Liberals everywhere received devastating news about one of their ideological icons this week when longtime television journalist Katie Couric revealed that she omitted from a 2016 interview with late Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg the far-left jurist’s full comments in opposition to the practice of kneeling during the national anthem according to the New York Post.
The admission comes in Couric’s forthcoming memoir entitled Going There, in which she describes the process that led her to selectively present portions of Ginsburg’s take on the practice of athletes and other high-profile individuals taking a knee during the anthem, as the Daily Mail noted.
While the piece authored by Couric for Yahoo! News did contain Ginsburg’s statement that declining to stand during the anthem was, to her, “dumb and disrespectful,” there were additional observations made by the high court justice that were apparently deemed by the journalist as potentially too damaging to the revered liberal figure’s reputation and legacy.
Cut from the piece, according to Couric, were Ginsburg’s assertions that those engaging in such protests were essentially displaying “contempt for a government that has made it possible for their parents and grandparents to live a decent life, something she said “they probably could not have lived in the places they came from,” remarks hardly in keeping with modern progressive doctrine.
“It think it is a terrible thing to do,” Ginsburg said of the kneeling protests, adding, “but I wouldn’t lokc a person up for doing it. I would point out how ridiculous it seems to be to do such an act,” according to the Post.
Couric attempted to justify her decision to censor the then-83-year-old legal legend by suggesting that she “was elderly and probably didn’t understand the question,” and that as a “big RBG fan,” she felt some responsibility to protect her from the firestorm that might ensue if her true thoughts were publicized, noting also that the Supreme Court’s public affairs office asked that the justice’s comments be left out of the final product.
Deservedly, Couric was on the receiving end of scathing criticism over her highly questionable journalistic decision, with Maggie Haberman of the New York Times stating, “This is toxic on a lot of levels,” and Megan McCain of the Daily Mail opining, “You can’t complain about distrust in the media when one of the most famous interviewers admits to rigging interviews to make liberals look good.”
Jorge Bonilla of the Media Research Center decried Couric’s “galaxy-level arrogance” in presuming that Ginsburg required her protection, and Mark Hemingway of RealClearInvestigations warned, “I’ve said this many times when discussing media bias, but bears repeating: The big question is often not what you see they’re doing, but what they’re hiding from you.”
Succinctly echoing the sentiments of millions of Americans upon learning of Couric’s utterly biased and deceptive presentation of Ginsburg’s take on an important issue of the day, conservative pundit Robby Soave tweeted simply, “Very, very, very bad.”