Below is my column in The Hill on the Graham Platner controversy on the eighth anniversary of the Kavanaugh nomination. It now appears that there are some women who are not to be believed . . . when the Senate may be in the balance.
Here is the column:
“It’s clear the fix is in.” Those words from Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.). came with her vote against confirming Brett Kavanaugh to the Supreme Court. Warren was outraged that her fellow senators refused to believe a woman who came forward with a decades-old allegation against Kavanaugh that lacked any corroboration.
It now appears that Kavanaugh’s former accusers are making the case that he was treated unjustly at their hands. At least they are now willing to swap “Me Too” for Maine.
Warren’s words were part of a mantra from Democratic members that either you believe women about sexual harassment and assault, or you are enabling abusers.
It was almost exactly eight years ago, in July 2018, that President Trump nominated Kavanaugh to fill the seat of retiring Associate Justice Anthony Kennedy. Kavanaugh, who was at first a very uncontroversial nominee, suddenly became the target of a well-financed, well-orchestrated campaign that would continue to resonate in that fall’s election campaigns. At the time, your failure to accept the word of Christine Blasey Ford that Kavanaugh had assaulted her in high school was just proof that you and the system were sexist.
Long after the Senate confirmed Kavanaugh, the left continued to claim that his presence on the Supreme Court “rests on a mountain of misogyny.” In Ms. Magazine, actress Kathleen Turner reminded people that not believing women was furthering misogyny: “Survivors who come forward break the rules of silence a sexist society demands, and society expects them to pay a price.”
If you recall, the lack of evidence led to the Senate Judiciary Committee combing through Kavanaugh’s personal calendars. Denials that such a thing had ever happened, coming from childhood friends, were treated as still more evidence of sexism.
There was Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), who grilled Kavanaugh about using the term “boofing” (apparently referring to passing gas) with a high school friend as if it were a confession to a rape. His inquisitorial barrage was something straight out of the McCarthy period.
Whitehouse expressed disgust that some would not take Ford’s word for it, declaring, “Today I stand with women who are brave enough to come forward with their stories of abuse and mistreatment. They deserve to be heard and credible allegations must be investigated. We must believe survivors, not bully them.”
Whitehouse is now a major donor and supporter of Graham Platner, the leading Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate from Maine. He dismisses the New York Times accounts from women of Platner’s physically and mentally abusive behavior. Instead of believing these women, he reportedly attacked Lyndsey Fifield, who “bravely” came forward publicly with her story at the request of Times reporters.
Whitehouse is quoted as saying that he was “unimpressed” by the allegations and the multiple women coming forward “seems like a lot of nothing.” He suggested that he is not prepared to believe a woman if she is a conservative. “I mean, the only one who had anything to say that seemed ‘unsettling’ was a woman who works for right-wing political operations,” he said.
That attack was picked up by others like writer Krystal Ball. She too had denounced those who did not believe Ford in the Kavanaugh controversy. In the past, she claimed at that time, “women just didn’t come forward. They knew they wouldn’t be believed.”
Now she cannot imagine why anyone would believe these women, particularly Fifield. “NYT published uncorroborated accusations against [Platner] of ‘unsettling’ and ‘toxic’ behavior that came from a Heritage staffer who previously worked for a conservative org that backs Collins,” she posted online.
Fifield, after sharing stories with the Times of Platner’s alleged abusive behavior, went public to complain that the newspaper had failed to include the corroboration she had provided. She posted that the paper not only failed to include that she has supported Democrats for office, but also asked, “Why does it say ‘nobody could corroborate’ when I offered them sources that COULD corroborate?”
She added, “The Times also failed to include any mention that I DID confide in multiple friends through the years that Graham had been abusive — long before he was running for office. Those friends confirm they told the Times so.”
If true, that is a strikingly different approach from the one taken by the media in reporting on the Kavanaugh allegations.
All the familiar faces are now attacking or dismissing these allegations. That includes Rep. Ro Khanna (D-Calif.), who campaigned for Platner this week. Khanna had previously pounded his chest in public over the Kavanaugh allegations: “I believe Dr. Christine Blasey Ford.”
Some of the usual suspects are now quiet, and for good reason. Former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo (D) and former Rep. Eric Swalwell (D-Calif.) dismissed Kavanaugh’s claims of innocence but later resigned from their respective offices after accusations of misconduct and harassment.
Of course, the sexual misconduct and mistreatment of women is not the only controversy surrounding Platner, who has reportedly ridiculed a wounded veteran, dismissed rape victims, and made other comments on his since-deleted Reddit account about Blacks and rural Mainers that would be considered disqualifying for most candidates. He made many other posts that were deeply offensive and some that were, frankly, gross.
