The Daily Signal - Ep. 310: The Media's Shameful Handling of Kavanaugh Accusations

Episode Date: October 4, 2018

Should the media be rushing to cover allegations with little or no corroboration? The Daily Signal's Ken McIntyre, a veteran journalist who covered Maryland as a crime reporter in the 80s, joins us to discuss. Plus: We look at the disturbing trend of selfie deaths.We also cover these stories:--After spending two weeks debating the allegations of sexual assault lodged against Brett Kavanaugh, Sen. Cory Booker suggested that it may not even matter whether or not he’s guilty.--Sens. Susan Collins, Lisa Murkowski, and Jeff Flake are all unhappy over remarks President Trump made about Christine Blasey Ford.--A fed-up Sen. Lindsey Graham tells an audience to "boo yourself" when he gets boos for saying Kavanaugh has been treated poorly.The Daily Signal podcast is available on Ricochet, iTunes, SoundCloud, Google Play, or Stitcher. All of our podcasts can be found at DailySignal.com/podcasts. If you like what you hear, please leave a review. You can also leave us a message at 202-608-6205 or write us at [e-mail]. Enjoy the show! Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

This is the Daily Signal podcast for Thursday, October 4th. I'm Kate Trinco. And I'm Daniel Davis. The nation's eye has been fixed on Dr. Christine Blazy Ford and Judge Kavanaugh in recent days. Even as Dr. Ford's testimony lacks corroboration, and even less substantiated claim of gang rape has emerged from Julie Swetnik. She says gang rape was common in high school back in those days. But one of our editors, Ken McIntyre, was a reporter back in the 1980s in the same exact area.

as Swetnik and Kavanaugh. He paints quite a different picture. We'll chat with him over the phone. Plus, we'll take a look at the disturbing trend of selfie deaths. But first, we'll cover a few of the top headlines. Well, Senate Republicans have complained that Democrats keep moving the goalposts when it comes to Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh. After spending two weeks debating the allegations of sexual assault lodged against Kavanaugh, Senator Cory Booker suggested that it may not even matter whether or not he's going to. guilty. Here's what he said in a press conference. Is this the right person to sit on the highest court in the land for a lifetime appointment

when their credibility has been challenged by intimates, people that knew the candidate well as a classmate, when his temperament has been revealed in an emotional moment where he used language that frankly shocked a lot of us. And then ultimately, not whether he's innocent are guilty, this is not a trial, but ultimately, has enough questions be raised that we should not move on to another candidate. And that long list put together by the Heritage Foundation and the Federalist Society, move on to another candidate because ultimately the Supreme Court is not an entitlement. Well, we appreciate that shout out to the Heritage Foundation from Senator Booker. Honestly, though, like temperament, you're accused of gang rape, all of

kinds of things and he's not showing the temperament. Whatever, Spartacus. All right. Well, moving on to another senator who had hot takes. There's no time and no place for remarks like that, but to discuss something this sensitive at a political rally is just not right. It's just right. I wish he hadn't had done it. I just say it's kind of appalling. That's Senator Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, speaking to NBC's Today's show about remarks that President Trump made Tuesday night about Christine Blazy Ford. 36 years ago, this happened. I had one beer, right? I had one beer. Well, do you think it was

nope, it was one beer. Oh, good. How did you get home? I don't remember. How did you get there? I don't remember. Where is the place? I don't remember. How many years ago was it? I don't know. I don't know. What neighborhood was it in? I don't know. Where's the house? I don't know. Where's the house? I don't know. Upstairs, downstairs, where was it? I don't know. But I had one beer. That's the only thing I remember.

And a man's life is in tatters. A man's life is shattered. His wife is shattered. His daughters who are beautiful, incredible young kids. They destroy people. They want to destroy people. These are really evil people. White House press secretary Sarah Huckabee Sanders

addressed Trump's comments in the Wednesday press briefing. The president was stating the facts and frankly facts that were included in special prosecutor Rachel Mitchell's report. He was stating facts that were given during Dr. Ford's testimony, and the Senate has to make a decision based on those facts and whether or not they see Judge Kavanaugh to be qualified to hold the position on the Supreme Court. Every single word, Judge Kavanaugh has said, has been picked apart. Every single word, second by second of his testimony has been picked apart. Yet if anybody says anything about the accusations that have been thrown against them, that's totally off limits and outrageous. This entire process has been a disgrace. And the only reason that it's been that way is because Senate Democrats didn't do this the way that it should have been done.

