Anonymous wrote:

Soon? Isn’t the primary today? After that it’s way too late.

Anonymous wrote:Hello DCUM friends, can you gift a WASHPO article and if yes, would anyone kindly gift this thread yesterday’s opinion piece on Platner from his former campaign manager Genevieve McDonald?

Thank you!

I don’t have a WaPo subscription but was able to read this when I googled. Hope others are too.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2026/06/08/graham-platner-maine-us-senate-primary-bid-sends-dubious-message/

Hello DCUM friends, can you gift a WASHPO article and if yes, would anyone kindly gift this thread yesterday’s opinion piece on Platner from his former campaign manager Genevieve McDonald?

Thank you!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am genuinely trying to understand how Democrats that wholeheartedly supported Ford can continue to support Platner and even worse, attack the woman who came forward so viciously. It seems completely hypocritical.

I just wrote a blog post about this. Lyndsey Fifield herself started an organization aimed at discrediting Christine Blasey Ford. This was just a couple of years after Fifield says that she had been in an abusive relationship. If her relationship with Platner was as abusive as she says, she doesn't appear to have gained much empathy from it. Regardless, as I wrote in my blog, it is reasonable to have the same doubts about Fifield as Fifield clearly had about Blasey Ford.

Except that anyone who "had doubts" about CBF was called all sorts of names for not "believing all women." Remember that?
DP

That’s what is happening to those who have doubts about Fifield, including by you.

You seem to be deliberately ignoring the point - which is why were so many Democrats, including you, so utterly outraged over an allegation of teenaged groping, yet now so completely willing to chalk up Platner's bad behavior and comments as "he was young and stupid, all is forgiven"?

Not to mention, why did you believe CBF without reservation (even with zero substantiation) but now call Fifield a liar - when she actually does have evidence in the form of old text messages? Don't you find this just a wee bit hypocritical?

You are a liar and presenting false information. I have never called Fifield a liar. In my blog post, I explicitly said that I am not calling her a liar. I have never said that Platner is forgiven for his alleged behavior.

You need to take a good look in the mirror and reconsider which of us is a hypocrite. You are not treating Blasey Ford's and Fifield's allegations equally. You are allowing political motivations to determine your opinion. Moreover, you are behaving exactly like you claim Kavanaugh's opponents were.

Remember when Democrats believed CBF without question - and screamed at anyone who had their doubts? Remember Democrats protesting during the Kavanaugh hearings?

You personally may not be calling Fifield a liar, but plenty of the same people who believed CBF certainly are. And you don't see anything hypocritical about that? Talk about 'political motivations'... THOSE are the people who are not treating the two allegations equally - and I am calling out THAT hypocrisy.

You conflate the two, and that’s why women who are actually raped and sexually assaulted have a difficult time coming forward. It’s because people like you PP. Kavanaugh was accused of an actual sexual penetration and yet you want to say it is equal to Platner being accused of grabbing his girlfriend’s arm. GTFOH with your BS.

Signed someone who was actually sexually assaulted. You people make me sick.

Is this what you are talking about? An anonymous woman represented by Michael Avenatti?
.

+1
Just absurd, not to mention a lie. He was never accused of rape - or "actual sexual penetration" as the PP claims. I guess they figure the more they say it, the more someone might actually believe it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The main subject thinks she was set up by the NYT to help Platner:

In the end, I don’t think she’s any different than any other woman who has tried to stand up to tell the truth about a man. It’s just a question of which side savages the whistleblower.

Wow, that was powerful. I don't blame her for feeling used. She provided them with everything they asked for, and more - which they didn't even use. Now they've painted her as some kind of political operative when she was simply recounting her experiences with Platner. Pretty gross behavior for the NYT to have so blatantly portrayed her in this way instead of, you know, "believing all women".

They totally softened the description of her political activism.

So? He also dated a Democrat who said he was "reckless and unsettling." Face it, you don't actually "believe all women."

Reckless and unsettling in what way? Did she describe what she meant by that? What was the context of this recklessness, spending, actions, driving, promiscuity, what exactly? When did they date? Was it fifteen years ago in his twenties, or three years ago? Are you the same person at 21, at 31, at 41 years of age? Timing is everything.