Nevertheless, figures like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) would not even address the allegations, simply repeating awkwardly, “We’re going to … take back the Senate.”
Back in 2018, Schumer was proclaiming on the Senate floor, “For too long, when women have made serious allegations of abuse, they have been ignored. That cannot happen in this case.”
For her part, Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) proclaimed her faith in any woman making such allegations in 2018. Now, she repeats, like Schumer, “I’m very optimistic we’re going to win Maine.”
In “A Man for All Seasons,” there is a scene where Sir Thomas More confronts Richard Rich, a former protege who lied in court to convict him in exchange for being named attorney general of Wales. As Rich passes by, More asks: “For Wales? Why, Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world … but for Wales!”
The response by Democratic leaders today appears to be, “Well, yeah — not for Wales, but we’ll do it for Maine.”
Jonathan Turley is a law professor and the New York Times best-selling author of “Rage and the Republic: The Unfinished Story of the American Revolution.“
Hillary actively defended Bill and sought to discredit the women who came forward.
During the 1990s, she notably characterized the allegations and the political fallout as a vast right-wing conspiracy.
Throughout her political career, particularly during her 2016 presidential run, her handling of these women drew significant scrutiny. Notable instances include: Paula Jones: Facing a sexual harassment lawsuit from the former Arkansas state employee, the Clinton camp deployed aggressive defense tactics. Hillary later admitted in her memoir, Living History, that she erred in opposing an early settlement.
Gennifer Flowers: In 1992, after Flowers alleged a long-running affair with Bill, Hillary publicly dismissed her as a “failed cabaret singer who doesn’t have much of a resume to fall back on”.
Monica Lewinsky: Hillary privately referred to Lewinsky as a “narcissistic loony toon” in discussions with former aides, according to leaked excerpts.
Juanita Broaddrick: Broaddrick alleged that Bill Clinton raped her in 1978, and later claimed that Hillary directly confronted and threatened her at an event shortly after the assault. Critics and accusers have frequently labeled Hillary as an “enabler”. When questioned about the #MeToo movement and her past defenses during a 2018 interview reported by Vox, she firmly stated that she did not believe her husband’s actions constituted an abuse of power and rejected calls for him to resign.
We should expect nothing less from these degenerate, lying, criminal infested, conspiring thugs.
Quote: “It now appears that there are some women who are not to be believed…”
As others here have observed, we learned that with Bill Clinton and his “bimbo explosions.” Over twenty women, as I recall, and every one was viciously abused and vilified by the Democrats and their captive media. Even Kathleen Willey, who was about as credible a witness as can be imagined.
None of that mattered. Clinton was on the right team. And he’s never been held to account or brought to justice. Two-tiered justice.
That is because the left wing of the Democrat party ( is there any other at this point) is Borg. The objective is to absorb all cultures and all power eliminating individuality in the name of collective success.
In our life times the Nazis and Communists have practiced this. But only modern Democrats have pursued it as ruthlessly as we see it happening now.
What is amazing to me is that after decades, indeed, centuries, indeed millenia, we still are unable to manipulate our genetic DNA to create recombinants that could eliminate tribalism, once intended for specie survival, but now used for political survival and dominance.
I agree wholeheartedly!!!
The tribalism of the MAGA cult is the most corrosive influence on mankind in all of recorded history.
nonny, you appear incapable of comprehending the thrust of Turley’s piece. Is that why you post anonymously?
ROFL
Lin notes that tribalism is in our DNA – but not just ours, but most mammals.
It is not going away. It is a valuable survival tool.
Human interactions require Trust.
Trust is build on common ground.
We inherently trust our family, our tribe, those who share things with us – even superficial things – more than those who do not.
We do this until we have more individual specific basis to trust or distrust someone.
If that was not genetic – we would create it.
The question is not why are humans tribal, but why do left wing nuts remain attached to a tribe that is a bloody failure.
And you dont think mutilation of children, chemical castration, the state interferring with a parents rights to be informed of their child’s well being is not corrosive? Biological males in women’s bathrooms or locker rooms is not corrosive? In women’s sports denying them awards, records, even scholarships is not corrosive? Drag queen story hour with men dressed like . . . something, twerking in front of very young children is not corrosive?
Platner’s comments about what he does in a port-o-potty is not corrosive? How about his behavior towards women?
“For Wales? Why, Richard, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world … but for Wales!” My favorite quote from any play, perfectly appropriate here.
Come on Man – reformed NAZI’s that get a little rough with the ladies and tell you to ‘suck it up’ if you don’t like it is going to be a raving success for Maine Dumbocrats in Washington DC! Arrive as a poor oysterman and after indoctrination on insider trading he should be wealthy in spite of the little kerfuffle about the NAZI symbolism and lovin on the ladies! Should be able to call it a career after a few election wins like MTG did with a nice nest egg.
