With the charges of an alleged attempted sexual assault swirling around the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Brett Kavanaugh, the liberal media pounced on the obligatory comparison to the allegations of sexual misconduct against Justice Clarence Thomas by Anita Hill. On NBC Nightly News, correspondent Andrea Mitchell rewrote history and implied that Hill’s claims were credible, hoping the charges would sink the nomination this time around.
At the start of the segment, anchor Lester Holt was quick to point out there were differences between the two cases but suggested there were larger observable similarities. “Many Americans may be thinking: ‘we’ve seen this movie before.’ Thinking back to the name Anita Hill and her own 11th-hour bombshell that nearly derailed another Supreme Court nominee decades ago,” he announced. “The circumstances different, but some of the underlying issues may be relevant.”
Mitchell referenced the “parallels” betwen the two cases, which she described as “eerie.” Both those supposed parallells and the “underlying issues” which Holt mentioned suggested that viewers should buy Hill's claims, despite the evidence, testimony, or lack thereof.
Skipping over the facts of the case, Mitchell whined about how Hill was “humiliated and accused of lying by some Senators on what was then an all-male Judiciary Committee.” Of course, there was no mention of how Hill’s story shifted over time or of a second witness's lack of credibility.
But that didn’t stop Mitchell from lamenting how “back then, the committee led by Joe Biden sided with Thomas. Refusing to let Hill introduce a lie detector test or a corroborating witness.” She also huffed about how the George H. W. Bush White House put together “a fierce counterattack with a searing denial from the nominee.”
Mitchell made it painfully obvious which way she believed the confirmation of Justice Tomas should have gone, and which way the nomination of Judge Kavanaugh ought to go when she wondered: “But in the #MeToo era, will it play out the same way?”
“She was called every name in the book for just trying to tell the truth as she saw it. And it made it clear the stakes are tremendously high for any woman who wants to speak out,” Jane Mayer declared to Mitchell. While NBC only noted that Mayer was the author of a book on Hill’s claims, there was no mention of her being a staff writer for The New Yorker or an author of other liberal books.
To drive home her hope of a different outcome for Kavanaugh, Mitchell wrapped up her report by touting how “Joe Biden says he owes Anita Hill an apology” and also noted, “the committee [now] has four women and 17 men.”
“And Anita Hill this weekend issuing a statement saying, ‘I have seen firsthand what happens when such a process is weaponized against an accuser. And no one should have to endure that again,’” Mitchell added.
The twisting and rewriting of history by Mitchell was disturbing. She omitted how, according to polls done at the time, more people believed Thomas than Hill after the hearings were held. There was also another parallel that Mitchell flat-out ignored, both Thomas and Kavanaugh had numerous women coming out in support of them.
NBC and the rest of the liberal broadcast networks (ABC and CBS) hid statements from two of Kavanaugh’s high school ex-girlfriends vouching for his character from their viewers. They also skipped over a letter signed by 65 women (who knew him back then) also vouching for his character.
Clearly, they see this as a second chance at trying to sink a GOP Supreme Court nominee.
The transcript is below, click "expand" to read:
NBC Nightly News
September 17, 2018
7:06:13 p.m. EasternLESTER HOLT: Many Americans may be thinking: “we’ve seen this movie before.” Thinking back to the name Anita Hill and her own 11th-hour bombshell that nearly derailed another Supreme Court nominee decades ago. The circumstances different, but some of the underlying issues may be relevant. Our Andrea Mitchell explains.
[Cuts to video]
ANDREA MITCHELL: The parallels are eerie. A female college professor reluctant to publicly accuse a powerful man nominated to the Supreme Court of past sexual misconduct. Days before a vote, forced out of the shadows when her identity is revealed.
ANITA HILL: My name is Anita F. Hill.
MITCHELL: Humiliated and accused of lying by some Senators on what was then an all-male Judiciary Committee.
HILL: I took that to mean we ought to have sex or we ought to look at these pornographic movies together.
MITCHELL: The White House organizing a fierce counterattack with a searing denial from the nominee.
CLARENCE THOMAS: I would have preferred an assassin's bullet to this kind of living hell that they have put me and my family through.
MITCHELL: But in the #MeToo era, will it play out the same way? Back then, the committee led by Joe Biden sided with Thomas. Refusing to let Hill introduce a lie detector test or a corroborating witness.
JANE MAYER (Author): She was called every name in the book for just trying to tell the truth as she saw it. And it made it clear the stakes are tremendously high for any woman who wants to speak out.
MITCHELL: What has changed? Now Joe Biden says he owes Anita Hill an apology and the committee has four women and 17 men. And Anita Hill this weekend issuing a statement saying, “I have seen firsthand what happens when such a process is weaponized against an accuser. And no one should have to endure that again.” Andrea Mitchell, NBC News, Washington.
