Mob Justice May Be Poetic Justice, But Cuomo Deserves Due Process

Below is my column in The Hill on the struggles of many in Washington in the worsening scandal surrounding Gov. Andrew Cuomo. We now have a second former aide alleging sexual harassment and Cuomo has denied the allegation. He is taking heat for saying that he was just being “playful” on such occasions. While the media is beginning to cover the scandal, it is nothing like the saturated coverage of the Kavanaugh controversy or the past Trump allegations. Indeed, Sen. Gillibrand and many of the Democrats who proclaimed Kavanaugh’s guilty are now insisting that both sides being heard. Others are far more measured on this scandal. For example, when CNN’s Dana Bash (who confused her colleague Chris Cuomo with his brother) asked Jennifer Psaki about the new allegations against Cuomo, Psaki called for both sides to be heard. That measured response is in stark contrast to her attack on Sen. Collins as a “fake feminist” and “coward” in voting to confirm Kavanaugh. We saw a similar contrast when then-candidate Joe Biden was accused of sexual assault, though some like Rep. Omar said he was probably a rapist but they would vote for him anyway.  This should not be difficult. These leaders are right to call for fair and due process, even belatedly.

Here is the column:

In 2012, Attorney General Eric Holder appeared before at Northwestern University Law School to announce President Obama’s “kill list” policy, under which he reserved the right to unilaterally order the death of any American deemed an imminent threat. After all, Holder explained, “the Constitution guarantees due process, not judicial process.” The response was as chilling as the message: The audience of judges, lawyers and law students applauded an attorney general who just told them that any of them could be killed tomorrow on the president’s order.

Some of us denounced the “kill list” policy, which foreshadowed what has become a campaign against due process. In our hair-triggered culture of Twitter attacks and “canceling” opponents, due process is treated as hopelessly arcane and inconvenient. Our political discourse must now be tweet-worthy — less than 280 words — and delivered in a news cycle measured in minutes.

Due process, like free speech, is rarely valued until its loss becomes personal. Take Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D-N.Y.). Cuomo advanced his political career by positioning himself at the front of every mob pursuing political rivals, as during Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing. Before hearing the defense of now-Justice Kavanaugh, Cuomo described the allegations against him by Christine Blasey Ford as presumptively true. He not only effectively called Kavanaugh a rapist, without any due process, but demanded that Kavanaugh take a polygraph as a condition to be believed.

Cuomo was not alone. Many Democratic leaders insisted that “women must be believed” when raising sexual harassment allegations and declared Kavanaugh guilty before hearing any testimony. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) dismissed due process concerns for Kavanaugh, adding: “When we talk about … due process and justice, it must focus on the victim.” Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii) said Kavanaugh was not entitled to a presumption of innocence and that men should “just shut up” and accept the allegations.

Last year, when Lindsey Boylan’s allegations went public, I wrote a column asking if Cuomo would presume himself guilty, absent a polygraph. Now, after Boylan added details of Cuomo’s alleged kissing and propositioning her, many are struggling with his (and their) prior positions against due process. While CNN, MSNBC and other networks blacked-out the story or barely covered it, others — including many on the right — have declared Cuomo to be guilty and dangerous.

Cuomo deserves due process, despite loudly denying it for others. Simply because Boylan made the allegations is not proof of guilt. Both sides have a right to be heard — not a right to be believed solely on their word. Due process allows us to determine who is a victim — not, as AOC suggested, to vindicate one party as the declared victim.

The Biden administration, however, is expected to build on President Obama’s anti-due process policies. During the Obama administration, universities were pressured, on threat of losing federal funding, to strip students of due process protections in cases of alleged sexual assault or harassment. Schools like Harvard initially resisted in court but quickly caved. On many campuses today, due process is often dismissed as a virtual claim of privilege or a tactic to delay racial justice.

Take the recent controversy at Smith College in Massachusetts. In 2018, Smith College and its president, Kathleen McCartney, spun into a frenzy after a student, Oumou Kanoute, accused the school of racism in an incident with a security officer and a lunch worker. Kanoute tweeted how a security guard was called to interrogate her for simply having lunch: “All I did was be black. It’s outrageous that some people questioned my being at Smith College and my existence overall as a woman of color.” Some media outlets ran the allegation without seriously questioning the underlying facts. As discussed in a recent New York Times piece, an intensive investigation disproved Kanoute’s allegations.

However, McCartney did not wait for an investigation; she suspended the janitor who called campus security, and ordered campus-wide training to deal with systemic racism. Kanoute reportedly published the names of the employees and one of their images, including one who was not even involved in the incident. All of the workers left Smith and were hounded as presumptive racists. After the investigation cleared them and found no racial bias, McCartney did not apologize and declared: “I suspect many of you will conclude, as did I, it is impossible to rule out the potential role of implicit racial bias..

Even the ACLU lawyer representing Kanoute dismissed any cost to these workers from being publicly humiliated without due process. Rahsaan Hall, racial justice director for the ACLU of Massachusetts, said: “It’s troubling that people are more offended by being called racist than by the actual racism in our society. Allegations of being racist … is not on par with the consequences of actual racism.” In other words, the Smith employees were not entitled to due process because they weren’t victims. The person who made the false allegation was the victim.

The Smith case is not unique. Lack of due process has long been a scourge on campuses, leading to a long list of real victims. In 2006, Duke University lacrosse players were accused of gang-rape; the university and the media treated them as guilty and dangerous, despite glaring problems with the account of the accuser (who was later convicted of second-degree murder).

In the 1968 movie “Green Berets,” John Wayne’s character, Col. Mike Kirby, says that “out here, due process is a bullet.” In today’s politics, due process has been reduced more to a bullet point. For too many pundits and politicians, the question of guilt is reduced to how the conclusion reinforces their own identity or agenda. Every accused, every victim, is a vehicle to amplify a message and that message just be delivered immediately and vehemently..

Of course, as Gov. Cuomo has learned, one can lead a mob one day only to be pursued by the mob on the next. It would be easy to leave him to the mob and call it poetic justice, but that is not justice of any kind. Cuomo should receive all of the due process he denied to others — not because he deserves it, but because he embodies the costs of ignoring it.

Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro Professor of Public Interest Law at George Washington University. You can find his updates online @JonathanTurley.

239 thoughts on “Mob Justice May Be Poetic Justice, But Cuomo Deserves Due Process”

  1. There has to be about 95 percent humidity before the due process will start. Get a fire hose.

  2. Re: The Cawthorn-Cuomo Equivalency

    One politician, Cawthorn, is accused of boorish behavior while an undergraduate student (There’s a shocker.), and of misrepresenting an element of his application to the Naval Academy.

    The other politician, Cuomo, is accused of such behavior in his early 60s, while an “I-believe-her” sycophant, and as the sitting governor. His policies were directly responsible for the killing of some 15,000 seniors — and he flouted federal law to evade detection.

    Tell your troll farm masters that when they want to push the fallacy of diversion, they need a red herring issue that is at least close to the original subject in its facts. It’s just too easy to see through: “He’s a mass murderer.” “Well, what about your shoplifter.”

    1. “His policies were directly responsible for the killing of some 15,000 seniors ”

      A claim you provide no evidence for. Yes, I’m well aware of his directive that nursing homes in NY accept patients with Covid. I’m also aware that the assessment of how many people died as a result of that policy isn’t clear (discussion here: https://khn.org/news/is-cuomo-directive-to-blame-for-nursing-home-covid-deaths-as-us-official-claims/). If you have a better analysis and data, present it.

      I have no problem condemning Cuomo for valid claims.

      As for Cawthorn, he isn’t simply “accused of boorish behavior while an undergraduate student.” He’s accused of sexual harassment and assault by multiple women. He isn’t just accused “of misrepresenting an element of his application to the Naval Academy,” he’s accused of lying about a variety of things, including his claim that the friend who was driving the car whose crash injured Cawthorn “leaves me in a car to die in a fiery tomb. He runs to safety deep in the woods and just leaves me in a burning car” (his friend and a bystander pulled him out), that his injuries were the reason he was rejected by the Naval Academy (he was rejected before the accident), that he’d been accepted to Princeton (he hadn’t), that “a large group of cartels, kidnapping our American children and then taking them to sell them on a slave market, a sex slave market” involves “tens of thousands of our children” (a false conspiracy theory), that “ballots were shoved into duffel bags and left in parks and gas stations” and that Nevada “allowed dead people and out-of-state voters to flood the electoral system” (another false conspiracy theory), and more.
      https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/02/27/making-madison-cawthorn-how-falsehoods-helped-propel-career-new-pro-trump-star-far-right/

      A letter that was ultimately signed by 150 PHC students about his acts while a student there –
      twitter.com/PureWater95/status/1317892325713039360/

      Just last week, he lied to the Clerk of the House of Representatives, saying “I am unable to physically attend proceedings in the House Chamber due to the ongoing public health emergency,” when the truth was that he skipped the vote on the Covid relief bill because was at CPAC.
      clerk.house.gov/legislative/proxy-letters/117/1/active/Cawthorn-NC11-20210225.pdf

      You don’t have to choose between condemning Cuomo and condemning Cawthorn. You can condemn them both.

