New York Times Forced to Admit Kavanaugh ‘Victim’ Doesn’t Remember Assault Nolte: I Do Not Remember Dean Baquet Sexually Assaulting me

CAP

JOHN NOLTE

The far-left New York Times has been shamed into adding a humiliating “correction” to its latest and now-debunked smear of Associate Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

The correction admits a fairly, somewhat, kinda, sorta, maybe important piece of information about how Kavanaugh’s alleged “victim” refused to talk to the Times and doesn’t remember the alleged “assault.”

Prior to publishing the smear, the Times knew this fact and still chose to deliberately hide it from the public. And we all know why… It proves the whole story is fake news.

Now…

Did you catch that?

Did you catch what the New York Times is now admitting…?

Let me repeat it for the CNN-impaired:

Brett Kavanaugh’s alleged victim doesn’t recall being an alleged victim.

The “victim” doesn’t remember the assault.

The “victim” doesn’t remember being sexually assaulted.

She doesn’t remember it happening.

And the New York Times not only went ahead and reported the story as credible, the New York Times hid that information from its readers.

On Saturday, the failing New York Times published a piece claiming it had found a new Kavanaugh accuser. Here’s the bombshell portion:

We also uncovered a previously unreported story about Mr. Kavanaugh in his freshman year that echoes Ms. [Deborah] Ramirez’s allegation. A classmate, Max Stier, saw Mr. Kavanaugh with his pants down at a different drunken dorm party, where friends pushed his penis into the hand of a female student. Mr. Stier, who runs a nonprofit organization in Washington, notified senators and the F.B.I. about this account, but the F.B.I. did not investigate and Mr. Stier has declined to discuss it publicly. (We corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier.)

But what the Times didn’t tell its readers is that the alleged victim of this alleged assault, the very person  into whose alleged hand the alleged penis was allegedly thrust, does not recall anything about the penis incident and does not want to talk to the media.

Does that piece of information not seem somewhat pertinent to the story? And when I say “pertinent,” I of course mean “the story is totally bogus and never should have been published.”

This now-debunked bombshell is based on an upcoming book by two New York Times reporters. In the book, they do admit the alleged victim does not remember the assault. But still, knowing this, the Times deliberately left that information — the only information that matters — out of its bombshell.

And the only reason we know the Times withheld this information is because the Times got caught.

Thankfully, and the Times obviously didn’t expect this, a few conservatives received an advanced copy of the book; they located this pertinent fact and blew it up on social media. This is the only reason why, after 36 hours of attempting to deceive the public, the Times grudgingly added the following correction Sunday evening:

Editors’ Note: An earlier version of this article, which was adapted from a forthcoming book, did not include one element of the book’s account regarding as assertion by a Yale classmate that friends of Brett Kavanaugh pushed his penis into the hand of a female student at a drunken dorm party. The book reports the female student declined to be interviewed and fr8iends say that she does not recall the incident. That information has been added to the article.

The updated story reads like this and even the update is a lie…

(We corroborated the story with two officials who have communicated with Mr. Stier; the female student declined to be interviewed and friends say she does not recall the episode.)

It’s worth pointing out Max Stier is a Democrat operative, a former attorney for the Clintons, and who also refused to talk to the Times.

Finally, when the Times claims in its update that it “corroborated the story” that’s a lie. All the Times did was talk to a couple of people who say Stier told them about a sexual assault that the victim doesn’t even recall happening. That’s not corroboration, that’s “hearsay.”

But…

Since this is the new standard of journalism, I have something to report…

I am deeply ashamed to admit it, but I honestly don’t remember New York Times Executive Editor Dean Baquet sexually assaulting me.

Here’s my headline:

I Do Not Remember Dean Baquet Sexually Assaulting Me

So a Democrat operative is running around claiming he witnessed an assault that the victim herself cannot remember, but even he is not talking to the Times about it — Gee, I wonder why?

Anyway, I honestly don’t remember Dean Baquet sexually assaulting me. How can I deny something when I don’t have any memory of it ever happening?