Great point! Did you believe the allegation of groping against a TEENAGED Kavanaugh? If you did believe it, did you also believe he had grown into a respectable man who is a pillar of his community? I mean, timing is everything, right? Or does that expansively forgiving attitude only apply to *checks notes* Democrats?

If you were not so entrenched in your own BS and biases and imbued with the ability to comprehend, you already know the answer to your silly question. Now go back and read with understanding instead of reading to counterpunch and respond.

It's funny how you refuse to answer straightforward questions but so very telling. You're more than willing to forgive mistakes made by young men - IF THEY'RE DEMOCRATS - but happy to join in a witchhunt against teenaged boys - IF THEY'RE REPUBLICANS. Glad we cleared that up, you tremendous hypocrite.

Was Platner accused of attempted rape and sexual assault like Justice Rapey? Because the allegations against one are not the same as the other. Further, one was an overprivileged dbag of the type all of us know. Used to getting away with everything and everyone making excuses for his entitled a--. The other served our country and suffered terrible PTSD that he admits contributed to some very bad behavior, including the the most recent allegations.

Both are bad. They are not both equal.

I'm not a Mainer. And if he was running in my state as a resident, I honestly don't know what I would do. But, at this point, you are comparing the two like they're the same. They're not.

Kavanaugh was NEVER accused of rape. Ever. When you lie like that, it discredits anything else you might have to say. And Kavanaugh is a far better person than this lowlife toad, Platner, who has said some absolutely repulsive things about women, black people, and his fellow vets. Lastly, Kavanaugh hasn't sported a Nazi tattoo, ever.

I'm not a Mainer either, but if I was, this would be the easiest choice ever.

Nah, it doesn't, Kavanagh fangirl. I simply was going off memory. Not rape, you're right. But he was accused of sexual assault and of witnessing and doing nothing about a gang rape. That's so much better, you're right.

Kav may not have sported a Nazi tattoo, he just lied and cried under oath (in addition to the above) to get a lifetime appointment where he is stripping away rights and democracy. So yeah, if I were weighing things, it really would be sort of easy now that you reminded me of some of this. And it wouldn't be for Kavanagh.

The person I assume you're referring to - Julie Swetnick - also falsely accused four coworkers of sexually harassing her. She had quite a history of making false claims - something I'm sure you didn't deliberately leave out.

In its civil complaint in a state court in Oregon, the company said Swetnick, a software engineer, was an employee for a few weeks before its human resources department received a report that she had engaged in "unwelcome sexual innuendo and inappropriate conduct" toward two male co-workers at a business lunch.

The lawsuit said that Swetnick in turn accused Webtrends of subjecting her to "physically and emotionally threatening and hostile conditions" and that she claimed that she'd been sexually harassed by four co-workers. The co-workers denied the allegations, the suit said.

Company officials later determined, the suit said, that Swetnick had provided false information on her employment application. The suit alleged that she had misrepresented the length of time she worked at a previous employer and falsely claimed that she'd earned an undergraduate degree in biology and chemistry from Johns Hopkins University.
https://apnews.com/article/lawsuits-ap-top-news-courts-sexual-misconduct-north-america-bccc4dd598df4e71bbf6c40ff4830373

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you compare base facts between Kavanaugh and Platner, Platner comes off worse. I personally do not see how anyone who believed Ford and opposed Kavanaugh can support Platner. Kavanaugh was a high schooler at the time of the alleged assault and there was no contemporaneous evidence of the alleged assault, whereas Platner was an adult and there is some contemporaneous evidence, albeit imperfect. Ford went first to Anna Eshoo and then Feinstein, Platner’s accuser is a conservative activist (but this happened in the days before DC was so polarized; that sort of dating wasn’t rare); that washes out. There are more women allegedly in the wings with more than there were with Kavanaugh. And, there weren’t any adult accusations of Kavanaugh, it was from when he was a teen.

I am genuinely trying to understand how Democrats that wholeheartedly supported Ford can continue to support Platner and even worse, attack the woman who came forward so viciously. It seems completely hypocritical.

Probably because the other five women had an entirely different experience, and they are also not attached to a political agenda as this one woman obviously is. Also, why is everyone calling it sexual assault? Where was the sexual assault allegation, or is it simply that her gender makes it sexual?

So again, all of the other women who had relationships with Platner and said he was a decent guy and was not at all abusive are all a bunch of lying scumbags to be ignored?