      1. “I’m also aware that the assessment of how many people died as a result of that policy isn’t clear (discussion here:”

        The number is not the important thing. You lost site of the fact that as governor it was his responsibility to protect the citizens and he along with others are responsible for placing Covid positive seniors in nursing homes. He is responsible for not using the hospital ship as there were plenty of beds available there and at the Javitz center. He is responsible for not listening to others and not listening to the families that saw their loved ones die. He is responsible for incorrectly reporting the data to hide his guilt.

        The number will never be known but it could be higher than the stated number. It is obvious that you do not take responsibility for your mistakes and don’t care what happened. You care about your favorite ball team.

        1. Others should have followed Steve McLaughlin’s lead, when Cuomo issued his ‘directive.’

          ‘”It was clear from the March 25th directive how evil that directive was. And I defied it. I was the only county executive in the state that did that.” McLaughlin said about not allowing the county-run nursing home, Van Rensselaer Manor, accept transfer patients. And he tested every patient before they came in.’

          https://cbs6albany.com/news/local/county-leaders-react-to-cuomo-aide-admitting-to-hiding-nursing-home-data

          There are too many sheep…

          1. “You don’t have to choose between condemning Cuomo and condemning Cawthorn. You can condemn them both.”

            To compare the two is a moral abomination. To even mention Cawthorn in the context of Cuomo’s crimes, is a blatantly dishonest attempt to distract attention from Cuomo’s deadly policies and to whitewash his evil.

              1. That’s hilarious. An “Anon” is concerned about a case of mistaken identity.

                (Besides, the quote makes clear to whom I was responding.)

                    1. Still waiting for you to condemn Cawthorn.

                      Still waiting for you to back up your claim that Cuomo’s “policies were directly responsible for the killing of some 15,000 seniors.”

                    2. “Still waiting for you to condemn Cawthorn.”

                      The following is essentially the claim anonymous is running with today. I would feel foolish taking such a position but anonymous grasps at straws all the time because he can hide his embarrassment with an anonymous name.

                      It sounds like a normal political hit job.

                      Let’s see what was said:

                      “His MO was to take vulnerable women out on these rides with him in the car, and to make advances,” “There was a lot of sexual innuendo,”

                      Wow. In college a young man is sexually attracted to women and is learning how to deal with his emotions and hormones. Anonymous wants him castrated. Take note of the phrase “vulnerable women”. How did a quote like that arise? Both women and men are attracted to sex, but that type of woman wouldn’t complain and might be happy at his actions. A lot of women like sexual play just like men do but one couldn’t just say that so to make the complaint look serious they have to add “vulnerable women”. Of course whoever said that was unlikely vulnerable.

                      Cawthorn says: “Looking back, I wish I could have changed my actions. If I made somebody feel uncomfortable in a situation, that is never my goal,”

                      Cawthorn is stuck with vague comments and apologized for any misunderstandings whether they occurred or not. Did he do anything unexpected for a male college student? No one said or had proof he did. Typical Democrat libel.

                      Anonymous never made a sexual companion feel uncomfortable? I guess he was a loner and that accounts for calling himself anonymous today.

                      CNN continues: “His modus operandi was to invite unsuspecting women on ‘joy rides’ in his white Dodge Challenger. “

                      But,

                      “more than 150 former students signed onto a letter blasting the then-candidate”

                      I guess that means his modus operandi was well known to the women on the campus. It’s not that large a college so this sounds more and more like the hit job it is. Anonymous seems to swim in those waters.

                      https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/01/politics/madison-cawthorn-sexual-misconduct-allegations/index.html

                    3. Anonymous continues: “Still waiting for you to back up your claim that Cuomo’s “policies were directly responsible for the killing of some 15,000 seniors.”

                      Anonymous is comparing a typical teenager (along with typical Democrats engaging in political libel) with a mass murderer. If anonymous considers typical acts by teenagers requiring condemnation then we can expand Cuomo’s negligent homicide of +/_ 15,000 citizens a mass murder.

                      There has to be something terribly wrong with how anonymous assesses wrong doing.

                    4. Sam says:March 2, 2021 at 9:05 AM
                      ‘There’s also a “Name” option to avoid conversation confusion.’

                      =====

                      Address the content. The person posting the comment is irrelevant.

                      If you feel the need to have a ‘conversation’, there are other options:

                      1) Phone or find a friend.

                      2) Get thee to a chat room or discussion board.

                      Some people make a comment or two. Others call this place “home.”

                    5. “Address the content.”

                      This comes from an anonymous individual who answers without content, provides links as proof that have no proof, and can’t distinguish fact from fiction.

                      When Anonymous writes anything what is written is meaningless like his alias anonymous. He is embarrassed at what he writes so he hides under the anonymous alias.

                  1. S. Meyer says:March 1, 2021 at 6:36 PM
                    “Anonymous figures are all the same. They do not exist. They have no credibility.”

                    lol

                    most anonymous “figures” don’t care what you think, pal

                  2. S. Meyer says:March 2, 2021 at 4:33 PM
                    Anonymous = no worthwhile content… See above.

                    ——–

                    Sure, pal. Because you say so?

                    lol

                    S. Meyer is clueless, toxic and abusive…, among other things.

                    1. Anonymous, I see you are back to the old insults without content. That is dumb.

                    2. “Anonymous, I see you are back to the old insults without content. That is dumb.” — Probably S. Meyer, given the specious accusation about ‘content’

                      lol

                      i guess you can’t read

                      start at the top

                      reread your own comments

                      and then, go blow

                    3. Anonymous, anyone can read for themselves and compare your responses with little or not content and lots of errors to mine. You can try to take any of my responses apart but you are unable.

                    4. “You can try to take any of my responses apart but you are unable.”

                      S. Meyer said that.

                      He’s delusional.

                      And an idiot.

                    5. >>“You can try to take any of my responses apart but you are unable.”
                      >S. Meyer said that. He’s delusional. And an idiot.

                      You are back to being insulting and dumb. You also have been having your pretend friends patting you on the back.

                      I am glad that you set the record straight here and elsewhere so everyone recognizes where you are coming from.

                  3. Given that you also post anonymously, Allan, you’re describing what you believe about yourself.

                    1. “Given that you also post anonymously,”

                      I am only posting anonymously right now because these posts are a waste of time for others on the blog. I am posting under one alias. You are posting under anonymous. Anyone reading this can see that you can’t control yourself.

                    2. “Full of himself” describes Allan…”

                      Worthless comment by Anonymous that should be immediately tossed in the garbage.

            1. You still haven’t presented evidence for your claim that Cuomo’s “policies were directly responsible for the killing of some 15,000 seniors ”

              You still haven’t condemned Cawthorn..

              “To compare the two is a moral abomination.”

              Condemning both of them isn’t comparing them. It’s quite moral to say that I condemn both, as both have engaged in behavior worth condemning.

              “To even mention Cawthorn in the context of Cuomo’s crimes …”

              You’re the one who introduced that. Don’t blame me for taking up your comment about both.

              1. Anonymous when you compare (placing both in the same sentence) a possibly reformed thief to a present day killer guilty of genocide of the elderly there is something wrong with your moral compass.

            2. Sam, what makes you think that you will get an honest opinion? There are those that do not act honestly or honorably. They generally have anonymous icons.

              1. “There are those that do not act honestly or honorably. They generally have anonymous icons.”

                BS from BS Meyer

                1. >>“There are those that do not act honestly or honorably. They generally have anonymous icons.”
                  >BS from BS Meyer”

                  Anonymous, you are proof of my point.

              2. “Sam, what makes you think that you will get an honest opinion?”

                Nothing.

                But it feels good to speak the truth. And I like it when some others, e.g., you, chime in.

        2. Some reliable sources report 13k, others 15k:

          “More than 15,000 people have died from coronavirus in the state’s nursing homes and long-term care facilities.” (NPR — look it up. Not you, SM)

          But what’s a few thousand seniors here or there — when the greater glory of Machiavelli’s Prince is at stake.

          1. That’s not evidence for your claim, which was “His policies were directly responsible for the killing of some 15,000 seniors”

            Go ahead, provide evidence that His policies were directly responsible for the deaths.

            1. Cuomo refused and continues to obstruct the release of the true statistics that might tell us the number. By that action we have a right to claim 20,000 which is a possibility. He doesn’t have a claim except that of being a murderer.

              1. Apparently you have trouble with bold text. I wasn’t challenging the specific number. I asked for evidence that his policies were directly responsible for the deaths. Prove that his policies were directly responsible for at least one death.

                1. I won’t ask you to prove Hitler was responsible for the murder of over 8 million Jews or even one. Your comment above should not be taken seriously.

                  1. If I claimed he was, and someone asked me for evidence, I’d provide it.

                    You frequently run away from providing evidence for your claims, Allan, and you consistently make excuses for it.

                    1. Anonymous you have left unproven most of your vile and specious comments. We are used to that. You just claimed I run away from presenting evidence. I think almost everyone with the tiniest bit of intelligence recognizes that I not only provide evidence but provide opinion based on principles that don’t change with the wind.

                      You on the other hand deal with fiction and dreams. That is fine for most of us recognize your propensity for such refuse. You would not be using anonymous if you were proud of what you say.