And they circumvented the entire system. And frankly, they've undermined our entire judicial branch by the way that they've acted in the inappropriateness of which they've conducted themselves. Senator Susan Collins, Republican of Maine and another pivotal vote told CNN that Trump's remarked, about Ford were, quote, just plain wrong. And Senator Lisa Murkowski of Alaska said, according to the Hill, that, quote, I think the president's comments yesterday mocking Dr. Ford were wholly inappropriate and, in my view, unacceptable. Well, new doubts are being raised about Dr. Ford's testimony, as her ex-boyfriend has now come forward and cast some doubt on several of her claims. The man whose name has been redacted for the media dated Ford for six years in the

1990s and on Tuesday sent a declaration to the Senate Judiciary Committee. First, he says Dr. Ford went to great lengths at one point to help one of her friends prepare for a polygraph test. That's relevant because under sworn testimony last week, she said she had never had any discussions with anyone on how to take a polygraph or, quote, given any tips or advice to anyone who was looking to take a polygraph test. She had taken a polygraph test. Her ex-boyfriend also claimed that she never voiced any fear of flying, even though in her sworn testimony, she said she couldn't testify in a prompt manner because she felt uncomfortable traveling on planes. Her ex-boyfriend said she had no problem living in a very small 500-square-foot apartment with one door, and that appeared to go against

Ford's claim in her testimony that she had a second front door installed at her home because of anxiety, phobia, and PTSD-like symptoms, which purported. were due to Kavanaugh's assault against her. In response to these new claims from her ex-boyfriend, Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley demanded that Ford's lawyers turn over her therapist notes and other relevant materials. We should also note that her friend who she allegedly helped with the polygraph

has issued a statement and said that she was not helped in the polygraph. Well, Senate Judiciary Chairman Chuck Grassley was not happy about new Kavanaugh allegations that came from Senate. or Chris Coons, Democrat from Delaware. Those allegations involve, get this, another party this time in the 80s at Yale, and come from a man who says he's not sure whether Kavanaugh would have been at the party or not. Grassley responded to Coons per National Review that, quote, we've reached a new level of absurdity with this allegation. There is no evidence to suggest Judge Kavanaugh was anywhere near this party or had anything to do with it at all. In fact, the only person we can be sure attended the party is the accuser himself.

The purpose of this allegation is plain to smear Judge Kavanaugh's name by associating him with this party's hosts. This guilt by association tactic is the basis form of political attack and deserves unqualified condemnation. Well, Senator Lindsey Graham continues to stand in strong defense of Brett Kavanaugh even before hostile audiences. He appeared this week at the Atlantic Festival, speaking alongside Jeffrey Goldberg, and in classic Lindsay Graham fashion, spoke his mind. If he's listening right now, what would you say to him about his performance last night in which he openly disparaged a person who was alleging that she was a victim of sexual assault by a Supreme Court nominee?

I said, hey, I can figure this out. Everything he said was factual. He's frustrated his nominee has been treated so badly. Factual is a personal degrading attack on someone who is. You know, here's what's personally degrading. This is what you get when you go through a trailer park with a $100 bill. See, this is not the first time this has happened. That's actually a reference to something somebody said.

And James Carvel. See, most of you all are too young to remember this. The bottom line is I know what can happen to a woman who comes forward in a political environment. Dr. Ford, I thought, was treated respectfully by Ms. Mitchell. I'm glad she did it. She was boring. Boring's okay. So I've been a prosecutor, most of my defense attorney and judge before I got in this business.

For every woman that comes forward, God knows how many never say a word and take it to their grave. Sometimes people are accused of something they didn't do. So President Trump went through a factual rendition that I didn't particularly like and I would tell him to knock it off. You're not helping. But it can be worse. You can actually kill somebody's cat and puncture their tires to get them to shut up. So, you know, what he said. I don't even understand what that means.

Well, you don't remember Kathleen. And he also said this. Like it or not, I really don't care. Here's the point. I have seen what happened to these women. In 1998, it came forward. I don't like what the president said last night. I'm the first person to say, I want to hear from Dr. Ford.