Did you ignore the 65 women who knew Kavanaugh in high school at the time of the alleged assault and signed a letter of support for him?

https://www.npr.org/2018/10/04/654303304/longtime-friend-defends-kavanaugh-against-sexual-assault-allegations

Yeah right, I doubt Kavanaugh even had 65 female friends in high school to begin with, let alone them remembering who the hell he was back then.

DP. You're completely proving the PPs point. You don't want to believe any support of Kavanaugh because you don't like him. And yet, he has/had tons of female friends, both in high school, and as an adult. RBG praised him for being the justice who hired the most female clerks. But I'm sure you've totally dismissed those facts.

Not at all. It's not credible in the first place. That "letter" was released within FOUR HOURS of Ford's allegations becoming public. You couldn't possibly reach out to 65 different women who you hadn't been in contact with for decades and get them to sign on to a letter that quickly. Clearly there is something very fishy about that "letter" - if anything the letter would have had to have been organized months in advance of allegations, if it was even real at all. That's not my opinion, either - numerous reporters and commentators believed the letter was fishy. First of all, they weren't high school classmates, as Georgetown Prep where Kavanaugh attended was an all-boys school. The women whose names appeared attended totally different schools or were friends of friends who didn't even know Kavanaugh well. Additionally, numerous women who allegedly signed the letter were either unable to be reached for followup by reporters, or when contacted said thy felt misled, they signed before knowing any of the details, or that they never would have signed, knowing what they later found out about the allegations.

I could go on the class year insta page for my high school and get probably 150 signatures for something important within an hour. Have you ever used social media.

When did you graduate from HS? Who in the heck is keeping up with HS forty-years out? LOSERS!

DP. My high school 40th reunion is this fall and there has been lots of communication via social media about it. I can see why you wouldn't know about this phenomenon - no doubt the organizers of your reunions have been leaving you off the list, for good reason. Wow.

It's very different to get people together for a reunion months ahead versus getting endorsements from people in 4 hours. Plus I still call BS because I was just at my 40th last fall and we lost a bunch of people due to cancer, car accidents and so on - the remainder are scattered all across the country and so on. And there are many who for various reasons are not into social media. For someone to suggest they could get some massive response in 4 hours or less is just straight-up BS no matter who you are, spare me your arrogant condescending "I can see why YOU..." crap because you are straight up lying through your teeth.

I could easily put a message on my FB page right now and get more than 65 responses. Especially if I was asking for something important, like people to vouch for my character or whatnot. You sound completely out of touch - both literally and figuratively. The fact that you don't seem to understand how easy it is to quickly connect with a large group of people makes that glaringly evident.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The main subject thinks she was set up by the NYT to help Platner:

In the end, I don’t think she’s any different than any other woman who has tried to stand up to tell the truth about a man. It’s just a question of which side savages the whistleblower.

Wow, that was powerful. I don't blame her for feeling used. She provided them with everything they asked for, and more - which they didn't even use. Now they've painted her as some kind of political operative when she was simply recounting her experiences with Platner. Pretty gross behavior for the NYT to have so blatantly portrayed her in this way instead of, you know, "believing all women".

They totally softened the description of her political activism.

So? He also dated a Democrat who said he was "reckless and unsettling." Face it, you don't actually "believe all women."

Reckless and unsettling in what way? Did she describe what she meant by that? What was the context of this recklessness, spending, actions, driving, promiscuity, what exactly? When did they date? Was it fifteen years ago in his twenties, or three years ago? Are you the same person at 21, at 31, at 41 years of age? Timing is everything.

Great point! Did you believe the allegation of groping against a TEENAGED Kavanaugh? If you did believe it, did you also believe he had grown into a respectable man who is a pillar of his community? I mean, timing is everything, right? Or does that expansively forgiving attitude only apply to *checks notes* Democrats?

If you were not so entrenched in your own BS and biases and imbued with the ability to comprehend, you already know the answer to your silly question. Now go back and read with understanding instead of reading to counterpunch and respond.

It's funny how you refuse to answer straightforward questions but so very telling. You're more than willing to forgive mistakes made by young men - IF THEY'RE DEMOCRATS - but happy to join in a witchhunt against teenaged boys - IF THEY'RE REPUBLICANS. Glad we cleared that up, you tremendous hypocrite.