Feel free to quote me on that.

GOOD NEWS: John Bolton’s Firing Leads to Mass Globalist Exodus From Trump Administration

They’re dropping like flies!

By Shane Trejo

The forced resignation of neoconservative warmonger John Bolton from the Trump administration has caused a mass exodus of globalists who have resigned in protest.

Garrett Marquis and Sarah Tinsley, who formerly worked as the National Security Council’s press operation as senior directors for strategic communications, and Christine Samuelian, who was Bolton’s personal assistant, have chosen to leave the White House staff as a result of President Trump’s decision.

“It was an honor to serve my country, and I wish the president and the administration success moving forward,” Marquis said on Wednesday

Marquis was connected to Bolton for years, working as his spokesman when Bolton had a job at the public affairs firm Prism Group. Samuelian was Bolton’s long-time assistant, having worked with the mustachioed warmonger for many years. Tinsley formerly worked for the Foundation for American Security and Freedom (FASF), a not-for-profit entity founded by Bolton to encourage a more hawkish foreign policy.

“America needs more robust and effective involvement in international affairs to keep our allies close and further our national security interests,” Bolton said in a press release when FASF was established in 2015.

“This new foundation will provide the necessary platform, resources, and leadership to demonstrate to the world that we will recognize American exceptionalism not only in rhetoric, but also in deeds,” he added.

After Bolton left the administration, President Trump made sure to kick him while the man was down, and further discredit his neocon globalist outlook on foreign affairs.

“So, John is somebody that I actually got along with very well. He made some very big mistakes,” Trump said following Bolton’s firing last week.

“As soon as he mentioned that, the Libyan model, what a disaster. Take a look at what happened to Gadhafi,” Trump elaborated about Bolton’s incompetence. “I don’t blame Kim Jong Un for what he said after that. And he wanted nothing to do with John Bolton. And that’s not a question of being tough. That’s a question of being not smart to say something like that.”

“John wasn’t in line with what we were doing and actually in some cases he thought it was too tough what we were doing. Mr. Tough Guy, you know, you had to go into Iraq. Going into Iraq was something he felt very strongly about,” Trump added.

It may be the dawning of a new era within the Trump administration, as the Bush-era neocons are losing the battle to influence President Trump into adopting the failed foreign policy of past globalist presidential administrations.

Trump DOJ to Disclose Identity of Saudi-Connected Man Alleged to Have Aided 9/11 Perpetrators

More truth about the Sept. 11 attacks is going to be released to the public.

By Shane Trejo

The Trump administration is getting ready to release the identity of a man who allegedly aided and abetted the Sept. 11, 2001 attackers, believed to be an individual with deep ties to the Saudi government.

Attorney General William Barr made the final determination for the Department of Justice (DOJ) to release this information on Thursday, one day after the 18th anniversary of the attacks.

The information will be released to attorneys that are representing the families of victims who have filed a lawsuit accusing the government of Saudi Arabia of helping to coordinate the terror attack that took their loved one’s lives. The attorneys will have to petition the DOJ to release the name to the greater public for the man’s identity to be widely known.

While it is commonly understood that 15 of the 19 terrorists who committed the attacks were Saudi nationals, the Saudi government has denied any complicity in the attacks, and the official investigation has largely cleared them of any wrongdoing. Additional information released to the public has shown that the Saudis may have been more intimately involved in planning the attacks than what was initially claimed by the Bush administration.

Stunning disclosures illuminating previously unknown facts about who provided material support to the 9/11 attackers have been made available to the public, as 28 pages of the Joint Inquiry into Intelligence Activities Before and After the Terrorist Attacks of September 2001 were finally released in 2016. The unredacted information provides shocking details that show the Saudi government had more than a passive role in facilitating the attacks.

The report states: “Prior to September 11th, the FBI apparently did not focus investigative resources on [redacted] Saudi nationals in the United States due to Saudi Arabia’s status as an American ‘ally.’”

