Booker Nightmare: Republicans Call for Investigation as Gay Man Goes Public with Sex Assault Allegation


Bad news is hitting for possible 2020 presidential candidate and current Democratic Sen. Corey Booker — and it could be making hypocrites of his entire party in the process.

An accusation has been made via Twitter that “Spartacus” — as the New Jersey senator infamously referred to himself during Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s confirmation battle — sexually assaulted a gay man.

The account, without being too graphic, does detail what allegedly happened when the man said he met Booker at “an informal gathering” four years ago. It also gives some detail about the man making the accusation without identifying him. (Note: Some very crude language.)

Newsom Debate Takes Brutal Turn as Opponent Pulls Out an All-Brown Map

The gist of the story is that Booker, who has admitted sexually groping a female friend in high school, sexually assaulted the man in a restroom after the alleged victim complimented him. The alleged victim’s account, published online, is lengthy and was shared with an attorney.

According to the man’s allegation — and at this point it is only an allegation without supporting evidence — the incident occurred in 2014, and the victim claims to be a liberal who was a Democrat at the time.

Do you believe the accusation against Sen. Corey Booker should be investigated?

While he wrote that he has gone through rough times since the alleged incident — “Fast forward 2 jobs, 3 therapists and one suicide attempt later to the latter half of last month” — he wrote that Booker’s behavior during the Kavanaugh hearings convinced him to speak out.

“Watching Mr. Booker’s histrionic defense of the alleged sexual assault victim was so laughably ironic, so jarringly cringeworthy, and so triggering that it put me into a state of depressed rumination,” he wrote.

He made contact with a lawyer — Harmeet Dhillon of the Dillon Law Group, the high-profile Republican attorney and a member of the Republican National Committee.

At Dhillon’s urging, the man wrote, he reached out to New Yorker reporter Ronan Farrow, who has broken so many #MeToo stories, but Farrow did not show much interest in his story, from the man’s account. (Readers might remember Farrow co-bylined an article in the New Yorker in which a former Yale classmate of Kanaugh’s accused him of drunkenly exposing himself during a party. That story had no corroborating witnesses, but it didn’t stop Farrow from going with it.)

Using the Twitter handle “Deep Throat,” the alleged victim posted a follow-up to his accusation post, addressing some questions and concerns that were raised regarding not reporting at the time and if he will press charges. The statute of limitations would prohibit charges being filed at this time.

Biden's Push to Allow Illegal Aliens to Live in National Parks Using Federal Funds Results in House GOP Block

As the whole country probably remembers, when Kavanaugh was accused of sexual assault without any evidence or corroboration, Booker himself had a lot to say that now he may wish he hand’t.

For example, he said witnesses who could not remember the party where Kavanaugh accuser Christine Blasey Ford said she was assaulted might have cast doubt on the accusations but did not exonerate Kavanaugh. Booker may regret setting such a foolishly reckless standard.

In Kavanaugh’s case, Booker and others made it clear that to them neither evidence nor due process mattered. An accusation was enough for Booker when it came to Kavanaugh. Now, some conservatives are asking, if Booker’s low standards for guilt were good enough for Kavnaugh then, why shouldn’t they be good enough for Booker now. That’s a hard question if you happen to be standing in Corey Booker’s shoes.

Booker also said that in Kavanaugh’s case wasn’t about politics but “moral leadership.” Shouldn’t Booker, along with the Democrats who parroted him then, hold himself to that same standard?

At one point, as The Daily Caller noted, Booker said, “There is so much at stake here — this has nothing to do with politics. This has to do with who we are as moral leaders” and that “in a moral moment, there is no neutral.”

He also called those supporting Kavanaugh “complicit in evil.” So, does the same apply to anyone supporting Booker against a similarly unproven accusation?

Making the most of a some of the highest quality political hay in recent memory, conservative activists and commenters have been rhetorically (and delightedly) calling for an investigation of Booker.

Other conservatives seem to be shifting from rhetoric into real calls for investigations, but unlike many leftists continue to stand by the idea of due process. For Booker that’s the most dangerous line of attack. Those conservatives can withold the traditional values of English and American law, while also creating a massive political headache for Booker vis a vis an investigatory nightmare.

Now we come to Booker’s nightmare. If he doesn’t treat himself the same way he treated Kavanaugh, his hypocrisy will be on full display, and right before the midterm elections and a potential 2020 presidential run. And since Democrats fawned all over Booker’s Spartacus act, they’re stuck too — crush Corey or prove they’re everything conservatives accused them of mere weeks ago.

While there’s no shortage of understandable glee coming from conservatives, we need to be very careful. We can’t use the left’s Kavanaugh strategy just because it’s now politically advantageous. Conservatives stand for the rule of law, and the law demands due process. Booker is not guilty until evidence proves it, and conservatives need to stake that position. The only place accusations alone are enough to convict a man is the court of public opinion, and it’s notoriously mob-like.

That does not, however, mean that we can’t investigate the claims. That will help determine whether there is evidence or not. Nor does due process mean we can’t hold the lefts’ feet to the fire on consistency. It is perfectly fine to rake Booker et al over the coals for having a double standard. Where we’ll err is in convicting before the evidence comes out.

What Booker’s now seeing is the world if evidence is no longer relevant and an accusation is all that’s required to end a man’s career.

One last point. This entire episode demonstrates a fundamental difference between leftists and conservatives. Leftists are willing to tear down traditions and institutions in order to advance their political interests. Conservatives, on the other hand, don’t usually destroy anything until they have something better to replace it.

And so far, no society has ever found anything better to replace due process — despite Democrats’ best efforts.

Truth and Accuracy

Submit a Correction →

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

, , , , , ,