                      Cuomo as governor was responsible for the placement of Covid positive patients in nursing homes where the largest numbers of deaths occurred. All responsible people, excluding you of course, believes those patients should have been isolated and never returned to those nursing homes unequipped to manage the potential spread of Covid positive cases.

                      You can tell me why Cuomo has no responsibility. Alternatively you can run away like you most frequently do.

                    2. Others should have followed Steve McLaughlin’s lead, when Cuomo issued his ‘directive.’

                      McLauglin:

                      ‘”It was clear from the March 25th directive how evil that directive was. And I defied it. I was the only county executive in the state that did that.” McLaughlin said about not allowing the county-run nursing home, Van Rensselaer Manor, accept transfer patients. And he tested every patient before they came in.’

                      https://cbs6albany.com/news/local/county-leaders-react-to-cuomo-aide-admitting-to-hiding-nursing-home-data

                      There are too many sheep…

                      People should have said “no” to the directive.

                    3. Allan, you’re what would’ve been labeled in the ’80’s a ‘crazymaker’. You take cover by whipping up chaos and you immediately go on the offensive. You think you present evidence to back up your claims, but mostly just blow off any attempt at it. The other shoe dropping to that tactic is blaming whoever you’re speaking with of doing exactly that. Since you’re such a trump lover that’s not surprising because these are standard tactics of his. And this gets at part of what your major malfunction is…

                      The other part of your deficiency is that you’re notoriously awful at even recognizing what comprises true evidence from what is just rhetoric. You wouldn’t recognize good science if it bit you in the ass. Part of the reason is you suffer from a huge dose of cognitive dissonance, the other part is you’re just a garden variety idiot.

                      No matter the cause, when it comes to honestly discussing an issue in a fact based manner, you run,
                      pointing your finger and becoming abusive because, most often, facts don’t back your assertions.

                    4. “You think you present evidence to back up your claims”

                      Anonymous, you are free to quote whatever I have said and show where I am wrong. Instead you spend a lot of time talking about it and being insulting.

                      That you are unable to provide competing arguments is your problem, not mine.

                  2. “You just claimed I run away from presenting evidence.”

                    Correct. You’ve been asked for evidence that Cuomo’s policies were directly responsible for the deaths in the nursing homes, and you’ve repeatedly run away from providing it. Of course, Same is the one who made the original claim, and he ran away from substantiating it with evidence too. If you hadn’t butted in, you wouldn’t have any burden of proof here. But since you doubled down on his claim, you also have a burden of proof.

                    “Cuomo as governor was responsible for the placement of Covid positive patients in nursing homes where the largest numbers of deaths occurred.”

                    Placing the patients in the nursing homes doesn’t prove that the policy was responsible for any additional deaths. I already linked to the Kaiser assessment that the deaths were more likely linked to infected staff. Have you bothered to read it?

                    “You can tell me why Cuomo has no responsibility.”

                    I didn’t say that he has no responsibility, so I have no burden of proof for it. One of your many trolling strategies is that you often attempt to make someone responsible for proving things he didn’t say.

                    1. “Placing the patients in the nursing homes doesn’t prove that the policy was responsible for any additional deaths. I already linked to the Kaiser assessment that the deaths were more likely linked to infected staff. Have you bothered to read it?”

                      What foolishness. The logical conclusion is that both infected staff and patients killed nursing home patients. That study doesn’t prove what you think it proves.

                      You are playing word games. Your word games tell us that you believe Cuomo was not responsible in any way for the deaths of any nursing home patients. The is your typical silliness evident to to everyone except you.

                  3. “The logical conclusion is that both infected staff and patients killed nursing home patients.”

                    No, the logical conclusion of your evidence so far is that it’s a possible contributing factor, and you don’t know if it was an actual contributing factor. Logical people understand the difference between “possible” and “certain” and don’t confuse conjectures with facts.

                    “You are playing word games. Your word games tell us that you believe Cuomo was not responsible in any way for the deaths of any nursing home patients.”

                    BS. This is just another of your trolling strategies, where you pretend to read someone’s mind and put words in their mouth. I’m tired of your trolling. CTHD was probably right that you should just be ignored.

                    1. No, the logical conclusion of your evidence so far is that it’s a possible contributing factor,

                      New York and New Jersey eschewed the offer of mobile capacity and discharged infectious people to loci of vulnerable people. They touch off an epidemic therein. The 19 counties around Manhattan have had the highest mortality rates in the occidental world. Gee, what could be going on here.

                    2. Florida with its larger population of seniors and nursing home patients and larger population overall had a lower death rate than NY and less seniors died. Rick de Santis refused to put any Covid positive patients into the regular nursing homes. He didn’t have the hospital ship or Javitz center. Certain nursing homes were designated to take Covid patients so there was a complete separation between the Covid positive population and the rest.

                      Florida did not shut everything down and had their schools open quickly though teachers fought to keep them closed while they fought to keep their salaries. De Santis took tremendous criticism but came out as one of the most successful governors. Not only that but he slashed Florida’s budget and forced the bureaucracy to spend less. That was similar to what the former governor did during the recession that Obama almost made into a depression.

                    3. No, anonymous, based on science, something forgotten by many Democrats, the act of placing Covid positive patients in nursing homes ended up killing nursing home seniors. Not only that but it contributed to the staff getting Covid and transmitting it to nursing home patients.

                      Look at the medical literature and infectious nature of Covid. In a court of law we don’t need absolute proof of guilt to convict one for criminal action. Cuomo fits nicely into a category similar to criminal negligence and manslaughter. He is a Democrat so the MSM will fixate on sexual complaints rather than his part in the deaths of thousands of nursing home patients. You will defend Cuomo with the hypocrisy we are so accustomed to and focus on unfounded accusations of a college teenager who I can no longer call a male until complete genetic testing and hormone evaluations are performed. Ridiculous.

                      You have stretched your credibility to the point that it broke long ago. After all you applauded Cuomo’s Emmy for his Covid performance and the deaths of thousands of seniors. To you that Emmy must mean he is innocent (lol).

                    4. “CTHD was probably right that you should just be ignored.”

                      Yep. S. Meyer lives for this.

                      Best not to feed him.

                    5. ““CTHD was probably right that you should just be ignored.”
                      Yep. S. Meyer lives for this.
                      Best not to feed him.”

                      Anonymous, your problem is not one of feeding but one of making comments that are asinine. When you were about 12 months old you probably started putting different shaped wooden objects into the appropriate holes. That was a lesson learned by most children relatively quickly. Apparently you never learned how that was done because today you are still trying to put square objects into round holes.

                      Don’t blame me. Blame whoever taught you logic and said you were smart.

                    6. NYC was the 1st large outbreak in the US, was in a dense urban environment, and before we had knowledge and supplies. It largely arrived there from European travelers. Of course the death rate was going to be higher than places with warnings, knowledge, and supplies.

                    7. Cuomo and de Blasio both screwed up. It doesn’t take much wit to know how.

                    8. Yep. S. Meyer lives for this.

                      Best not to feed him.

                      He says the same things over and over and over and over….

                    9. Apparently you didn’t read my first reply so here it is again.

                      Anonymous, your problem is not one of feeding but one of making comments that are asinine. When you were about 12 months old you probably started putting different shaped wooden objects into the appropriate holes. That was a lesson learned by most children relatively quickly. Apparently you never learned how that was done because today you are still trying to put square objects into round holes.

                      Don’t blame me. Blame whoever taught you logic and said you were smart.

                    10. “40 comments from S. Meyer on this page alone
                      gotta laugh”

                      Most of them were intelligent replies to you who made comments like this one that you just posted or comments absent content, logic or basic manners. Despite their numbers, you don’t seem to have learned anything.

                  4. “it contributed to the staff getting Covid and transmitting it to nursing home patients.”

                    That’s possible. It’s also possible that some staff became infected in their lives outside of work and brought it with them into the nursing homes and infected the residents and other staff.

                    “You will defend Cuomo”

                    I haven’t defended him. I’m simply saying that you need to prove your case instead of assuming it.

                    Once again, you troll by lying about what I’ve said. What a sad little man you are.

                    1. I accept all those modalities for the Covid passing from one to another, but you aren’t telling the truth when you say you didn’t defend Cuomo. You were applauding when he won his Emmy. Most of the major positions you have taken in the past years have been completely wrong and you can’t accept that.

      2. “You don’t have to choose between condemning Cuomo and condemning Cawthorn. You can condemn them both.”

        Yep.

  3. Libertarians carry the burden of insisting that all must enjoy Constitutional protection, even political hypocrites who ethically don’t deserve it. It’s an acknowledgment that rights must exist for all or they exist for none. We should remember that politicials who are elected and repeatedly reelected despite their abject hypocracy are not like Federal judges who are appointed for life. Their electorate are either unbothered by or ignorant of their actions. Should we blame a snake for biting someone who tries to feed it or the person for ignoring that biting is what snakes do when someone approaches it? Politics are full of snakes that get repeatedly fed by electorates who at some point express surprise that the snake behaved like a snake.

  4. Lots of reporting about Cuomo, as it should be.

    There should also be lots of reporting about Rep. Cawthorn.

