Graham Platner has been knifed in brutally expedited fashion, and a conclave of Democratic Party officials is already preparing to hand-pick his replacement, through an as-yet-unknown process that will mercifully bypass any inconvenient input from Maine primary voters, who had already voted for Platner in overwhelming fashion on June 9.
This isn't really about Platner or even the allegations. It's about the incentive structure.
Once political actors realize unadjudicated allegations can effectively nullify the outcome of a primary, they'll have every incentive to reach for that tool again.
...I'm "missing the point" because I wrote an article about the latest Platner developments, and you apparently wanted an article to be written on some other topic, making some other point that you wanted to make. OK. I agree someone is "missing" something here.
The important story is that another deceptive scumbag with no reverence for the truth is exploiting cultural victim compassion in pursuit of their own agenda. Michael has now brought it to the attention of the public. What needs to be addressed is the general failure to recognize and punish such sociopathic campaigns. Media literacy, on average, is like a 3/10.... it needs to be a 7 or 8 minimum. Can't have random individuals affecting politics with lies.
Seriously? It it's obvious that the accusers timed both these events to happen when there was no time to fight back. We'll see what turns up in the next few months. Maybe it was all true, and maybe it was a hit job.
But it was definitely timed to back the Maine supporters of Platner into a corner where it was impossible to keep him on the ballot. Platner is not the only victim here. I live in Maine and supported him.
YOU GET what's going on. I am a MEN'S RIGHTS advocate and also a truth seeker. I DO NOT believe ANY gRAPE 'claims' from MENOPAUSAL GROUPIES... in case people don't know that IS a thing. I find you very refreshing & truthful, even IF we are different and you think I am rough around the collar, I AM on board with MOST of what you say because it IS the TRUTH.
Joseph, the core problem with your MRA mantle as it pertains to sex crimes,is that, many women are also being charged with sex crimes. In lots of cases, as in other areas of criminal law that intesect with gender, women are given FAR longer index sentences than men for the same crime. For example women who kill their partners, are on average sentenced to 5 years longer than men who kill a partner. These data are for felony level charges, misdemeanours are different; women do generally get off more lightly in the lower courts.
This year a Wisconsin female teacher aid was sentenced to 50 years in prison for sex with multiple teenagers. Joseph, the enemy isn't women, the enemy is the state, the governance that use sex crimes as a tool for political leverage. Tracey's article is but an example of this playing out centre stage in the arena that manufactured it. Stop drinking the good aid dude
THANKS FOR PROVING SAUL ALINSKY'S COMMUNIST MANIFESTO.
"RULES FOR RADICALS" 101: 'Use the truth in REVERSE'
Sorry but you are regurgitating the exact antitheses of the TRUTH....
Just the opposite. w0e-MEN usually get a PUSSY PASS.
FACT: MEN serve 60% LONGER prison sentences than w0e-MEN for the SAME crime.
FACT: w0e-MEN are the aggressors in 70% of domestic violence....
yet 85% of the restraining orders are against MEN. w0e-MEN perpetrate FOUR TIMES as many child murders as MEN and commit 83% of all child abuse....
Yet w0e-MEN get custody in 82% of the cases. 78% of teachers are w0e-MEN....
And they are the ones banging their students in MOST cases....
That doesn't mean they are being prosecuted as the same rate....
Or given the same sentences.... It's the same with bestiality....
MOST bestiality is perpetrated by w0e-MEN....
Yet the feminist/fact/check/ doesn't show that....
w0e-MEN are having sex with animals ALL over social media including face book....
You NEVER see MEN being suggestive with animals....
But there are w0e-MEN all over social media humping animals....
So, it's obvious w0e-MEN commit most of the bestiality....
Even though it's not reflected in the feminist/fact/check stats.
I CALL BULLSHIT on your feminist/fact/check/ the TRUTH speaks volumes....
In the opposite direction. Susan Wright plotted her husband's murder, got him drunk, tied him up for kinky sex, melted hot wax on his balls, stabbed him 193 times....
Taking breaks in between the stabbings to talk to her kids....
Buried the body in the back yard/smiled in court.... AND SHE'S OUT! AFTER 16 YEARS!
Loreana Bobbit mutilated an innocent MAN while he was unconscious....
And SHE GETS OFF??????
The core problem with MRA'S is letting w0e-MEN grift as truth seekers
The core problem with ANY MAN is taking advice from a w0e-MAN....
Thanks for doing what Satan calls w0e-MEN to do.... USE THE TRUTH IN REVERSE.
Esposito you are correct on some points but you remove context. YES women are convicted of more crimes against children because they havd disproportionate burdern of child care. Also, womej who kill babies often have extreme mental illness ie post natal psychosis. Overall women d9 get off more lighting for same crimes as men, but NOT for felony crimes.
I am still trying to understand how a cosplaying oyster rich guy served our country, got a disability pension but yet is supposed to be competent to be a U.S. Senator. Aside from problems with women and the rape accusation he has also said really strange things like raping a burglar. Sorry this guy seems a little too twisted for me.
I agree - he was a problem candidate, but they chose him. Even if the Democratic leadership had continued to support him, the accusation would certainly cost him some female votes. It's a huge mess. I think Ms. Racicot should have volunteered for a polygraph test. Perhaps Platner should sue her for slander and then agree to drop the suit if she agrees to be polygraphed and make the results public. I don't think this should just go away. I don't understand why Swalwell did think of this.
Swalwell got out because when you have to constantly answer questions regarding a scandal you lose control of the campaign narrative and it gets ugly. Platner is just a bridge too far a lot of his statements dredged up are incredible to me he is ill suited to be a Senator even with some of the characters there now.
Yeah, just now learning more about Platner. I knew about the tattoo thing but since he had it covered and denied any Nazi stuff I thought he would be ok with that one. The rape allegation, unless proven false would have ruined him even if he stayed in a denied it. The Republican candidates seem to do better with rape allegations - or perhaps Trump is just an outlier.
And guess what Susan Collins was the vote who brought Kavanaugh over the brink. And the first accuser from Washington had actually worked with Susan Collins on the Kavanaugh vote. If it wasn't a hit job, it sure plays one well on TV. And I'm not certain about anything, but I think it should be investigated.
