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.“
So Sunny Hostin believes that character, and morals matter; Until she Doesn’t!
Leftists are mentally deranged monsters.
Here’s a big difference: Trump was accused with zero evidence, zero proof. Platner admitted many things, and his history is quite disturbing. Reichsmarschall Platner can be a Nazi, woman-abuser, rape excuser, rape fantasizer, and Obamapotty aficionado, but Democrats will support him because they care about power over everything else. That’s how they supported Klansmen, for example. Nothing matters but power.
Estovir, Trump led an insurrection and was convicted of multiple felonies. Plus Trump managed to lose a rape civil suit that should’ve been simple to beat had he not acted like a bully in court.
Therefore to imply that Trump is the innocent victim of devious plots against him is absolute bunk.
ED (Estovir derangement) sufferer: it wasn’t an insurrection, and the felonies were bogus. The civil suit was bogus too and in a kangaroo court. It is accurate to say that Trump was the target of the most vicious sustained lawfare campaign in history, not to mention the many physical assassination attempts that continue virtually every month. Get out of your ultra-left-wing bubble and live in the real world. It’s very different than the one you’ve been fed by the lying liars who feed you lying propaganda which you swallow whole, you pathetic moron.
Estovir, Trump never answered for January 6th. So no one knows how he might have fared under oath. Same thing with those felonies and the rape civil suit. Trump alienated the juries and never took the stand.
Trump said to protest peacefully. He asked for the National Guard but Nancy Pelosi said no.
You mean the Show Trials ,Stacked with Dimwits?……Yea,,yea..The Fed-surrection..where the most armed people ,in a highly armed society ,didnt bring GUNS…and what about the 375 FBLie agents in the crowd..Or your Hero..Ray Epps…Idsay youre drinking too much leftist coolaid..but that gives you too much credit../you are a VILE ,EVIL ,MEAN ,Supporter of CRIMINAL ILLEGAL ALIENS that Rape ,molest and Murder my people..(you arent American..so you dontqualify)…You are the ENEMYWITH,we were warned about ,by those Great Old White Men….PISS OFF ..Loser..
Estovir, let’s see an established source regarding those ‘375’ FBI agents. You won’t find ANY documented count like that outside the rightwing bubble. And if that were even vaguely fact, why didn’t Republicans take part in the J 6 hearings??
Dude, the FBI was under Trump’s DOJ headed by William Barr who downplayed the Mueller Report. Like Barr really planted 375 FBI agents at Trump’s rally..??
Man you are ignorant
Dems needed more masculinity and, well, here we are. He will be replaced ala the kamala-catastrophe or bernie-bumrush.
You know what they found in the public toilets that Platner talked about using?
–salty remnants of Platner’s Peenits
Is criticism meant to discourage or encourage free speech?
Irrelevant question. It is part of free speech.
Criticism is part of the give-and-take in the marketplace of ideas. It is meant to point out errors in someone else’s speech, and then the other person can defend their speech or adjust their position to be superior to their previous position.
Speech in response to speech is not an end in itself but an essential process for arriving at truth, goodness, and things that make sense. Without which, society falls into ever deeper error. The emporer would have been better off if someone had told him he had no clothes before he went out in public.
One of the reason tyrants often lose conflicts is that the people around him are afraid to say anything that contradicts his position.
Helpful to read the Wikipedia article on the Skull and Crossbones insignia. It was first used by Hussars in 1711 and is currently part of the insignia of a USMC specialized unit.
Forget about the tattoo, write it off as martial fervor, it is unimportant.
Disregarding the tattoo doesn’t improve the portrait of Platner in the slightest.
David B. Benson regrets not being invited by the German scientists during the Nazi regime to partake in experiments using Carbon tripled bonded to Nitrogen to manufacture the pesticide Zykon B. Sure, it was used as a cyanide (C ≅ N ) agent by the Nazis to kill millions of people in their concentration camps, but Benson is only interested in its use as a pesticide.
Besides, the Nazis did a lot of good. Just ask any Democrat
Estovir, serious question. “Are you a daytime drinker?”
We ask because a high ratio of your, under ‘Estovir’ and all those other names convey a sense of mindless rage. Like some boring drunk desperate for attention.
^ ED (Estovir derangement). The other kind too. ^
Estovir is losing his mind, it appears.
Translation: David B. Benson is against moral relativism, even if he bathes in it liberally. Nothing unscientific or unsound about him!
Note to Benson’s ACLF nurses: up the Haldol dose stat.
This is a joke? Ever heard of the Autobahn? Oh and guess what country pioneered workplace safety rules and cancer research. You guessed it! NS Germany
The swastika was originally a symbol for good luck in Eurasia. So on that basis would you be willing to overlook that a political candidate got a swastika tattoo?
Also similarly by certain Indigeneous American tribal groups.
In two dimensions the swastika is a chiral symbol. The Nazi version points to the right. Many of the others point to the left. So confusing🤔
In a way the Alphabet Mafia is like the Nazis in having viciously and subversively stolen the rainbow symbol from everyone else.
Happy Pride to you to Old Fish.
