They could wind up on the Supreme Court!

Bile from Bannon is a heavyweight

...to support the claim.

How many women have to come forward with their stories before its clear that this guy is really bad news?

Verifiable evidence is the only way to fairly support a claim. Lack of such evidence is NOT sufficient to determine the truth. Otherwise, a mere claim becomes a conviction...which is sort of in direct conflict with our understanding of fairness.

A man's word is not holy or sacred and neither is his career.

But some people automatically believe anything a man says and always doubt women.

I trust women. I believe women. And I know that sexual assault occurs often, and it occurs in a context where there are no witnesses and no cameras. Demanding that kind of evidence is just one more way of keeping your foot on our necks.

I believe in evidence and reaching sound conclusions based on that evidence.

Genitalia is a terrible way to determine facts or truth.

That's a straw man.

Some people think it isn't sexual assault unless its established in a court of law. Sexual assault is rarely prosecuted successfully.

That's a very, very unfortunate aspect of requiring evidence to reach a conviction.

The best thing would be for any woman suffering such an assault to go to the hospital immediately! DNA evidence would be pretty much indisputable.

(I know that that can be extremely difficult and uncomfortable for a woman, but if it will put a rapist in jail, please at least consider it. The bastard belongs in prison where he can't harm other women.)

Police and district attorneys have limited resources and they decide what gets prosecuted. In the event that a woman is able to fight off her attacker without actually getting raped or harmed by a weapon, its very unlikely that that incident will be prosecuted. It can't be prosecuted because there is no DNA evidence.

Reporting is stiil important because sex offenders keep doing what they do. If the police have heard about the attempts and have a description it may make it easier to arrest someone when they commit a prosecutable offense. I definitely favor reporting, but you can't expect too much.

One of the down sides of living in an open, free society with at least an aspiration to real justice is that some of the SOBs can operate at the margins and take advantage of the very fairness we are committed to.

But I can't think of another way that doesn't put innocent people in prison.

Did a ra*p kit and they still did not prosecute. You have no idea how traumatizing that process is.
She was told it was his word against hers. He stated it was consensual.
They wanted her to call her attacker and get him to admit on tape what he did.

This happened 24 years ago and things have not changed much.

Some here will still say what she did wasn't good enough.

It was a work related incident. She was a security guard for a major studios corporate housing. They hired some holidays season help that they didn't vet.
Turned out her attacker had similar allegations from other companies that they ignored.
It took a year for her to even be able to talk about it. I did find her a good lawyer and she sued both her attacker and employer
She won her case but was never able to collect the judgment from him. She did get training in a new field and what amounted to about five years of pay and insurance from her employer.
Not enough for how it has affected her life.

And you're right. I have no idea how traumatizing it is, just that I know it's traumatizing.

I'm sorry that the police or prosecutors didn't follow up as they should have. It's abhorrent on every level. I assume there was evidence of a struggle, so it should have been an open and shut case, imv.

Can you imagine a mugger saying, "Hey, it's their word against mine." and the prosecutors declining to prosecute?

So she knew him that's why they didn't prosecute. He was a temporary employee during the holidays.
Turned out he had similar allegations from previous employers and her company didn't vet him. To make it more complicated they were armed security guards, the police didn't understand why she didn't use her weapon. She froze and after that incident never returned to work.

The accuser told multiple people and there is emails with her accusations. This all from years ago. Why would she have lied to her therapist and friends about this back then?

As well as an interview today.

Last edited Mon Jul 6, 2026, 06:10 PM - Edit history (1)

I am talking in general when I say that accusations require verifiable evidence.

Now, read this next part with the understanding that I in no way, shape, or form believe what I'm writing happened. I'm merely pointing out possibilities.

To answer your questions:

1. She could conceivably have lied because she was angry at Platner for some reason.

2. She could be not lying but misconstruing what happened for some reason or other. Maybe she exaggerated, maybe she was under the influence, maybe she conflated a dream with reality. Who knows?

Again, I do not believe either of those things. But both are possible based on what we know at present.

In general, I am not prepared to convict a man until there is sufficient evidence. If the accusation becomes the conviction none of us are safe.

In this case, I gotta wonder why a guy who has raped someone would run for public office? He's gotta know that it's going to come out. (Yes, there are possible explanations for that, too. But it's one of those things that baffle me.)

found to be exaggerated?

I assume so since I haven't taken the time to remember...but I could be wrong.

"2. She could be not lying but misconstruing what happened for some reason or other. Maybe she exaggerated, maybe she was under the influence, maybe she conflated a dream with reality. Who knows?"