Right. The pool of potential politicians that have been in a "situation ship" at some point in their life is pretty big, and you just confirmed that winning the primary is meaningless for all those people.
No, you are missing the point. The collective action is occurring to kick out a candidate who is a clear liability, the accusation is a way to launder this occurrence. If some other candidate tries this it will just be ignored by the powers that be and go nowhere
Only aligned political actors in tune with the establishment can do this, and they will continue to do so as they have done. Everyone else reaching for this tool will discover that it wasn't made for them
"Once political actors realize accusations can nullify primaries..."
They can't, the establishment deciding to take a candidate out is what does that. And the establishment already knows this, they don't need to realize it.
Michael is laying out the facts and connecting some dots. These connections, and many more examples, would possibly underpin a more grand theory about the incentive structure that he clearly hinted at strongly here.
FOOL! YOU are the one that is missing something. grape IS political and GROUPIES crying grape on innocent MEN IS the issue even if those men are assholes.
I’m pleased to learn that I’m part of a functioning political party that can knife the loser who needs knifing, to get him out of the way so it still has a hope of winning in November. If you’ve become emotionally committed, especially as a public figure/commentator, it’s hard to just say ‘oops’ and move on. As the casual observer can, and the cold-blooded operator must. Tracey has long been making a (reasonable) case that we’re in a moral panic about sex crimes, but that’s not useful in winning Maine. Three cheers for the brutally expeditious!
Funny that your definition of a "functioning political party" is one that can decree from on high, using whatever flimsy pretext they wish, that its own primary election outcomes are negated.
It’s not funny, it’s practical. In this instance the primary voters picked a lulu. Understandably; I supported him and would have voted for him. But no need for a party to march right off a cliff to respect my vote for a doomed candidate, if there’s an alternative that might win.
It’s so funny that you guys think mainstream democrats are simultaneously useless and all-powerful like this, but I’m glad you’re showing your true colors here.
Just being practical. Platner’s viability was a judgement call until very recently. Now it’s clear he can’t beat Collins, that’s all. A shame, because there are other issues in play here.
They should have stuck to their guns and suggested that both Racicot and Platner be polygraphed. That is not perfect, but I can't think of anything better. The Dems can't just drop candidates every time a woman claims rape.
The idea that the Democratic Party is “functional” is legitimately insane. And being proud of a party that destroys a candidate with a flimsy and unverified rape accusation is just weird.
The woman waits several years to press any charges or say anything publicly, then does so in a way calculated to kill a popular political insurgent’s seemingly successful candidacy just at the point when his ejection from the race will leave selecting his replacement to the party establishment while making any legal investigation or timely adjudication of her accusations impossible. I have no doubt she will never actually file any charges. And, clearly, this “expeditious” move was not aimed at saving the Democrats losing a potential Senate victory. It was about saving the Democrats from the potential victory by a disruptive populist candidate who threatened the party establishment, which considers losing to a Republican a small price to pay for defeating such an embarrassing insurgency.
I'm not sure that's true. Platner was bringing in voters from outside of the Democratic Party. Independents and people who are unhappy with Trump. I'm not sure any of the candidates we're looking at (and I live in Maine) have that particular cocktail.
Platner was chosen not only for his politics, but also because the Democrats could see that he was a candidate who might finally win against Collins. Last time we lost by nine points. Time before that by 37 points.
That’s fair, and since I don’t live in Maine I’ll take your word for it. But were those voters going to stick with him in the fall after the scandal machine has done its work? People who identify as Loyal Democrats will grit their teeth and vote for the nominee no matter what. But the others…
I think with the latest allegations, he lost enough to support to not win the election. If those had come in the fall, the same thing would've happened.
What I'm saying is, I don't think the replacement will win. We'll find out.
I don't know if the assualt allegations are true or not. I think it's about 50-50 that it was a hit job. There was a lot of stake in this election, but I just don't know.
If the Uber wealthy whose taxes might go up, or the conservatives who are worried about the Supreme Court, or the crypto Bros who are worried about more regulation, or many others, didn't do a hit, they were sure thinking about it.
Maybe this was done for practical reasons (not moral). Maybe the Democratic leadership were worried he would lose to Collins. I still don't like it, but this could be true.
I initially thought this was some AIPAC hit job - I'm still not sure it wasn't.
Democrats got away with it when they went after Judge Roy Moore for having younger girlfriends when he was thirty, now they're turning on their own and accusing them of some obscure rape that probably never occurred. Sex is the new political weapon.
Good point, I forgot about him. I do vote for the Democrats. What he was doing wasn't illegal at the time. I do think Alabama raised their age of consent to 18 in the aftermath of that. I think they called it "The Roy Moore law".
I compared the Platner situation to the Kavanaugh appointment hearing.
It’s more his age. At that time 18-21 year old man and 14 year old girls was a normal thing, maybe even 23 year old men. But he was 32 and that was too old to be with a 14 year old girl. He still would not have gotten much time. Maybe 6 months? No idea. 6 months to 3 years, closer to 6 months.
It might've bolstered your point to include an image of the Al Franken case you describe. If it's so trivial, readers will see that and it'll lend validity to your perspective.
On Platner, I've not seen any major political pundit push back on this rape allegation. Most I've seen on Youtube, for example, appear to have wholesale accepted that he's a rapist - case closed...
Youtuber Vaush, who'd previously told people to vote Platner, didn't take a skeptical view. His most thoughtful claim was that Platner should drop out bc the rape allegations will now mean than his supporters have to spend forever arguing about the allegations - which is bad optics - rather than his policies. An earlier Vaush would've said that Leftists should speak what they percieve to be the Truth no matter the consequences, but that was a brash young man speaking a long time ago. What do you all think? 🤔
This was a long article you got out so quickly, so great job on that Michael. I felt a few more images to break up the text would've helped... I liked all the hyperlinks you put in, and thought you wrote well and with great emotional appeal.
Not sure where I stand on this story. I struggle to believe it's all concocted. But then, I'm not an unscrupulous lawyer targeting public figures with unprovable, highly emotive claims that most people wouldn't wanna be seen as defending/questioning - even if they're correct...
