Some people just like classic Coke. Others insisted on the original Reese’s recipe. New York Times writer Jodi Kantor went on CNN to explain why Democrats can vote for Maine senatorial candidate Graham Platner despite multiple women coming forward to denounce him: this is really not the classic Me Too allegations that Kantor and others seem to prefer for outrage.
Kantor won a Pulitzer Prize for her reporting on Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein’s sexual abuse and was called forth by CNN to explain why it is ok for liberals to support an alleged abuser of women. A prior girlfriend has accused Platner of physically abusing her and even locking her into a room overnight. He is also accused of sexting women and dismissing rape victims.
None of that, however, necessarily presents a barrier for those who want to retake power by any means necessary.
Kantor clinically explained that these “are not classic MeToo accusations.” Specifically, “they’re not about a boss and a young female employee being subjected to sexual advances. They were mostly made in the context of consensual relationships. There are these, like, very sensational texts about sex. There are allegations from former girlfriends that are not — the way my colleagues reported them were not like classic abuse allegations,” she stressed.
In a statement that would have produced a torrent of condemnations if used during the Kavanaugh controversy, Kantor insisted that “they were mostly like being his boyfriend gave me a view into him and I did not like what I saw. His character was scary. He had this Nazi tattoo. Et cetera.”
In fairness to Kantor, she was attempting no small feat: to allow liberals to continue to claim Me Too outrage while grabbing Maine.
Of course, Kantor quickly brushes over the other controversies beyond the abuse allegations as simply a Nazi tattoo. She omits his mocking of a wounded veteran, rural people, and rape victims while praising Hamas and embracing communism.
However, her diminishing of the account of women like Lyndsay Fifield as “they were mostly like being his boyfriend gave me a view into him and I did not like what I saw.”
What Fifield alleges that she “saw” were marks left on their body after being yanked and grabbed by Platner. In one case, she claimed “he twisted her arm behind her back, shoved her into a bedroom and held the door closed from the other side so she couldn’t get out, telling her to remain there until she was ‘calm.’”
Kantor seems to begrudgingly acknowledge that “there was one allegation of crossing a line physically, but I think that means that these are pretty different accusations than, say, the one that — the ones that President Trump faced.”
Previously, Kantor did not draw this distinction between classic Me Too and new knockoffs involving non-employment situations. She once grouped a wide variety of controversies from Al Franken to Brett Kavanaugh to Jeffrey Epstein under the banner:
“it felt like there was this period where discussion of #MeToo was actually pretty bipartisan. Democrats like [Sen.] Al Franken were accused, but so were Republicans, like [Alabama Judge] Roy Moore. And also, a lot of these stories played out in the corporate arena, which is not particularly political. But the Kavanaugh hearings almost felt in a way like a return to an older pattern, like a return to a pattern that we saw with the allegations against Bill Clinton, Clarence Thomas, and Donald Trump. Those are scenarios in which the allegations take on all of the heat and the poison of American political life. And in those stories, it turns into a holy war very, very quickly and can almost feel like it’s not even about the women anymore.
…The #MeToo movement has proven so durable and so self-correcting. I think there was a moment after the Kavanaugh hearings where it all just felt like it had become impossibly politicized, to the point where it was almost preventing constructive conversation.
Ironically, Kantor’s rationalization returns to the very partisan “older pattern” that she once denounced in how allegations from women are treated in the media.
In rationalizing the Platner support, Kantor was obviously singing to the choir on CNN. Democratic figures like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and Sen. Elizabeth Warren celebrated his securing the nomination.
Yes, he may be a rape-mocking, sex-texting, Hamas-praising, Nazi-tattooed, veteran-abusing, self-proclaimed communist. However, he will return them to power.
Other media figures, like The View co-host Sunny Hostin, have added their own rationalization for choosing power over principle. She has declared that he is “a liar, a racist, an antisemite, and a homophobe.” However, he is still better than voting for a moderate Republican woman. This week, Hostin explained:
“let’s be strategic, let’s get some power, let’s take over the Senate, let’s take over the House and let’s right the ship. Let’s get our country back…I am sorry, I am someone that believes in character, I am someone that believes that morals matter,” she concluded. “But because of the state of this country, I would — if I lived in Maine I would hold my nose and I would vote for Platner. I would.”
And so, Me Too becomes Meh when Maine is at stake.
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.“
I am starting to miss the days of 9% inflation, open borders, censorship, rampant anti-semitism, racism, two tiered justice, banning gas appliances, government by auto-pen and unelected bureaucrats, etc. Iran, China, Russia and N. Korea were all happy with us. Trillions of $ flowing out of the US Treasury going to God knows who for God knows what. Those were days the Democrats want to return us to and worse.
The Trump supporters of January 6 acted like the Nazis of the Beer Hall Putsch.
Yeah. Talk about “mob blindness”.
You the German police shot a bunch of them dead, no? It was a lot more violent than a mass trespassing event.
Horst Wessel
^ This is the kind of garbage that passes for reasonable on the Left ^
Whether the D primary election just held or the upcoming general election for a seat in the USSenate … those who vote for Platner are sycophants looking for a D/progressive/nazi-loving/anti-Semite/liar whose name is on the ballot. They are no better than Platner and, maybe, worse because their votes can reject such a wanna-be in the USSenate.
There was a time when you could find Waldo, the Reich Minister of Propaganda. Joseph Goebbels. If you repeat the lie often enough it is the truth. Today we have the internet and the Reich Minister is metastasized into organized groups. Funded organized groups. Finding Waldo is better internet speech against bad internet speech. Smoke out the lie with the truth. The Maine Senate race is another test bed. Mainers have sent Susan Collins to D.C. for a long time. She likes the high road as a Republican moderate. All she has said is that the Platner facts are “troubling”. And they are. Right now that word is up against rivers of word salads like Johnathan has addressed. I’m sure her election people’s opposition research will find more brass knuckles for her to put on. But will her style let her? In this age of rage, who and how the brass knuckles of truth get applied will be illuminating.
