NY Times reporters say Brett Kavanaugh asked them to lie in exchange for an interview
The lesson a lot of people are going to take from this is to just not respond to reporters. That interview negotiations (even on the staff level, they admitted they didn't even speak to Kavanaugh) can now be blown up and mischaracterized like this is bad
So the scandal here is that Kavanaugh wanted to talk on background only and the journalists declined. That's what we're litigating, right?
"New York Times reporters Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly said that Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh agreed to let them interview him for their upcoming book ― as long as they would publicly lie about it."
Can we go back to the thing where A SUPREME COURT JUSTICE asked the press TO LIE? Feel like this was buried in whistleblower BS yesterday.
I am confused. It sounds like Kavanaugh wanted to speak with them off the record, or on background—a condition all sorts of reports generally accept, have you seen White House reporting lately?—and they rejected this. Okay. What's the story?
Didn't Kavanaughs representative basically ask for an off the record with the reporters, something that's extremely common in reporting?
Super weird that the NYTIMES missed this scoop. They could have run with it long before all the other outlets, right?
Super weird that the NYTIMES missed this scoop. They could have run with it long before all the other outlets, right?