I thought she was handled respectfully. I thought Kavanaugh was treated like crap. Yeah, well boo yourself. Tell you what, Lindsay Graham's coming at Rockstar for all conservatives right now. He is on fire, that's for sure. I have a lot of questions about this dead cat business. But the New York Times reported Wednesday, quote, and sorry, this is a long one, that the Times investigation based on a vast trove of confidential tax returns and financial records

reveals that Mr. Trump received the equivalent today of at least 413 million from his father's real estate empire, starting when he was a toddler and continuing to this day. Much of this money came to Mr. Trump because he helped his parents dodge taxes. He and his siblings set up a sham corporation to disguise millions of dollars and gifts from their parents. Records and interviews show. Records indicate that Mr. Trump helped his father take improper taxes. deductions worth millions more. He also helped formulate a strategy to undervalue his parents' real estate holdings by hundreds of millions of dollars on tax returns, sharply reducing the tax bill

when those properties were transferred to him and his siblings, end quote. President Trump responded in, what else, a tweet Wednesday, writing, The failing New York Times did something I have never seen done before. They used the concept of time, value of money in doing a very old, boring, and often told, hit piece on me. Added up, this means that 97% of their stories on me are bad, never recovered from bad election call. Sarah Huckabee Sanders also discussed the story Wednesday. Actually inaccurate about it. It's a totally false attack based on an old recycled news story. I'm not going to sit and go through every single line of a very boring 14,000 word story. Well, earlier this summer, Washington, D.C. residents voted for a minimum wage boost for restaurant employees, even when many of those employees didn't actually want it.

Initiative 77 passed back in June, but it turned out to be short-lived as the City Council on Tuesday repealed the measure by an 8-5 vote. The policy put in place at $15 minimum wage for all food service workers, even though many workers admitted to making much more than that in tips. More than 8,000 restaurant workers urged a vote on repeal, prompting the city council to action. Next up, we'll talk to a man who reported in Maryland in the 1980s at the time when Julie Swetnik alleges that there were gang rapes occurring. Do conversations about the Supreme Court leave you scratching your head? Then subscribe to SCOTUS 101, a podcast breaking down the cases, personalities, and gossip at the Supreme Court. After what you describe as this attack on you and a rape, did you take? tell anyone? Oh yes, I contacted the Montgomery County Police. You did. And I also, I told my mother,

and she cried with me. She held me the next day. I was so distra- She wanted me to go to the police immediately. She was just outraged. She was so hurt for me. Do you remember who you spoke to? I vaguely remember people, but I'm not quite sure, not 100%. Swetnik's mother has since passed away. Sweatnick also named one of the officers. She said she said she's spoke with. That officer is now deceased. NBC News verified he worked for the Montgomery County Police at that time. We have requested copies of any records, but Montgomery County police officials said today it could take up to a month for them to respond. That's not true. That was Julie Swetnik, who is represented, of course, by Michael Avanotti speaking to NBC in an interview that

aired earlier this week. Sweatnik alleges that Kavanaugh attended parties where gang rapes occurred. Joining us today is Ken McIntyre, senior editor for The Daily Signal. Ken is a veteran journalist, and in the 1980s he covered Montgomery County in Maryland for the Gathersburg Gazette. Ken, what did you think about Swetnik's claims? Hi, thanks for having me, guys. Well, what raised my eyebrows, well, several things did, but when she actually told her interviewer at one point, I think everyone in the county remembers these parties. I had to just respond to myself, not me. And I was a reporter from 1979 until the early 80s in Montgomery County, much of that time as a police reporter. And I know how that system worked.

And I covered the community closely because I worked for newspapers that covered everything that move. And there was, I remember nothing of scuttle but rumor anything about such parties in Montgomery County. And I worked in and around the community that she lived in. Ken, do you recall any story that you wrote or heard about that, you know, that pertained to any sort of party, high school party, any kind of assault that happened? What was, what was the normal kind of crime among high schoolers that you heard about? Yeah, I mean, not at all. I mean, there were, there were routine, you know, incidents where the police would bust up a party where teens were drinking or something of that nature, public disturbance, underage drinking, you know, occasional fights in parking lots,

things like that. But I would routinely see police reports, which were summarized and given to reporters by the Montgomery County Police Department. And they were always covering some crimes and incidents that had happened in the last 48 or so hours. and they would also put out special reports when something major happened. And believe me, I think I would remember allegations of gang rape parties of the sort that Swetnik describes. I hope that answers your question. So I think one of the things that the Me Too movement has argued is that sexual assault was not always taken as seriously as it should have been.