A more relevant question is how did Democrats in Maine get themselves to this position ?
Does anyone Doubt that the DNC would greatly prefer a candidate other than Platner right now ?
That if Mill and others were still in the race they would be asking Platner to drop out ?
John Say,
I asked a similar question: This guy is the best they could come up with?
IIRC, Mills was considering getting into the race.
Bottom line: Sheldon Whitehouse, Liz Warren, Chuck Schumer, Bernie Sanders, Ro Khanna and Kirsten Gillibrand will even back a Nazi perv in order to gain power. That says it all.
NAILED IT.
Anyone with two brain cells to rub together knew the dems were full of sh** at the time, this was the party of Clinton before Obama. That was actually the final straw for me, and possibly many others, after Nancy ripped up the speech.
Theater driven by sociopathy. The dems don’t care who gets hurt so long as at the end they are in charge, but they’ve gone from being akin to mafiosos to being the Manson Family in record time.
Sheldon Whitehouse is the most reliable “tell” we have. Anything he supports has got to be bad for humans. Chuckie, Elizabeth and the others are pretty reliable too, but Sheldon never fails.
Many years ago Whitehouse was interviewed about a so called “carbon tax”. The interviewer framed the question expressing some concern about the magnitude of the proposed tax. Estimated at $1 TRILLION annually. I will never forget how excited Whitehouse got. He could barely contain his excitement. With a big smile on his face he said something to the effect of, ‘yeah $1 trillion is a lot of money, but just imagine how much good we can do with another $1 trillion a year.’
Nothing about how it would somehow “improve” the climate. But how much good the government could do with another $ trillion.
That sealed the deal for me that the so called “climate crisis” was just another giant redistributionist money grab.
Ask Al Gore.
Bush stole the election, said Gore and his acolytes. Now nobody trusts elections in the U.S.
Creekan
Gore also said the polar ice caps were melting and Florida and New York would be underwater. Only the same dimwits listen to man pig bear words of wisdom.
When commenting about Democrats, particularly Democrat politicians, it never gets old to note: if hypocrisy did not already exist, they would invent it at breakfast if only to survive until lunch. Why people continue to vote for their treachery remains a mystery. Oh …, wait …, perhaps it’s TDS…?
No, it is not TDS. It existed long before Trump appeared on the scene. “Why people continue to vote for their treachery remains a mystery.” Not a mystery to me. Reason #1 is that millions of voters believe them when they say they are “for the little guy”, aka the 60% of America that struggles to make ends meet. Those voters include many of the other 40%, viz., those who are well-educated and comfortable, but who have a guilt complex that controls their brain. Reason #2 is that most voters are simply stupid and the dems and the teachers unions do their best to keep them that way.
… insightful comments ….
“No, it is not TDS. It existed long before Trump appeared”
Most forgot GWB. Charles Krauthammer, M.D., a psychiatrist, coined the term, Bush Derangement Syndrome. “the acute onset of paranoia in otherwise normal people in reaction to the policies, the presidency—nay—the very existence of George W. Bush.”
https://www.heraldnet.com/2003/12/04/bush-derangement-syndrome-is-beginning-to-spread/
We didn’t have an RDS, but the left similarly went after Regan, though today many on the left who did so swear they voted for Reagan. Wiseoldlawyer has some wonderful points.
It wasn’t called RDS at the time, and it wasn’t quite as severe, but I do recall RDS in people I knew. It had many of the same symptoms. My parents even had NDS (Nixon Derangement Syndrome) in the early 1970s.
Adolf Hitler experienced combat, and had PTSD. Hitler was an economic populist with massive support among the population. He portrayed himself as a man of the people who had experienced struggles, and a dark period in his life. Hitler missed out on getting a Totenkopf chest tattoo, though.
Ok. So Hitler had PTSD. What’s the excuse for the millions of other Germans and Europeans who went along with his genocidal madness?
Mainer supporters of thst sort and their like-mindedDemocrat minions across the nation,are wet sacks of moral and ethical turpitude. but we’ve known that all along haven’t we. The corruption within the Clinton campaign of 2016, the detritus of the train wreck of a Biden administration, and that wretched corrupt son of his merely Reinforces it in our memories. “A constitutional republic, if you can keep it.“
I think the term here is hypocrisy. Just as Pres. Clinton got a pass for his sexual transgressions, I suppose Mr. Platner will get a pass from his supporters. Of course if incriminating photos appear that might be different. One can even blow those off as AI. People lie, Women lie, Men lie, families lie, spouses lie. Sit in a physician’s office for 46 years and you will hear some real stories and lies. Like everything else you have to see the context, the timing, the secondary gain that might be obtained., The state court in NY rode one of the thinnest stories I have ever seen to convict Mr. Trump of sexual assault.
