NY Times reporters claim Kavanaugh agreed to be interviewed, but asked them to lie, so they bailed

(File photo: screenshot)

Authors of the new book about Brett Kavanaugh are stirring the pot again with a new allegation that the Supreme Court Justice had conditionally agreed to be interviewed.

Robin Pogrebin and Kate Kelly, the New York Times reporters behind a controversial report about Kavanaugh published last weekend, claimed on Wednesday that they had to walk away from an interview with him because he allegedly asked them to write that he had declined to be interviewed for their book.

(File photo: screenshot)

In another confusing twist in the prelude to the release of “The Education of Brett Kavanaugh: An Investigation,” Pogrebin and Kelly told an audience at a National Press Club event in Washington D.C. on Wednesday that they had approached Kavanaugh about an interview as their book was reaching its final stages.

The associate justice allegedly agreed to speak to the reporters to provide background information as they wrapped up their 10-month investigation on his education and the sexual allegations against him that surfaced during his contentious confirmation hearings last year.

But Pogrebin and Kelly claimed that Kavanaugh agreed to be interviewed as long as the reporters wrote that they didn’t speak with him.

“Brett Kavanaugh agreed to talk to @katekelly and @rpogrebin for their book – If they wrote that they didn’t talk to him,” National Press Club president Allison Kodjak tweeted. “The authors – who told the story tonight @PressClubDC, refused and walked away from the interview.”

The reporters told the audience Wednesday that they could not agree to Kavanaugh’s condition and declined to meet with him.

Fox News reported that an attempt to reach Kavanaugh’s office for a comment did not get an immediate response.

A piece adapted from the book by Pogrebin and Kelly was published last week in The New York Times referring to a resurfaced allegation of sexual assault by Kavanaugh during his college days. But The Times was forced to walk back the smear piece that alleged corroboration of the incident.

The newspaper came under fire for tweeting – then deleting – an offensive promotion of the article that referred to sexual assault as “harmless fun.” The Times also clarified that the alleged victim the reporters referred to had actually refused to be interviewed and had told friends she did not remember the alleged incident.


Please help us! If you are fed up with letting radical big tech execs, phony fact-checkers, tyrannical liberals and a lying mainstream media have unprecedented power over your news please consider making a donation to BPR to help us fight them. Now is the time. Truth has never been more critical!

Success! Thank you for donating. Please share BPR content to help combat the lies.
Frieda Powers


We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please click the ∨ icon below and to the right of that comment. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

PLEASE JOIN OUR NEW COMMENT SYSTEM! We love hearing from our readers and invite you to join us for feedback and great conversation. If you've commented with us before, we'll need you to re-input your email address for this. The public will not see it and we do not share it.

Latest Articles