We’re a little busy today. Make your comments precise, concise and to the point.
None of the comments here have any relevance to my life.
None of our comments were written to have relevance in your life.
They should have been.
The lesson here is to return the focus of political campaigns to issues, to acknowledge that we are all willing to be blatantly hypocritical about what personal failings we are willing to ignore — because a scummy Dem is better than a virtuous Republican or vice versa.
Does Animal Farm’s Squealer come to mind, or is it just me?
It is just you.
Another stupid answer from Ano.
That choice of answer was provided by BigA.
The Democrats are just so very shameless in all things, including and especially hypocrisy. They should be sent to electoral oblivion to save us all from their bad ideas and their horrible company.
They don’t measure lies and hypocrisy the same way you do; they’re sociopaths.
Let’s see. You’re a multimillionaire, reasonably good looking and you could help to advance a young girls career but not one of these women would ever come on to you. Did Monica come on to Bill? City girls just seem to find out early How to open doors with just a smile A rich old man and she won’t have to worry. Welcome to the real world. However, neither Bill nor Donald had a tattoo celebrating a Nazi police force that shot millions of Jews in the back of the head or rounded them up and sent them to the gas chambers. So given the opportunity they would hold their nose and vote for an anti semite who celebrates Nazism and the philosophy of a man known as Stalin who was responsible for millions who starved to death in Russia. All along they’ve exclaimed that Trump is a Nazi but now they are willing to vote for a real Nazi who has said he supports Hamas which is an organization that carries on the tradition of killing Jews in the same way as Hitler.
Holding ones nose means your willing to put up with the stink of the corpses loaded on to the trains with bulldozers.
And yet somehow they still think of themselves as moral people.
TiT,
The far leftist illiberal Democrats, whom have highjacked the party, have more in common with Stalin, Mao, and now Hitler then they do with the old JFK Democrat party.
It would be funny if it were not so, “I would hold my nose and I would vote for Platner. I would.” disturbing.
And then she implies, “put emotions on the side, let’s be strategic, let’s get some power, let’s take over the Senate, let’s take over the House and let’s right the ship. Let’s get our country back.”
And then what?
Interesting that “getting our country back” means putting it into the hands of psychopaths.
Ano
means putting it into the hands of psychopaths.
__________________________
The DNC is just that.
Dems candidate choice overshot the target masculinity and went right into barbarism.
Toxic males now allowed!
When a crazy person from Maine is elected to the Senate, you get a Maine-iac as a Senator.
I cannot understand how the “MeToo” movement could ever have been taken seriously. With a name like that it reeks of copycats, and when I was growing up, copycats were considered at a lower form of life who lacked personality or imagination, who had no life and rode on the coattails of their betters.
Well take a look at what happened to feminism, it’s taken over by men in dresses and become toxic femininity.
William Heffner apparently believes that women go to be raped to copy cat other women who have been raped.
Your’s is a truly sick attack on victims.
slightly OT (apologies, this is brief):
(1) Platner claims Republicans are trying to frame him (“Anything alleging physicality, anything alleging that I knew what my tattoo was, these are the statements of someone who’s politically motivated..”https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/platner-says-accuser-is-lying-about-him-being-rough-with-her-not-true/ar-AA24SxFW
(2) Bill Gates just testified that Epstein was trying to frame him.
(3) But…… only Trump is lying about Epstein trying to frame him him.
Maine is now a NAZI state. How low can Maine go? Not much lower.
Meanwhile, Nancy Pelosi is trying to figure out why her political machines are blowing gaskets.
The alcohol fueling Pelosi is running out
A brief history of endorsements of political candidates:
1) He is the most capable, experienced, and trusted candidate
2) He can get things done
3) She knows people
4) She toes the party line
5) He will win the election
6) He’s NOT the other candidate
7) The other candidate is worse
8) He might be a crook, but he’s our crook
9) Hold your nose and vote for him
10) Of course he is a rapist, a murderer, and a thief, but you’ll vote for him anyway
11) What does it matter, just rubber stamp your vote. We’ll count the vote as a win for her anyway.
12) Any criticism of our candidate will result in arrest
A few topical headlines from the Bee:
– Maine updates state flag to include a swastika
– Planter reassures voters there are probably only 14 or 15 more horrific revelations to come
– Democrats clarify everyone is a Nazi except the guy with the Nazi tattoo
– Nation shocked as candidate with Nazi tattoo turns out to be total scumbag
– Planter smooths things over with Democrats by covering Nazi tattoo with hammer & sickle
– Planter says he got his “I (heart) Hitler” tattoo before he knew of his Nazi connections
– Saint Paul relinquishes “Chief of Sinners” title after new Planter allegations come to light
Seriously everyone, is anyone that uses a shred of critical thinking actually surprised in any way that the political left would stoop to sweeping abuse towards women under the table when it’s a candidate they want to win a political race?
The political left has shown everyone repeatedly that their transparent double standards are pure partisan hypocrisy. As is evident by the tactics the political left has used repetitively since 2008, the underlying core of the political left’s ideology is morally bankrupt aka evil.
The political left? Have you forgotten about the political right? Trump? Epstein files? Sexual abuse, felonies, etc. It seems the left is just following the standard the right has established for politicians and those seeking office. Why would or should it be shocking?
He stated “political left”, where Platner exists. are you stupid?
Anonymous wrote, “He stated ‘political left’, where Platner exists. are you stupid?”
Yes, he’s a stupid rationalizing fool. that’s how progressive morons argue.
That’s not an argument. You’re defending the same behavior on the right. Trump is a great example. Why should the left be criticized if the right is doing the same thing? It’s ok for the right when politicians are immoral or unethical sexual abusers. So why not those on the left.
