Katie Couric Admits She Edited Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Knock Against Anthem Kneelers

The Purge

Platinum Member
Aug 16, 2018
17,881
7,852
400
It seems that Katie Couric was protecting the “Notorious RBG” from being too notorious.

In her new memoir, Going There, Couric admitted she edited comments from Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg for her 2016 interview to protect her from severe public backlash. The Justice’s crime? Criticizing the national anthem kneelers.

Couric omitted parts she deemed more problematic, such as when Ginsburg said that the protesters were showing “contempt for a government that has made it possible for their parents and grandparents to live a decent life.”

Couric admitted in her memoir that she believed the then-83-year-old just was too “elderly and probably didn’t fully understand the question.” Couric further described her struggle with putting her journalistic integrity over “personal politics,” saying she faced a “conundrum” when it came to the celebrated feminist Justice, believing that her comments were “unworthy of a crusader for equality.”

Shortly after the interview, Couric received a call from the head of public affairs for the Supreme Court asking that her remarks about the anthem protesters be removed from the story, claiming that she misspoke. David Westin, former head of ABC News, advised Couric to keep Ginsburg’s comments in the report while New York Times journalist David Brooks told Couric that Ginsburg likely did not understand the question. Couric ultimately compromised and included a censored version of the justice’s comments.

Saying she “lost a lot of sleep over this one,” Couric still wonders if she made the right decision, asserting that she “wanted to protect” the justice over an issue that might have been a “blind spot” for her.

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

“Elderly, and didn’t understand the question... Paging Resident Biden! “
But at the same time sharp enough to decide cases on the Supreme Court.
 
She lost sleep over it? Wow. Isn't that special.


Just one more example that whenever the left pretends to get outraged over some shit, that htey are lying.


GIve them a reason, and they shit can their..."principles" faster than you can say, "the kneelers were anti-American fags".
 
This should be seen as the norm.

Stop watching the news, they are compulsive liars, swindlers, and misinformation agents.

1634234205658.png
 

"The UK Daily Mail noted that Couric described going to Brooks for advice: “Couric called a friend, David Brooks, a New York Times journalist, who advised her that Ginsburg probably didn’t understand the question, even though she was still serving on the Supreme Court at the time.”
That provoked the ire of liberal constitutional law scholar Jonathan Turley, who wrote that Brooks’s role in Couric’s censorship was “troubling.”
He added: “Notably, in rationalizing a decision to bury a major news item, Brooks allegedly maintained that Ginsburg probably did not understand the question. It is a remarkably [sic] spin since, if she did not understand that question, how did she understand the other questions?”
Turley concluded: “Couric chose the narrative over the news. In doing so, she did a disservice to both journalism and the law. This was not “youthful folly” by Couric. It was advocacy masquerading as journalism.”"

Comment:
Both Brooks and Couric (leftist journOlists) supporting the suppression of truth they don't like, breaking news? This sort of lying by omission happens hundreds of times a day by the Progressive Marxist/DSA Democrat Commie Propaganda Machine, aka the Quisling Media.
 
Too old to understand, but perfectly fine to sit on the court.

Bullshit. I disagreed with probably 95% of what Ginsberg said but addle-brained she was not. Sleepy, yes. Stupid, no.

Not the first time Couric has pulled this shit. And now she's crapping on Ginsberg for cover, which is snake belly low.
 

"The UK Daily Mail noted that Couric described going to Brooks for advice: “Couric called a friend, David Brooks, a New York Times journalist, who advised her that Ginsburg probably didn’t understand the question, even though she was still serving on the Supreme Court at the time.”
That provoked the ire of liberal constitutional law scholar Jonathan Turley, who wrote that Brooks’s role in Couric’s censorship was “troubling.”
He added: “Notably, in rationalizing a decision to bury a major news item, Brooks allegedly maintained that Ginsburg probably did not understand the question. It is a remarkably [sic] spin since, if she did not understand that question, how did she understand the other questions?”
Turley concluded: “Couric chose the narrative over the news. In doing so, she did a disservice to both journalism and the law. This was not “youthful folly” by Couric. It was advocacy masquerading as journalism.”"

Comment:
Both Brooks and Couric (leftist journOlists) supporting the suppression of truth they don't like, breaking news? This sort of lying by omission happens hundreds of times a day by the Progressive Marxist/DSA Democrat Commie Propaganda Machine, aka the Quisling Media.


Also, if they really believed that she "didn't understand teh question, then aren't they covering up the "fact" that a SITTING SUPREME COURT JUSTICE, is incompetent and unable to do her job?
 
It seems that Katie Couric was protecting the “Notorious RBG” from being too notorious.

In her new memoir, Going There, Couric admitted she edited comments from Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg for her 2016 interview to protect her from severe public backlash. The Justice’s crime? Criticizing the national anthem kneelers.

Couric omitted parts she deemed more problematic, such as when Ginsburg said that the protesters were showing “contempt for a government that has made it possible for their parents and grandparents to live a decent life.”

Couric admitted in her memoir that she believed the then-83-year-old just was too “elderly and probably didn’t fully understand the question.” Couric further described her struggle with putting her journalistic integrity over “personal politics,” saying she faced a “conundrum” when it came to the celebrated feminist Justice, believing that her comments were “unworthy of a crusader for equality.”

Shortly after the interview, Couric received a call from the head of public affairs for the Supreme Court asking that her remarks about the anthem protesters be removed from the story, claiming that she misspoke. David Westin, former head of ABC News, advised Couric to keep Ginsburg’s comments in the report while New York Times journalist David Brooks told Couric that Ginsburg likely did not understand the question. Couric ultimately compromised and included a censored version of the justice’s comments.

Saying she “lost a lot of sleep over this one,” Couric still wonders if she made the right decision, asserting that she “wanted to protect” the justice over an issue that might have been a “blind spot” for her.

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...

“Elderly, and didn’t understand the question... Paging Resident Biden! “
But at the same time sharp enough to decide cases on the Supreme Court.

That's democrat "journalism" for you
 

Forum List

Back
Top