Katie Couric Admits She Censored Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Answer Against Anthem Protestors

[Anti Federalist]

Katie Couric Admits She Edited Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Knock Against Anthem Kneelers

https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/...them-kneelers/

Paul Bois 13 Oct 2021

It seems that Katie Couric was protecting the “Notorious RBG” from being too notorious.

In her new memoir, Going There, journalist Katie Couric admitted that she edited comments from the now-deceased Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg for her 2016 interview with Yahoo! News to protect her from severe public backlash. The Justice’s crime? Criticizing the national anthem kneelers.

Though the original interview quoted Ginsburg calling the anthem protests “dumb and disrespectful,” Couric omitted parts she deemed more problematic, such as when Ginsburg reportedly said that the protesters were showing “contempt for a government that has made it possible for their parents and grandparents to live a decent life.”

Ginsburg added, “Which they probably could not have lived in the places they came from…as they became older they realize that this was youthful folly. And that’s why education is important.”

As the Daily Mail noted, the 64-year-old Couric admitted in her memoir that she believed the then-83-year-old just was too “elderly and probably didn’t fully understand the question.” Couric further described her struggle with putting her journalistic integrity over “personal politics,” saying she faced a “conundrum” when it came to the celebrated feminist Justice, believing that her comments were “unworthy of a crusader for equality.”

Shortly after the interview, Couric received a call from the head of public affairs for the Supreme Court asking that her remarks about the anthem protesters be removed from the story, claiming that she misspoke. David Westin, former head of ABC News, advised Couric to keep Ginsburg’s comments in the report while New York Times journalist David Brooks told Couric that Ginsburg likely did not understand the question. Couric ultimately compromised and included a censored version of the justice’s comments.

Saying she “lost a lot of sleep over this one,” Couric still wonders if she made the right decision, asserting that she “wanted to protect” the justice over an issue that might have been a “blind spot” for her.

[Brian4Liberty]

Uh oh! Jon Gruden did that too, and now he's erased from history. Will RBG get memory holed?

[kahless]

I sat down with Ruth for a meeting back in 2015. She seemed pretty sharp to me and no cognitive issues.

They did talk about her like she was some sort of deity and there was some shock that I questioned the deity on her beliefs on a particular topic I was there to discuss with her.

[tod evans]

I sat down with Ruth for a meeting back in 2015. She seemed pretty sharp to me and no cognitive issues.

They did talk about her like she was some sort of deity and there was some shock that I questioned the deity on her beliefs on a particular topic I was there to discuss with her.

Cryptic comments are for children.

Come out and say what you're alluding to.

If in fact you had a discussion with RBG then spit it out.

[GlennwaldSnowdenAssanged]

What difference does any of this make? This is the MO. I remember watching Trump and listening to any of his speeches. After his speech you could go to MSM and listed to them tell you what Trump said. I would wonder what speech they had watched.

[kahless]

Cryptic comments are for children.

Come out and say what you're alluding to.

If in fact you had a discussion with RBG then spit it out.

What is child like is you thinking people can simply open up in a public forum concerning private information.

I usually do not mention any of my dealings with politicians in both parties and the news media since it simply is not worth the grief in and outside this forum besides being none of anyone's $#@!ing business or I am not allowed to for various reasons.

[dannno]

What difference does any of this make? This is the MO. I remember watching Trump and listening to any of his speeches. After his speech you could go to MSM and listed to them tell you what Trump said. I would wonder what speech they had watched.

This one's for the lefties.

[Anti Federalist]

What difference does any of this make? This is the MO. I remember watching Trump and listening to any of his speeches. After his speech you could go to MSM and listed to them tell you what Trump said. I would wonder what speech they had watched.

That's Trump. You expect the Marxist media organs to lie, spin, censor or delete what he said, or Ron, or Rand or anybody else to the right of Chairman Mao.

It's mildly shocking to me that they did that to one of the left's most sacred icons.

It proves what I already know: that the Marxist left is utterly committed to the narrative and the goal, and they will censor anybody that contradicts that narrative.

[acptulsa]

It proves what I already know: that the Marxist left is utterly committed to the narrative and the goal, and they will censor anybody that contradicts that narrative.

When did you last see one quote MLK?

[Anti Federalist]

When did you last see one quote MLK?

King is out, his philosophy and message is gone.

"I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."

In woke Marxist circles, this is, quite literally, regarded as racism.

[tod evans]

What is child like is you thinking people can simply open up in a public forum concerning private information.

I usually do not mention any of my dealings with politicians in both parties and the news media since it simply is not worth the grief in and outside this forum besides being none of anyone's $#@!ing business or I am not allowed to for various reasons.

So you didn't speak to RBG and were just blowing hot air.

If, after being online for years, you can't make a point or complete a thought without "simply opening up in a public forum concerning private information" I don't have any advice.

However, you're the one making cryptic statements alluding to access to a supreme court judge, I just called you on it.

Acting all butt-hurt and asking "permission" is cute but an ineffective way to avoid the issue of BS posting. Or is the cryptic message in this post that you're too far up the food-chain to relate such trivia to mere mortals?

[69360]

The liberal left likes to portray itself as homegenus. Heads would have exploded simply because RBG held some patriotic beliefs.

[Occam's Banana]

Katie Couric Admits She Winston Smith Admits He Edited Ruth Bader Ginsburg’s Knock Against Anthem Kneelers

Fixed it for them.

[kahless]

So you didn't speak to RBG and were just blowing hot air.

If, after being online for years, you can't make a point or complete a thought without "simply opening up in a public forum concerning private information" I don't have any advice.

However, you're the one making cryptic statements alluding to access to a supreme court judge, I just called you on it.

Acting all butt-hurt and asking "permission" is cute but an ineffective way to avoid the issue of BS posting. Or is the cryptic message in this post that you're too far up the food-chain to relate such trivia to mere mortals?

I have no reason to lie about that. I never said anything about asking permission and have no idea where you got that from. You should go back and read my replies and yours. Maybe you would realize you are being an $#@! in your replies.

I simply saw this.

As the Daily Mail noted, the 64-year-old Couric admitted in her memoir that she believed the then-83-year-old just was too “elderly and probably didn’t fully understand the question.”

and thought I would tell the forum my impression of her and how others, particularly Democrats reacted years back. Maybe she declined after that, IDK.

You are smarter than your responses knowing that people cannot discuss legal matters in a public forum. Nothing cryptic about that and maybe again you are simply just being an $#@!.