Right-wing voters choose pedophiles, sexual abusers, and corrupt politicians on the right as long as they deliver on their promises. Why would platter be any different?
Right-wing voters choose pedophiles, sexual abusers, and corrupt politicians on the right as long as they deliver on their promises.
Except those are just accusations that you repeat unthinkingly. Most such accusations turn out to be false.
Aaand there’s the excuses. That’s exactly what I’m referring to. Thanks for proving my point.
X, stop posting as anonymous when you are intimidated by the feedback that would normally apply to X/George.
Search for “Republican child sexual abuse.” You will find convictions and prison sentences.
you will if you search for “blank child sexual abuse” – so what. The question is not of 100M republicans is there atleast on pedo.
Or even atleast on pedo that got elected.
One question is what did Republicans do when they found out – what they did NOT do is run them for Senate.
I think there is a good argument that pedos are more common inthe democratic party.
But they are not more than a few percent of the population or any group or party.
For the most part Republicans get accused of saying stupid things.
Democrats get accused of DOING them.
Why are pedos among democrats more likely – because the democratic party today is divorced from any moral foundations.
Because the democratic party is further from religion – and like it or not the threat of eternal damnation stops more bad conduct than atheism.
There is lots wrong with religion – but less than the lack of beliefs.
There is a reason tyhat Socialism nearly always ends in copious bloodshed – and that is rooted in its fungible values.
With specific respect to pedophilia – you left wing nuts are trying to sexualize children – that is litterally the definition of pedophilia.
No it is not surprising that there are more democrat pedophiles. Even if it did not start that way – YOUR values would attract them.
Alll they would have to do is claim to be trans and you would be completely accepting.
X wrote, “You’re defending the same behavior on the right. “
Only a moron would make such an unsubstantiated claim when all the evidence is sitting right in front of everyone’s face.
I didn’t defend any behavior from anyone on the right, you Sir are a f’ing liar!
Anonymous wrote, “Right-wing voters choose pedophiles, sexual abusers, and corrupt politicians on the right as long as they deliver on their promises. Why would platter be any different?”
Everyone here should read that statement and weep for the USA!!!
That folks this is exactly the kind of morally bankrupt thinking that’s used by far too many politicians and partisan sheeple enablers in our 21st century political race to the bottom. People that think like this are morally bankrupt, period!
Your cognitive dissonance and moral double standards are wild.
X wrote, “Your cognitive dissonance and moral double standards are wild.”
ROFLMFAO!!!!!!!!!!!
You owe me a keyboard, you made me spit out my coffee!
That comment coming from a Dunning-Kruger effected internet trolling moron is quite hilarious!
Rhetorical question; didn’t anyone ever teach you that it’s far better to remain silent and appear like a moron than to speak/write and remove all doubt.
You’re intellectually unprepared for anything more; but go ahead, keep digging.
So you went ahead and removed all doubt by responding. Oh the irony.
Do you know that you argue like a 5th grader?
You’re the one arguing like a 5th grader. So much emotion and animosity you can’t think straight. I’m not the one throwing insults and overdramatizing.
X
Please cite a single instance in which you have been correct about anything controversial ?
X wrote, “I’m not the one throwing insults and overdramatizing.”
Maybe not, but since you’re trolling, again, and now you’re trying to deflect, again, with this comparison, I’ll bite for a brief moment.
You’re throwing out a whole lineup of nonsense deflections trying desperately to steer the conversation(s) away from the moral bankruptcy of the political left, unethical rationalizations, and baldfaced fabricated lies; so you’ve got being a liar going for you, while I’ve got the terms I use (you call them insults), that I can support using definitions and facts like related quotes, going for me. That’s as far as I’ll take this comparison deflection.
Like I wrote before; you’re intellectually unprepared for anything more; but go ahead, keep digging.
X didn’t even know what cognitive dissonance was until it was used in this comment section a few years ago. It apparently impressed him, just like “reading comprehension” and “context” does, –as well as “Krueger-Dunning (sic) (George’s version, after he saw “Dunning-Krueger” in this comment section. ANow he uses these terms so much he could fill a few pages with it.
george
But the lies to tell are far worse.
Then you would be able to democtrrate that with evidence.
So far you cited Caethorn and Grietens – neitehr of which had allegatiosn either as strong or as bad as those against Platner.
Cawthorn was defeated by republicans in a republican primary.
Greitens was eventually exonerated and his prosecutor disciplined – and should have gone to jail.
Again, ignore the issue at hand as there is no excuse and point at something, anything else.
Slipping! Textbook x
X wrote, “The political left? Have you forgotten about the political right? Trump? Epstein files? Sexual abuse, felonies, etc. It seems the left is just following the standard the right has established for politicians and those seeking office. Why would or should it be shocking?”
Almost every word of your comment is a deflection utilizing the unethical “everybody does it” Golden Rationalization which is #1 on the list of Unethical Rationalizations and Misconceptions.
I don’t rationalize like that and when I see others do it, it get’s pointedly called out.
Brief repeat; X wrote, “It seems the left is just following the standard the right has established for politicians and those seeking office.”
That is pure gaslighting, and if you actually believe it you’re a damn fool.
When Donald Trump came on the political scene in 2015 and his tactics perfectly mimicked the tactics of the dominate progressive wing of the political left and the Democratic Party lost their collective minds. How dare a “Republican” use the political left’s tactics against them. Democrats are completely blind to just how morally bankrupt their own tactics are.
I wrote way back in December of 2015 that “Trump is not a true conservative, he is a caricature of what Liberals think Conservatives.”, and “Trump is fully engaged in using the worst of the worst Liberal tactics in his campaign and he’s put them on a continuous IV stream of steroids.”. I’ve also written the following in so many comments across the internet that I can no longer count them, “Donald Trump is an unethical loose cannon mouthed narcissist individual that speaks just about anything that comes to his mind and has a bad habit of punching down.”