I suspect Platner did have sex with this woman, whilst he was drunk, that was not very pleasant for all involved. The level of intoxication suggested in the rape article is high, claiming that Platner had no recollection of his actions the next day.
If we go off the version of events presented so far, he was in an ongoing casual relationship with this woman whom he had has sex with prior multiple times, and he'd come to her house one night blackout drunk. It's certainly possible that he then, without being consciously aware of it, made a very bad, drunken error of judgement that has now cost him his political career...
When a blackout drunk woman has sex with a man, we would say she was unable to give meaningful consent. Seems the same would apply here; i.e. Platner could not meaningfully understand the gravity of his actions, nor is he alleged to have even been aware of them or able to remember them, if they occurred at all...
Seems like a lesson for us all on responsible drinking and caution around casual sex, even if you're in an "on and off" relationship with someone you think you're on good terms with... Platner has denied the claims and it'll be interesting to see if the case is taken any further, if more details and any meaningful evidence is made available to the public...
Haha, his early content was very entertaining, lively and authentic imo. Highly recommend clicking the "oldest" tab on his channel and listening to a vid that catches your eye. Nowadays, however, he's terrible. Often has cringe takes, no longer participates in live debates, and spends most of his time giving news commentary. Really, he just tries to avoid rocking the boat to keep a paycheck coming in, imo...
(And oooh, Senpai noticed me! 🫨👀✨️🔥👌👍 I'm honored 🫠 Hope I can provide helpful comments in future, at least on subjects I know about, which involves mostly sex science and sexual politics...)
Yes Vaush and his audience just double down on MeToo at this point, shutting out, sometimes banning any dissent. I do question whether he's truly sincere that his views have changed, considering he is a deep thinker. Part of me thinks when it comes to sex and sexual misconduct, that 2019-era Vaush is still there. Remember when he was caught with fetish-type drawings fairly recently? And he has the nerve to pedophile-panic every chance he gets for his Gen Ztard audience.
If a drunken w0e-MAN can't consent, then a drunken MAN can't consent either. The only part of your post that approached objectivity. Which is why I TOOK BACK MY LIKE on your post. By the logic that is used in the law, w0e-MEN are raping MEN equally by the logic being used
It’s amazing how much mutually non-consensual sex there is, right? 😂 Almost more the rule than the exception in many social circles! (Including, as it happens, the ones academics and media people run in.)
Once again Joseph, I get the point you're trying to make. Biologically women metabolise alcohol more slowly then men. Once thing worth pondering is, how does a woman who's had several drinks or is "blackout drunk" able to ascertain that she didn't consent?
The point isn't really about Platner. The point is the ability of the party insiders to get the candidate they want on the ballot even if it is not the candidate that gets the most votes in the primary. What purpose does the primary serve if the party is deciding who gets on the general election ballot instead of the voters?
I find it interesting and revealing that all these government officials top priority is getting Platner to drop out, not getting Platner in front of a jury.
So is Susan Collins, though not for the same reasons. It's a shame but I think the Democratic voters are willing to lower their standards just as the Republicans have done. I don't blame them.
Tracey stated in a recent stream with Hanania that this sort of Me Too type crap is not his desired beat but who else is gonna take it on?
Unrelated, I’m not sure the link is there between the DSCC, motivated by a recent pole showing Collins up by 3 points and the grifter Cheyenne Hunt’s Reckoning Action clown car takedown of Platner. Assuming none exists, it appears some clickbait chasing Gen Z monster, AKA Cheyenne Hunt, is deciding to shake up the Democratic party’s batting order in the top of the ninth inning of Maine’s senatorial contest. Is this really how the Democratic Party operates in the year 2026?
And finally, Al Franken, the only senator ever to resign over a jokey photo and a pic of him getting a little side boob via the back of his hand. What a giant pussy.
I haven't posited any particular "link" between the DSCC and any of the allegations, I was just citing their statement Monday (Schumer and Gillibrand) as one component of the Democratic Party infrastructure coalescing at warp-speed to defenestrate Platner.
Gillibrand is a FALSE rape grifter and a MAN hater as well as a hypocrite. She was buddy buddy with Weinstein until they railroaded him with those FALSE charges. btw for any morons that don't know Harvey was FRAMED, some of his convictions are being overturned. You might not know that his TWO main accusers were inviting to their MOTHERS HOUSE for dinner & personal haircuts for FIVE YEARS! They were giving him personal haircuts over their mother's house emails show for FIVE YEARS
Wow, didn’t have “Harvey Weinstein defense” on my bingo card!
I think a big problem Weinstein has is that even if there are issues with his convictions, he is indisputably a huge, condemnable scumbag. Which isn’t a crime in itself, but makes people less interested in any protestations on his behalf.
Anyone who paid me to be a political consultant would be wasting their money 99.5% of the time, but I would have earned it if Franken had had me on hand to say (as I was saying to my TV screen at the time): “Senator, go canoeing for ten days without your phone or a radio; see how things look when you get back.” He’d still have a political career (as a funnier and more intelligent, though otherwise interchangeable, establishment Dem). It’s normal for these feminist takedowns to be based on unsupported allegations; Franken’s was distinctive in that there were barely any allegations to begin with.
BINGO! Franken is innocent. He was trolling the camera KNOWING that the camera was on him> He PRETENDED to be feeling her breasts through a thick canvas military jacket
It’s funny how Cheyenne Hunt never mentions “putting her stake in the ground” to help women keep men out of their sports, bathrooms or locker rooms! Apparently that misogyny is ok.
Lest we forget that The Party did the same to "Luv Guv" Cuomo when his Emmy-winning daytime Covid updates (all fake, since he cooked the Nursing Home death stats that his directives caused) made him "the anti-Trump voice of reason" to a swooning populous. The Party deemed his popularity would threaten the plan to running the demented (and easily controlled) Biden. Same pattern.
Unquestionably, #MeToo takedowns have a generic quality such that they have more in common with each other than with the situations they are ostensibly meant to rectify. I think, however, the Cuomo one was more a power play by the new NY Democratic Party, which is now ascendant with Mamdani et al., rather than much to do directly with the presidential race.