    “BuzzFeed News spoke with more than three dozen people, including more than two dozen former students, their friends, and their relatives, who described or corroborated instances of sexual harassment and misconduct on campus, in Cawthorn’s car, and at his house near campus. Four women told BuzzFeed News that Cawthorn, now a rising Republican star, was aggressive, misogynistic, or predatory toward them. Their allegations include calling them derogatory names in public in front of their peers, including calling one woman “slutty,” asking them inappropriate questions about their sex lives, grabbing their thighs, forcing them to sit in his lap, and kissing and touching them without their consent. One of these women now works as an intern for another Republican member of Congress and passes Cawthorn in the corridors of the Capitol. According to more than a dozen people — including three women who had firsthand experience and seven people who heard about these incidents from them at the time — Cawthorn often used his car as a way to entrap and harass his women classmates, taking them on what he could call “fun drives” off campus. Two said he would drive recklessly and ask them about their virginity and sexual experiences while they were locked in the moving vehicle.”
    https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/addybaird/madison-cawthorn-sexual-misconduct-allegations-patrick

    The challenge is: what does due process mean when there is no court case? Does it simply mean getting statements from both sides when no one is under oath?

    1. Turns out Cawthorn also lied about his “future” at the Naval Academy – he never had one – and has exactly 1 year of college with a D average.

      Trump loves him. Why wouldn’t he?

    2. Yep, judge Kavanaugh received explicit due process from about all of the Democratic Senators did he not? Other than their hate for DT, I ‘ve never seen such rancor since they Borked Judge Bork. Now with a non prosecuted participnts in an attempted Coup to remove DT when he becme the Repub candidate until Jan 20, 2021. surley you cyclopes can see, the USA no longer has a true rule of law with a lady of justice being truly blindfolded. PS: I can still see that chickencrap pseudo grin Joe Biden exhibited to Judge Clarence Thomas “in that pubic hair on a can of coke”, each time he addressed him. Anita Hill’s biggest problem was when Clarence Thomas married a white gal. She had followed Thomas from post to post as he moved up the ladder. The Book states; Hell hath no fury like the scorn of a woman. Selah

      1. Bork was rejected with a bipartisan vote.

        Kavanaugh was able to testify under oath, as was Blasey Ford. Just what due process do you think he was denied?

        There was no “attempted Coup to remove DT.”

        Biden screwed up the Thomas-Hill hearing by refusing to allow additional witnesses.

        1. “There was no “attempted Coup to remove DT.”

          You’re right. It wasn’t “attempted”. It was successfully executed on November 3, 2020.

            1. Why? Likely without the fraud Trump won by a lot. There are lots of sane Democrats that recognize that likelihood, but don’t want to attach their name to such a statement. They don’t want to be crucified which is what the left does to anyone that steps out of place.

              Did you and your buddies get over Trump’s win. No. But those pulling for Hillary and then trying to oust Trump broke laws and so far successfully hid themselves from prosecution. They have altered the rule of law and excluded themselves while punishing innocent people they don’t like. We saw this in the fascist regimes in Europe prior to WW2.

              Right now, most of the right accepts Biden as President despite his policies. Perhaps as the American population has to pay for leftist policies the nation will move in another direction. It might not happen and if it doesn’t your grandchildren as well as mine will suffer.

              1. “Likely without the fraud Trump won by a lot.”

                Nope. A.G. Barr: “To date, we have not seen fraud on a scale that could have effected a different outcome in the election.”

                1. “we have not seen”

                  You are like the captain of the Titanic. He only looked at what he could see and was dumb enough to believe the rave reviews of the Democrats,,,I mean the ship builders.

                  1. Barr isn’t a Democrat.

                    You haven’t presented any evidence that “Likely without the fraud Trump won by a lot,” and now you admit that your claim isn’t based on what you’ve seen but only on what you imagine.

                    You resort to insults because you get off on denigrating those you disagree with.

                    1. “+100 to Anon’s comment @ 6:56 P

                      Such is the honor of the anonymous characters. They even pat themselves on their own backs. You prove my point.

                    2. “Bar isn’t a Democrat”

                      I don’t care what party people belong to. I judge people by their character not there color whether it be red or blue.

                      Don’t blame me for you following in the footsteps of the captain of the Titanic.

          1. An election isn’t a coup.

            Trump was rejected by voters, whether you can admit it or not.

            1. A rigged election is a soft coup.

              In fact, a rigged election is the most common method for executing a soft coup.

              1. You haven’t presented evidence that it was a rigged election.

                Dozens of lawsuits were filed. Some were rejected for lack of standing, and the rest were rejected on the merits.

            2. A coup is what the FBI, the bureaucracy and the Democrats attempted to do. They failed but succeeded in creating an election that many less democratic nations would never permit.

        2. Bork was rejected with a bipartisan vote.

          Chuckles. Six out of the 58 votes came from Republicans. The six were Lowell Wicker, Robert Packwood, Arlen Spector, John Chafee, Robert Stafford, and John Warner. The American Conservative Union compiles voting scorecards for all members of Congress. Weicker, Spector, Chafee, and Stafford had voting records closer to the median of the Democratic caucus than to the median of the Republican caucus. Packwood was equidistant between the caucuses (rather like Susan Collins today). Voting against their caucus is what these characters did normally. (By the way, Weicker, Spector, and Packwood were clowns. You’re welcome to them). The only anomaly was John Warner, John Warner is the man who thought it a capital idea to marry Elizabeth Taylor; he’s the last survivor of the 7 men who took that plunge. Note, Weicker and Spector both left the Republican Party. Chafee died in 1999; his son and heir also left the Republican Party. John Warner has in recent years offered a raft of endorsements of Democratic candidates, among them Hillary Clinton, Sundown Joe Biden, and (in Virginia Senate contests) Tim Kaine.

    3. “Lots of reporting about Cuomo, as it should be.”

      Too little and far too late. There was little to no reporting when Cuomo was killing seniors. There was little to no reporting when families were complaining about the loved one’s deaths. You followed in lock-step and it wasn’t until there were political reasons to get rid of Cuomo that the media or you suddenly changed its mind. In fact if I remember correctly the media and you appeared to be happy with Cuomo’s Emmy which demonstrates how late to the party all of you came.

    4. If you’re counting, somewhere between three and seven people claim he was at age 18 given to insults, vulgar remarks, and reckless driving. I’m really not interested. (Nor do I take Wikipedia at face value). I don’t know why a young man of 25 is slated to run for Congress and I do not know why people would vote for that. That juveniles behave in unedifying ways is of no interest. (BTW, I’ll wager that at age 18 he had lots of friends, male and female. The manners of contemporary youth are not what you see in Jane Austen novels).

      1. “Nor do I take Wikipedia at face value”

        I didn’t cite Wikipedia. I cited (1) articles in Buzzfeed and The Washington Post that quoted from interviews with people and quoted testimony in court, (2) a letter written by 10 people and signed by over 160 additional supporters from the college he attended (here’s a version with the additional supporters – https://twitter.com/itsgrandmarquis/status/1319376748505686016), and (3) a letter from Cawthorn to the Clerk of the House lying about why he was missing a vote.

        “I’m really not interested.”

        I’m not surprised that you don’t care if a member of Congress lies in the context of his congressional vote. I’m not surprised that you don’t care whether a member of Congress engages in sexual abuse and harassment. I’m not surprised that you don’t care whether a member of Congress lies about diverse other things. After all, you’re a Trump fan, and Trump is a pathological liar.

        1. You made a big thing about proof, recently asking for proof of Cuomo’s responsibility in the deaths of nursing home seniors. You acted as if there was no proof of even one death. Then you argued that proof was a necessity and lambasted others for not providing the proof you required that Cuomo was responsible for nursing home deaths.

          Tell us your proof that Cawthorn in his teens engaged in abusive behavior at College that was at significant variance with many young men of the same age. You don’t prove such an accusation with political hit jobs. You prove them with fact. Now, do so.

          1. “Tell us your proof that Cawthorn in his teens engaged in abusive behavior at College that was at significant variance with many young men of the same age.”

            I don’t have to prove that it “was at significant variance with many young men of the same age,” because I didn’t say that. That other young men also abuse and harass young women doesn’t absolve Cawthorn. I said he engaged in abusive and harassing behavior, and I already linked to evidence for it in the form of first person statements in the Buzzfeed and Washington Post articles from women he abused and harassed and the letter written by 10 PHC students (and signed by over 160 others) about his behavior there. Here’s more evidence with first person statements –
            https://world.wng.org/2020/08/rising_republican_star_faces_accusations_from_women

            I also provided evidence that he lied about his friend who pulled him out of a burning car with the help of a bystander, lied about why the Naval Academy rejected him, lied about having been admitted to Princeton, lied to the Clerk of the House about why he was missing the vote on the Covid relief bill, and lies to promote conspiracy theories (e.g., that “a large group of cartels, kidnapping our American children and then taking them to sell them on a slave market, a sex slave market” involves “tens of thousands of our children”, that “ballots were shoved into duffel bags and left in parks and gas stations” and that Nevada “allowed dead people and out-of-state voters to flood the electoral system”).

            1. “You don’t prove such an accusation with political hit jobs. You prove them with fact. Now, do so.”

              S. Meyer has commanded…

              lol

              Thanks for the info on Cawthorn.