Do I like President Trump, nope.
Don’t give me anymore of your rationalization BS.
Deflection? More like pointing out reality. I’m sure you were all apoplectic when those on the right in similar situations were being excused by those on the right as “false claims” or the women were lying. The double standard remains. No amount of cursing and laughing will change that.
X wrote, “Deflection? More like pointing out reality.”
That was a moronic, pre-adolescent mentality, thing to write in response to my comment. I wrote everything in clear concise English, please stop reading in dumbass.
X wrote, “I’m sure you were all apoplectic when those on the right in similar situations were being excused by those on the right as “false claims” or the women were lying.”
Only a moron would make false claims like that with absolutely no evidence to support the claim, and you trolling your lies doesn’t make them true.
I directly challenge you right here and now to prove your unsupportable fabricated lie using my own words. I’ll gladly provide you with a link to my blog, Society’s Building Blocks, where there are hundreds of essays and a really good search engine for you to use. Try to find the proof or retract your baldfaced fabricated lie. Just in case you can’t find sufficient incriminating evidence on my blog, here’s another blog that I comment on regularly and have done so since December of 2015, Ethics Alarms, you can get your own link for that one.
If doing the work to support your false claims is too inconvenient, time consuming, or too much hard work for you then you truly are an morally bankrupt intentional trolling moron.
X wrote, “The double standard remains.”
Continuing with your unethical deflection and rationalization?
By the way; I’ve never, ever claimed that there aren’t double standards on both sides of the political aisle; however, I can say with all honesty that double standards are a core ideological component of the Socialist/Communists/progressive left that absolutely dominate the 21st century Democratic Party.
X wrote, “No amount of cursing and laughing will change that.”
You know, “X” aka moron, maybe you should seriously consider not writing verifiable falsehoods and completely absurd nonsensical comments. It’s your choice to represent yourself as a trolling moron, try choosing differently.
“Have you forgotten about the political right?”
Nope.
But this is about YOUR hypocracy.
Republicans did NOT say “beleive all women”
That is on YOU.
In reality you have to weigh each and every allegation and the evidence that exists to support it.
With respect to Platner. Many women have come forward telling much the same story.
Further though NYTfailed to examine it – several of the alleged victims provided other sources to corroborate their stories.
Next – most of these allegations are recent – some VERY RECENT. Some of the women have been interviewed – more can be.
Details of their stories can be checked.
You can chose to beleive these women – or you can choose to beleive they are all lying and Platner is not.
We also KNOW that he had the Totenkopf tattoo for over a decade.
You can believe that he did not know that the Tottenkopf – “deaths head” was an infamous SS Panzer division where most of its members were former concentration camp guards.
Platner served 8 years in the Marine Corps. While it is remotely possible that Platner did NOT know all the details of the TotenKopf, i.e. that it was the insignia of an SS panzer division made up of former Concentration camp guards and that the TotenKopf were noted for their brutality and war crimes, it is a HUGE reach to beleive that anyone in the marines for 8 years did NOT know that the TotenKopf was a Nazi insignia.
But lets assume that you actually beleive he did not know. That makes him incredibly stupid which alone is disqualifying.
But you do you.
Does Trump or any other Republican have a Nazi Tattoo ? You whigged out because Elon Musk gave a slute that VAGUELY resembled a salute associated with fascists – and myriads of other militaries.
As usual you do NOT judge your own by what you claim to be your standards.
What of Trump ? There is nothing even close to a credible allegation that Trump has ever been violent towards women. There is no allegation that he ever locked anyone up.
You can disbeleive those claims regarding Platner – but you have no equivalence.
As to Epstain – Great – Bring on actual EVIDENCE. Is there a single Epstain victim that has identified Trump ? Several including virginia guilfoyle claim that Trump always treated them with respect and that Trump banned Epstain from MAL as a result of her complaints to Trump about Epstain. Further Trump is the one who reported Esptain to the Florida Police.
All you have in the Epstain files is that Trump and Epstain encountered one an other occasionally publicly prior to 2006, and that After 2006 Epstain repeatedly maligned Trump – likely because Trump turned him in to the police. You do NOT have epstain or anyone else providing ACTUAL evidence.
You do not have an actual credible allegation regarding Trump.
E Jean Carol is a liar and a nut job. While it is not clear whether she will be prosecuted for Perjury – it is absolutely clear that she committed perjury. It is also absolutely clear that the Judge Errered (or was incredibly biased) in denying the defense the opportunity to present the jury with proof that Carol had lied in her deposition. Evidence challenging the credibility of a Witness or accuser is ALWAYS admissible. Even the claim that she “did not remember” is admissible.
Regardless, you conducted a kangaroo court and got a result almost no one beleives.
In fact thgat is an excellent theme for ALL your lawfare.
Almost no one beleive James idiotic claims regarding the Values or Trump properties.
It is hard to tell what people beleive regarding the Bragg Fiasco – people can not even tell what actual crime was alleged.
Personally – thgough I do not care – I do not beleive Daniels. She knew too much about Trump’s hotel room and nothing about her own – including what hotel it was in and where that hotel was located. I also do not beleive Daniels – because if her story was true – then in 2016 – Daniels would have KNOWN that the Clinton campaign would have paid MILLIONS for it. True stories can be marketed ANYWHERE – Only the victim is ever willing to pay to kill a false story.
But you can beleive every word Daniels said – and still not have a crime.
Where to start with Cohen ? The most damaging thing about Cohen is that he once was Trump’s lawyer. That is it. Beyond that his testimony did not damage Trump – even if True,
and it is highly unlikely Cohen even knows the truth – he has lied to himself so much.
But again – assume Daniels is telling the Truth and Cohen is telling the truth. Calling a “hush money payment” a legal expense is LEGITMATE.
Further NO MATTER WHAT it is called – it is not Fraud. Trump could have called the payments to Cohen Taxi Fare – there still would be NO CRIME – Proper Taxes were paid – no one lost money as a result of YOUR claimed misrepresentation. As none other than Ruth Bader Ginsberg said – Fraud is a PROPERTY crime – someone must be deprived of a TANGIBLE asset of value.
Your beleif that you are entitled to know about allegations of Consensual sex does not create a right that anyone violated.
Platner actively triued to hide this damaging information – He hid his TotenKopf tattoo – is he guilty of a crime other than stupidity ? No.
As to Other Republicans – if you have evidence of misconduct by other Republicans – bring it on. They should be publicly chastized and if appropriate prosecuted.
Regardless – it is NOT the right that has established a standard for public office – it is the Left. Porter, Swallwell, Franken, Clinton, Weiner, Joe Biden, Hunter Biden, the entire Biden clan. and on and on and on.
John Say,
Great comment.
I would add, in order to “Get Trump!” they had to change laws.
Carol changed the date of when the alleged incident happened. She wore a outfit she claims she was wearing when Trump supposedly assaulted her. It was shortly proven that outfit was not made till years later. She was not credible.
“You gotta twist yourself into a pretzel to figure out what the crime was. [Bragg] doesn’t like him — New York City didn’t like him for a while,”
“I would be happier, as someone who owns property in Manhattan, if the district attorney of New York County would take care of criminals who were making it impossible for citizens to walk in the streets and use the subway, to use his efforts to keep those people off the street, than to spend $5 million or $10 million of taxpayers’ money trying Donald Trump on this nonsense,”
— Judge Judy Sheindlin, 6-21-2024
Upstatefarmer, you making things up I see.
Carroll wore a black wool Donna Karan coat-dress that was manufactured and sold in the late 1980s and early 1990s, perfectly matching her timeline of the mid-1990s. Trump’s defense team never proved the outfit was made “years later.”
Trump famously undermined his own defense during his deposition when he was shown a 1987 photo of Carroll and mistook her for his ex-wife, Marla Maples. This completely torpedoed his repeated public defense that Carroll was “not my type”.
Because he’s a prolific liar he couldn’t keep his story straight in a deposition.
Carroll never claimed to remember the exact day or month of an event that happened decades prior—which experts note is standard for trauma survivors. A unanimous jury evaluated the evidence and witnesses and found her highly credible, holding Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation.
New York passed a temporary, one-year lookback window allowing adult survivors of sexual assault to file civil lawsuits regardless of the statute of limitations.
This law was passed to help thousands of victims of institutional abuse across the state—including victims of Harvey Weinstein, Jeffrey Epstein, and abuse within universities and prisons. It applied to everyone equally; Carroll simply utilized the same legal tool available to any other citizen.
Dress Carroll Alleges to Have Worn During Assault Did Not Exist at Time
“She said, this is the dress I wore in 1994. They went back, they checked. The dress wasn’t even made in 1994.
“And that’s why the date’s moved around. This is the 80s. Is it the 90s? Is it the 2000s? President Trump has consistently stated that he was falsely accused and he has the right to defend himself.”
She originally claimed that the ‘event’ happened in 1994, and that she wore the Donna Karan dress on that day. The problem is that New York Times Fact Checkers found the dress wasn’t even made by Donna Karan until long after 1994.
https://capitalisminstitute.org/report-dress-carroll-alleges-to-have-worn-during-assault-did-not-exist-at-time/
“Carroll wore a black wool Donna Karan coat-dress that was manufactured and sold in the late 1980s and early 1990s, perfectly matching her timeline of the mid-1990s. Trump’s defense team never proved the outfit was made “years later.””
Glad you SORT of commit to SOME facts.
Regardless you are incorrect.
Carrol publicly displayed the SPECIFIC dress she claims she was wearing – trying toi replicate the Clinton Blue Dress story.
It was quickjly established that Dress was not made until after the time frame she claimed.
Regardless the
FACT that Her Timeframe covers several years and several months within those years alone would normally have gotten the case tossed.
It is also the reason that statutes of limitations exist, as was evident in the Kavanaugh hearing.
Trump has defeated the claims like Carrols many times in the past – How ? Because courts will not allow such claims unless the plaintiff can provide enough detail that the defendant has the oportunity to disprove the plaintiff.
Trump has lived a very public life – in the Bragg trial – we had the exact day and time of the event and Trump was able to present evidence from a person he called while the Daniels interaction was occuring, and the security person outside his hotel room.
These were unfortunately not determination in the Daniels case – because it actually does not matter if Daniels is telling the Truth.
Regardless as I have said before – between Daniels own testimony, the testimony of others – like these people, and the FACT that her story ONLY IF TRUE was more valuable to Clinton or the DNC or the same democrat billionairte that Carrol lied about funding her – Daniels is not stupid, but she is also not credible.
Regardless this was not possible in the Carrol case – because Carrol could not provide enough specifics to allow Trump to call witnesses to prove he could not have been with her at the time.
This is a violation of ANY defendants rights – and it is why numerous similar cases against Trump were tossed out of court – even in NYC in the past.
Further – Carrols legal team – and the Judge KNEW that if Carrol made a specific claim about when this event occurred – the case would be dismissed.
The vague time frame is NOT accidental – it is a strategy.
Just as it was With Kavanaugh. Kavanauigh produced Diaries detailing his life over the several years of Fords allegations. Because her allegations were so vague – like Carrols not even specific to a month or year or day of the week, It was impossible to prove that Ford’s claim was false – but it was possible to prove it was highly unlikely.
NORMALLY – outside of left wing nuts fevered dreams – you do not get into court 25 years after your claims.
You do not get into court if you can not provide enough facts regarding events to allow the accused to defend themselves.
When a case becomes SOLELY he said/she said over events int he distant past – JUSTICE requires that it must be tossed.
Regardless the Dress claim was disprove quicklyu and the dress was NOT admitted into evidence – specifically because it would have been trivially refuted.
The dress was for public consumption for dingbats like you – who never bothered to check if it was even possible given Carrols claims.
It was not.
“Trump famously undermined his own defense during his deposition when he was shown a 1987 photo of Carroll and mistook her for his ex-wife, Marla Maples. This completely torpedoed his repeated public defense that Carroll was “not my type”.”
“Not My Type” is not a defense – it is All Trump had left when the court improperly allowed allegations so lacking in testable specifics that it was impossible to defend against. I would note the Photo of Carrol that Trump misidentified was taken almost 10 years BEFORE the alleged event. Carrol did look like Maples at that time.
She did not look like that during the several years in which she claims this occured.
“Because he’s a prolific liar he couldn’t keep his story straight in a deposition.”
He did not and could not have a “story” – because there were no specifics to be able to refute.
Trump’s Actual defense was limited by the vagueness of Carrol’s story to “this did not happen”
His “story” did not fall apart – he was denied the oportunity for any defense.
How would YOU prove that YOU had not Raped Carrol at sometime in the mid 90’s ?
I would separately note that Carrol has IN WRITING identified more than 50 men as having raped her. She wrote a book about it.
She wrote about women’s issues and rape all the time – accusing pretty much every man she ever met of raping her.
But she never accused Trump in writing or otherwise prior to Trump being elected president.
“Carroll never claimed to remember the exact day or month of an event that happened decades prior”
Or Year or Day of the week.
“which experts note is standard for trauma survivors.”
ROFL
Sunday May 9, 1984 – that is the day that My wife was raped. I will NEVER forget that date. While we are well past that now – not a single year passes by that May 9th is not a dark cloud in our lives.
I will raise you REALITY for “faux experts”
Nor is this limited to Rape – a super majority of people who experience serious Trauma remember all kinds of details – the weather, the smells, the colors.
While there are exceptions – such as people who were drugged or drunk – Carrol has claimed neither.
“A unanimous jury evaluated the evidence and witnesses and found her highly credible, holding Trump liable for sexual abuse and defamation.”
And the rejected the claim of Rape. Which pretty much proves they could not figure out what had actually happened and were splitting the difference.
“new York passed a temporary, one-year lookback window allowing adult survivors of sexual assault to file civil lawsuits regardless of the statute of limitations.”
Correct – violating the constitutional rights of myriads of New Yorkers.
You seem to think that laws are just a game.
Statute of limitations exist for good reason – to preclude injustices like this case.
:
“This law was passed to help thousands of victims of institutional abuse across the state—including victims of Harvey Weinstein, Jeffrey Epstein, and abuse within universities and prisons. It applied to everyone equally; Carroll simply utilized the same legal tool available to any other citizen.”
False – it was passed specifically to get Trump.
The law was passed on Nov 24, 2022 and remained in effect through Nov. 24, 2023.
Weinstein had already been convicted in 2020 and was in Jail
That law is blatantly unconstitutional. It is a violation of due process rights – but then again left wing nuts never care about due process – until it is them or theirs being accused.
Your argument is also stupid – the NY law ha absolutely NOTHING to do with “institutional abuse” – it is entirely about individuals – both alleged victims and their alleged perpitrators.
Defending yourself against unfounded accusations is never supposed to be defamation – but the left has been weaponizing defamation claims for a long time.
It is fairly well established now – that the claims that got Guiliani in trouble were true.
I would note that the Guiliani case was settled for 400K – which is less than the plantiffs legal costs.
This was claimed as a victory for the left – but the 148M verdict is completely gone.
Guiliani settled because he is old and can not keep up the fight – but the plantiffs settled because their cdase was Garbage.
Guilini did not name them specifically – they outed themselves. Further his remarks were in the context of court cases – and black letter law provides that the remedy for statements made in the conduct of a court case is limited to the civil contempt powers of the judge in the case.
The alex jones case is still ongoing – and no one has received a dime from Jones. It hit several roadblocks in TX when the attorneys for the plantiffs were caught engaging in illegal conduct related to the case. And Jones is till on the air.
“someone must be deprived of a TANGIBLE asset of value.”
Such as hiding a payment to a prostitute in order to get elected by depriving the public of information that would be detrimental to a campaign?
Paying hush money is a bad look either way. Concealing that payment as something else is fraud. Keep in mind that almost no money is, in fact, tangible. It’s just numbers. What matters is that the persons being defrauded don’t get what they were promised.
John, your argument fails because it relies on the very collectivist, tribal blind spots that individualists and libertarians consistently reject. By framing accountability as a partisan “Us vs. Them” game, you fall into a classic tu quoque fallacy, using the left’s blatant hypocrisy to excuse or minimize the misconduct, shifting evidentiary standards, and questionable associations found on the right. A consistent individualist judges a person’s actions by an unwavering standard of personal responsibility and objective evidence, not by the color of their team’s jersey. Both major parties are power-seeking cartels inherently incentivized to protect their own; therefore, both sides will routinely dismiss unfavorable legal outcomes as “lawfare” or rationalize an ally’s red flags while demanding strict execution for the opposition.
The right is just as guilty of this collective bias and selective outrage. When Graham Platner was exposed for having a Totenkopf tattoo and facing domestic misconduct allegations, your side rightfully demanded accountability. Yet, when right-wing figures face serious, documented credible allegations or embrace extremist imagery, the right utilizes the exact same script of minimization, deflection, and attacking the accusers. We see this when partisans brush off Donald Trump’s multi-million dollar civil liability for sexual abuse as a purely partisan “kangaroo court,” or when conservative voters consistently give a pass to figures like former Congressman Madison Cawthorn or Governor Eric Greitens until it becomes politically inconvenient. Claiming moral exceptionalism for the right simply ignores political incentives and human nature. When you rely on a laundry list of the left’s sins to deflect from the flaws within your own tent, you aren’t defending principle—you are defending the duopoly. The core issue isn’t just the hypocrisy of the left; it is the systemic failure of the entire partisan system to hold individuals accountable to objective reality rather than political convenience.
“John, your argument fails because it relies on the very collectivist, tribal blind spots that individualists and libertarians consistently reject.”
Ignoring your spin – No libertarian has EVER rejected “tribalism” That is just nonsense.
“By framing accountability as a partisan “Us vs. Them” game,”
That is what the left does NOT what I have done.
Us vs. them typically fails because comparisons are NOT equal. Each event must be weighed on its own merits
Platner inarguably had a TotenKopf Tattoo – are you debating that ?
No one right or left can Prove he KNEW that – though one of his sexual violence victims claims he explicitly identified it as a “Death’s Head” – i.e. Toten Kopf Nazi tattoo.
He would have been Far better off claiming that it was an unfortunate choice -= and just intended to communicate that as a marine he was not to be messed with. That it was NOT meant to communicate that he was a fascist.
People would have bought that. I would have bought that – it still was stupid – but it was Stupid in a way that 8 year Marines are often stupid.
Claiming he did not know is NOT plausible.
Other anonymous posters – possibly you have tried to cite examples of Republican politicians accused of being pedophiles. NONE of these are within an order of magnitude as prominent as Platner – or SwallWell or Clinton or Porter or Weiner or Franken.
Further the posted cited accusations not evidence. I(f the evidence exists – then these people – whoever they are should be jailed and the key thrown away.
That is what all but a tiny fraction of conservatives do all the time.
Absolutely there are allegations against more high profile republicans – accusations of all sorts come with prominence – and even happen to people NOT very prominent.
I was accused of murdering my Father – that ALMOST lead to the prosecution of the accuser for false claims, and that would have been prosecuted but for the difficulty prosecuting someone out of state. Regardless the local DAs office was VERY pissed – and the evidence the claim was false was incontrovertible. But that did not prevent damage to my reputation.
Regardless people are accused falsely – all the time. They are accused correctly all the time. We must look at the details in EACH case to determine the truth.
It is RARE that we can know the truth beyond any doubt at all. But it is common that we can actually know beyond a reasonable doubt.
It is not “tribalism” to expect that you will NOT engage in stupid whataboutism.
Whether you like it or not a Jury of 77M decided all the NYC Trump cases against you in Nov. 2024. They decided that EJC is a liar, that James and Bragg are crooks and liars.
It is likely in the very long run – that will be the legal result in those cases.
Nearly all of your Lawfare has gone to schiff. None of it ever amounted to anything normal people would beleive.
While my POLITICS are not “normal” – my discernment relative to facts in the real world is extremely normal. And in those instances where I have reached conclusions outside the norms – I have been proven right.
Collusion delusion was a hoax, Hunter Bidens laptop was not russian disinformation, EJC is a liar, As is Comey, The Climate is always changing, Humans are NOT destroying the planet – if anything they are making it better. For all our many problems – including the myriads of disasters those of you on the left are imposing on us – the world, this country, life are slowly getting better in nearly every way. Everything is NOT going to h311.
All people are “racist”, sexist, holding a wide variety of discriminatory and incorrect views, but with extremely rare exceptions – it does not consequentially negatively impact anyones life. We have lots of injustice in our justice system – too much – but we still get it right more than the minimum necescary for a stable society.
Unlike left wing nuts like you – I do NOT expect utopia.
Is Platner sexually violent, or mysognistically violent ? I do not know – but many women claim he is. There is also some ACTUAL evidence to support some of their claims.
With respect to Carrol – if we actually assume that something did happen – which is a HUGE reach. Carrols own story is so messy there is no way to tell if it was just mutally desired passion or something that might have crossed a line – Personally – there is no credible evidence it happened. And if you can not make a claim with enough specifics that the accused can defend themselves – then the case does not belong in court.
Platner has the oportunity to defend himself – though that is currently occuring in the court of public oppinion – where he does not appear to be doing well.
He is NOT todate facing Criminal charges or a defamation lawsuit – and Why not ? There is more than sufficient basis to files charges,
Frankern Resigned – a photo of him with his hands on a sleeping womens breast is pretty damning, but it was accusations by other democrats that he grabbed their Ass AFTER the allegations went public that damned him. This is misconduct, it is criminal, it shoudl be charged and prosecuted – this was ACtual sexual assault – arguably a minor one – but still a crime. You do not have actual evidence of even that with Trump. Even Carrol has not consistently claimed something that constitutes sexual assault.
While Platner is playing word games about “physicality” – a non denial denial, even if he is telling the truth – which seems unlikely – he is not denying all misconduct, and there are social media posts. “I am not denying frequenting sites with underage women, but I did NOT actually toach any of them – is NOT a basis for voting for him.
But you do you.
ROFL
“you fall into a classic tu quoque fallacy,”
tu quoque is a fallacy when it is a form of ad hominem and not the actual argument.
It is only a fallacy if it is off point, AND ad hominem.
In this instance it is YOU that are engaged in tu quoque – You are criticising Turley because the article is about Platner – NOT what you falsely claim are equivalent on the right.
I have merely pointed out that there are FEW comparables on the right and lots more on the left.
That is not Tu quoque it is a rebutabl to a tu quoque fallacy.
I am happy that you have learned a bit of latin and the names of some fallacies.
Now you should try learning what the fallacies actually are.