Was Platner accused of attempted rape and sexual assault like Justice Rapey? Because the allegations against one are not the same as the other. Further, one was an overprivileged dbag of the type all of us know. Used to getting away with everything and everyone making excuses for his entitled a--. The other served our country and suffered terrible PTSD that he admits contributed to some very bad behavior, including the the most recent allegations.

Both are bad. They are not both equal.

I'm not a Mainer. And if he was running in my state as a resident, I honestly don't know what I would do. But, at this point, you are comparing the two like they're the same. They're not.

Kavanaugh was [b]NEVER accused of rape. [/b] Ever. When you lie like that, it discredits anything else you might have to say. And Kavanaugh is a far better person than this lowlife toad, Platner, who has said some absolutely repulsive things about women, black people, and his fellow vets. Lastly, Kavanaugh hasn't sported a Nazi tattoo, ever.

I'm not a Mainer either, but if I was, this would be the easiest choice ever.

Here you are in a conversation in which you are utterly ignorant of the facts or just an outright liar. Here is just one article of many that you could have easily found if you were half way interested in the truth.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/amp/nation/how-the-sexual-assault-accusation-against-kavanaugh-unfolded-in-one-timeline

Are you actually saying I'm not aware of the timeline of events? I've read everything related to the Kavanaugh allegations and am well aware of who said what. Are you the idiot who claimed he had "penetrated" someone, but naturally provided no links?

YOU are the outright liar here. You should be so ashamed of yourself.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am genuinely trying to understand how Democrats that wholeheartedly supported Ford can continue to support Platner and even worse, attack the woman who came forward so viciously. It seems completely hypocritical.

I just wrote a blog post about this. Lyndsey Fifield herself started an organization aimed at discrediting Christine Blasey Ford. This was just a couple of years after Fifield says that she had been in an abusive relationship. If her relationship with Platner was as abusive as she says, she doesn't appear to have gained much empathy from it. Regardless, as I wrote in my blog, it is reasonable to have the same doubts about Fifield as Fifield clearly had about Blasey Ford.

Except that anyone who "had doubts" about CBF was called all sorts of names for not "believing all women." Remember that?
DP

That’s what is happening to those who have doubts about Fifield, including by you.

You seem to be deliberately ignoring the point - which is why were so many Democrats, including you, so utterly outraged over an allegation of teenaged groping, yet now so completely willing to chalk up Platner's bad behavior and comments as "he was young and stupid, all is forgiven"?

Not to mention, why did you believe CBF without reservation (even with zero substantiation) but now call Fifield a liar - when she actually does have evidence in the form of old text messages? Don't you find this just a wee bit hypocritical?

You are a liar and presenting false information. I have never called Fifield a liar. In my blog post, I explicitly said that I am not calling her a liar. I have never said that Platner is forgiven for his alleged behavior.

You need to take a good look in the mirror and reconsider which of us is a hypocrite. You are not treating Blasey Ford's and Fifield's allegations equally. You are allowing political motivations to determine your opinion. Moreover, you are behaving exactly like you claim Kavanaugh's opponents were.

Remember when Democrats believed CBF without question - and screamed at anyone who had their doubts? Remember Democrats protesting during the Kavanaugh hearings?

You personally may not be calling Fifield a liar, but plenty of the same people who believed CBF certainly are. And you don't see anything hypocritical about that? Talk about 'political motivations'... THOSE are the people who are not treating the two allegations equally - and I am calling out THAT hypocrisy.

You conflate the two, and that’s why women who are actually raped and sexually assaulted have a difficult time coming forward. It’s because people like you PP. Kavanaugh was accused of an actual sexual penetration and yet you want to say it is equal to Platner being accused of grabbing his girlfriend’s arm. GTFOH with your BS.

Signed someone who was actually sexually assaulted. You people make me sick.

Wait - WTAF are you talking about? Provide a link stating the bolded.

You know what makes me sick? People like you LYING about rapes that never occurred. THAT is what makes women hesitant to come forward, because aholes making false accusations make people doubt others. You are truly disgusting.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As we sit here arguing about Platner online, it is only one year ONE YEAR since his wife caught him cheating on their marriage with a half dozen sexting partners and just a couple of months after that he announces a Senate campaign.