The 28 pages contain evidence that the 9/11 attackers contacted and received support from individuals closely connected to the Saudi royal family. The report also indicated that CIA and FBI officers were aware of these connections, but they were mysteriously covered up. The Saudis also stonewalled the investigative process and made it difficult for federal authorities to get answers after the attacks took place.

“A number of FBI agents and CIA officers complained to the Joint Inquiry about a lack of Saudi cooperation in terrorism investigations both before and after the September 11 attacks,” the report states.

While some lawmakers see the release of the documents as a substantial victory for transparency, Saudi authorities still refuse to take any culpability for their behavior that led to the worst attacks in American history.

“The information in the 28 pages reinforces the belief that the 19 hijackers — most of whom spoke little English, had limited education and had never before visited the United States — did not act alone in perpetrating the sophisticated 9/11 plot,” former Senate Intelligence Chairman Bob Graham said in a statement after the documents were released.

“It suggests a strong linkage between those terrorists and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Saudi charities, and other Saudi stakeholders. The American people should be concerned about these links,” he added.

“Hopefully, these pages will provide some resolution to the families of victims of the attacks and help our government craft better foreign policy moving forward,” Rep. Thomas Massie (R-KY) said after the pages were released.

“Several government agencies, including the CIA and the FBI, have investigated the contents of the ’28 Pages’ and have confirmed that neither the Saudi government, nor senior Saudi officials, nor any person acting on behalf of the Saudi government provided any support or encouragement for these attacks,” Saudi Ambassador to the United States Abdullah Al-Saud said in 2016.

“We hope the release of these pages will clear up, once and for all, any lingering questions or suspicions about Saudi Arabia’s actions, intentions, or long-term friendship with the United States,” he added.

Nothing will be cleared up until an authentic independent investigation takes place into what really took place on 9/11. The new release of a four-year academic study showing that World Trade Center building seven did not collapse due to office fires only underscores the need for another investigation.

 

Sorry Democrats and Never-Trumpers… Import Prices are Down Despite Trump Tariffs!

CAP

 

President Trump has said for years that the US was hurt by politicians that didn’t protect US jobs.  He decided to do something about and the US is winning because of it!

The far-left Washington Post wrote in August that President Trump’s tariffs will cost the average family hundreds of dollars a year –

More than a year into the U.S.-China trade war, American consumers are about to find themselves squarely in the crosshairs for the first time, with households estimated to face up to $1,000 in additional costs each year from tariffs, according to research from JPMorgan Chase.

Consumers, whose spending fuels about 70 percent of the U.S. economy, have been largely shielded from previous rounds of tariffs, which have left businesses reeling and upended global supply chains. But that’s about to change with the 10 percent levies on roughly $300 billion in Chinese imports, about a third of which will take effect Sept. 1. Those tariffs will primarily target consumer goods.

But it was just more fake news from the far left Washington Post.

Sorry liberals, Trump’s tariffs are having little to no impact on the cost of goods to the consumer.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported this morning that the costs of imports actually went down in August.

Prices for U.S. imports fell 0.5 percent in August following a 0.1-percent increase in July and a 1.1-percent decline in June. With the exception of the August and June decreases, U.S. import prices advanced in each month of 2019. Despite the increases, the price index for U.S. imports declined 2.0 percent from August 2018 to August 2019. (See table 1.)

Fuel Imports: Import fuel prices decreased 4.3 percent in August, after rising 0.7 percent the previous month. Prices for import fuel fell 11.1 percent over the past 3 months. In August, lower petroleum prices more than offset higher prices for natural gas. The price index for import petroleum declined 4.8 percent, after increasing 0.9 percent the previous month. Fuel prices decreased 8.7 percent over the past 12 months; prices for import petroleum fell 9.6 percent over the same period. The price index for natural gas imports rose 16.0 percent in August, after declines in each of the previous 4 months. Despite the August increase, natural gas prices fell 6.1 percent over the past year.

