The big story this week has been the claim that Brett Kavanaugh, Donald Trump’s second nominee to the United States Supreme Court, allegedly sexually assaulted a woman 35 years ago. Although the woman has presented no corroborating evidence, and the Federal Bureau of Investigation declined to look into the claim, the story, and responses, have still dominated the news cycle.
A story that received much less attention is what a woman says democrat Representative Keith Ellison of Minnesota did to her. Indeed, the same party that has repeatedly demanded that the Kavanaugh accusation must be treated seriously and fully investigated, and that a vote on his confirmation must be delayed until the investigation is completed, seems to have a far different standard for accusations against their party, even with corroborating evidence.
The victim’s bombshell, which consisted of documents from 2017, pertaining to her claims, may finally force the media to pay attention.
Karen Monahan claimed that she and Ellison were in a relationship, and that during the time they were together, the high-ranking democrat abused her.
Yesterday, after her claims were mostly ignored, Monahan released a photo of her medical report, dated 11/28/2017, on a Twitter account that the mainstream media identified as belonging to her.
In it, the physician recorded that she had said Ellison abused her both physically and emotionally, and that she was terrified of speaking up for fear of possible retribution from the powerful politician.
The Free Beacon noted that Monahan said she had been abused by the democrat Congressman as recently as 2016, and that she had openly agreed to sit down with him to talk about what had happened, so long as investigators were present.
He declined her offer.
This week, Ellison’s accuser noted the vast difference in treatment that she received, versus how they treated Christine Blasey Ford, who claimed that Judge Brett Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her 35 years or more ago.
Blasey’s only basis for her allegation is her word, and notes from a ‘marriage counseling’ session that she and her husband attended in 2012, where she initially made the claim, but did not name Kavanaugh.
Karen Monahan released two different medical reports, as well as records from her therapist that discussed how she had worked to overcome the trauma.
Meanwhile, in the midst of the democrat party’s desire to support women who claimed to be victims (as long as it supported their agenda), they completely ignored her claims.
In fact, on Tuesday, the Democratic National Committee Chairman, Tom Perez, said that he believed he rebuilt trust in the political organization by hiring none other than Congressman Keith Ellison, who is currently deputy chair of the group.
Why the disparate treatment of two people?
Specifically, why are they so quick to back the claim of a woman who cannot even remember the time or place of a claimed sexual assault that took place 35 years ago, while completely ignoring (or worse) the claim of physical and emotional abuse that occurred as recently as two years ago?
It would seem that the democrats find it more important to back the one who can push their political goals, rather than to believe ‘all women.’
A similar thing occurred during the Hillary Clinton campaign, when the democrats had to choose between her demand that all women “deserved to be believed” and her refusal to believe Juanita Broadrick or others who said her husband had sexually abused them.
Given the choice between two women, one who was attacking the reputation of the party’s second-in-command and another who is attacking Donald Trump’s pick for the United States Supreme Court, they made their choice.
In the 2016 and 2018 election cycles, the Democrat party has tried to say that it is the party of minorities, and of women, and to paint republicans as the opposite.
It seems that they’ve added an addendum; they support women, as long as they aren’t attacking favored officials in the DNC.
Outside of Fox News, no major news outlet in the United States, no member of the ‘mainstream media,’ has decided to address her claims, or the fact that she released multiple documents that provide at least some support for her claims.
Meanwhile, there are dozens of articles about the likely unprovable claims made by Mrs. Ford.
One set of claims attacked a democrat, the other offered democrats a chance to derail the confirmation process for SCOTUS nominee Kavanaugh, who is currently a federal judge and who has gone through no less than six Federal Bureau of Investigation background checks in his life.
While not as dramatic, and not as trumpeted by the media, the claims from Monahan deserve every bit as much investigation (and scrutiny) as those made by the leftist college professor.