BINGO! Remember the 12 GROUPIES who pretended Cuomo raped them/sexually assaulted them? Remember one of the accusers said "he made a joke about "eating the whole thing" when talking about a hot dog?
Thank you for writing this. I had no idea about this person. I was absolutely shocked at the speed of the endorsement take backs as well as the sheer number of people and organizations who felt the need to weigh in. Bernie was particularly disappointing. After all the smear efforts before that he had overcome, the fact that this one had such significance floored me. I am now even more informed and incredibly disappointed.
Michael writes: "The POLITICO article she planted was cleverly framed to suggest corroborating evidence had been uncovered that proves the 2021 rape, though if you spend approximately two minutes diligently scouring the article, no such evidence is presented."
From the Politico piece:
"Racicot also shared details about the alleged assault to the man she dated after Platner, who she began dating in 2022. The man, who was granted anonymity out of concern for his personal privacy, told POLITICO that Racicot had told him in bits and pieces about a bad experience with Platner before confiding the full details of what had happened in 2023. His account of what Racicot told him about the incident matched what Racicot told POLITICO.
"Racicot shared with POLITICO a series of private Facebook messages she exchanged with an acquaintance in 2023, about a year and a half after the alleged assault and well before Platner launched his political career, in which she cautioned the acquaintance against getting involved with Platner. In the messages, Racicot said she had “ended up in a bad situation with him,” describing Platner as “consensually careless” and saying he “doesn’t listen to you when drunk.” Reached by POLITICO, the acquaintance said she received the messages but declined to comment; POLITICO granted her anonymity at her request to protect her privacy in her Maine community.
"POLITICO also spoke with a friend Racicot had told about the alleged assault last summer, shortly after Platner launched his campaign. The friend, to whom POLITICO granted anonymity due to fear of social and professional backlash, recalled Racicot telling her about the incident, including that Platner had been “very drunk and wouldn’t take no for an answer.”"
How is this not corroborating evidence? You know, it's possible that both, 1) Platner was railroaded and 2) he's a rapist, are true.
Stupid comment. I virtually never accuse any alleged victim of outright lying, because my assessment is that in something like 95% of cases, even if an allegation is flawed, embellished, inaccurate, dubiously-motivated, or implausible in any number of respects, the reason for this does NOT tend to be willful, conscious lying. It's a much more complex set of cognitive and social factors. But whatever.
Wonderfully enjoyable narration. Almost perilous since I've got a mug of hot tea here with me.
Racicot's story is as peculiarly-worded as could possibly have been contrived and as much of a scumbag as Platner has appeared to be from the start, it docked perfectly in all my skeptical receptors. The guy certainly attracts idiot fuckbuddies.
He could win, though, if he has the stones to stay in. I hope he pulls out because I really don't want control of the Senate to tip.
I thought it was awfully convenient of the giants of the Democrat Party to en masse call in very short order on Platner to drop out, like they'd previously gotten their talking points. Warned what was coming? It makes Tracey's thesis more compelling. I'd not heard of the link between Hunt and the purging of the odious Swalwell and now Platner till today.
It could also be that those talking points were in a sealed envelope to only be opened and statements made in the event of anything else bad coming out. That could have included views of horrifying internal polling. The Monday deadline coming up, they were out of time. Their Senate control dreams were in deep trouble. Wheel out Hunt's Racicot project.
I just discovered that when Ms. Hunt announced the formation of her new advocacy organ in May, she was joined by several members of the Democratic Women's Caucus, including Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Debbie Dingell, Becca Balint, Rashida Tlaib, and others. So who the hell knows who she's coordinating with.
The only way either party will let you get this far, is if they have something on you so that you can be controlled. I guarantee this clown has far worse skeletons in his closet. If Collins wasn’t a defacto Democrat, they’d stick with their man.
Tracey is missing the point.
This isn't really about Platner or even the allegations. It's about the incentive structure.
Once political actors realize unadjudicated allegations can effectively nullify the outcome of a primary, they'll have every incentive to reach for that tool again.
Platner is temporary. The precedent isn't.
...I'm "missing the point" because I wrote an article about the latest Platner developments, and you apparently wanted an article to be written on some other topic, making some other point that you wanted to make. OK. I agree someone is "missing" something here.
Strange.
I thought criticizing the focus of someone else's analysis was a pretty normal part of journalism.
Don't you do that all the time?
You analyzed the immediate developments.
I'm saying the institutional precedent they create is the more important story.
The important story is that another deceptive scumbag with no reverence for the truth is exploiting cultural victim compassion in pursuit of their own agenda. Michael has now brought it to the attention of the public. What needs to be addressed is the general failure to recognize and punish such sociopathic campaigns. Media literacy, on average, is like a 3/10.... it needs to be a 7 or 8 minimum. Can't have random individuals affecting politics with lies.
The latest developments include Platner resigning, which makes your screed here aged like milk.
" resignation" in politics is but a euphemism for ousted by party politics see Keir Starmer
Yet Platner chose not to fight his accusers. He is a man without courage nor honor, then. Why defend him?
Seriously? It it's obvious that the accusers timed both these events to happen when there was no time to fight back. We'll see what turns up in the next few months. Maybe it was all true, and maybe it was a hit job.
But it was definitely timed to back the Maine supporters of Platner into a corner where it was impossible to keep him on the ballot. Platner is not the only victim here. I live in Maine and supported him.
Then you have already joined the forces calling for this man’s head, or like him have shown yourself unwilling to fight against them.
YOU GET what's going on. I am a MEN'S RIGHTS advocate and also a truth seeker. I DO NOT believe ANY gRAPE 'claims' from MENOPAUSAL GROUPIES... in case people don't know that IS a thing. I find you very refreshing & truthful, even IF we are different and you think I am rough around the collar, I AM on board with MOST of what you say because it IS the TRUTH.
Is this written is sporadic CAPS ironically to sound like a performatively edgy red piller, or are you being serious?
@BOTH!
Lol leave caps out of it. Gotta say it loud sometimes
Joseph, the core problem with your MRA mantle as it pertains to sex crimes,is that, many women are also being charged with sex crimes. In lots of cases, as in other areas of criminal law that intesect with gender, women are given FAR longer index sentences than men for the same crime. For example women who kill their partners, are on average sentenced to 5 years longer than men who kill a partner. These data are for felony level charges, misdemeanours are different; women do generally get off more lightly in the lower courts.