Or...........maybe he did it.

Unlikely he will be convicted; he hasn't been charged with a crime.

I stated twice that I didn't believe either of those.

Seems pretty specific mansplaining for something you don't believe.


Why did you edit your original post? Hm.

My edit was because in the Reply title the first word was wrong. I inadvertently typed "Your" instead of "You're". Hope that helps.

Or were you too busy doing Susan's work for her?

HE needs to do what is best for the country as any good Democrat should do and HE needs to put his personal ambitions in the right place and step aside until it plays out in court.

It's not a legal requirement since there isn't an indictment or any presentation of evidence before a judge but if he refuses to step aside and Collins wine because of the backlash, it's minor that he lost but not minor that the country did. This election will not determine the future on its own no matter what some people on DU think, but we need every win because we have seen what the repugs have done with the slimmest of majorities.

It's one thing to lose because some cheated, lied, or took advantage of the situation as the repugs did to Clinton but they weren't the cause of his problems. He was.

What he does now tells us whether he is just another self-centered politician or someone who puts his country first. Resignation is not an admission of guilt. He won't be out on the street starving. Nobody will tear off his bars, cut off his buttons and paint a yellow stripe down his back. When you run for office, your past is an open book. He just has too many questions to answer that honest people will ask. Unlike the repug rabble who close their eyes to the worst of crimes, we Democrats still have the decency to say our Constitution, our Democracy, our sense of honesty, ethics, fairness and caring about everyone is more important than one man's ambitions. He needs to show he is one of us. We don't need to bend to him.

Making a decision on who should represent the people as a Senate candidate and making a decision to convict someone of a crime are not remotely on the same level.

If he did none of things he is being accused of and forced out of the election is that fair to him? Not at all.

If he did the things he is being accused of and he is allowed to represent the people of his state is that fair to the women he assaulted. Not at all.

So there is no answer that is going to be perfect without additional facts that we are almost certainly not going to have access to prior to that decision being made. But we have to make decisions like that constantly, every day of our lives.

In my view there are more bad scenarios if he stays in that if he drops out.

The only thing you left out is the voters.

on so-called "false " rape claims, and on the number of rapes that are never reported, PRECISELY FOR THE kinds of posts I am seeing here. And also look at the misogynist attitudes of law enforcement, legal systems, the military, and even hospitals. Let's talk about HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF UNTESTED RAPE KITS. Let's talk about women being forced to pay to have these kits tested, something no other victims of crimes are required to do.

SMDH

None of that, not one iota justifies convicting someone (man, woman, or child) without verifiable evidence. None of us ever should be convicted on the basis of general statistics. Evidence should determine guilt.

Yes, every SA report should be taken seriously. But that means it should be investigated if possible. It most decidedly mean that the man is guilty merely because he's accused. As the current case makes clear, the allegation alone is extremely damaging.

The other problems you outline obviously exist. Neither Platner nor me nor anyone else in this thread are responsible for them.

presumed to be a liar until proven otherwise by the misogynist systems under which we live.

I do shake my head in sad disbelief at the utter blind cluelessness of the reality in which women live, and how it is perpetuated.

If I thought that they were liars, I wouldn't want their claims to be investigated -which is the opposite of what I said. All such claims should be investigated.

What I won't do is credulously believe an allegation based simply on one's gender.

The accused is entitled to a presumption of innocence by law and common fairness.

I'm a stickler for reaching conclusions based on sound evidence rather than emotion or my gut.

Ooops!

Go ahead, take the last word.

your support should they become SA survivors.

backed up by the contemporaneous documentation. The story is done. Protecting rapists is disgusting.

long before Platner ran for office, she told the times this off the record, she told a subsequent boyfriend. What do you need a bus load of nuns, a video?

What more I need is context. What was the relationship like between them, for instance? There are people in the world who will say things to hurt other people. So if they had a destructive relationship, for example, it's possible (not saying I believe or disbelieve) that she just wanted to trash him.

What other things did she tell these people about Platner at the time, IOW.

I would just like some context in which to place the allegation. It's only fair.

That said, if it's true then he should drop out -never should have run in the first place. Additionally, if the Statute of Limitations hasn't run out, charge his ass and take him to court.

actually a slight bit over a month, and we have heard nothing about this woman being either a liar or disturbed. Oh, and let's not forget that there are still two other women.

Now, let's have a closer look. People will say different things in the media than they might under questioning. While we're at it, let's question Platner aggressively, too.