All Imports Excluding Fuel: Prices for nonfuel imports were unchanged for the second consecutive month in August following 0.3-percent decreases in both June and May. In August, lower prices for foods, feeds, and beverages and nonfuel industrial supplies and materials were offset by price increases for automotive vehicles and consumer goods. Prices for nonfuel imports declined 1.0 percent over the past 12 months, led by price decreases for industrial supplies and materials and capital goods.

President Trump said years ago what he would do years ago about China to stop their theft of American jobs – tax China 25%.

Winning, Winning, Winning!

BETO O’ROURKE: “HELL YES, WE’RE GONNA TAKE YOUR AR-15”

Beto O'Rourke: "Hell Yes, We're Gonna Take Your AR-15"

The days of Democrats saying, “Nobody wants to take your guns,” are behind us

  – SEPTEMBER 12, 2019

Beto O’Rourke solidified himself as the Civil War candidate after proclaiming, “we’re going to take your AR-15, your AK-47,” during Thursday night’s Democrat debate.

The amazingly stupid presidential hopeful is openly promoting a policy that would rip the country apart by sending armed government agents to seize semi-automatic rifles from law-abiding Americans.

Beto even reiterated his bold stance on Twitter, repeating, “Hell yes, we’re gonna take your AR-15.”

CAP

O’Rourke previously tried to mask his intentions by calling his plan a “mandatory government buyback,” but most people understood exactly what that means.

The Texas Democrat is using his anti-gun platform to raise money, asking people to donate money so he can ban semi-automatic rifles.

CAP

The 2020 field of Democrats is the most anti-Second Amendment group of politicians to ever run for office in America.

Gungrabbers Unite! BETO, Biden, Kamala and Klobuchar All Pledge To Go After Your 2nd Amendmenthttps://assets.infowarsmedia.com/videos/f5cb7028-ae4c-4f8c-b2d3-ab25d319bd15.mp4

Federal Appeals Court Revives Emoluments Case Against Trump

CAP

By Joshua Caplan

A U.S. federal appeals court ruled Friday that a lawsuit accusing President Donald Trump of violating the U.S. Constitution’s emoluments clause can move forward.

The lawsuit, filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), was dismissed for lack of standing by a lower-level judge in December 2017. The plaintiffs, comprised of the president’s rivals in the hospitality industry, have alleged that the president’s profiting off his “foreign and domestic government clientele” have hurt their businesses.

CAP

“The Plaintiff establishments cater to foreign and domestic government clientele, and allege that they are direct competitors of hospitality properties owned by the President in Washington D.C. and New York City. The complaint alleges that President Trump, operating through corporations, limited‐liability companies, limited partnerships, and other business structures, is effectively the sole owner of restaurants, hotels, and event spaces, which are patronized by foreign and domestic government clientele,” reads the appellate court’s explanation of the case.

“The President has announced that, since assuming office, he has turned over day‐to‐day management of his business empire to his children and established a trust to hold his business assets. However, he maintains sole ownership, receives business updates at least quarterly, and has the ability to obtain distributions from the trust at any time,” it added.

Noah Bookbinder, CREW’s executive director, lauded the development and called on the president to “end his violations” of the Constitution’s emoluments clauses.

“We thank and applaud the judges of the Second Circuit for their decision today. We never wanted to be in a position where it would be necessary to go to court to compel the President of the United States to follow the Constitution,” Bookbinder told Law&Crime. “However, President Trump left us no choice, and we will proudly fight as long as needed to ensure Americans are represented by an ethical government under the rule of law.”

“If President Trump would like to avoid the case going further and curtail the serious harms caused by his unconstitutional conduct, now would be a good time to divest from his businesses and end his violations of the Emoluments Clauses of the Constitution,” he added.

 

US Attorney Recommends CRIMINAL CHARGES Against Andrew McCabe – DOJ Rejects His Last Minute Appeal

CAP

 

US Attorney Jessie Liu has recommended charging former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe.

