When Brett Kavanaugh was hit with baseless sexual assault allegations during his Supreme Court confirmation, Democrats far and wide demanded that his nomination be withdrawn under the asinine notion that we should “believe all women.” Now that their Nazi-tatted Senate candidate is facing far more credible accusations of misconduct, however, the party is changing its tune on such a standard.
The unsurprising flip-flop came about following the Thursday release of a New York Times exposé on Graham Platner, the presumptive U.S. Senate Democrat nominee in Maine. The report includes allegations by several of Platner’s ex-girlfriends of experiencing “volatile and ‘toxic’ relationships” with Platner “that were unsettling and at times emotionally wrenching.”
“Mr. Platner could be charming and charismatic, they recalled in interviews, but also demeaning to women and, in at least one case, even physically threatening. He drank heavily and was regularly unfaithful,” the report reads.
Much of the article centers around claims made by ex-girlfriend Lyndsey Fifield, a 40-year-old Virginian who worked in conservative circles and purportedly dated Platner from 2013 to 2015. Fifield — who has since accused the Times of “methodically delay[ing] and twist[ing]” the story to benefit Platner — alleged that the Democrat candidate “could be rough with her … particularly when they were drinking,” as described by the Times. She also claimed he “regularly grabbed her by the shoulders — sometimes hard enough to leave marks — and, on one occasion, yanked her out of a cab by her wrist after an argument when she wanted to stay in the car.”
Times writers Katie Glueck and Lisa Lerer did not disclose those allegations until the 22nd paragraph of the report.
A Platner campaign rep told the outlet that Platner “strongly disputes” Fifield’s claims of physical intimidation or squabbles, which the Times said it couldn’t corroborate. The Maine Democrat admitted that he “too often self medicated with alcohol, and was a far from perfect boyfriend” but that “[a]ny characterization beyond that is false, and … politically motivated.”
The allegations came following reports that Platner sent sexually explicit text messages to several women while married to his current wife.
[READ: What Graham Platner Did At His Brother’s Wedding Revealed His Repulsive Character 10 Years Ago]
Within hours of the Times story breaking, Democrats and their acolytes quickly dismissed Fifield’s allegations, mainly on the grounds that her claims shouldn’t be taken seriously because of her work in Republican circles. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., for example, reportedly said he’s “not impressed” with the Times report and that it “seems like a lot of nothing” from a “woman who works for right-wing political operations.”
Funny how Democrats are willing to so easily sideline Platner’s accusers as unreliable after treating the word of Kavanaugh’s suspect accusers as gospel. That point is particularly notable given that there is far more evidence to suggest wrongdoing by Platner than there ever was with Kavanaugh.
For starters, Platner doesn’t deny being in a relationship with Fifield. Nor did his campaign dispute some of Fifield’s claims, such as the one that Platner allegedly said he would “rape” anyone who broke into his apartment in “a sexual way, not in a gay way.”
What’s more is that the Times reportedly obtained and reviewed “texts between Ms. Fifield and Mr. Platner, along with Google Chat exchanges, texts and Facebook messages between Ms. Fifield and her friends during and after the relationship.” The outlet said it additionally “reviewed some of Ms. Fifield’s diary entries from after the relationship had ended.”
At the very minimum, it seems both parties confirmed that they interacted with one another and that there was, in fact, a relationship between them at some point.
While the veracity of the physical abuse claims is yet to be determined, what’s been presented thus far is already far more than what was put forward during the witch hunt against Kavanaugh. In Kavanaugh’s case, there was no evidence whatsoever to corroborate his accusers’ claims of sexual impropriety, let alone that he had even met them.
In their book Justice on Trial, authors Mollie Hemingway and Carrie Severino noted the inconsistencies in the testimony of Kavanaugh’s chief accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, and how she couldn’t even recall basic details about her alleged encounter with Kavanaugh. None of the people Ford named as being at the supposed party where the alleged rape occurred — including Ford’s lifelong friend Leland Keyser — recalled being at any such party. Keyser also said that she doesn’t know Kavanaugh, didn’t believe Ford’s story, and told the FBI that Ford’s allies tried pressuring her to change her statement to help Ford.
Claims by accusers Deborah Ramirez and Julie Swetnick also lacked any corroborating evidence and similarly collapsed under scrutiny.
And yet, Democrats and their media allies treated them all as credible.
What Graham Platner’s latest scandal confirms (yet again) is that the left doesn’t actually “believe all women.” They choose to “believe” some women and their allegations only when they can be weaponized to advance their quest for power.
Kavanaugh’s accusers were deemed “believable” because they could be used to block a conservative judge from ascending to the Supreme Court and moving it in an originalist direction. Eric Swalwell’s accusers were deemed “believable” because they could be used to prevent potential Republican victories in California’s gubernatorial primary. But since Platner’s accusers could threaten Democrats’ chances of giving GOP Sen. Susan Collins the boot, the party couldn’t care less.
It’s still possible that Democrats could try to make a last-minute swap with a less-controversial leftist in Maine’s Senate race. But unless and until that happens, the “party of women” will continue to defend Platner for as long as it takes.
