Leave it to the Bezos-owned Washington Post to publish even more fake news when it comes to Brett Kavanaugh.
As Amber Athey notes for The Daily Caller, the WaPo’s Emily Heil reported on October 18 that Kavanaugh’s alma mater, Georgetown Prep, was hiring a “director of alumni relations” and that the school posted the ad for the position that week.
The article further suggested that the school was adding the position because of the news surrounding the confirmation of Justice Brett Kavanaugh, a Georgetown Prep alum, to the Supreme Court.
Why, of course! The controversy over Kavanaugh’s nomination, and the unsubstantiated, uncorroborated allegations against him, must have caused such an uproar among alumni that the school had to hire someone to manage the tumult…
Athey continues, explaining that reporter Heil was informed by the school that the job was advertised in July -- prior to Kavanaugh being nominated to the Supreme Court, and prior to any allegations against him being dragged through the pop media.
Pop media such as The Washington Post.
Heil specifically asked spokesperson Patrick Coyle when the alumni director job was posted, according to a copy of the email posted by @AG_Conservative. ‘Just thought it was interesting, given all the attention that your alums have been getting recently,’ Heil wrote to Coyle. ‘I wondered if the job had been posted before or after the Kavanaugh hearings, and anything else you can tell me about it.’ Coyle responded within eight minutes telling Heil that it was ‘posted in July 2018,’ and pointed Heil to a group of other statements from Georgetown Prep.
And, of course, Coyle had to contact the Post to ask for a correction. Yet, even after the paper added a small correction, Heil insisted that the tenor of the piece – that somehow the school had to hire an alumni director because of troubles due to Brett Kavanaugh – is somehow valid.
As Athey observes:
Heil’s corrected story still tied the alumni director position to the Kavanaugh hearings, and she claimed the job post is newsworthy regardless of when it was posted.
There's nothing more enjoyable than flimsy and feckless defenses for an incorrect report that appears to reflect a bias on the part of the reporter and the paper.
And so here, again, we see more of the smoke offered by the pop media when it comes to Kavanaugh, rather than the fire. There were plenty of real, actual positions Brett Kavanaugh had regarding things like The Patriot Act, the Fourth Amendment, and others, that could have been discussed at length when looking at his nomination for the U.S. Supreme Court.
Instead, readers have been ill-served by reports that try to score emotionally charged political points.
We’ve come to expect that from biased publications like The Washington Post. After all, leftist Jeff Bezos, owns it, and his company, Amazon, has $600,000 contract with the CIA for data services, so why should anyone expect the Post to be unbiased, or in any way a-political?
Why would anyone expect them to look at substantive stories, like the relationship between the Supreme Court and one’s natural rights?
It’s much more fun to just make things up, as they have been caught doing here.