              1. I ended up with the dirty job of dealing with your BS. So far not a single piece of useful content from your side.

            2. ” I said he engaged in abusive and harassing behavior”

              Prove it. Virtually all teenagers will do things we do not find appropriate as adults. That is the nature of teenage years. This is true of Democrats, Republicans and all others. You do not understand how important it is to link proofs in appropriate scenarios. You are making a non-complaint unless you can demonstrate the actions being out of the norm. It’s pure foolishness.

              Let us hear the quotes along with the proof that the behavior is outside the norm. You probably peed in bed as an infant. Should we blame you for peeing in bed? Is it abnormal? No. It is age appropriate. What type of fool makes the types of statements you are making.

              You are going to bring in garbage from all over without the content. I don’t like liars and that goes for you as well, but under certain circumstances all people tell fibs. The public should know the truth and then vote with knowledge but that is not how Democrats handle things. They lie and lie by commission and omission. Prove any lie you want, but in context with proof. You lie all the time but I am still communicating with you much to your chagrin.

              Not only do you lie, but you libel.

              1. “You lie all the time but I am still communicating with you much to your chagrin.” -S. Meyer

                lol

                who is this guy

                1. This guy is a poster with a consistent alias who is discussing things with an anonymous fraud.

                  1. “This guy” — Allan/S.Meyer — insults others and calls them “liars.” And he can’s shut his mouth.

                    1. Anonymous, you are the one insulting others. I take note that you insulted Young a couple of times as well. You think insulting people is a good substitute for intelligence. It isn’t.

            3. “The making of Madison Cawthorn: How falsehoods helped propel the career of a new pro-Trump star of the far right”

              “Cawthorn has emerged as one of the most visible figures among newly arrived House Republicans, who have promoted baseless assertions and pushed a radicalized ideology that has become a driving force in the GOP”

              https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/02/27/making-madison-cawthorn-how-falsehoods-helped-propel-career-new-pro-trump-star-far-right/

              1. Wow, I don’t know if anything the WaPo says is true. I read maybe half the article where it tells a story and puts in quotes 3 words at a time without documentation but plenty of innuendo. Based on this article one can’t draw any conclusions though anonymous seems to draw them all.

                Anonymous doesn’t provide an argument that is proven by a documented quote because there aren’t any that are good enough. Anonymous doesn’t know what a verified fact is and he has a hard time picking out fact from fiction or opinion.

                He is known not to be credible and this is another example why.

              2. I decided to pull out one paragraph that has some evidence, a quote from a deposition. That is a document and has a legal basis.

                In his deposition, Cawthorn did not say his friend left him for dead. Instead, he said, “I have no memory from the accident.” An accident report and other records from the Florida Highway Patrol say Cawthorn was incapacitated and in critical condition, not that he was declared dead.

                With the injuries sustained he might very well have thought he was dead. Such a trauma can cause all sorts of thoughts and sometimes statements that are thought to be true but aren’t. He had “no memory from” the accident. We have no way of knowing the truth of that statement. We have no way of knowing if he intentionally lied in other statements or if they were errors. Maybe there was a bit of puffery, maybe not.

                This is the reason anonymous links so much. The stuff he links to has a lot of BS and doesn’t contain solid facts. That is why no matter what anonymous says I consider it fiction unless he has the ability to provide reasonable proof.

                I am not defending Cawthorn because I would prefer someone a bit more mature in such an office

                1. “We have no way of knowing if he intentionally lied in other statements or if they were errors.”

                  No, we can know that he was lying, because nobody makes these kinds of false statements by mistake.

                  When he was a freshman, he said this about the accident (audio at the bottom, he says this ~7:05 into the tape): “[Brad, the driver] was my brother, my best friend. And he leaves me in a car to die in a fiery tomb. He runs to safety deep in the woods and just leaves me in a burning car as the flames start to lick my legs and curl up and burn my left side. Fortunately, there was several bystanders who come by and they break the window open, they pulled me out to safety and they sat me down. The paramedics arrive and decided that I’m gone and I have no pulse, I have no breath. And I was, I was declared dead on the scene. For whatever reason, may it be adrenaline or divine intervention, I definitely believe it’s the latter, I had a deep inhale of breath.”

                  If he had no memory of the accident, as he said under oath, then he does’t remember any of this, and the honest thing to say is “I don’t remember.” Or, if he wanted to tell the story based on what others had told you, then he doesn’t invent things out of thin air.

                  You don’t just claim by mistake in 2017 that someone left you in a car to burn in 2014 when the news about the accident after it happened was that the guy helped to get you out –
                  https://www.blueridgenow.com/article/NC/20140806/news/606028457/HT
                  “The 17-year-old [Ledford] broke through the passenger side window, got out and pulled his friend [Cawthorn] out. Two bystanders helped Ledford pull Cawthorn away from the burning SUV, which he said had turned from tan to black. The four waited for help to arrive. Cawthorn, 19, was taken by helicopter to Halifax Hospital in Dayton Beach, Fla. Ledford said emergency responders tried to send him to a separate hospital, but he asked to go wherever Cawthorn went. He stayed with Cawthorn for the next two weeks in the hospital.”

                  Cawthorn’s own father said in 2014 that “If it wasn’t for him [Brad], Madison would have died. Because the car was on fire, and the driver [Brad] had to break out a window. … He wasn’t scared, didn’t run from the fire, He helped -, he pulled Madison out of the car, ’cause he was unconscious. (youtube.com/watch?v=bZIi_f8EeFE, ~0:57)

                  It’s pretty hard to reconcile his father’s claim in 2014 that Brad didn’t run with Madison’s claim in 2017 that Brad ran away.

                  You don’t invent that you were “declared dead on the scene” if you weren’t declared dead.

                  “he might very well have thought he was dead.”

                  Maybe he thought that, but that’s not the same as being declared dead by the paramedics after they arrive.

                  You just don’t pay attention to details, Allan.

                  1. Get it straight, anonymous, you don’t know cr-p and your understanding of right and wrong is limited. You jump to your desired conclusions because you pimp for the Democrats. You make up stories trying to destroy other’s character with innuendo, lies or incomplete facts. That type of behavior is disgraceful.

                    He suffered significant trauma so it is not unusual for him to potentially piece things together erroneously. Additionally the mind has a protective mechanism with severe traumas that sometimes creates a story that is more palatable to the individual than what actually happened. It is not voluntary. You have zero understanding about these things.

                    I don’t know what the truth is and most of it has little importance as to his character as an adult. Your statements are more indicative to your own character.

                    If you think there is something significant skip all the other rhetoric and produce only one or two statements that are well documented. Tell us how they are significant. That can be discussed. I read about half of the WaPo article you linked to and it was junk.

                    1. Allan, he was deposed multiple times. He lied to his classmates. If you can’t admit it, that’s your problem.

                      You also ignore all of his other lies, like the BS conspiracy theories he’s peddling and lying to the Clerk of the House about why he wouldn’t be in the House chamber to vote on the Covid relief bill, when he was playing hooky at CPAC. (I already linked to a copy of that letter on the congressional website.)

                      You ignore his harassment and abuse of young women. Maybe you think it’s OK for a guy to put his hand under a woman’s dress and grab her thigh, but I don’t. Maybe you think it’s OK for a man to grab a woman’s face and kiss her when she already made clear that she didn’t want to kiss, but I don’t. Maybe you think it’s OK for a guy to use misogynist names for women, but I don’t. I’m sure that your daughter — if you have one — says that’s all hunky dory with her too.

                    2. Allan, Cawthorn wasn’t a teenager when he lied to his classmates at Patrick Henry about what happened to him in the accident. Cawthorn wasn’t a teenager when he engaged in sexual abuse / harassment at PCH.
                      He wasn’t a teenager when he lied to the Clerk of the House just last week –
                      https://web.archive.org/web/20210228164922/https://clerk.house.gov/legislative/proxy-letters/117/1/active/Cawthorn-NC11-20210225.pdf
                      That letter is especially ironic given that when Democrats used proxy votes, he’d previously responded “Leaders show up no matter how uncertain the times are. The Democrats are cowards for hiding and not showing up to work. I guess we can label them as ‘Nonessential personnel’?”

                      “You link or provide quotes from third parties but you don’t provide his quotes in context.”

                      You’re a pathological liar.

                      I quoted Cawthorn, and I provided the context by linking to his entire speech at Patrick Henry (and every telling you the timestamp of the part I was quoting). He isn’t a third party. I quoted his father and provided the context by linking to the entire news report where his dad was interviewed. You simply aren’t capable of having an honest discussion about it.

                    3. Anonymous , your primary statement was “That letter is especially ironic given that when Democrats used proxy votes, he’d previously responded…”

                      It’s bunk.

                      Your secondary statement:

                      >>”“You link or provide quotes from third parties but you don’t provide his quotes in context.”
                      >You’re a pathological liar.

                      An anonymous figure that doesn’t exist, isn’t credible and has been shown to lie all the time is accusing another of lying. What a ridiculous situation. Anonymous #1 or maybe #2, #3 or #4 etc. or an anonymous pretend friend #1,#2,#3,…etc. is calling someone a pathological liar.

                      Firstly there is context, secondly there are actual verifiable quotes, thirdly there is significance. We will deal with your actual quotes by Cawthorn. If I missed one with all the junk you provided I’m sorry but hold that apology until you provide the quote, a link to where you posted it and a source that is considered accurate. Make sure there is context and significance. Your primary statement above stinks.

