The New York Times took another swing at Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh but it appears that they have missed again. This time they tried to say that Kavanaugh misrepresented his involvement with the nomination of a judge back in 2006. Judge Charles W. Pickering Sr. was working to get confirmed to the appeals court and the NYT thinks that they caught Kanavaugh lying about his involvement back in 2006. That dog won’t hunt, and here is why.
As Written and Reported By Ashe Schow for the Daily Wire:
Democrats are so desperate to find something on President Donald Trump’s Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh that they’re suing to uncover millions of records from his time in the George W. Bush White House.
But while they wait — or stall, as Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-IA) suggests — they’re continuing to shop tepid, trumped up hit pieces on the nominee to various left-leaning outlets.
In The New York Times, Democrats tried to claim that Kavanaugh “misled” the Senate during 2006 testimony when he was an appeals court nominee. Here’s the Times’ lede:
As a White House lawyer working for President George W. Bush, Brett M. Kavanaugh helped the administration’s effort to win Senate confirmation for one of Mr. Bush’s most disputed judicial nominees, a Mississippi district court judge who was seeking an appeals court seat, internal White House emails show.
Wow, seedy stuff. Looks like they really got Kavanaugh now. Combine this with his purchase of baseball tickets and love of beer and they might just take this guy down.
It’s not until the fourth paragraph that the Times tells you why this is supposedly bad for Kavanaugh. You see, back in 2006, Kavanaugh was asked about his work to….
KEEP READING THERE IS WAY MORE AT THE LINK BELOW: