By the time Marcia Coyle weighed in on Jill Abramson’s piece about Justice Thomas, I had already written a five-part series rebutting most of Abramson’s claims. (See Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, & 5)
I am weighing in again because Coyle’s piece includes a damning piece of evidence that completely undermines Abramson’s credibility.
Abramson’s piece included allegations against Justice Thomas by a reporter named Nancy Montwieler, who, according to Abramson:
confided that Thomas had also made weird, sexual comments to her, including describing porn and other things he found sexually enticing. Montwieler, who considered Thomas a valuable source and didn’t think he was coming on to her, had invited him to a black-tie Washington press dinner, where he also made off-color remarks.
Except . . . Montwieler says none of that ever happened. According to Marcia Coyle:
Montwieler, reached by the NLJ after the publication of Abramson’s story, said she sent a message to New York magazine on Monday that read in part: “I knew Clarence Thomas in a professional capacity and never experienced any type of inappropriate behavior from him. Moreover, despite allegations in the article, I do not recall any conversations with Justice Thomas regarding inappropriate or non-professional subjects.”
Maybe Abramson should try reinventing herself as a fiction writer.