I have no idea whether Mr Platner is guilty of these transgressions but that is for the voters of Maine to figure out, one way or another. Hope they get it right.
I have a female colleague who is a psychologist and she strongly felt that Christine Blasey Ford was lying. I felt the story was suspect but my colleague was one of the best Psychologists I worked with and so I asked her opinion and her response was stronger than mine.
Also wonder why the NY Times left out so much corroboration (according to other news sources) You don’t suppose they have some viewpoint bias?
GEB the question is not whether Platner is “Guilty” but what exactly is he guilty of.
He has admitted infidelity and poor judgement. But the allegations include sexual assault and even pedophilia.
“GEB the question is not whether Platner is “Guilty” but what exactly is he guilty of.”
The question is: based on what is on the table, should the people consider him a viable candidate? Would anyone proceed with cardiac surgery by a surgeon whose credentials were suspect?
100%, GEB! One word “hypocrisy” says it all!
👏👏👏👏👏
The other thing you will see here today is the whatabout routine. Instead of dealing with Platner or what their own leaders are doing, some will immediately reach for “what about Trump” or “what about [insert Republican here]” as if pointing at other allegations somehow cleans up these ones.
That move does not defend a principle; it only defends a jersey. It is a way to own the hypocrisy instead of owning the standard. And in the process it trains people to believe that unproven accusations against their enemies count as “evidence,” while even well‑sourced reports about their allies are waved away. That is not moral reasoning; it is pure team sport, and it is exactly how you form citizens who can no longer tell the difference.
You’re right in that this isn’t a proud moment for Democrats. They are demonstrating a hypocrisy seemingly inherent in all politicians. They have little right to claim the moral ground. I was picking up some chicken wings late one afternoon from a local bar my wife and I sometimes go to for dinner. A white guy with a New England Patriots polo shirt sat next to me as I waited. I thought he might have been the same gut who sent my wife and I a drink as I was wearing a Ravens jersey and New England had just beaten Baltimore. I asked him what he thought New England was going to do about their head coach who was caught up in a sex scandal. He searched for a good answer and finally said, “I guess people just don’t care anymore.” Doing the right thing didn’t extend to getting rid of a winning coach, nor does it extend to Democrats hoping to retake the Senate.
I can’t defend the hypocrisy of Democrats in this instance, but in defense of the “whatabout routine” you mentioned. What entitles the people here (and Turley) to make Democrats the scapegoats while ignoring Trump, Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas, Jim Jordan, Matt Gaetz, and many more. The holier than thou attitude here is laughable.
🤔 enigma, “that is a lucid, intelligent, well thought‑out comment.
Overruled…” for the last paragraph. 😆
Just like the judge in My Cousin Vinny had no legal basis to overrule Vinny, On what basis can you ignore the at least equivalent behavior of those you have to ignore to claim the moral ground? I’m not talking about you, but those who lump all Democrats together in a moral abyss while clinging to serial adulterers, and those who at minimum are protecting pedophiles.
Might have something to do with all the dumbocrats violence and statements of destroying our current system to favor their murderous reign over humanity?
They don’t discuss that in My cousin vinny law school.
EB – The left gets lumped together into a moral abyss – because they belong their – entirely independent of sex scandals.
You ideology justifies the use of FORCE against others to try (and fail) to do positive Good. That is a moral abyss.
Turley is specifically attacking those democrats specific democrat leaders who tell us “beleive all women” out of one side of their mouth, and “do not beleive Fifeild” out of the other.
Republicans do not do that. Are republicans gleefull about Democrat scandals. And some are saying “I beleive this accuser, or that one”
But Republicans have not engaged in this “Beleive all women, but not ones accusing our team” nonsense.
Worse still – #metoo was a flash in the pan. Pretty much all the prominent figures who were engaged in misconduct are back as if nothing happened.
Republicans do not do that. Are republicans gleefull about Democrat scandals. And some are saying “I beleive this accuser, or that one”
But Republicans have not engaged in this “Beleive all women, but not ones accusing our team” nonsense.
You’re right in that Republicans have continually believed no women. You must be proud.
This is not about serial adultery. While you are free to vote based on a candidates fidelity to their wives.
We are long past infidelity being a crime.
If all that existed regarding Platner is accusations – even proof of infidelity – he would be fine.
As to the rest – Pedophiles should go to jail – those on the left and those on the right.
Those of you on the left should quit trying to sexualize children – because that absolutely WILL lead to Pedophilia, whether that is your intention or not.
Those who are violent – with women – or anyone – should be held accountable. Regardless of party.
Voters should hold candidates accountable for LEGAL conduct – because those engaged in illegal conduct should be prosecuted.
Who is it exactly, that has kept 3 million Epstein Files from being released?