But I cannot and will not conclude a man is a rapist on partial evidence. End of story.

Every accusation of SA deserves to be investigated. OTOH, as point out, it can be extremely difficult to investigate since it may come down to he said/she said.

That leaves us nowhere good. On the one hand, every decent person wants to get justice for the victim. On the other hand, our commitment to justice as we traditionally understand it, is to require sufficient evidence before convicting someone.

So what do we do in such circumstances? I think that as a society it's imperative to uphold our commitment to traditional justice. Unfortunately, that means many, perhaps most, of these bastards will get away with it.

Fat lot of good that does for the victims, I know, but I can't think of any other way to handle it that doesn't scream "Danger!"

The best I can do is to hope that where criminal justice can't carry the load that civil justice can step in and provide some sort of rough justice. The standard of evidence for winning a civil suit is much lower than in the criminal sphere, so there is a reasonable chance to win even in a he said/she said instance. It won't put the rapist in prison, but it will cost him money and attach a big social stigma. That is, I think, better than nothing.

It was more of a "he-said, she-said" determination by the jury, and they believed her. There was no proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

How many women accused Trump before there were any legal consequences? At least 28.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Donald_Trump_sexual_misconduct_allegations

How many women accused Harvey Weinstein before there were any consequences? At least 8.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harvey_Weinstein_sexual_abuse_cases

How many women accused Eric Swalwell before he resigned from office? 6 have accused him. He resigned after 4.
https://abc7news.com/post/fellow-california-congressman-rep-sam-liccardo-says-rumors-eric-swalwell-sexual-misconduct-swirled-years/18894415/

How many women accused Bill Cosby of drugging and raping them? At least 60.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Cosby_sexual_assault_cases

How many female athletes accused Dr Larry Nassar of sexually assaulting them? Around 150.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Nassar#Sexual_assault_accusations_and_convictions

Actually, more than one problem.

Problem #1 is that there are men in the world who know how to get away with it for a long time.

Problem #2 is that there seems to be a stigma attached to being a rape victim that prevents women from coming forward, and in many cases, going to the hospital or police when these assaults occur.

Problem #3 is that even when SA occurs it can be difficult to prove.

However, we can't convict people based on nothing more than the same accusation made by multiple people. We can, and absolutely should, investigate such claims completely. But the mere number of claims is useless, imo.

I can't tell you that false accusations never happen. But I seriously doubt that these amount to more than 1-2% of the total. Women don't get together in groups and plot to ruin someone's bid for public office by coming up with false accusations of rape.

Democrats fell for Platner's PTSD card and excused all kinds of questionable behaviors. I'm not saying that he doesn't have PTSD, but it cannot grant permanent immunity for a Senate candidate against all scrutiny. Democrats avoided an accountability analysis.

stated several times during that primary, I have been around, and worked with, PTSD vets for decades, and not one of them ever said the things platner did.

It matters. Quit with the guilty until proven innocent mess. This is what she said to the NYT back when the Susan Collins operative said she was manhandled back a few months ago.

I want to vomit at the woman hate here.

Yes, I think Platner could be a drunken boar. I also think this woman could be mentally ill and want attention from whereever she can get it. The fact is she could NOT produce any physical evidence to corroberate her story other than contact with other people relaying a story that may or may not be true.

Wow. just wow.

Went out with her twice. Did not have sex. Cut off contact because she was a bit clingy. Next thing II know she shows up at my house. She went to work at CMP and looked up my address from their company records.

Were you afraid she might harm you or even kill you?

Did you generalize this experience to decide that all women are crazy?

My point still stands that she has no evidence to back up her claim. Why is it that a woman's side of the story should be taken as fact? Politico is in business to make money and I'd be willing to bet this woman now has some account in the Cayman Islands from a Collins pack.

It couldn't be that a guy who allegedly said that he would rape a burglar to dominate him actually snuck into her house and assaulted her.

All these women must either be saying these things for money or because they are mentally ill.

Just the facts count. Would you also hang someone because you “believed” they murdered someone? This is politics and this smacks of the the Bannon playbook.

Isn’t it so weird that according to a different ex- girlfriend, Graham Platner would have raped an intruder for doing what Graham Platner did.

But not in a *gay way*.

And they won't feel all clean and self righteous all the way to the maga gulag.

Sorry, folks, in the fight for American democracy, we may have to cut cards with the devil more than once. If not, enjoy feeling all pure and self righteous on your way to the maga gulag. I don't want to hear one GD whine out of any of them.

