The National Review on frivolous lawsuits....

A woman claims to have been groped by her boss at the end of a meeting. Two witnesses were present who did not corroborate her story. The scandal caused the boss to resign anyway. She did not lose her job. And, wait for it, this all happened in Switzerland, and the organization she works with is not American.

Yet she is petitioning the US Supreme Court.

What says National Review?

It’s a long shot that the Supreme Court will do anything but dismiss this case out of hand, and perhaps that’s just as well.
[...]
For Cynthia Brzak’s complaint, the Supreme Court may not be the answer; but the rest of Washington would do well to take up this case.

That's not too unsympathetic, is it? Oh, wait. Miss Brzak is suing the United Nations. That explains.

More on the story here, here and here. Interesting tidbits:

1. The UN internal investigation into the harassment claim is clearly a sham.
2. The guy heading the Office of Internal Oversight Services (who did the report), has himself been accused of sexual harassment (and graft). In fact, his staff threatened with a vote of no confidence if his term would be extended.
   
3. This is the same guy who sat on his ass for years doing nothing about the Oil-for-Food scandal (until he was replaced by Paul Volcker).
4. The National Review piece was written by Claudia Rosett, a real-life journalist (although she also editorializes for the Wall Street Journal). Her beat? The Oil-for -Food scandal. In other words: she knows all this, yet chooses to write down something else.
   
5. Although I do think that Claudia Rosett is, indeed, a real journalist, she receives her paychecks from The Foundation in Defense of Democracies, a "non-partisan policy institute" that was founded "shortly after 9/11 by a group of visionary philanthropists".
6. The "non-partisan" bit here means that you get William Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, Richard Perle, Gary Bauer, Jeane Kirkpatrick etc. etc. and dilute this with....... Zell Miller and Joseph Lieberman.
   

For some reason the right wingnuts prefer to present this case as a straightforward sex scandal with cover-up (lots of dust in Annan's desk drawers, evidently). In this case Rosett sticks to the script, even when she knows better. Maybe because the woman is American. And probably because this way, even though we're talking about a single, alleged, fully dressed grope of one 60-yeard old by another, you can call it a SEX scandal at the UN.