Give it up En
Biden did zip when it came to Epstein Files. Sure didn’t help when many dems names kept popping up.
If you libs had some kind real dirt on Trump. It would have been front page news.
Talk about beating a dead horse.
Trump, Kavanaugh, Clarence Thomas, Jim Jordan, Matt Gaetz are holier than all your thous.
What exactly did Kavanaugh do? Your comment was pretty good (for you) but of course your partisan blindness kicked in and you equated the asinine accusations against Kavanaugh with the Maniac’s actions.
30 year old accusations with ZERO corroboration and ZERO contemporaneous evidence vs what the NY Times outlined against the ME creep is just dumb. Plus the Clarence Thomas told a dirty joke garbage is ridiculous too.
You touched on something you can actually blame Biden for. There were four women prepared to testify against Thomas, but Biden blocked three of them, he was always trying to get along with the Republican Senators.
You are so full of it.
________________________
During the 1991 Supreme Court confirmation hearings for Clarence Thomas, then-Senator Joe Biden, who chaired the Senate Judiciary Committee, did not call three other women prepared to testify in support of Anita Hill. The other women were prevented from testifying live before the committee due to a combination of time constraints, a private agreement among committee members, and doubts about the testimony’s admissibility.
You said zip about the other women who worked with Thomas. They all said he was a good person and nothing like what Anita Hill claimed.
What was asinine at the Kavanaugh hearing was Kavanaugh’s elevated reaction to the accusations. He displayed a striking lack of judicial temperament like that Pocatello stomper recently exposed. I like beer, do you, Sen. Klobuchar? (No, her father was an alcoholic, and she knows one when she sees one.)
“You’re right in that this isn’t a proud moment for Democrats. They are demonstrating a hypocrisy seemingly inherent in all politicians. They have little right to claim the moral ground. ”
I would agree. But the Point of Turley’s article is NOT Platner’s alleged conduct – but the double standard of Democrats other than Platner himself.
It is those – Particularly leading democrat women who tell us – “Beleive all women” One moment and this is a political hit job, the next.
Republicans do NOT do this in the same way as Democrats do.
The Media is anchored to the Platner allegations – that is just how the media works. Sexual misconduct Allegations make the news regardless of the inherent left Bias in the media.
But Platner is NOT the real story – the allegations against him will either Fade or strengthen over time.
The Actual story – at least Turley’s story is the reaction of the Democrat party – particularly those leaders who told us all that Women making allegations MUST be believed.
Are republicans reveling in this mess – absolutely, it is always fun to see the other team make an own goal.
But with few exceptions Republican leaders are NOT saying “Beleive all women”
Republican leaders are mostly quiet – waiting and seeing.
In reality some people behave violently to others. And some people lie – even telling big lies.
Each of us has to work out with each claim what we think the truth is.
Many of us will do that informed primarily by ideology.
But alot of us will “wait and see” what the facts are.
I would separately note – all “sex scandals” are not alike.
Planter will survive with minimal impact if this is just – infidelity and being a horn dog.
But if the credible allegations of force and pedophila develop more substance – Platner is toast.
And that is as it should be.
Clinton survived his sex scandals because the were successfully spun as consensual infidelity.
Reality appears to be somewhat different.
Trump has survived for much the same reasons.
Regardless ALL these allegations – whether of Democrats or Republicans are NOT the same and are NOT equally credible.
Each has to be evaluated on its merits – not on the Politics of those involved.
I didn’t miss Turley’s point that Democrats other than Platner are drowning in hypocrisy. My point is that the people throwing stones are as bad if not worse. Trump has been found liable for sexual assault, been a serial adulterer, and paid women to be silent, hundreds if you ask Steve Bannon. You know who he is and don’t care. Republicans are doing all they can to protect those in the Epstein Files. Trump is in the files being accused by a 13- or 14-year-old of rape. Melania has now been accused by Amanda Ungaro of having been an escort and trafficked to Trump by Epstein. That would make Trump a john by the way. Compare those charges to anyone else.
Trump is in the files being accused by a 13- or 14-year-old of rape.
__________________________
Any proof…
ZIP!
Any proof that he’s in the files being accused by a 13-14-year-old? Absolutely! That might have been something worth investigating.
https://factually.co/fact-checks/justice/trump-allegations-13-year-old-rape-epstein-files-bebbd1
As you likely won’t consider any source I provide, I encourage you to look this up yourself, one source, of course, is the EPSTEIN FILES!
Enigma, you need to go to an insane asylum. There you can gather all the proof you wish. What you are doing is placing untrue statements alongside true statements and sorting them based on whether they are for or against Trump. That ought be beneath your intellectual abilities but unfortunately that is how you present yourself.