This year a Wisconsin female teacher aid was sentenced to 50 years in prison for sex with multiple teenagers. Joseph, the enemy isn't women, the enemy is the state, the governance that use sex crimes as a tool for political leverage. Tracey's article is but an example of this playing out centre stage in the arena that manufactured it. Stop drinking the good aid dude
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL......LOL
THANKS FOR PROVING SAUL ALINSKY'S COMMUNIST MANIFESTO.
"RULES FOR RADICALS" 101: 'Use the truth in REVERSE'
Sorry but you are regurgitating the exact antitheses of the TRUTH....
Just the opposite. w0e-MEN usually get a PUSSY PASS.
FACT: MEN serve 60% LONGER prison sentences than w0e-MEN for the SAME crime.
FACT: w0e-MEN are the aggressors in 70% of domestic violence....
yet 85% of the restraining orders are against MEN. w0e-MEN perpetrate FOUR TIMES as many child murders as MEN and commit 83% of all child abuse....
Yet w0e-MEN get custody in 82% of the cases. 78% of teachers are w0e-MEN....
And they are the ones banging their students in MOST cases....
That doesn't mean they are being prosecuted as the same rate....
Or given the same sentences.... It's the same with bestiality....
MOST bestiality is perpetrated by w0e-MEN....
Yet the feminist/fact/check/ doesn't show that....
w0e-MEN are having sex with animals ALL over social media including face book....
You NEVER see MEN being suggestive with animals....
But there are w0e-MEN all over social media humping animals....
So, it's obvious w0e-MEN commit most of the bestiality....
Even though it's not reflected in the feminist/fact/check stats.
I CALL BULLSHIT on your feminist/fact/check/ the TRUTH speaks volumes....
In the opposite direction. Susan Wright plotted her husband's murder, got him drunk, tied him up for kinky sex, melted hot wax on his balls, stabbed him 193 times....
Taking breaks in between the stabbings to talk to her kids....
Buried the body in the back yard/smiled in court.... AND SHE'S OUT! AFTER 16 YEARS!
Loreana Bobbit mutilated an innocent MAN while he was unconscious....
And SHE GETS OFF??????
The core problem with MRA'S is letting w0e-MEN grift as truth seekers
The core problem with ANY MAN is taking advice from a w0e-MAN....
Thanks for doing what Satan calls w0e-MEN to do.... USE THE TRUTH IN REVERSE.
Esposito you are correct on some points but you remove context. YES women are convicted of more crimes against children because they havd disproportionate burdern of child care. Also, womej who kill babies often have extreme mental illness ie post natal psychosis. Overall women d9 get off more lighting for same crimes as men, but NOT for felony crimes.
Killing a baby is not a felony crime?
If we are to believe in that FAKE psychobabble about postpartum depression....
As if w0e-MEN'S hormones and lack of stability....
Should weigh into her sentence.... if postpartum depression....
is allowed as a defense for CHILD MURDER....
I'd say that proves w0e-MEN are unstable animals that need to be controlled.
I'd say w0e-MEN are less stable than MEN yea?
I am still trying to understand how a cosplaying oyster rich guy served our country, got a disability pension but yet is supposed to be competent to be a U.S. Senator. Aside from problems with women and the rape accusation he has also said really strange things like raping a burglar. Sorry this guy seems a little too twisted for me.
I agree - he was a problem candidate, but they chose him. Even if the Democratic leadership had continued to support him, the accusation would certainly cost him some female votes. It's a huge mess. I think Ms. Racicot should have volunteered for a polygraph test. Perhaps Platner should sue her for slander and then agree to drop the suit if she agrees to be polygraphed and make the results public. I don't think this should just go away. I don't understand why Swalwell did think of this.
Swalwell got out because when you have to constantly answer questions regarding a scandal you lose control of the campaign narrative and it gets ugly. Platner is just a bridge too far a lot of his statements dredged up are incredible to me he is ill suited to be a Senator even with some of the characters there now.
Yeah, just now learning more about Platner. I knew about the tattoo thing but since he had it covered and denied any Nazi stuff I thought he would be ok with that one. The rape allegation, unless proven false would have ruined him even if he stayed in a denied it. The Republican candidates seem to do better with rape allegations - or perhaps Trump is just an outlier.
Focusing on what actually happened does not miss the point. This is not about how brilliant you are, deep thinker.
You're right.
We should definitely wait until everyone starts abusing the precedent before discussing whether it's a bad precedent.
I suggested that this was a political hit job. I think the same was true for the accusations against Kavanaugh.
And guess what Susan Collins was the vote who brought Kavanaugh over the brink. And the first accuser from Washington had actually worked with Susan Collins on the Kavanaugh vote. If it wasn't a hit job, it sure plays one well on TV. And I'm not certain about anything, but I think it should be investigated.
Right. The pool of potential politicians that have been in a "situation ship" at some point in their life is pretty big, and you just confirmed that winning the primary is meaningless for all those people.
No, you are missing the point. The collective action is occurring to kick out a candidate who is a clear liability, the accusation is a way to launder this occurrence. If some other candidate tries this it will just be ignored by the powers that be and go nowhere
Congratulations.
You just restated my argument and somehow thought you were disagreeing with it.
Congratulations.
You are wrong again.
Only aligned political actors in tune with the establishment can do this, and they will continue to do so as they have done. Everyone else reaching for this tool will discover that it wasn't made for them
Are you translating my replies into Chinese, then Sanskrit, then back into English before reading them?
This is the second time you've restated my original argument and called it a disagreement.
No, you said
"Once political actors realize accusations can nullify primaries..."
They can't, the establishment deciding to take a candidate out is what does that. And the establishment already knows this, they don't need to realize it.
ONLY FOOLS would condone or justify FALSE accusations for political reasons.
"YOU SHALL NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESS"
Thank God for the TEN COMMANDMENTS.
FALSE rape accusations are at 98% >LIES.
FALSE rape accusations from menopausal GROUPIES is WORSE than left vs right
Are you telling me that? I don't recall justifying it
Ok no harm no foul
This does seem like a hit job to me. The timing of it alone makes me think so. This was a great article. I'm even more convinced now.
