What was NBC thinking?  It turns out that Julie Swetnick, the woman who allegedly went to all the rape parties, had a bad night on NBC.  Her story made no sense, according to this report at Reason:

In the course of the interview, Swetnick contradicted her previous written statement, jumbled the timeline of her decision to come forward, and expressed uncertainty about whether Kavanaugh was actually involved in her own assault. 

She also borrowed a few key phrases from the story told by Christine Blasey Ford, the initial Kavanaugh accuser who testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee last week. 

In stark contrast to Ford, Swetnick was neither persuasive nor believable.

Let me add that Ford was credible in large part because no one really challenged her in public.  In other words, Ford came across as a nice person, although her story has more holes than the lunar surface.

It makes me wonder what NBC was thinking.  How do you put someone on the air who turns out to be unbelievable and not persuasive?  Did they have to interview Julie to figure that out?

The Kavanaugh story raises many issues, from convicting people without evidence to asserting that women are always telling the truth to some journalists who treat Julie Swetnick like a serious person.

Julie is floating in the sky with diamonds, and some in the media are tagging along!

PS: You can listen to my show (Canto Talk) and follow me on Twitter.