The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation, written by New York Times reporters Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, was released Tuesday in the wake of the controversy surrounding a previously released excerpt from the book. As The Inquisitr reported, the excerpt covered another alleged sexual assault accusation against Kavanaugh from Max Stier, who claims to have witnessed the Supreme Court Justice expose himself at a Yale party. However, the excerpt left out a crucial detail from the book: that the alleged female victim said she didn’t remember the incident and refused to speak about it.
Fox News reports that Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly appeared on The View Tuesday and the hosts wasted no time grilling them about the curious omission.
“We just have to start out with the controversy,” co-host Meghan McCain said. “I’m going to try and make this as clear as possible. The New York Times ran an excerpt from your book over the weekend, in the opinion section, that included a new allegation of sexual misconduct against Brett Kavanaugh, but you guys left out a key detail.”
According to Kelly, they did not intend to “withhold important information” from readers.
“First of all, there was no desire to withhold important information from our readers. We have all of it in the book,” Kelly said. “The essay is an adaptation of the book that, of course, we had to edit for length and clarity.”
“It was an oversight and the Times adjusted it and we’re very sorry that it happened,” she added.
McCain suggested that the error is yet another example of why average people don’t trust the media.
— Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) September 17, 2019
According to Vanity Fair, Kelly and Pogrebin pitched their report to the Times’ news side. However, the editors believed that the story didn’t have enough “juice” and opted to put it in the Sunday Review section, which is part of the Opinion department. The revelation suggests that the Times knew that they were misleading and that Kelly and Pogrebin may have been aware as well.
“In today’s journalistic world, the conversation is a bit irrelevant,” one source said. “Your average reader is not gonna really know or care where it is.”
Of course, another Times source suggests that the controversy is undermining what the book actually is: a “fair” and “balanced” look at Kavanaugh that was not meant to ignite calls for impeachment — as many Democratic presidential candidates have done following the publication of the excerpt.