The potential charges against McCabe are related to his false statements to feds in the FBI’s investigation into Hilary Clinton.

Via Mark Meadows–

CAP

Fox News reported:

U.S. Attorney Jessie Liu has recommended moving forward with charges against Andrew McCabe, Fox News has learned, as the Justice Department rejects a last-ditch appeal from the former top FBI official.

McCabe — the former deputy and acting director of the FBI — appealed the decision of the U.S. attorney for Washington all the way up to Jeffrey Rosen, the deputy attorney general, but he rejected that request, according to a person familiar with the situation.

A source close to McCabe’s legal team said they received an email from the Department of Justice which said, “The Department rejected your appeal of the United States Attorney’s Office’s decision in this matter. Any further inquiries should be directed to the United States Attorney’s Office.”

Comey confidant Benjamin Wittes said in a Lawfare blog post a couple weeks ago that he expected former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe to be indicted any day now.

Wittes wrote in a blog post that he was “shocked” to find out federal prosecutors were in the final stages of deciding whether to indict McCabe on charges he lied to federal investigators, referring to the New York Times bombshell released a couple weeks ago.

The potential indictment of McCabe stems from the Inspector General’s findings that the FBI official lied to federal investigators.

McCabe was criminally referred to the US Attorneys office for prosecution in the Spring of 2018 and they are finally getting around to (maybe) indicting him.

The process has been dragged out because of internal deliberations and the case is taking so long that the term expired for the grand jury evidence. One of the lead prosecutors on the case has since left the DOJ out of frustration, according to the NYT.

Some airplanes did something?! New York Times article ‘de-terrorizes’ 9/11 attacks

CAP

On the anniversary of the most devastating terrorist attack on US soil, a story by the New York Times suggested that “airplanes” brought down the twin towers. The seeming shift of responsibility did not sit well with readers.

“18 years have passed since airplanes took aim and brought down the World Trade Center,” read a tweet from the New York Times on Wednesday. “Today families will once again gather and grieve at the site where more than 2000 people died.” Inside an accompanying article, the same bizarre sentence was repeated.

Though technological dystopia was all the rage in 2001, what with the success of ‘The Matrix’ two years earlier and the passing of Y2K after that, the 9/11 attacks were not carried out by sentient airplanes, but by terrorist hijackers. Enraged readers made sure the NYT knew that, slating the newspaper for omitting the terms ‘Islamic terrorists’ or even the less-loaded ‘Al Qaeda’ from its story.

CAP

CAP

The Times later deleted the tweet and amended its story, which, this time around, read: “Eighteen years have passed since terrorists commandeered airplanes to take aim at the World Trade Center and bring them down.” Responsibility was placed squarely with Al Qaeda in the updated article.

But why the strange phrasing in the first place? The Times did not report the recent mass shootings in Texas as the work of a disembodied AR-15. Nor does the paper attribute President Donald Trump’s executive orders to levitating pens, or climate change to fossil fuels deciding to burn themselves.

CAP

To some observers, the watered-down description of the attacks was an effort to… not offend anybody, including ordinary Muslims who risk guilt-by-association for sharing their religious beliefs with the perpetrators. “Some airplanes did something,” jibed one commenter, comparing the Times’ coverage to a much-maligned soundbite from Democratic Minnesota Congresswoman Ilhan Omar earlier this year, in which Omar summarized the attacks as “some people did something.”

CAP

CAP

To be fair, radical Islamic terrorists aren’t alone in having their deeds sanitized by the New York Times in recent days. The paper marked the 43rd anniversary of Chinese Communist leader Mao Zedong’s passing on Monday with a tweet describing how Chairman Mao “began as an obscure peasant” and “died one of history’s great revolutionary figures.”

After a similar backlash, the tweet was deleted, with the paper apologizing for not providing “critical historical context;” namely the famines that occurred on Mao’s watch and his role in the 1966-1976 ‘Cultural Revolution,’ events that left tens of millions of Chinese citizens dead.

 

Blog at WordPress.com.

Up ↑