That said, I don't think they can keep doing this. It won't take too long for the people to wake up and smell the bullshit.
Very good and well put point. 👍✨️
Michael is laying out the facts and connecting some dots. These connections, and many more examples, would possibly underpin a more grand theory about the incentive structure that he clearly hinted at strongly here.
FOOL! YOU are the one that is missing something. grape IS political and GROUPIES crying grape on innocent MEN IS the issue even if those men are assholes.
When in doubt, get the hammer & sickle tattoo, not the totenkopf - even if it costs extra.
Good one lol
I’m pleased to learn that I’m part of a functioning political party that can knife the loser who needs knifing, to get him out of the way so it still has a hope of winning in November. If you’ve become emotionally committed, especially as a public figure/commentator, it’s hard to just say ‘oops’ and move on. As the casual observer can, and the cold-blooded operator must. Tracey has long been making a (reasonable) case that we’re in a moral panic about sex crimes, but that’s not useful in winning Maine. Three cheers for the brutally expeditious!
Funny that your definition of a "functioning political party" is one that can decree from on high, using whatever flimsy pretext they wish, that its own primary election outcomes are negated.
It’s not funny, it’s practical. In this instance the primary voters picked a lulu. Understandably; I supported him and would have voted for him. But no need for a party to march right off a cliff to respect my vote for a doomed candidate, if there’s an alternative that might win.
I agree. This is not what I would call "functional".
It’s so funny that you guys think mainstream democrats are simultaneously useless and all-powerful like this, but I’m glad you’re showing your true colors here.
God bless you, Michael! YOU GET IT.
Ugh. What you are advocating for is winning at all costs, including subverting democracy. Election denial by another name...
Just being practical. Platner’s viability was a judgement call until very recently. Now it’s clear he can’t beat Collins, that’s all. A shame, because there are other issues in play here.
Platner’s viability was a judgment call until the Democratic Party twisted the knife.
They should have stuck to their guns and suggested that both Racicot and Platner be polygraphed. That is not perfect, but I can't think of anything better. The Dems can't just drop candidates every time a woman claims rape.
The idea that the Democratic Party is “functional” is legitimately insane. And being proud of a party that destroys a candidate with a flimsy and unverified rape accusation is just weird.
The woman waits several years to press any charges or say anything publicly, then does so in a way calculated to kill a popular political insurgent’s seemingly successful candidacy just at the point when his ejection from the race will leave selecting his replacement to the party establishment while making any legal investigation or timely adjudication of her accusations impossible. I have no doubt she will never actually file any charges. And, clearly, this “expeditious” move was not aimed at saving the Democrats losing a potential Senate victory. It was about saving the Democrats from the potential victory by a disruptive populist candidate who threatened the party establishment, which considers losing to a Republican a small price to pay for defeating such an embarrassing insurgency.
I'm not sure that's true. Platner was bringing in voters from outside of the Democratic Party. Independents and people who are unhappy with Trump. I'm not sure any of the candidates we're looking at (and I live in Maine) have that particular cocktail.
Platner was chosen not only for his politics, but also because the Democrats could see that he was a candidate who might finally win against Collins. Last time we lost by nine points. Time before that by 37 points.
That’s fair, and since I don’t live in Maine I’ll take your word for it. But were those voters going to stick with him in the fall after the scandal machine has done its work? People who identify as Loyal Democrats will grit their teeth and vote for the nominee no matter what. But the others…
I think with the latest allegations, he lost enough to support to not win the election. If those had come in the fall, the same thing would've happened.
What I'm saying is, I don't think the replacement will win. We'll find out.
I don't know if the assualt allegations are true or not. I think it's about 50-50 that it was a hit job. There was a lot of stake in this election, but I just don't know.
If the Uber wealthy whose taxes might go up, or the conservatives who are worried about the Supreme Court, or the crypto Bros who are worried about more regulation, or many others, didn't do a hit, they were sure thinking about it.
YOU ARE A FOOL. YOU ARE AN ASSHOLE.
"YOU SHALL NOT BEAR FALSE WITNESSES"
You need to learn the TEN COMMANDMENTS.
Your types are the reason the West is going down, and MEN & BOYS are being attacked.
It is just another dem hit and run by the Democronies… looking to keep status quid pro quo.
Bravo! We need more manipulation; don’t you think?
Maybe this was done for practical reasons (not moral). Maybe the Democratic leadership were worried he would lose to Collins. I still don't like it, but this could be true.
I initially thought this was some AIPAC hit job - I'm still not sure it wasn't.
We JOOZ are pulling the strings everywhere.
I’m sure that isn’t true, but if it is - we need to give them credit for all the good things that happen as well don’t we?
Democrats got away with it when they went after Judge Roy Moore for having younger girlfriends when he was thirty, now they're turning on their own and accusing them of some obscure rape that probably never occurred. Sex is the new political weapon.
Good point, I forgot about him. I do vote for the Democrats. What he was doing wasn't illegal at the time. I do think Alabama raised their age of consent to 18 in the aftermath of that. I think they called it "The Roy Moore law".
I compared the Platner situation to the Kavanaugh appointment hearing.
No it was illegal. AOC in Alabama was 16 at the time.
I know he was banned from some mall for trying to pick up girls there lol. We need more Republicans like him so we can win some more elections
Roy was trying to get ones under 16?
She was 14.
Did you see the post I sent you about the swastika people?
They seem to like some of my posts - I’m afraid to ask why lol
Yes but they are blocked.
I did not know that. Maybe he should have gone to France. Not that I approve of course. Jesus what a creeper lol.
It’s more his age. At that time 18-21 year old man and 14 year old girls was a normal thing, maybe even 23 year old men. But he was 32 and that was too old to be with a 14 year old girl. He still would not have gotten much time. Maybe 6 months? No idea. 6 months to 3 years, closer to 6 months.
Very bold and brave again, Michael.
It might've bolstered your point to include an image of the Al Franken case you describe. If it's so trivial, readers will see that and it'll lend validity to your perspective.
On Platner, I've not seen any major political pundit push back on this rape allegation. Most I've seen on Youtube, for example, appear to have wholesale accepted that he's a rapist - case closed...