I get what you're saying. My point is, without all the hyperbole, we tend to expect perfection from our candidates. Our agenda comes second. It's the exact opposite with Republicans. They don't care what their politicians do as long as their agenda moves forward. Not saying we need to go to that extreme but we may need to look the other way and hold our nose far more than we're do. Particularly if our democracy is on the line.

should ever look the other way for.

I don’t expect perfection from any candidate as no one is perfect. I often vote for candidates I don’t always see eye to eye. But a rapist, sex pest, abuser, just no.

Cheats on is wife? Unsavory, but so did JFK. But committing a violent crime like what's accused? If true, even in my most Machiavellian moods I can't put up with that. If true. But this is the heat of election season and it's hard sometimes to tell truth from fiction. Lets see where this goes. As I said on a previous thread, lets see how he defends this. That might clear things up a bit. Honestly, we may never know the full truth.

If this can be believed, then he doesn't deserve to be in office.

He flat out denies it. She has provided some evidence that is insufficient on its own, but certainly bears further investigation.

It is possible that both are telling the truth from their own perspectives.

may be telling the truth as far as having no memory of it, since he was probably black out drunk.

He's blamed booze before.

This has been going on forever and as I look back over my life, I realize how often I've been on the receiving end of their toxic behavior. Is it really that hard to be a reasonable decent person?

What gets me are the candidates who don't self-examine before committing to run for office. If there is anything about your past that could come out, think about what the cost might be.

do their own opposition research to find out the bad stuff before one's opponent does. If this allegation is true, this is inexcusable.

How sick is that?

Frat boy "toxic masculinity" is a thing.

that after his divorce he had gone to his ex-wife's new home, kicked the back door, and broke it. She reported it to the police and sued him for repairs.

That was the worst they could find. Not horrible, but it was embarrassing for him. When you run for office this kind of stuff can come up because its public information.

They think it's not all that bad. Just "guys being guys".

We need to change how we raise our boys. I've done my part in that regard and now my son is raising two decent boys.

there you can be president, Sec of Defense, etc

they’re not as wrong as I wish they were.

And so many are undoubtedly wondering why women really aren't interested in them.

He had no legislative experience so he had no real campaign experience. Oh well.

the bar is apparently set low for them everywhere

We should hold our noses and vote for abusers because they get a pass because republicans. This is what has hurt our country no morals just blue versus red.

Damn it.

and to the people who claim any such sentiment is "helping Susan Collins", GET BETTER CANDIDATES

JFC

and Secretary of Defense

I cannot believe the rape apologists on here today.

Ever wonder if this latest one is cashing a nice, fat, Republican check? Hmmm?

Ever wonder if your guy is cashing a nice, fat Republican check? Hmmmm? After all, he's known for his Nazi tattoos and deriding women and Muslims and lying about his background.

Hmmmm?

I'm not in Maine, but if I was, my first choice was Mills. I generally don't trust populists until they have a track record. But given the numbers he was able to pull in the primary, the big turnout, and the excitement, I figured he had a damn good chance of unseating Collins. For me, it's control of the Senate that's most important. I'll cut cards with the devil to get it, but only to a point.

Secondly, many Dems demand perfection and are endlessly disappointed. We're candidate purity first, agenda second. Republicans are the opposite and their agenda moves forward. Ours does not.

Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly, I don't burn people on the slightest pretext. Particularly in election season. Way too much shit flying around to do that since it's difficult to judge rationally what's true and what isn't. If it is true, I'll help you burn him. But I don't think we know enough yet other than he said / she said, and Republicans willing to go to extremes to hold onto the Senate.

Lets see how he responds to this. That may clear some of the uncertainty. If he screws it up and can't adequately defend himself, most likely it's true. If so, I'm with you. We will see.

couple with a verifiable record of mysogynistic and bigoted statements, lies about his rugged he-man upbringing, and, of course, the Nazi tattoo are hardly slight pretexts.

I've seen progressives on social media toss a Democrat to the wolves because they worked with Republicans on a bipartisan bill or (gasp) mentioned god in a tweet. But Platner? Everyone is lying but him.

There is no time to see. Maine has until Monday to name a new nominee. Shame on everyone involved, especially Platner himself, for thinking this wouldn't come out.

MAYBE the fate of democracy and the United States shouldn't depend upon ONE election in ONE state!

And women shouldn't be expected to be the sacrificial lambs to the party!

I have no sympathy for men who abuse women!

women than what Platner did nor did not do.

There will likely be 2 more vacancies during the next 6 years.

Carry on.