I suggest you use “the shoe on the other foot” approach and discard the garbage. Try carrying the thought to the end and switching the shoe from one foot to the other.
It’s a true statement that an allegation of a woman exists in the Epstein Files claiming Trump forced her to have oral sex with him when she was 13-14 years old. She went on to say that she bit Trump and he struck her. That is in the Files whether you like it or not.
I only made statements that are in the record about Trump. He’s a serial cheater (ask any of his wives), I could have added his first wife accused him of rape in a deposition, he has had over twenty accusations against him of sexual abuse and harassment, he’s used his position to walk thru the dressing rooms of teenage beauty contestants in various stages of undress, Why would I have to make up anything about Donald Trump, whose best friends have included Jeffrey Epstein and John Casablancas (both pedophiles) and we’ve all heard from his own mouth say you can do anything to women if you’re a star.
“It’s a true statement that an allegation of a woman exists in the Epstein Files claiming Trump forced her to have oral sex with him when she was 13-14 years old. “
Enigma, I trust you on that, but that is not the question. Is it meritorious? That is what you have to deal with, and the answer to that question is a solid no. If you can provide solid legal evidence, I will join you in calling for his arrest, the gathering of evidence, and his conviction if it is proven true. We all know that high-profile individuals are prone to untrue claims of this type, and both of us have to protect society from such claims.
I remember when Bill Clinton was President, and they wanted to impeach him. Yes, he did some things I didn’t approve of, but they were not relevant to how he carried out his presidential duties. They said he lied: ‘I did not have sex with that woman,’ again not relevant. I fought republicans on that issue, and he was not convicted, though he did lose his law license. I am not sure he should have, but my voice doesn’t count.
You are very emotional, but I don’t see why you need to stoop to the level of George Svelaz X. He does not have your intelligence, if he has any at all. Yet you foolishly said Trump was a racist because his father, Fred Trump, was arrested at a KKK march 20 years before Donald Trump was born. The one-sided facts you presented were mostly untrue or highly questionable, as proven by the data I presented to the blog. You need to stay away from such hyperbole for good people to hear what you are saying.
You have some valid complaints when not laced with hyperbole, and some of them are true, but the hyperbole, like my Trump example, pollutes all your valid arguments. We need tempered voices on this blog and in discussion. I hope you decide to join.
I’ll deal with all your arguments in this post and others if you want to approach the discussion in a non-emotional manner.
Fortunately, I don’t have to rely on your interpretation of what I said about Trump and his father. I call him racist because of his oiwn actions and words. Here is what I said:
“Donald Trump has tried to tie or at least suggest the possible involvement of Ted Cruz’s father in the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. The “evidence” is a grainy group picture that includes Lee Harvey Oswald and allegedly Pablo Cruz taken sometime in 1963.
I have listened to Pablo Cruz speak and much of the more righteous than thou attitude of Ted… he got it from his papa. There is much to find fault with in the positions of both Ted and his father and how they wish to impose their beliefs on the rest of us. There is nothing about that picture what will influence my thoughts about either in 2016, whether Pablo Cruz was actually in it or not. I turn instead to look at his primary accuser.
It is said that if you live in glass houses you shouldn’t throw stones. Did Donald forget that his father was actually arrested along with others following a violent confrontation with police at a KKK rally in New York? Despite Donald’s claims that it never happened. It was published contemporaneously in the New York Times before Donald was born and before Fred became a big local developer. They listed Fred’s home address and there is no chance of mistaken identity. One might reasonably wonder which side he was on and whether he was just caught up in the wrong place at the wrong time? Then one finds that all seven men were represented by the same attorney which kind of places him with his Klan brethren.
Much like Ted’s attitudes reflect those of his father. Donald has engaged in discriminatory housing practices for which he was sued by and ultimately settled with the Federal government. His own words about Muslims, Mexicans, “the Blacks”, women, LBGT, Asians and almost everyone except white males say more than I could say about him.
In fairness, I’d like to cite Donald Trump’s response to a 2015 interview about his father’s arrest.
“He was never arrested. He has nothing to do with this. This never happened. This is nonsense and it never happened,” Trump said about his father in the September 2015 article. “This never happened. Never took place. He was never arrested, never convicted, never even charged. It’s a completely false, ridiculous story. He was never there! It never happened. Never took place.”
If you’ve ever witnessed Donald’s casual relationship with the truth, you can then decide upon his ability to deny an event that preceded his birth. Pablo and Ted Cruz, Fred and Donald Trump. Like father like son?”
https://enigmainblack.wordpress.com/2016/05/03/the-sins-of-the-fathers/
Enigma, that is what you wrote and sanitized on your blog. I recall mentioning that on one issue, perhaps the one presently under discussion. I even demonstrated a time change at the time. I gave you the chance to fix what you wrote, but you doubled and then tripled down, making your statement indelible. You have freedom of speech, so you can rewrite history any way you want, but your history on the blog says it all.
