearsay as it seems like no one even remembers this party except for her and the rest were pretty outlandish, especially Avenatti’s accusers. As it turns out NBC interviewed some of his clients. Julie Svetnick the accuser that associated Kavanaugh with a party that held gang rapes was one of them. She claimed that Kavanaugh and Judge lined up outside of these rooms. But during the interview, her story changed.

In the interview with NBC News, Swetnick said they did not stand in lines but “huddled by doors,” and that she “didn’t understand what it could possibly be.”

She also originally made the claim that they had spiked the punch but it turns out they were just standing near the punch bowl.

But that’s not all as it turns out another of Avenatti’s client’s also came forward recanting her accusation of misconduct prior to the vote. The second client still remains unknown.

So you have Ford’s shoddy testimony and two recanters. So that leaves the accusers who claimed Kavanaugh flashed his privates at a party. Big step down from alleged rapist.

So you would think that NBC would have run the story discrediting another of Avenatti’s client’s story as this was news especially when they found out two days prior to the vote. But instead, reporter Kate Snow claimed that the reports were not substantiated and therefore could not be run.

“By the time we were able to find the woman independently from Mr. Avenatti, who declined to give us her full legal name and phone number, and fully report and vet her story, the Kavanaugh confirmation process was over and the news value was limited.”

“To be clear – we did NOT have enough reporting to publish the second woman’s account until after Justice Kavanaugh secured enough votes for confirmation”

We always want to be clear and fully transparent around our reporting, and that’s what we’re doing here.”

So they ran the Ford allegations and the other accusers claims without substantiating the stories but evidence of his innocence somehow need to be properly vetted? Talk about biased news…

Send this to a friend