Graham Platner, the professed communist and former Nazi admirer who has lied wildly about his past and is, as progressive Stockholm syndrome victim David Brooks explained on PBS, “a moral degenerate,” has now been credibly accused of rape.
Brooks went on, “The abuse of women, the sexting, the Nazi tattoo, I don’t even need to say anything beyond his Reddit posts, which are not in the past, by the way. He did that for a long time, abusing rape — people who might have been raped, diminishing rape in the military, insulting fellow military officers, calling himself a communist.” Rape would seem to be frosting on this particularly disgusting cake that Democrats were prepared to devour and say “Yum-yum.” Rape? Never mind. Democrats, including Chuck Schumer and Elizabeth Warren have made it clear that they will support Platner in his race against squish GOP Senator Susan Collins because they want to win majorities in Congress no matter what values they have to trash and no matter what scum they have to support to do it.
Today another test of their resolve arrived. One of the named women the New York Times interviewed in its investigation into Platner’s sexual history, Jenny Racicot, 41, elaborated on her previous account to the Times by revealing that Platner raped her. She had originally told the paper only that she cut off contact with Platner after he arrived at her home drunk and engaged in “unsettling” and “reckless” behavior. Now she admits that the “unsettling” behavior was raping her.
Racicot did not disclose the sexual assault for fear of being labeled a rape victim, she told Politico, which broke today’s story. Politico also spoke to the man Racicot dated after Platner, and whom she confided in about the alleged sexual assault, reviewed communications between Racicot and her therapist discussing her decision to come forward, and reviewed communications between Racicot and an acquaintance whom she warned about getting involved with Platner.
As he has denied so many things that turned out to be true, Platner denied the latest allegation, telling Politico, “These allegations are troubling, serious, and false. Any accusation of non-consensual behavior is categorically untrue.” He also posted a video to his Senate campaign’s X account shortly after the Politico piece was published in which he stated that the allegations of sexual assault were false and said he and his team are “taking time to reflect on the best path forward.”
I’m sure you remember that Platner also denied that he knew the large Nazi tattoo he had on his chest was a large Nazi tattoo when he got it. Platner is a serial applicant for an Ethics Alarms “Jumbo,” the award a public figure can acquire here when he or she emulates Jimmy Durante in the film of the musical “Jumbo.” Jimmy played a clown apprehended trying to steal the biggest elephant in the world from the circus. Caught elephant-handed and asked by a constable, “Where are you going with that elephant?,” Durante responded, “What elephant?”
Ethics Alarms 
All those who defended Platner should be ethically estopped from commentary about his qualifications as senator.
In fact, in view of their tragically misguided and unethical behavior, they should be mocked relentlessly every time they comment about US politics.
Every senator who supported him, especially after the revelation of his Totenkopf tattoo, should issue a formal, abject, level 1 apology.
Final observation: None of this will happen, and the Platner defenders will shamelessly blame Trump and the Republicans for dirty tricks, completely ignoring the fact that this could be seen coming for months and months without any help from the right at all.
I find the accusations against Platner to be imminently believable, but I’m hesitant on one front. There allegations made, yes, but as of yet no convictions in a court of law. And I hate so much that all these allegations appear just in time to derail a candidacy, no matter how credible they are. Am I a naif for wanting to hold onto the creed, “Innocent until proven guilty?”
Heh. Well, that has never been the standard for political campaigns.
If this were the only potentially disqualifying thing in his campaign, then I might agree that it may not be, by itself, enough.
But considering all the other things that have come to light vis-a-vis Platner, this is the proverbial straw that broke the camel’s back, even before it is proven in a court of law (assuming it has not passed the statute of limitations).
That’s just how these things work. Political campaigns are about proving your worthiness to serve in a position, in this case, US Senate. With all the sexual irregularities brought to light notwithstanding this accusation, along with the moral turpitude of tattooing a Nazi death-camp symbol on your body, the preponderance of the evidence has long been against being qualified.
He survived this long only because replacing him is likely to be fatal to the Democrat’s chances. Not certainly, to be sure, but likely. So the Dems defended him to an absurd degree. This is just a bridge too far for most of them.
Well, that has never been the standard for political campaigns.
I cannot deny that. And certainly on Racicot’s side are details and evidence that she can provide — therapist notes, texts with friends, a boyfriend who said she told him what happened before Platner ever started his campaign. If I had to make a snap call given the evidence at hand, I’d conclude Platner is guilty.
But…
Isn’t it convenient that Platner was “blackout drunk” and couldn’t recall what had happened the next morning? And of course he denies it ever happened, denies that any of the abusive behavior he has been accused of ever happened, and that it has all been orchestrated by outside operatives trying to derail his campaign. I would have laughed at that, except we’ve seen this happen time and again. If the Left doesn’t want someone in office, they will pull out the stops on the smear campaign, throw as much mud as possible to see if anything sticks, like with Kavanaugh.
But…
Just because it is a smear campaign, that doesn’t mean that the allegations aren’t true. As we saw with Swalwell, it seems that the Left can sit on a trove of damning details and only unleash them when politically expedient. Maybe the Left doesn’t care if their candidate has a sordid history; maybe that’s a feature, not a bug, because that makes removing them much easier, if necessary.
Looking at Maine’s laws, it seems that the statute of limitations on unlawful sexual contact, if the victim is over 18 years of age, is 20 years, so Racicot has plenty of time to file charges. I don’t know what her chances of success would be, though. There tends to be an uphill battle for a woman to convince a jury it was rape when there was already a sexual relationship in place.