Youtuber Vaush, who'd previously told people to vote Platner, didn't take a skeptical view. His most thoughtful claim was that Platner should drop out bc the rape allegations will now mean than his supporters have to spend forever arguing about the allegations - which is bad optics - rather than his policies. An earlier Vaush would've said that Leftists should speak what they percieve to be the Truth no matter the consequences, but that was a brash young man speaking a long time ago. What do you all think? 🤔
This was a long article you got out so quickly, so great job on that Michael. I felt a few more images to break up the text would've helped... I liked all the hyperlinks you put in, and thought you wrote well and with great emotional appeal.
Not sure where I stand on this story. I struggle to believe it's all concocted. But then, I'm not an unscrupulous lawyer targeting public figures with unprovable, highly emotive claims that most people wouldn't wanna be seen as defending/questioning - even if they're correct...
I suspect Platner did have sex with this woman, whilst he was drunk, that was not very pleasant for all involved. The level of intoxication suggested in the rape article is high, claiming that Platner had no recollection of his actions the next day.
If we go off the version of events presented so far, he was in an ongoing casual relationship with this woman whom he had has sex with prior multiple times, and he'd come to her house one night blackout drunk. It's certainly possible that he then, without being consciously aware of it, made a very bad, drunken error of judgement that has now cost him his political career...
When a blackout drunk woman has sex with a man, we would say she was unable to give meaningful consent. Seems the same would apply here; i.e. Platner could not meaningfully understand the gravity of his actions, nor is he alleged to have even been aware of them or able to remember them, if they occurred at all...
Seems like a lesson for us all on responsible drinking and caution around casual sex, even if you're in an "on and off" relationship with someone you think you're on good terms with... Platner has denied the claims and it'll be interesting to see if the case is taken any further, if more details and any meaningful evidence is made available to the public...
Thanks for writing Michael, as always. ✨️✨️
I'm slightly disturbed that you were watching that creature called "Vaush," but thanks.
Haha, his early content was very entertaining, lively and authentic imo. Highly recommend clicking the "oldest" tab on his channel and listening to a vid that catches your eye. Nowadays, however, he's terrible. Often has cringe takes, no longer participates in live debates, and spends most of his time giving news commentary. Really, he just tries to avoid rocking the boat to keep a paycheck coming in, imo...
(And oooh, Senpai noticed me! 🫨👀✨️🔥👌👍 I'm honored 🫠 Hope I can provide helpful comments in future, at least on subjects I know about, which involves mostly sex science and sexual politics...)
Yes Vaush and his audience just double down on MeToo at this point, shutting out, sometimes banning any dissent. I do question whether he's truly sincere that his views have changed, considering he is a deep thinker. Part of me thinks when it comes to sex and sexual misconduct, that 2019-era Vaush is still there. Remember when he was caught with fetish-type drawings fairly recently? And he has the nerve to pedophile-panic every chance he gets for his Gen Ztard audience.
If a man is black out drunk - there is a good chance he would not be able to get an erection.
The timing of the allegation, and the lack of evidence is just too suspicious to ignore.
If a drunken w0e-MAN can't consent, then a drunken MAN can't consent either. The only part of your post that approached objectivity. Which is why I TOOK BACK MY LIKE on your post. By the logic that is used in the law, w0e-MEN are raping MEN equally by the logic being used
It’s amazing how much mutually non-consensual sex there is, right? 😂 Almost more the rule than the exception in many social circles! (Including, as it happens, the ones academics and media people run in.)
YES! By the logic that's used in the laws... w0e-MEN are raping MEN equally
If a w0e-MAN can't consent when she's drunk neither can a MAN consent when he's drunk.
The arcane feminist logic in these laws actually neutralizes the LAW itself, considering MEN in these situations are ALSO DRUNK.
It is SEXISM in the LAW to give a pass to a drunk w0e-MEN but not a drunk MAN.
Once again Joseph, I get the point you're trying to make. Biologically women metabolise alcohol more slowly then men. Once thing worth pondering is, how does a woman who's had several drinks or is "blackout drunk" able to ascertain that she didn't consent?
In partial solidarity/ curiosity menopausal woman
Oh Micheal. While I very often find myself agreeing with you, Platner was a dirtbag and an absolute train wreck of a candidate.
The point isn't really about Platner. The point is the ability of the party insiders to get the candidate they want on the ballot even if it is not the candidate that gets the most votes in the primary. What purpose does the primary serve if the party is deciding who gets on the general election ballot instead of the voters?
I find it interesting and revealing that all these government officials top priority is getting Platner to drop out, not getting Platner in front of a jury.
Exactly, have you heard anything about Swalwell being arrested or indicted in the last couple of months?
So is Susan Collins, though not for the same reasons. It's a shame but I think the Democratic voters are willing to lower their standards just as the Republicans have done. I don't blame them.
Tracey stated in a recent stream with Hanania that this sort of Me Too type crap is not his desired beat but who else is gonna take it on?
Unrelated, I’m not sure the link is there between the DSCC, motivated by a recent pole showing Collins up by 3 points and the grifter Cheyenne Hunt’s Reckoning Action clown car takedown of Platner. Assuming none exists, it appears some clickbait chasing Gen Z monster, AKA Cheyenne Hunt, is deciding to shake up the Democratic party’s batting order in the top of the ninth inning of Maine’s senatorial contest. Is this really how the Democratic Party operates in the year 2026?
And finally, Al Franken, the only senator ever to resign over a jokey photo and a pic of him getting a little side boob via the back of his hand. What a giant pussy.
I haven't posited any particular "link" between the DSCC and any of the allegations, I was just citing their statement Monday (Schumer and Gillibrand) as one component of the Democratic Party infrastructure coalescing at warp-speed to defenestrate Platner.
Gillibrand is a FALSE rape grifter and a MAN hater as well as a hypocrite. She was buddy buddy with Weinstein until they railroaded him with those FALSE charges. btw for any morons that don't know Harvey was FRAMED, some of his convictions are being overturned. You might not know that his TWO main accusers were inviting to their MOTHERS HOUSE for dinner & personal haircuts for FIVE YEARS! They were giving him personal haircuts over their mother's house emails show for FIVE YEARS
Wow, didn’t have “Harvey Weinstein defense” on my bingo card!