And if you had heard of such a rumor or had seen a police report about gang rapes or something, would you have thought it was worth covering at the time? Oh, yes, certainly. It would have been a huge story if there were even just one gang rape alleged at a teenage party, much less a series of up to 10, as she has described. And I want to just jump back if I could to Ms. Wedding saying that she reported it to Montgomery County police. if that were true and it was a regular incident report, that report would have showed up within a couple of days at the very most in the information that reporters got. And I assure you, if they developed any information that there were a series ongoing parties,

that's one heck of a cracked police department. They would have broken up that ring, and that would have been a sensational story about arrests and the people involved. I don't know what she reported to police, but it's an indication to me that they didn't follow up if she did because they didn't give it out to reporters. I've done some Googling, and I cannot find anything like what she's talking about occurring in the early 80s of Montgomery County.

Well, so one other thing that I wanted to discuss, Ken, was, you know, obviously you have many decades of experience in journalism going from the Gathersburg Gazette to the Washington Times to now, of course, the best of them all, the Daily Signal. But you mentioned that you were very surprised that. that NBC aired this story in the first place? How have you thought about the media coverage in general? Yeah. Well, starting with this specific interview, what surprised me, I have no problem with NBC checking out, trying to get an interview with Julie Swetnik, hitting down what they're asking for questions and that sort of thing. What I have a problem with is them going to air with it, regardless of the fact that they could not find a substantiation or curb it.

You're having a Kate moment. I always struggle with pronunciation on this podcast too. I can't believe I just screwed up saying podcasts. Corroboration. Okay. Given that she, none of that was supplied. And by the reporter's own admission, Kate Snow's admission, they checked out four names that had been given to them by Julie Swetnik

and found out that one said that he or she didn't know her. the other was dead and two others never got back. And to me, NBC will probably say, well, you know, we did clue the viewers into what we know, but what's the hurry going on air with this? What's the thinking behind airing these kind of salacious, unconfirmed accusations? Well, it seems pretty clear to me to further tarnish Fred Kavanaugh on his nomination. And I think that's deeply sad for the news media in general. And I think that the deterioration and sometimes abandonment of journalistic standard is just a crisis in the country.

When they're held to in some cases and thrown away in others, you know, what standards really exist? Right. And of course, you know, and obviously we know about this too, the Daily Signal. there is so much pressure, you know, to be the first one out with the story, etc. But, I mean, that doesn't mean when there's a lack of corroboration and someone's reputation stands to be, you know, at risk that you should go forward. I mean, I think, you know, anyone in D.C. hears rumors about people, but, of course, most of those rumors will never be reported and nor should they because you don't know if they're true or not. You know, I think it's really interesting in general how the media has covered this. Of course, you know, we've seen some. some other accusations that have perhaps even less credibility, shall we say, than sweatnecks gain traction with the media.

But I was really struck on Wednesday by this New York Times article that sort of followed this pattern that if you're on Twitter, it's sort of dubbed conservatives pounce. And it's when a story, as told by the mainstream media, becomes less about the facts and more about the angle of who's using those facts. And this particular one, the headline was Christine Blaisey Ford's credibility under new attack by Senate Republicans. And the lead is, Senate Republicans are stepping up efforts to challenge Christine Blaisey Ford's credibility by confronting her with a sworn statement from a former boyfriend who took issue with a number of assertions she made during testimony before the Judiciary Committee last week. So that would be a great instance where you would really think that the story is not Senate Republicans are trying to undermine her credibility. But an ex-boyfriend or an alleged ex-boyfriend, he's anonymous so we can't check him out, is claiming that she has credibility issues.

Right. And in traditional reporting, what you do is you add, you know, you add to the wealth of public knowledge about any story. And if you have reason to believe that this person really was for a former boyfriend and that all checks out, it's an important element of the story to report what he has to said, someone who had knowledge of her. when she was younger and had some specific things to say about her. I think that's totally legitimate. And what really concerns me about the sweat-knick story is that police reporting is all about what the police tell you. I mean, we all read police stories and almost every sentence says, police said, police said. And that's because the reporter is basing his or her reporting on statements that have come out of the police department about the, elements that they believe to be facts, or at least according to the person who complained or the victim.

