The Deborah Ramirez story was not credible enough for the New York Times to run with during the Kavanaugh hearings. Even now, the Times made the decision not to treat it as news, but to run it as a book excerpt on a Sunday.
Ramirez would not cooperate with investigators at the time and was unsure if Kavanaugh was even involved.
The New York Times editors, not the reporters, deleted references to a new purported victim’s lack of memory of events.
The reporters and the New York Times used Max Stier and did not properly disclose that Max Stier actually did not sit for interviews or make himself available.
The new victim did not make herself available.
No eyewitnesses remember Deborah Ramirez’s claims. The one person who claimed knowledge of it got it from someone else and that person has no idea what the guy is talking about.
We actually do not know if Max Stier remembers correctly.
The other purported victim not only did not sit for an interview nor did that purported victim have any eyewitnesses sit for an interview, but the purported victim herself has no memory of the events.
We do not know anything about Stier other than he worked for Bill Clinton. Most particularly, we do not know if Stier was an actual purported eyewitness nor do we know if Stier too was drunk at the event in question like everyone else supposedly was, including the purported victim.
In short, the only new information we have is that Leland Keyser was pressured to change her story by people close to Ford. We also know Keyser is increasingly sure the Ford event never happened.
Today, for Memorial Day, I want to honor my own grandfather, Paul Gumz, who was a WWII veteran. He did not die during the war, but was able to live a long life after. He passed away back in 2008. He w …