🏳️🌈🏳️⚧️💪🏽
Gays for Gaza send their regards
Saw the Kinks long ago. They were OK. Ramones blew them out of the water. Joe Jackson rocked too.
A ridiculous designation for the month of June. You have fun flying your anal flag.
Very true. But our radical progressive friends rarely read military history to any depth.
Tom MacDonald got a point.
3,365,433 views Feb 6, 2026
as of June 11, 2026 @1616 EST
Since the outcome of the Maine Senatorial election may tip the balance of power in the Senate, MAGA and Trump are obsessing over Platner. Trump called him a “pig” ( how rich is that?), accused him of being the worst Senatorial candidate in history—forgetting, of course, about his support of Roy Moore, credibly accused of sexually assaulting underage girls and who was removed from the Alabama Supreme Court for refusing to comply with SCOTUS rulings. Then there’s Trump’s own sexual assault adjudication obtained by E Jean Carroll and the fact that Trump brags about sexually assaulting women and is credibly accused of sexually assaulting several other women. He was best friends with a notorious pedophile that Trump is still protecting. Does anyone seriously believe that Trump cares anything about any alleged victims? Trump has never expressed anything resembling empathy for the Epstein victims.
I wonder how much MAGA billionaires will pay to try to get women to make up lies about Platner? They’ll pay anything to keep those tax breaks and rolling back of consumer and environmental protections.
How about Susan Collins? She is a known quantity— mostly MAGA and mostly whatever Trump wants. Mainers are tired of her. Platner admits he went through a dark period after his military service in which he saw combat and is not denying most of the allegations against him, other than accusations of violence. He is seeking redemption, unlike Kavanaugh, who denied allegations of misconduct and who was protected against additional evidence from coming out by Republicans who cut off 25 witnesses who wanted to testify. Platner’s populist message is very dangerous to the MAGA Project 2025 agenda so we’re in for a long tough battle.
Platner has not been accused of anything as serious as the allegations against Trump, and he did serve his country—which is more than draft-dodging Trump was willing to do. MAGA knows he has a good chance of beating Collins and that’s why Turley is going to keep harping about Platner.
The EJ Carroll case looks like nonsense. Same with the 34 felonies.
Slow-walking the Epstein reveal is tangentially related to protecting a few rich and powerful players but it is primarily about protecting a most-favored nation. I can’t definitively prove that but that’s the way to bet.
oh here is our daily TDS Poorly Written Fictional Dump from a ranking Paid TDS Anon… how boring….
It’s Gigi posting from an insane asylum. MAGA MAGA MAGA blah blah blah. The same lunacy every day.
Look up Roy Moore and verify Trump’s support of him— then consider which one is the “pig” and the worst Senatorial candidate.
You’ve got to come up with some new material on Trump. In my opinion, Ms. Carroll is in need of treatment to regain her sobriety. Her handlers let her be interviewed — by Anderson Cooper, for example — when she is clearly not sober. This is cruel. This is what users do.
She can’t remember the year the alleged incident happened. She asks us to believe that Trump was just loitering in a high end women’s department store, waiting to assault some addled shopper in a dressing room. How did the assault work exactly. Did he rip off her clothes, as the sales lady hovered and asked if a different size was needed? Were all the other dressing rooms empty? Did no one hear her cries for help?
It was an abuse to fund her and amplify her and parade her broken self on national television shows. Just like the Dems did with broken down old Joe Biden. Bunch of users.
Feminazi and New York Times writer Jodi Kantor is the very personification of Rush Limbaugh’s “Feminism Hypothesis.”
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Time Magazine interview with Rush Limbaugh, Oct. 25, 1992
Q. I know you’re not a hater, but don’t you think you come across as mean when you call feminists ugly women who can’t get dates?
A. No, it’s not mean. I once wrote a newspaper column when I was in Sacramento, and I said feminism was established so as to allow unattractive women easier access to the mainstream. There is a profoundly held, truthful belief rooted in there that is, in my mind, compassionate and sympathetic to women. But you have to think about it yourself in order to get it.
Q. I’m thinking.
A. Because of the shallowness of our society and because of the biological differences in men and women, attractive women have an edge at the outset. They are the first noticed in social situations, and they are highly thought of in business situations. It’s just a fact. And in many cases attractive women have not had to prepare themselves as well intellectually because they’ve got these other things to rely on. Meanwhile you have women who don’t think they fit into the category of attractive, pretty, beautiful, whatever, who nevertheless are intelligent and bright and witty, and who have devoted themselves to education, and they care seriously about advancing through life as much as anybody else does. And they are just fed up that a bunch of bimbos are either married to high-profile people or are employed by high-profile people and they aren’t.
Q. So women go to law school because they’re ugly?
A. I’m not saying that. I’m saying feminism was established, that the idea was, “Goddammit, we’re going to have to have a political movement here to get what we’re entitled to because it’s not fair, we’re not getting it out there.”
In the Maine senate race, you have an authentically normal person for whom you can vote, Senator Collins. She seems to do her homework and make careful decisions, with good intentions.
Platner, by contrast, is having trouble faking being a measured person with rational positions long enough to win. Weird stuff keeps erupting. What are his real, actual positions on the issues? With Trump, you knew those. Yes, he has an intemperate personality like Platner,’s but you always knew Trump’s positions on the issues. They haven’t changed much.