                      Links are not quotes and do not expect anyone to look at them especially since you have used links in the past that didn’t prove what you said, sometimes proved the opposite or actually proved nothing because all you did was read the hyped headline.

                      (By the way I believe many use the age of 25 to determine when the mind is matured.)

                      Your third and last statement: “You simply aren’t capable of having an honest discussion about it.”

                      My reply above demonstrates that I am more than willing to discuss anything. It is you that lacks proof, runs away or throws out nonsensical insults without content because you have a low frustration tolerance. It is you that acts anonymously and tries to blame others for what you say. It is you who is not credible.

                    4. Anon about Allan & Cawthorn: “You simply aren’t capable of having an honest discussion about it.”

                      True.

                      That said, Allan is desperate for discussion — with someone — with anyone. He seems to crave attention. He’ll go ’round and ’round about the same stuff FOREVER; no one likes to beat a dead horse more than Allan.

                    5. “That said, Allan is desperate for discussion “

                      Not at all. I am waiting to hear something intelligent from you. That rarely happens.

                      You, an anonymous figure, called me a pathologic liar. You don’t exist, you aren’t credible and you have been shown to lie all the time. Such a moral degenerate doesn’t have the standing to make such claims.

                      I’ll alter Judge Judy’s comment. How do you know anonymous is lying? Whenever one opens his responses. He doesn’t know what truth is.

                      You failed to prove your case about Cawthorn but helped enhance your reputation as a very foolish person that would rather lie then be right.

                    6. “It’s bunk.”

                      No, Allan, I linked to a copy of Cawthorn’s letter and a copy of his previous tweet. He’s a hypocrite.

                      “You link or provide quotes from third parties but you don’t provide his quotes in context.”

                      That’s BS. I literally gave you a link to his ENTIRE speech at PHC so that you could listen to the context if you wanted.

                      “We will deal with your actual quotes by Cawthorn.”

                      I already gave you quotes from Cawthorn AND his father –
                      https://jonathanturley.org/2021/03/01/mob-justice-may-be-poetic-justice-but-cuomo-deserves-due-process/comment-page-1/#comment-2067510

                      I didn’t quote the young women he harassesd/abused, and I’m not going to now, but if you want to read their quotes, these comments have links to articles that quote them –
                      jonathanturley.org/2021/03/01/mob-justice-may-be-poetic-justice-but-cuomo-deserves-due-process/comment-page-1/#comment-2067130
                      jonathanturley.org/2021/03/01/mob-justice-may-be-poetic-justice-but-cuomo-deserves-due-process/comment-page-1/#comment-2067401

                      “you have used links in the past that didn’t prove what you said”

                      I haven’t. Once again, you’re pretending that there’s only one anonymous commenter, when you’re confusing me with someone else. It’s easy to confuse some of the different anonymous commenters (other anonymous commenters are easy to identify, I can generally tell when it’s you even if you don’t sign it; that’s also how I knew it was you when you’ve used other names, including S. Meyer). But only a purposefully dishonest person will pretend that several different people are just 1 person.

                      “Your third and last statement: “You simply aren’t capable of having an honest discussion about it.” My reply above demonstrates that I am more than willing to discuss anything.”

                      I said “You simply aren’t capable of having an honest discussion about it.” I didn’t say “You simply aren’t capable of having a discussion about it.” I absolutely agree that you’ll discuss things. You just won’t discuss them honestly.

                    7. Anonymous, you provide links because intellectually you are unable to build your case with your own words and need the help of others for you to appropriately interpret your own links. The Cawthorn letter is more demonstrative of you being an idiot than Cawthorn being any different from those that reside in Washington. You are just too Stupid.

                      His speech doesn’t tell us much of anything though you think with his speech you can indict him for some horrible crime. Again you don’t have the intellectual ability to make an argument…too stupid. You can type a few words and provide the time for others to debate your point with you, but you prefer being stupid.

                      “I literally gave you a link to his ENTIRE speech at PHC so that you could listen to the context”

                      Are you too stupid to know we want to know what your argument is. You need everyone else to interpret audible and written words so you will understand what was said before you make a point.

                      You use tertiary sources as quotes when someone else’s words are merely an opinion of what another said. Then based on third party statements you say he abused women. That too is stupid. Any other stupid comments you would like to make?

                      Go watch a rerun of Cuomo receiving his Emmy.

                    8. Allan, your reply is full of lies and insults, and I’m not going to waste any more time on you.

                      Even when you’re given quotes from Cawthorn and his father, you cannot bring yourself to admit that Cawthorn lied about the accident years later. Even when you’re given recent quotes from Cawthorn, you cannot admit that he lied to the Clerk of the House about his absence during the Covid Relief bill vote in February and his hypocrisy in condemning people who vote remotely. Even when you’re given links to quotes from women who say that he engaged in sexual assault and harassment at PHC, you make up excuses for his behavior. When you’re given quotes from Cawthorn about conspiracy theories he’s peddling, you are silent.

                      It’s clear that all you want to do here is troll.

                    9. “Allan, your reply is full of lies and insults, and I’m not going to waste any more time on you.”

                      That you don’t want to waste any more time is a relief to the entire blog. But you have said that before, so I am sure you will do the opposite.

                      If you do want an answer to any of his quotes provide a significant one in context. I’ve already explained why what you have said earlier is imbecilic, but maybe using one quote at a time you will better understand what I have said or maybe you will find something he said I don’t personally like. As a rule I don’t like politicians so you have a good chance but the question is one of significance and context. That is where you miserably fail.

                    10. “It’s clear that all you want to do here is troll.” -Anon to Allan / S. Meyer

                      It’s been clear for a very long time…

                      …and yet, you keep feeding him.

                      The guy’s a joke and he loves attention.

                  2. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/03/02/what-we-know-sexual-harassment-allegations-rep-madison-cawthorn/6890294002/

                    “It was previously revealed that Cawthorn exaggerated his work history. In an Oct. 2 interview with the Citizen Times, a USA TODAY network paper, Cawthorn said he worked full-time on the staff of ex-Rep. Mark Meadows. A campaign spokesman later said he only worked part-time, which is consistent with House spending records.”

                    The full truth about this guy will come out, eventually.

                    1. So far anonymous you haven’t shown anything startling. Judge Judy’s famous quote (may not be 100% her words) “How do you know when teenagers are lying? When their lips are moving.” You don’t bother thinking before you heap garbage on another individual. Through innuendo you try to destroy their character.

                      That makes you more or less a liar and I doubt you are a teenager.

                    2. “The full truth about this guy will come out, eventually.”

                      So far, anonymous you haven’t been able to create a chain of logic to make Cawthorn look bad. You link or provide quotes from third parties but you don’t provide his quotes in context. You don’t even provide the name of the person making the comment. When it comes to accurate reporting or accurately reporting the truth, you fail. You are incorrigible.

              3. https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/03/02/what-we-know-sexual-harassment-allegations-rep-madison-cawthorn/6890294002/

                “It was previously revealed that Cawthorn exaggerated his work history. In an Oct. 2 interview with the Citizen Times, a USA TODAY network paper, Cawthorn said he worked full-time on the staff of ex-Rep. Mark Meadows. A campaign spokesman later said he only worked part-time, which is consistent with House spending records.”

                So we know that Cawthorn “exaggerated” his work history.

                1. Madison Cawthorn gets Democratic challenger

                  BY LEXI LONAS – 03/03/21 10:29 AM EST

                  https://thehill.com/homenews/house/541374-madison-cawthorn-gets-democratic-

                  Excerpt:

                  Rep. Madison Cawthorn (R-N.C.) has a Democratic challenger for his House seat, with a local county commissioner announcing plans to run against the first-term lawmaker on Wednesday.

                  “Some people will say, a gay woman who’s a Christian minister just can’t get elected in the South. Not to mention she’s a Democrat,” Jasmine Beach-Ferrara said in her campaign video. “But I say, an insurrectionist, who flirts with Nazis, and fires up a violent crowd to attack our democracy, well, he shouldn’t get reelected anywhere.” — Lexi Lonas, The Hill

  5. Mr Turley is a very educated man but a little gullible. There is no “due process” when it comes to our elected officials. They don`t have the same justice system that we have, they have the “I`m innocent and even if proven guilty I`m still innocent” and life goes on as usual”. The people have grown weary of the obvious “two systems”.

    The only accountability is that of the citizens….hence the outrage, torches and pitchforks.