And I would be the first to apologize to Julie Swetnik if the Montgomery County Police produce a report in several weeks that has anything to do with a gang rape at a party in the Gatorsburg area. And I will be very anxious to see to what extent that was publicized because it would have been a huge story. Okay, well, we'll definitely have to have you back on the podcast for that apology if that occurs, but we'll see what actually happens. Thank you so much for joining us today, Ken. It's great to finally be on with you guys, and maybe not this would not be my choice of stories, but it's good to be here. Good to have you. I'm Rob Blewey, editor-in-chief of The Daily Signal. And I'm Jenny Malta Bono.

Each weekday, the Daily Signal delivers the Morning Bell email direct to your inbox. We created the Morning Bell to be your one-stop source for credible news report. and insightful commentary on the issues that are shaping the agenda. You can subscribe today and get it delivered to your inbox each weekday morning. Sign up now at daily signal.com. Just click on the connect button at the top of the page and subscribe today. Well, if you like taking selfies, be warned. There's a growing trend of selfie deaths.

Yes, selfie deaths. That's people dying while trying to take a selfie. A new study out of India says that 259 selfie deaths have been reported in just the last six years. The leading cause of death in these cases is drowning, followed by incidents involving transportation and falling from heights. Kate, are you now determined to stop taking selfies? I don't take that many selfies. I have never taken a selfie in front of a moving train and a moving vehicle

and any number of idiotic situations in which people have. I don't know. I mean, it's sad, but it also just strikes me as like there's risky things people do that lead to death occasionally. You know, everyone's in a blue moon. I assume someone dies from skydiving or something similar. But like this strikes me as unbearably sad and a whole new level because it's like you're taking a picture

to show off to other people and you lost your life for it. What is wrong with our society? Yeah. I'm trying to think of different situations where like extreme weather selfies could definitely be a dangerous one. Like going out and. And, you know, people that chase storms and tornadoes and that sort of thing. I have a memory of my dad, like, during a tropical storm or something like he wanted to go outside and record it on camera.

And my mom freaked out. I was kind of scared for him, too. But there's definitely that impulse in a lot of people. And also, I wonder if any of these involved with the selfie stick. That seems like an oddly dangerous thing to throw into the mix. Yeah. I mean, maybe. I don't know. I've never actually used the selfie stick, so I can't. It sounds so old here. I'm not sure if that would add to the date. I just in general, I mean, I guess 259 deaths,

I don't know how many selfies were taken in the period of years that this was done. I imagine if percentage-wise, we're talking about a very, very, very tiny percentage. But it's still, especially because, I mean, you do see these things. You do hear about people taking selfies on railroad tracks and like sometimes even just looking at Instagram the number of selfies I see of women, or not selfies but photographs actually now I think about it on the streets of New York and you assume most of them are when like it's a red light so it's relatively safe but it does seem like there is such a need to get the perfect shot that maybe we're not prioritizing safety like we ought to. Yeah it's interesting that more than 85% of the victims

recorded in the study were between ages 10 and 30. So it's definitely young people doing the selfies. And I believe 72% were male who died. Yeah, 17% so that's interesting. Which was, actually, that was interesting to me because I can't think of that many male selfies I've seen. Like, there's definitely some, but I would say overall girls do it a lot more. But I guess if you're doing your makeup selfie, that's like at home in a safe place. I don't know if, I don't have any guy friends who take selfies on cliffs, but I guess that exists.

Yeah. I mean, you know, I was looking, reading this article. in Washington Post, and apparently in Russia there was a campaign against this. They launched a safe selfie campaign. And the slogan was, even a million likes on social media are not worth your life and well-being.

And they had an informational graphic with icons of bad selfie ideas. And there was like a stick figure posing on power poles and holding guns as an example of what done to do. Well, I think it's interesting. They, you know, explicitly tie it to social media likes. And I think, you know, unfortunately, like, there probably will be a lot of likes because, you know, you're always trying to find something new and cutting edge and dangerous selfies will always be unusual angles and less seen because most people are smart enough to not risk their life for a selfie. So I don't know. But, yeah, I agree with Russia in this case. Social media likes are not worth it.

Absolutely. Call me a communist. And that's a good place for us to end it. But thanks so much for listening to the Daily Signal podcast, brought to you. from the Robert H. Bruce Radio Studio at the Heritage Foundation. Please be sure to subscribe on iTunes, Google Play, or SoundCloud, and please leave us a review or rating on iTunes to give us any feedback. We'll see again tomorrow. You've been listening to The Daily Signal podcast, executive produced by Kate Trinko and Daniel Davis, sound design by Michael Gooden, Lauren Evans, and Thalia Rampersad. For more information, visit DailySignal.com.