Anyone who can’t grasp the impulsive madness that dictates Platner’s existence is very naive and in for a rude awakening.

+1
It's cute how he thought none of his grotesque behaviors would be discovered during a campaign. That shows how unremarkable he considers this kind of behavior. Just a big nothingburger to him. Honestly, I've got very little sympathy for his wife at this point. WTH would she stay with this creep?

Probably because he saw that Americans don’t care. After all people voted for Trump twice to be POTUS and three times to be the face of his political party. And this is after Trump was accused of much worse. Look at Texas and Paxton. I noticed Platner haters haven’t said one negative word against Paxton.

I think Paxton was a terrible choice - Cornyn should absolutely have won. Happy?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you compare base facts between Kavanaugh and Platner, Platner comes off worse. I personally do not see how anyone who believed Ford and opposed Kavanaugh can support Platner. Kavanaugh was a high schooler at the time of the alleged assault and there was no contemporaneous evidence of the alleged assault, whereas Platner was an adult and there is some contemporaneous evidence, albeit imperfect. Ford went first to Anna Eshoo and then Feinstein, Platner’s accuser is a conservative activist (but this happened in the days before DC was so polarized; that sort of dating wasn’t rare); that washes out. There are more women allegedly in the wings with more than there were with Kavanaugh. And, there weren’t any adult accusations of Kavanaugh, it was from when he was a teen.

I am genuinely trying to understand how Democrats that wholeheartedly supported Ford can continue to support Platner and even worse, attack the woman who came forward so viciously. It seems completely hypocritical.

Probably because the other five women had an entirely different experience, and they are also not attached to a political agenda as this one woman obviously is. Also, why is everyone calling it sexual assault? Where was the sexual assault allegation, or is it simply that her gender makes it sexual?

So again, all of the other women who had relationships with Platner and said he was a decent guy and was not at all abusive are all a bunch of lying scumbags to be ignored?

Did you ignore the 65 women who knew Kavanaugh in high school at the time of the alleged assault and signed a letter of support for him?

https://www.npr.org/2018/10/04/654303304/longtime-friend-defends-kavanaugh-against-sexual-assault-allegations

Yeah right, I doubt Kavanaugh even had 65 female friends in high school to begin with, let alone them remembering who the hell he was back then.

DP. You're completely proving the PPs point. You don't want to believe any support of Kavanaugh because you don't like him. And yet, he has/had tons of female friends, both in high school, and as an adult. RBG praised him for being the justice who hired the most female clerks. But I'm sure you've totally dismissed those facts.

Not at all. It's not credible in the first place. That "letter" was released within FOUR HOURS of Ford's allegations becoming public. You couldn't possibly reach out to 65 different women who you hadn't been in contact with for decades and get them to sign on to a letter that quickly. Clearly there is something very fishy about that "letter" - if anything the letter would have had to have been organized months in advance of allegations, if it was even real at all. That's not my opinion, either - numerous reporters and commentators believed the letter was fishy. First of all, they weren't high school classmates, as Georgetown Prep where Kavanaugh attended was an all-boys school. The women whose names appeared attended totally different schools or were friends of friends who didn't even know Kavanaugh well. Additionally, numerous women who allegedly signed the letter were either unable to be reached for followup by reporters, or when contacted said thy felt misled, they signed before knowing any of the details, or that they never would have signed, knowing what they later found out about the allegations.

I could go on the class year insta page for my high school and get probably 150 signatures for something important within an hour. Have you ever used social media.

When did you graduate from HS? Who in the heck is keeping up with HS forty-years out? LOSERS!

DP. My high school 40th reunion is this fall and there has been lots of communication via social media about it. I can see why you wouldn't know about this phenomenon - no doubt the organizers of your reunions have been leaving you off the list, for good reason. Wow.

Maybe or maybe I don’t consider my glory days in the past as a seventeen year old kid. So much more has happened in 40 years, with more interesting things and people. But YDY.

Oh, hon. I absolutely don't consider my high school days my "glory days." I haven't kept in touch with any of my high school classmates, except one, a lifelong best friend. I will, however, be attending my 40th reunion, because why not? It'll be fun to see people I haven't seen in 40 years.

You sound singularly unpleasant, and again - it's no surprise no one's passing along details of your reunions.