Did you even know this was the annual Queens Memorial Day parade that was close to his house? It’s telling you never mentioned that. The KKK demonstration was a countermarch, and Fred was swept up while the police cleared the streets. That is why he was immediately let go without charges or a fine. You should also know Fred wasn’t on the Klan’sregistry. Fred, if it was Fred, was swept up as an onlooker, as occurred with many bystanders. The shared attorney of the seven, not individually Trump, at the time was customary in mass arrests.
I provided a ten-year-old blog which you say I sanitized, presumably because of your criticisms but before I knew of your existence. Now I’m “too emotional” to have a discussion with. I have no problem calling Trump a racist, I guess that’s what people who have ancestors in “shithole countries” do. I could make the case it’s likely Trump began his racism in the home, but racism isn’t inherited, it’s learned.
How can you say, “if it was Fred”? Of course there was another Fred Trump with the same home address, but Donald’s brother wasn’t born for another decade so we can probably rule him out. Maybe some stranger was walking around with Fred’s ID? He couldn’t have been just sent on his way because he required a lawyer, the one he shared with his six Klan fellows. And you’re suggesting it couldn’t have been Fred because he wasn’t current on his dues?
I understand Donald’s desperation to claim Fred wasn’t a member of the Klan. Why are you in denial?
We have gone down these roads many times and, as you say, these discussions occurred a long time ago. That is why I said I couldn’t remember which one of your blog posts was the one I proved you sanitized. I remember you altering your other blog during our argument on this blog, trying to sanitize it.
“Now I’m “too emotional” to have a discussion with: ‘I have no problem calling Trump a racist.’”
That is precisely your problem. You are so emotional that you fabricate narratives, like when you argued over numerous posts that Trump was a racist in part because his father was arrested at a KKK march (which was actually an annual Queens Memorial Parade the KKK took advantage of) 20 years before Donald Trump was born. That statement was outright absurd, driven by your inability to control your emotions. Fred Trump, according to your logic, supported the KKK, though he was charitable to the very Jews the KKK hates, and no evidence existed of his having sympathies with the KKK. Enigma, you are ridiculous!
You are concerned about whether it was actually Fred Trump. I don’t take issue with him being there, though contemporary reports questioned his presence. I’ll accept he was if you say so, but your statements are not based on truth. They are based on ridiculous accusations and conclusions manufactured to convict Donald Trump of racism close to a century later. Yes, your emotions are running the show, and you are unable to look at the facts.
Thank you for reminding me about this article which was ten years ago and only appeared on WordPress when I was just starting out and never appeared on Medium and Substack where I do have a meager audience. I wouldn’t want anyone to be deprived of the knowledge of Fred’s arrest and Donald’s denial he was there. Maybe you can look in the Klan registry you have access to and get Fred’s former lawyer to sue me. You’ll have to excuse me now; this has all been so emotional for me and I have to go.
“I wouldn’t want anyone to be deprived of the knowledge of Fred’s arrest and Donald’s denial he was there.“
You feel that way and will lie to provide out-of-context information, forgetting all the evidence that shows you are all wet and slimy. Imagine accusing a man of racism only when he runs against the Democrat Party, despite the fact that many of his views were held by people like JFK, and the evidence is that Fred Trump was near his home during the annual Queens Memorial Parade, interrupted by the KKK, where he was swept up along with others.
Why would anyone want to sue a foolish person who can’t get his facts straight and only impugns his own credibility?
Be careful, you’re sounding a tad emotional there.
https://medium.com/@williamspivey/ten-years-ago-i-wrote-about-fred-trumps-klan-arrest-i-thought-it-worthy-of-recycling-c5497e0dc1ad
https://williamspivey.substack.com/p/ten-years-ago-i-wrote-about-fred
Enigma, I leave the emotion and fabrications to you.
FYI, the article you inspired is really taking off on Substack, Medium takes longer to see results. About half my Medium posts get picked up by Level and then half of those go to MSN where they really get traction. I should thank you for pushing this story.
Your welcome, Enigma. Posting lies leads to increased clicks. I’ll stick to the truth and leave the lies to you.
No need to lie when the truth will suffice.
Enigma, if you feel that way you should first correct your errors. Start wherever you wish. There are plenty of corrections for you to make.
Re: “What entitles the people here (and Turley) to make Democrats the scapegoat…” Perhaps its because it’s their turn in the barrel, they know what will be expected of them, and should find a way out before it sucks to be in there.
Maybe we should ask Bill Clinton about this. I’m sure he knows the ins & outs.
Anyone see his missing cigar?