What are Platner’s? He’s meajlymouthing them. All things to all people style.
Platner’s handlers may end up deciding, Let Platner be Platner. He can’t be anything else. In this strategy, they would have let him be honest and upfront about his actual positions. He is a bad mealymouther. He can’t Spanburger his way through, and only after elected show his true colors.
Voters can deal with a boor, if they like his positions. Trump has taught us that. And Platner is having trouble being a phony. He should stop trying.
Yeah, we can expect Trump to pander to the very stupidest people. And Planter aspires to emulate that formula.
And Planter (sic) aspires to….
X, you will never get a fraction of the attention that Platner (not Planter) receives, despite you being more stupid than a potted plant.
🤣🤣🤣
Platners positions,
1. How to please yourself in a port-o-potty
2. Sexting while married
3. Nazi tats
4. Homophobe, antisemitic and misogynist slurs 101
5. How to manhandle and slightly kidnap women
6. Showing up drunk to a womans house when she told you not to, a self study guide, BYOB
Is that the latest MAGA spin? That’s the best you can do? Platner’s sincerity is clicking with Maine voters. Susie Collins has Parkinson’s, which makes it difficult for her to speak, and she is anything but careful with her voting record. She is mostly pro-MAGA, and succumbs to pressure from Republicans—which voters don’t like. Maine voters want someone to stand up to Trump and Project 2025. Maine voters want a change and regardless of Platner’s past dark period following his combat service, he is seeking redemption and the promises he is making to Maine voters are resonating. That’s why MAGA is so afraid of him.
OT
Abschiebe-Hansa
Der Osten Machts!
Sommer, Sonne, Remigration!
– AfD
________
Literal Translation: Deportation-Hansa – The East is getting it done! – Summer, sun, remigration!
This slogan was prominently featured on AfD election posters during state parliament election campaigns in eastern Germany (such as Thuringia and Brandenburg). The visual design of the posters typically features a passenger airplane.
JAWOHL!
The question yet unanswered remains: is there redemption from being a reprehensible sack of moral and ethical turpitude? Mainers will provide it in November. It may just turn out to be another Michael Jackson moment of no consequence to the psychofans amongst us.
Has Kantor committed a crime by writing what she wrote?
That’s the standard? Nobody is allowed to criticize anyone else’s positions unless they commit a crime by writing them down? Are you really that much of an idiot?
It would encourage more free expression, which is what it’s all about, so I heard. It is also in the spirit of brainstorming.
Some criticism is just wanton sadism which produces no solutions at all. There is nothing constructive to it at all.
Jodi Kantor just invented a tiered abuse registry. Classic MeToo. And the store-brand knockoff. She put herself in charge of the grading scale. The rule appears simple. Allegations against the right enemy are disqualifying. Allegations against the right ally are “pretty different.” This is not journalism. It is product management.
We were told for years that character matters, abuse matters, and women should be believed regardless of politics. Now we’re informed that some allegations are “classic” and others are apparently substitutes.
Flip the jersey. Would Kantor go on CNN to explain the taxonomy if the party labels were reversed? Would she reassure viewers that allegations of arm-twisting, physical confinement, and a Nazi tattoo were not the right kind of allegations? Would she describe a woman’s account of being locked in a room overnight as mostly “being his boyfriend gave me a view into him and I did not like what I saw”?
The answer is not complicated. MeToo was a claim that character and conduct matter. Kantor is not walking that back. She is auctioning it off. The price is a Senate seat in Maine.
Principles that bend for power were never principles. They were positioning.
A timeline of Graham Platner’s controversies during his Senate campaign
https://archive.md/PuE7S
So she shouldn’t have a right to write what she writes because the free speech lovers here don’t like what she writes?
Wrong.
She has the 1stA right to write whatever she wants.
And by her writing, she proves to the rest of us how she will change her stance on #metoo because Platner is a Democrat.
Then the View’s Sunny Hostin proves to us how flexible she is concerning the #metoo movement if it means gaining power.
True. I’m sick of people defending her because of her right to free speech, but she has no right not to be criticized for her speech. That’s the beauty of the First Amendment. We all have the freedom to speak without the government abridging that right. And power is everything to them.
Oh, and I applaud for both Kantor and Hostin to speak their minds and let us know exactly the kind of character they are.
Would you prefer that they not have that kind of character?
They can have any kind of character they want or choose to. That is all them.
Just lets us and all the other women out there know what that is.
I looked closely at the 1st Amendment again…nope… nothing about not being allowed to criticize anyone’s speech.
What is the purpose of criticizing it? To make it stop?
That’s the standard? Nobody should write anything down unless their purpose is to make the thing they write about stop? Are you really that much of an idiot?
She can write whatever the heck she wants. The First Amendment gives her the right to do so, but doesn’t require that one agree with her or not point out her blatant, sickening hypocrisy. Quite honestly, she and her ilk like Schumer and Warren make me sick with their win-at-any-cost approach to politics. Beware the Jacobins.
This kantor is just a piece of sh*t!!
Formidable foe?