Somehow, I doubt
this will get as much media attention as now-Justice Kavanaugh's accuser got:
Shall we go by the old rules or the new rules? Rep. Jim Renacci’s (R-OH)
Senate campaign has highlighted a claim by an anonymous woman that
incumbent Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) might have sexually harassed or assaulted her in the late 1980s.
The Renacci campaign has released a statement from the woman’s
attorney, who says the victim has indirect support of her claims....
What is this "indirect support"?
The statement does not provide a date, a location, supporting evidence
or identify the woman, but describes her as “a very credible source and a
professional woman.”
That's at least as much evidence as Kavanaugh's accuser could make up, so by the Democrats' own rules, Sherrod Brown has to go!
Under the old rules, this would require more than a little
skepticism. This woman just so happened to reach out to Renacci’s law
partner, huh? To describe a physical assault from 30 years ago just a
few weeks before an election, when Brown has been running for statewide
and federal offices since 1983, when he first won the Secretary of State
position? Stories like these that emerge right before a vote would
normally be considered a smear without really solid proof, and for good reason...
Of course, those were the old rules. Under the new rules of the Kavanaughcalypse, the accusation is enough. Who needs substantiation and direct corroboration? Believe the women rather than test the evidence? For Sherrod Brown, those new rules looked pretty tasty just a few days ago....
Will the legacy media have 24 hour wall-to-wall coverage of this? Uh, no. No, it will not.
No comments:
Post a Comment