We support our Publishers and Content Creators. You can view this story on their website by CLICKING HERE.

Yesterday I weighed the evidence bearing on Kamala Harris’s claim of employment by McDonald’s in the summer of 1983. By contrast with the Washington Free Beacon story raising doubts about Harris’s claim, the New York Times asserted that there was no evidence to rebut Harris’s claim. “Donald Trump has claimed without evidence that Ms. Harris never worked at the fast-food chain,” the Times wrote said. “Her campaign and a friend say she did.”

However, the Free Beacon story included real evidence — indeed, evidence of a kind that would be admissible in court — raising doubts about the veracity of Harris’s claim. The Times story was limited to the word of one Wanda Kagan, who alleges that she heard from Harris’s deceased mother that Harris worked at McDonald’s. By my lights that left Harris’s claim hanging by a thread against the evidence compiled by the Free Beacon. No reasonable finder of fact would buy it. The Times story is a self-parodying piece of hack work.

I also added that Kagan’s testimony would not be admissible in court. Kagan’s recitation of what she heard from Harris’s mother some time in the past is, among other things, hearsay.

What if Kagan’s testimony were admissible? Today the Free Beacon impeaches Kagan’s hearsay in “Meet the New York Times Source Who Claims Kamala Harris’s Late Mother Told Her That Her Daughter Worked at McDonald’s. She’s a Harris Campaign Surrogate Who’s Visited the White House.” It’s an intensely reported story.

All of the impeachment evidence lovingly compiled by reporters Joe Simonson and Chuck Ross was of course omitted by the Times. The rout of the Times by the Free Beacon’s happy warriors is complete. I can only add the comment that the Free Beacon may be having too much fun.