    1. Mr Turley is a very educated man but a little gullible.

      Not gullible; principled. This is a post about due process and double-standards. Go type “Politics” into his blog archive search field and the posts reek of evidence proving a two tier system. Here’s a few:

      Search Results for: politics
      COLUMNS, CRIMINAL LAWFebruary 19, 2021
      Want To Prosecute Trump? It Will Require Proof Not Politics For A Viable Case
      Below is my column in USA Today on the calls for criminal charges against former president Donald Trump and what…

      109 Comments
      COLUMNS, MEDIA, POLITICSJanuary 4, 2021
      De Blasio’s Dance and The Delusional Politics Of 2021
      Below is my column in the Hill on the rise of delusional politics in America — a problem captured vividly…

      392 Comments
      COLUMNS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, MEDIA, POLITICS, SOCIETY, SUPREME COURTMarch 19, 2020
      Supreme Identity Politics: Biden Pledges To Only Consider Black Females For Supreme Court Pick
      Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on former Vice President Joe Biden’s pledge that he will select a…

      150 Comments
      COLUMNS, CONGRESS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, COURTS, MEDIA, POLITICSSeptember 18, 2019
      Kavanaugh Impeachment Would Be Long On Politics And Short on Principle
      Below is my column in the Hill newspaper on the recent allegations published by the New York Times against Justice…

      38 Comments
      COLUMNS, CONGRESS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, POLITICSAugust 5, 2019
      Eat The Rich: Democratic Candidates Plunge Party Into Class Warfare Politics
      Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on the growing calls from Democratic presidential candidates for “wealth taxes” targeting…

      233 Comments
      COLUMNS, CONGRESS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, COURTS, LAWYERING, POLITICSJune 6, 2019
      The Politics and Pathology of The House Litigation Addiction
      Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on rejection of the lawsuit by the House of Representatives against the…

      195 Comments
      COLUMNS, CONGRESS, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW, COURTS, CRIMINAL LAWApril 15, 2019
      The Trolling Of Bill Barr: How Politics Has Outstripped Meaning
      Below is my column in the Hill newspaper on the rising attacks against Attorney General Bill Barr even before the…

      245 Comments
      CONGRESS, POLITICSJanuary 8, 2019
      Tax Hikes or Tax Hypes? Both Sides Start The Spin Toward 2020 On Tax Politics
      Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) has reignited the debate over tax rates with her proposal a 70 percent top federal income tax rate.…

      93 Comments
      COLUMNS, MEDIA, POLITICS, SOCIETYNovember 8, 2018
      Politics By Other Means: Both Trump and Pelosi Suggest Using Investigations For Political Purposes
      Below is my column in The Hill newspaper on the mutual threats from Nancy Pelosi and Donald Trump to use…

      157 Comments
      BIZARRE, MEDIA, POLITICSOctober 8, 2018
      “I’m Just Glad We Ruined Brett Kavanaugh’s Life”: Colbert Writer Tweets Out A Celebration Of The Politics Of Personal Destruction

  6. Everyone deserves due process with a crime.

    Unfortunately, JT again demonstrates how prone he is to factual errors –

    “Before hearing the defense of now-Justice Kavanaugh, Cuomo described the allegations against him by Christine Blasey Ford as presumptively true. He not only effectively called Kavanaugh a rapist, without any due process, but demanded that Kavanaugh take a polygraph as a condition to be believed.”

    Blasey Ford didn’t accuse Kavanaugh of rape (only of assault where she feared she might be raped), so Cuomo wasn’t effectively calling Kavanaugh a rapist.

    “McCartney … suspended the janitor who called campus security, and ordered campus-wide training to deal with systemic racism. Kanoute reportedly published the names of the employees and one of their images, including one who was not even involved in the incident. All of the workers left Smith and were hounded as presumptive racists. … McCartney did not apologize”

    She suspended the janitor with pay while the claim was being investigated. He later resumed his job. The cafeteria worker left for health reasons. The cafeteria worker said that McCartney apologized privately to her.

    1. “Unfortunately, JT again demonstrates how prone he is to factual errors –“

      From what is written above one cannot say there were significant errors in what Turley wrote. In fact the comments made appear to be an attempt to minimize what Kanoute and the school did along with an attempt to marginalize the harm to others. The response sounds more like propaganda.

    2. Blasey Ford didn’t accuse Kavanaugh of rape (only of assault where she feared she might be raped), so Cuomo wasn’t effectively calling Kavanaugh a rapist.

      So it’s all good.

      People who profess to take Blasey Ford seriously assiduously refuse to ask themself the obvious question. Why is there no evidence (other than her claims) that she was ever in the same room with them two men she accused?

      1. Maybe because there were only three people in the room and no surveillance cams? I mean, it predated the web a little bit and Barty OK was just into drinking beer and not yet into the prospect of drinking beer and posting footage of his thrash kegger Mr. Happy dances online yet.

        EB

      2. There isn’t evidence of most people being in a room together decades ago, other than the claims of one or more people there. How odd that you assume there should have been additional evidence.

        There’s evidence that Blasey Ford told others about it years before Kavanaugh was nominated.

        1. Typical worthless comment. Her witnesses couldn’t testify on her behalf. Her psych records couldn’t be released. She lied about a number of things and the proof of some of those lies was demonstrated on this blog. Those lies were for her personal benefit and that is important.

          If you ever get something straight I think most of the blog will be shocked.

          1. The Republican majority wouldn’t allow Blasey Ford’s corroborating witnesses to testify and the FBI didn’t interview them.

            Here’s an example of a letter submitted by one of them to the Senate –
            https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CREC-2018-10-05/html/CREC-2018-10-05-pt2-PgS6635-2.htm

            As is typical for you, Allan, you assert things like “proof of some of those lies was demonstrated on this blog” without providing any evidence (no quotes from comments, no links to comments). You will likely now try to put the burden of proof for your claim on me, so I’ll point out in advance that you’re the one with the burden of proof for your claims.

            1. “The Republican majority wouldn’t allow Blasey Ford’s corroborating witnesses to testify and the FBI didn’t interview them.”

              That is BS. Ford was held in the background and used as a willing tool. A lot of what she had to say was held up as well. The Democrats were stringing all of this along and lost on virtually every important issue. Ford was a liar as were the Democrats that were involved. Her own witnesses refused to lie for her. There comes a point where one can’t keep stringing people along. The Democrats had their chance long before Ford’s name was known and then for weeks and weeks.

              Everything has to end and so did Ford. It’s stupid to believe otherwise.

  7. I suppose part of due process is just zipping it and letting things unfold to either being taken seriously or to let allegations drift off. But I know you have mandated talking points, Jon, so they clearly take precedence.

    EB

    1. I believe the two Attornies I have seen in this DT time and period are Profresors Jonathon Turley and Alan Derschowitz. I see them as having no bias in their analysis, just simplyy based on their legal principled beliefs. . Yet every post Prof Turley compiles, he is daily accused of being bias. Apparently, if it doesn’t fit the agenda of the reader, then he/she jumps in with their jaundiced bias postings

      1. Actually, nearly all the accusations come from Gainesville (under the three handles he uses) and Natacha.

            1. Anonymous, how many more times will you add such approval to EB and your own comments that aren’t worth it?

  8. re: being playful at work. Who knew that the Michael Scott character was based on Andrew Cuomo?

  9. There are a number of people who believe there is an effort to compromise Andrew Cuomo inside the Democratic party to clear the path for Kamala Harris for the 2024 nomination. it is believed that Barack Obama is playing a role. I think his record is already damaged enough that he will not obtain the nomination.

    1. I heard that viewpoint mentioned on a Sunday news show. It is believed by some that the once hopeful Andrew Cuomo is now expendable.

    2. Hey Physic: News bulletin to you.

      Kam will be POTUS by or before 12-31-2021.
      Of course, the real reason why Joe Biden won’t speak in unscripted settings is because he can’t.

      White House insiders say Biden can barely keep it together when he’s reading from the teleprompter.

      Recently, Biden gave remarks honoring the 500,000 lives lost from the Communist Chinese coronavirus when his brain short-circuited and he began muttering pure gibberish.

      This was a continuous issue during the campaign which, clearly, voters did not find all that concerning. Or, if they did, knew it was only a matter of time until Vice President Kamala Harris would replace him.

    3. Cuomo’s window was this past election — even before the harassment allegations broke.

      The dems have a stable of possibilities as the face of the party will get younger. Trump winning the repub nomination in ’24 sets that party back even further. He’s never won a popular vote and never cracked a 50% approval rating in office. Biden is more popular in his first month than trump ever was in his term. Trump, managed to lose the House, Senate and Presidency in one term, which is a feat only achieved previously by Herbert Hoover.

      Trump can’t win again, not only that he’ll be bogged down legally pretty much for the rest of his life. The only real place left for repub crazy is in the House as the demographic wave swallows up the party elsewhere. In the Senate Ossoff and Warnock put GA in a headlock and Stacey Abrams is the next governor there. Portman seat up for grabs in Ohio. Cruz on the way out in Texas.

      EB

          1. Not a fan, but if she were to run, Keisha would probably win – doesn’t have the heavy skunk-in-the-room political baggage Abrams has, comes across as reasonable and well-spoken, was an early Biden supporter,

  10. … so with all due respect what you are saying is that we continue to treat Leftists, Neo Marxists, aka Democrats differently than conservatives are treated by the MSM, Judiciary, and those that have consumed the Kool Aid…

    Isn’t that what has gotten this “Democracy” into trouble???

    … and has nearly allowed Neo Marxists to rule the air waves, print content, and Big (corrupt) Tech…

    Will Senator McCarthy please step forward…

    Your services are needed and a sweep of the country is necessary as the CCP has deeply infiltrated what was once a Democratic Republic, now run by Charlatans!!!

  11. Gee, I thought maybe JT was finally going to address the Capital Mob and his part in it’s creation by justifying the Voter Fraud Big Lie. He was spewing the nonsense about how a certain percentage of people believing in a flat earth meant we had to study it.