The El Vulva Cohiba? Or the Johnson y Monique?
You stupid F.
You poor child. Did mommy take your (Binky) away when you turned 18 years old.
haha TDS inflammation today? That why you’re here? TDS acting up and need to let out some of that on-brand dumocrat rage?
Love it!
El Clinton Peyronie! Curved for extra flavor!
An unmentioned factor is that Platner is, for the Democrats, what they had hoped Tim Walz would be: a he-man. While Tim showed us his he-man attributes by changing the air filter on his truck, Platner, they believe, could give it a tune-up. This translates to man votes. They love his baritone voice and take-command language, even though his past is riddled with misogyny, questionable associations, and parental help in finances.
@gdonaldallen
Respectfully, in 2026, only if one is irretrievably stupid. And if the dems think they are somehow appealing to Independents or Conservatives, hoo boy. What remains is the pool that would’ve voted for plankton if it was blue, anyway.
All the modern left know are stereotypes, because all the modern left know are their own closed feedback loop and stereotypes based on it. Original, creative thoughts and novel ideas are anathema to them. No amount of lying or faking it will cure this, intrinsically.
dumbocrats trying out some masculinity but unfamiliar with the concept, they found an actual sterotypical toxic male.
Platner matches how dumbocrats view the average man.
gdonaldallen,
Makes me question the kind of people who would vote for him. After the NYT report was posted, Platner raised $200,000 that afternoon from about 5,000 people, averaging $40 each.
For awhile there, we kept hearing about “toxic masculinity!” This guy seems like a text book example. I am disgusted he is a US Marine.
It’s hard for Democrats to be consistent when they have no morals at all.
There is a different kind of consistency at work here, and X is about to prove it. When he enters this thread, as he reliably does, it will be to oppose whatever Professor Turley has written, to excuse the double standard, and to double down on the jersey flip. That is a kind of consistency too, but it runs in exactly the wrong direction: not toward principle, but toward defending the team no matter how far the hypocrisy goes.
The double standard is apparently on the part of Turley who excused the accusations against Kavanaugh and now finds similar accusations as evidence.
Frankly, eliminating sexual assaulters from government is a good idea, but the Republicans and their double standards went with a guy who bragged that he could sexually assault any woman because of his position. Whether he had actually done so or not, the idea that he expressed that he could is reprehensible and should have been disqualifying. Instead it became a source of admiration by Republican voters that he could do that.
But here we are. Complaining about what is happening Maine and ignoring the snoring guy with the nuclear codes.
Huh
The term “spin doctors” arose during the Clinton Administration. Paul Begala and Kirsten Powers come to mind.
They are being consistently amoral. Hypocrite, thy name is Democrat.
Nothing new, as Ecclesiastes tells us. Tara Reade? Douglas Emhoff’s girlfriends? Juanita Broderick? And the beat (ings) go on…
This is the purest kind of jersey flip: the principle never really mattered, only the uniform did. That move does more than expose hypocrisy; it actively forms people. When citizens watch leaders treat “believe women” as absolute against Kavanaugh and negotiable for Platner, they learn that standards are temporary and team dependent. Over time, you don’t just get partisan double standards in Washington; you get citizens who instinctively ask not what is true or just, but whether the accusation helps their side.
Truer words. A sad state of affairs we are in.
The hypocrisy of the American left is truly stultifying. But it’s not just the hypocrisy, but the truly malign nature of it all. In the case of Kavanaugh, it was ginning up people who were very clearly not credible — and very transparently lying — to carry our character assassination of a nominee (whom one of their own later sought to truly assassinate once he became a Justice, but that doesn’t appear to be such a big deal to these people). In this case, all you need to do is to look at the guy’s own written and spoken communication, his own images, and his wife’s own admissions. The guy is a scumbag, but since he’s the left’s scumbag, he must be squeaky clean. Give us all a break.
Given there are only 100 US Senators in a country of 350 million people it’s disgusting this scumbag could a be in a position of influence and power
If Platgner did what he is accused of – he should be in jail.
If Kavanaugh did what he is accused of he should be in Jail.
If Trump did what he is accused of – he should be in jail.
If Swalwell did what he is accused of – he should be in jail.
The key question is what did they actually do ?
It is clear that allegations of sexual impropriety are being politically weaponized.
It is also clear that sometimes they are true, and sometimes they are not.
You can as many – particularly those on the left decide purely on a partisan basis,
Or you can try to discern the truth from the available facts and claims.
So you said a whole bunch of nothing. Congratulations
You left out Clinton the serial harasser and perjurer.
Anonymous – while I generally agree with you – we must still divorce Politics from accusations and facts.
The accusations against Kavanaugh were antique, lacked clarity, and detail sufficient to critically examine them.
That’s what they said essentially