“using the left’s blatant hypocrisy to excuse or minimize the misconduct,”
The article is about Platner – not republicans – It is YOU that is engaged in tu Quoque or what aboutism.
And Badly.
MY point was that YOUR whatabotism is NOT equivalent.
YOU are the one shifting evidentiary standards.
With Platner there is a real tattoo,
Whether Platner knew its Nazi connection is not proven – though there is evidence from statements he made to others that he did,
and if he did not – expecially given his 8 years in the Marines that too would be disqualifying.
As I said in another post he would have been better off owning the Tattoo, but explaining that for him and his peers it meant he was a badass – not a Nazi.
That is weak, but not as bad as Sorry, I did not know that the TotenKopf was the symbol of a notorious Nazi SS panzer division despite 8 years in the Marines.
I do not think the Tattoo is “disqualifying” though it is very disturbing. Lying about it only makes it worse.
The accusations of sexual violence and violence towards women have No equal I am aware of with ANY republican.
Even EJC – if you beleive her has not claimed anything as serious as Several women have regarding Platner.
Further the Platner conduct is recent – either multiple women are lying, or he is NOW a Sexually Violent person.
I am not ready to send Platner to jail. But there should be a criminal investigation – these allegations are of Crimes – some SERIOUS crimes.
Much more serious than anything regarding Trump or any republican – or frankly most democrats.
ONE of the accusations is that Platner locked a girlfriend in a bedroom overnight – that could be kidnapping, and it is certainly unlawfully detaining – and it is a serious felony.
Even absent any sexuality – it is very serious.
So the real question is whether these allegations are true ?
The evidence is RECENT – some claims are less than a year old.
The evidence is far more specific that EJC
The evidence has multiple sources.
Is that proof beyond any doubt – no.
But juries accross the country would accept that as proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Then there is the allegation that Platner is frequenting dating social media where 60+% of the participants are underage.
That is not a crime. But it is certainly Icky.
Purportedly there are also messages that he sent to people – possibly under age.
You claim that I or Turley is manipulating evidence standards – but that is not close to true.
YOU are.
” questionable associations found on the right.”
You are free to vote for or not vote for someone because of people that associate with regularly or even only once.
But associating with people is NOT a crime. And deriving meaning from it requires a fair amount of information and judgement.
Most of those YOU claim Trump is associating with are rouhgly speaking the Mamdani
s of the Right. But none of them are Mayor of the largest city in the country.
It is democrats who elected Mamdani – who is as extreme as it gets – right or left.
” A consistent individualist judges a person’s actions by an unwavering standard of personal responsibility and objective evidence”
Correct – Turley does that.
I do that
You do not EVER do that.
You hold Trump and republicans to standards you would not dream of holding any democrat too.
Based on what I know right now – I would have difficulty convicting Platner of a crime – but with further evidence that could change.
But you are not even close to the same quantity or quality of Evidence regarding Trump – or any republican.
I listed a number of Democrats – please tell me a SINGLE one that does not have far more damning evidence that anything you have on Trump.
Your decisions are determined by the color jersey that someone is wearing – NOT the facts.
And like idiots you have dragged that into the court room – which is why so many here want to seem most of you in jail.
The ACTUAL abuse of government power agains thr innocent because they are your political enemies is ACTUALLY a crime.
The correct use of govenrment power against the guilty who are also political enemies is called justice.
” when right-wing figures face serious, documented credible allegations or embrace extremist imagery”
Please cite an ACTUAL example ?
Wer have go0ne through all your claims and they are not close to equivalent, the evidence is pi$$ poor to non-existant, the allegations are vague – usually single sourced and ancient.
“We see this when partisans brush off Donald Trump’s multi-million dollar civil liability for sexual abuse as a purely partisan “kangaroo court,””
Because it is – and it is not just conservatives that did that – MOST of the country did.
Thje allegations against Cawthorn are tame compared to Platner or any of the others I mentioned – aside from insider trading – which is an allegation that can be made of every congressman, none of the allegations are criminal – many regarding Platner are.
Further Cawthorn was defeated by another republican in a republican primary. Contra your claims – Republicans decided they did NOT want him representing them.
Platner is YORU candidate for a much higher office.
You do know that the allegations against Eric Greitens ultimately were PROVEN FALSE and that the DA that accused him admitted to going after him illegally and politically.
That was a REALLY stupid choice on your part.
I’m not saying I’m smarter than anyone else but when I stepped onto those yellow footprints at San Diego MCRD at 18 I knew then about that SS Totenkampf tat. And would never have gotten one. USA, USMC and the EGA was enough for me.
Poor george
Epstein files? How come biden never released them?
Far to many dems names on that list
Anonymous wrote, “Epstein files? How come biden never released them?
It wasn’t politically to their advantage to release them until they could use them to attack President Trump. It’s all smoke and mirrors.
Here’s a great evaluation of the political left’s obsession with the Epstein files…
Ethics Foul Call: The Jeffrey Epstein Obsession Is a Pure Trump Derangement Symptom and Another “Get Trump!” Hoax, Nothing Else
The delusional political left is trying their best to gin up as much anti-Trump hate as they can for something that Trump never did and gullible morons swallow the propaganda narrative as fact; watch some moronic troll say that that negative hasn’t been proven yet.
The delusional leftists are continuing their Marxist “show me the man and I’ll find you the crime” tactic, ad nauseum. Day after day, the political left just can’t help proving that they’re morally bankrupt, aka evil.
X
Few trust those of you on the left regarding what is and what is NOT a crime.
While this is not about Trump. It is just another example of left wing nuts weaponizing the justice system to punish decent people.
I would love to ask Sonny Hostin what she would do if instead of Platner being an anti-Semite and homophobe with a Nazi tattoo he was a racist with a kkk hood tattoo. Can she overlook Jew hatred but not Black hatred?