    1. Anon: There was voter fraud. Now that the suits have been filed, just remember the process called “Discovery”. Perhaps that door is to be fully opened, By the time this year of the :ides of March or a few days after, you will probably see some big disclosures. ( That would be March 15, 2021 to March 25, 2021).

      1. A small number of people were already arrested for voter fraud. No one disputes that. What sane people dispute is that it was widespread.

        We’re looking forward to discovery as much as you are. Are you also one of the people who insisted that Trump would be sworn in again on 1/20/21?

  12. I’m using Rumble more and more for video’s. I don’t know if today this video would be permitted on Youtube, but it is scary. Listen to Biden when the clips are shown and add what you learn to what you already know. Then think Cuomo was a strong future Presidential candidate. Kamala is VP ready to sit in Biden’s seat when he can’t get out of bed. This represents the Democrat party.

    “Ignored by Media: Joe Biden Is Completely LOST in Texas Even with Handler Nearby”

    https://rumble.com/ve7cjz-ignored-by-media-joe-biden-is-completely-lost-in-texas-even-with-handler-ne.html

    1. “Secret Service: Nationwide Silver Alert

      “If you see a doddering old fool, wearing an earpiece and calling himself ‘the president’ — please bring him to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue. Or to a Cuomo-run nursing home. Preferably the latter.”

  13. All of this reminds me of the Doonesbury cartoon, where Mark is screaming Guilty, guilty, guilty when talking about allegations about then-Attorney General John Mitchell. It was wrong then (albeit somewhat humorous) and is wrong now. Everyone, including Cuomo, is entitled to due process of law

      1. “What does due process of law involve when there is no court case?”

        Rule of law.

        I guess that isn’t taught to leftists or Democrats.

        Cuomo even had NY law changed so he and the ones around him could not be held liable for their part in killing nursing home patients. All of that seemed fine with you when he got his Emmy but now that there is a political reason to dump Cuomo, without anything new happening, the MSM and you along with Democrats and leftists have suddenly changed their opinion.

  14. The “mob” is a good term to describe those who stormed the Capitol on January 6, based on lies and conspiracy theories.

    It is not such a good term for the people who want workplace sexual harassers held to account.

  15. Inherently leftists and most Democrat leaders are dishonest. They do not gravitate to the rule of law for the rule of law interferes with their personal self-interest.

    I’m not a Democrat, but even in Cuomo’s case I call for due process.

    1. Inherently rightists and most Republican leaders are dishonest. They do not gravitate to the rule of law for the rule of law interferes with their personal self-interest.

      1. That is being totally dishonest. We listened to your applause of Cuomo while he was killing nursing home patients. We listened to you applauding the Emmy Cuomo won. That is evidence of the dishonesty of those on the left. Suddenly when not fashionable to support Cuomo the entire left and Democrat establishment turns against him. That demonstrates the distinct lock-step dishonesty of the left that has been repeated over and over again There is repeated widespread evidence of lock-step dishonesty as has been demonstrated on the blog.

        I don’t exclude the Republican party but on issues of conscience they don’t act in a lock-step fashion so one cannot apply the same comment to the Republican party in the same manner.

        1. Well stated, Neo Marxists and Leftists disguised (not so much anymore) as Democrats have made a mockery of their so called interest in the plight of the abused woman. That on top of their utter disdain of the woman in the sports arena that they now want competing with those that can call themselves a woman whenever the wind shifts…

          What a tangled web these hypocrites have been weaving…

        2. Actually, use of the term “lock-step” implies staying in step with, so using that metaphor in regard to a party’s seemingly sudden turn on a member doesn’t fit, S’Allan…

          It doesn’t fit the specifics of the situation and it exhibits a disjointed and non rational mind on your end.

          1. ” it exhibits a disjointed and non rational mind on your end.”

            Anonymous, the metaphor, lock-step, is perfect for the Democrat mindset that rigidly and mindlessly acts in unison. In addition it gives the added dimension of fascism or nazism which in some ways is similar to what we are seeing today. You are wrong about the definition. What else would we expect from one wrong about almost everything. Instead of my mind it tells us more about your mind that is so rigidly and mindlessly conforming to the leftist and Democrat talking points of the day. I can almost hear the click of your boots.

    2. “Of course, as Gov. Cuomo has learned, one can lead a mob one day only to be pursued by the mob on the next. It would be easy to leave him to the mob and call it poetic justice, but that is not justice of any kind. Cuomo should receive all of the due process he denied to others — not because he deserves it, but because he embodies the costs of ignoring it.”
      ***************
      Well, we’ve got accuser number three coming forward now and I’m all for Cuomo getting the due process he denied others and then eventual justice in our earthly realm. I’m just hoping for some cosmic justice too, for killing 15,000 seniors with policies no sane person can defend. I’ve lately started enjoying videos from people with near death experiences (including lots of nonreligious) describing in almost lockstep uniformity their visions of Hell. Fiery lakes, smoking sulfur and lots of screaming no, realty wailing going on among the damned. Take your sun screen and ear plugs in your coffin, Andy. You’ll need ‘em.

  16. It’s a reasonable wager that Cuomo is getting raked over the coals because factions in the Democratic Party want him out of the way. Those factions have their media auxilliaries. He’s a guilty man being subject to an orchestrated campaign to wreck his future prospects. Recall what Henry Kissinger had to say about the combatants in the Iran-Iraq War.

    I’ve spent 80% of my life in New York. New York’s voters in aggregate have themselves to blame for the quality of government in the state. Cuomo’s predecessor, David Patterson, was a passably decent man who gave some evidence of public-spiritedness (every other Governor we’ve had since 1982 has been by all appearances a stew of megalomania and sociopathy). At one point, Gov. Patterson’s approval ratings were running at about 17%. You despise quality but you put the likes of George Pataki and Andrew Cuomo in office, you get what you get. It’s the same in regard to the other statewide offices. Both U.S. Senate seats have since 2000 been occupied by people of low character and one of the two has been since 1980. The last state attorney-general who wasn’t a sketchy character left office in 1992. None of the state comptrollers who have held office since 1955 have had a background in accounting or finance and one of the more recent ones went to jail on corruption charges. Note, these two positions should be the redoubt of people drawn from the ranks of corporation counsels, prosecutors, accountants, and finance mavens. It’s political hacks with law degrees every time.

    1. We all know about Deco’s high standards of character. No doubt a high consideration for him before joining the Trump-cult.

      1. “We all know about Deco’s high standards of character. “

        I agree. Art Deco has excellent character and is honest.

        1. So far you and JF don’t have a good record against Art Deco. He comes out of the fray looking good.

  17. The Dems are fundamentally biased and unfair.

    Many Republicans are the same way, but there is a huge difference.

    The difference is that the Dems will claim virtue until the cows come home. They will consistently lie – both to us and to themselves about their hypocrisy.

    Just read some of the postings on this blog. Many of the posters are beneath contempt.

  18. Even as a conservative, who rejects the hateful identity politics and ad hominem attacks manufactured by the Democrat machine, it is a challenge to stay measured. I watched Democrats, with the Press as both their propaganda arm and executioner, destroy good people – Flynn, Page, Covington Catholic, Kavanaugh, Conway, and a multitude of conservatives – as if it was a zealot’s mission. And it hasn’t been just the last 4 years – it’s been 4 decades.

    Cuomo himself used his people and the American public as a cudgel against the Trump administration, which provided the lying Cuomo EVERYTHING he asked for: PPE, Hospital Beds, ventilators, vaccinations, etc. And the Press deified Cuomo and repeated his lies for months.

    Democrats are a visceral, hateful, rage-filled machine and conservatives have every right to play by the same rules. I wish it wasn’t true but if you voted for the Democrats who have filled our Congress, you must know that turnabout is fair play. I’d like to be the better person — but not yet.

    1. Starboard media has been banging the drums about the nursing home scandals in New York and Pennsylvania for about 10 months now. Cuomo’s problems have nothing to do with anything people like us are promoting. The Democratic media is after him for occult reasons. Not unjust, but with scant doubt none of it is in good faith.

      1. He was on the list of future Presidential candidates so they built him up. That he killed seniors, did a miserable job as governor, and is a spiteful man didn’t make a difference. He looked good to them at the time and could promote any interests without fear of their morality. I think forces, no better than him, find this an opportune time to get rid of a future competitor.

      2. This is an affirmative action play. They want the black AG lady to be the next governor. Watch and see how this plays out. Sal Sar

        1. Chuckles. That she’s in the attorney-general’s chair is testament to the willingness of New York voters to cast a ballot for any Democrat with a pulse beat. Note, she was a sometime public defender and legal aid lawyer hasn’t practiced in about 20 years. Between the time she received her law degree in 1987 and the time she was admitted to the bar in 1989, the New York Bar exam was administered on 3 or 4 occasions. North of 90% of those admitted to the bar in this country require just one or two attempts at the exam. As an attorney, she’s the dregs. (Her Republican opponent had 25 years under his belt as a working lawyer and was a partner in the firm of Ropes & Gray. He had better things to do with his life than run for office, but he ran. Again, when you despise quality, you get what you get. Alas, the sensible people in New York get it to).

          1. Well on NPR today some self appointed authority was saying she is very smart. This is the quality of goobermint radio these days.

Leave a Reply