I think a big problem Weinstein has is that even if there are issues with his convictions, he is indisputably a huge, condemnable scumbag. Which isn’t a crime in itself, but makes people less interested in any protestations on his behalf.
Anyone who paid me to be a political consultant would be wasting their money 99.5% of the time, but I would have earned it if Franken had had me on hand to say (as I was saying to my TV screen at the time): “Senator, go canoeing for ten days without your phone or a radio; see how things look when you get back.” He’d still have a political career (as a funnier and more intelligent, though otherwise interchangeable, establishment Dem). It’s normal for these feminist takedowns to be based on unsupported allegations; Franken’s was distinctive in that there were barely any allegations to begin with.
BINGO! Franken is innocent. He was trolling the camera KNOWING that the camera was on him> He PRETENDED to be feeling her breasts through a thick canvas military jacket
It’s funny how Cheyenne Hunt never mentions “putting her stake in the ground” to help women keep men out of their sports, bathrooms or locker rooms! Apparently that misogyny is ok.
FUCK w0e-MEN'S sports. God bless transgenders! Fighting the good fight!
If w0e-MEN can invade BOYS SPORTS and MALE SPACES for decades....
Then they have to DEAL WITH KARMA! I support boys in girls' sports.
#GO #TEAM #TRANS! LAUGH OUT LOUD!
Huge huge issue.
Lest we forget that The Party did the same to "Luv Guv" Cuomo when his Emmy-winning daytime Covid updates (all fake, since he cooked the Nursing Home death stats that his directives caused) made him "the anti-Trump voice of reason" to a swooning populous. The Party deemed his popularity would threaten the plan to running the demented (and easily controlled) Biden. Same pattern.
Unquestionably, #MeToo takedowns have a generic quality such that they have more in common with each other than with the situations they are ostensibly meant to rectify. I think, however, the Cuomo one was more a power play by the new NY Democratic Party, which is now ascendant with Mamdani et al., rather than much to do directly with the presidential race.
BINGO! Remember the 12 GROUPIES who pretended Cuomo raped them/sexually assaulted them? Remember one of the accusers said "he made a joke about "eating the whole thing" when talking about a hot dog?
Thank you for writing this. I had no idea about this person. I was absolutely shocked at the speed of the endorsement take backs as well as the sheer number of people and organizations who felt the need to weigh in. Bernie was particularly disappointing. After all the smear efforts before that he had overcome, the fact that this one had such significance floored me. I am now even more informed and incredibly disappointed.
I’d hate to be sexually assaulted by someone who agreed with my politics.
What a conundrum. A real Platner’s Choice.
Michael writes: "The POLITICO article she planted was cleverly framed to suggest corroborating evidence had been uncovered that proves the 2021 rape, though if you spend approximately two minutes diligently scouring the article, no such evidence is presented."
From the Politico piece:
"Racicot also shared details about the alleged assault to the man she dated after Platner, who she began dating in 2022. The man, who was granted anonymity out of concern for his personal privacy, told POLITICO that Racicot had told him in bits and pieces about a bad experience with Platner before confiding the full details of what had happened in 2023. His account of what Racicot told him about the incident matched what Racicot told POLITICO.
"Racicot shared with POLITICO a series of private Facebook messages she exchanged with an acquaintance in 2023, about a year and a half after the alleged assault and well before Platner launched his political career, in which she cautioned the acquaintance against getting involved with Platner. In the messages, Racicot said she had “ended up in a bad situation with him,” describing Platner as “consensually careless” and saying he “doesn’t listen to you when drunk.” Reached by POLITICO, the acquaintance said she received the messages but declined to comment; POLITICO granted her anonymity at her request to protect her privacy in her Maine community.
"POLITICO also spoke with a friend Racicot had told about the alleged assault last summer, shortly after Platner launched his campaign. The friend, to whom POLITICO granted anonymity due to fear of social and professional backlash, recalled Racicot telling her about the incident, including that Platner had been “very drunk and wouldn’t take no for an answer.”"
How is this not corroborating evidence? You know, it's possible that both, 1) Platner was railroaded and 2) he's a rapist, are true.
If someone has been accused of sex crimes, no matter their stature or political affiliation, Mike is here to tell you that fucking slut is lying.
Stupid comment. I virtually never accuse any alleged victim of outright lying, because my assessment is that in something like 95% of cases, even if an allegation is flawed, embellished, inaccurate, dubiously-motivated, or implausible in any number of respects, the reason for this does NOT tend to be willful, conscious lying. It's a much more complex set of cognitive and social factors. But whatever.
46% of rape accusations are fake. 92% are junk and can’t result in an arrest.
Wonderfully enjoyable narration. Almost perilous since I've got a mug of hot tea here with me.
Racicot's story is as peculiarly-worded as could possibly have been contrived and as much of a scumbag as Platner has appeared to be from the start, it docked perfectly in all my skeptical receptors. The guy certainly attracts idiot fuckbuddies.
He could win, though, if he has the stones to stay in. I hope he pulls out because I really don't want control of the Senate to tip.
I thought it was awfully convenient of the giants of the Democrat Party to en masse call in very short order on Platner to drop out, like they'd previously gotten their talking points. Warned what was coming? It makes Tracey's thesis more compelling. I'd not heard of the link between Hunt and the purging of the odious Swalwell and now Platner till today.
It could also be that those talking points were in a sealed envelope to only be opened and statements made in the event of anything else bad coming out. That could have included views of horrifying internal polling. The Monday deadline coming up, they were out of time. Their Senate control dreams were in deep trouble. Wheel out Hunt's Racicot project.
I just discovered that when Ms. Hunt announced the formation of her new advocacy organ in May, she was joined by several members of the Democratic Women's Caucus, including Debbie Wasserman Schultz, Debbie Dingell, Becca Balint, Rashida Tlaib, and others. So who the hell knows who she's coordinating with.
The only way either party will let you get this far, is if they have something on you so that you can be controlled. I guarantee this clown has far worse skeletons in his closet. If Collins wasn’t a defacto Democrat, they’d stick with their man.