Progressives Want To Play The Guilt-By-Association Game When It Comes to Trump's 'Racist' Tweets? Fine, Let's Talk About Jeffrey Epstein

Uploaded 7/7/19 by JVL, screenshot from video embedded in story

If there’s one thing that characterizes the modern Democrat party and the hard-left progressives trying to control it, it’s this: they have an unnerving willingness and tendency to shoot themselves in the foot.

One way they manage to keep hobbling themselves is by playing the “you’re guilty by association if you support Trump because he’s racist/sexist/nativist/white supremacist/*insert other hateful thing* and you are, too”.

This never works out for them but, by gum, they continue doing it. And in increasingly stronger terms.

Take this weekend’s “GoHomeGate” (as I saw it called on Twitter). After it was decided Trump’s tweets were patently racist (I disagree), anyone who failed to condemn them — or continued to support Trump in any way — was also declared a racist.

Here’s AOC calling the entire Republican caucus filthy bigots:

The Daily Beast was even more direct in a piece with the very subtle title: “Trump Is a Racist. If You Still Support Him, So Are You.”

So we’re gonna do this, are we? Ok, fine. Let’s talk about pimp, sex trafficker, and pedophile Jeffrey Epstein and apply the same rules, shall we?


We all know about Bill Clinton’s friendship with the man, including his flights on the infuriatingly named “Lolita Express.” But what should we make of ABC host George Stephanopoulos, who dined with the man after he served time for the same crimes for which he’s been recently re-arrested? For that matter, what about other guests who visited Epstein’s home hoping to meet Prince Andrew? They include Katie Couric, Charlie Rose, comedian Chelsea Handler, and director Woody Allen. Are they all pedophiles (with the exception of the last one because we already know his proclivities) because they didn’t condemn Epstein’s behavior and broke bread with him? Is regretting being a guest of Epstein now, as George apparently does, enough to clear him?

What about Presidential nominee Sen. Kamala Harris (D-CA)? Her husband “headlined a fundraiser hosted for her campaign by lawyers at Kirkland and Ellis on the same day the California senator blasted the law firm for its defense of Jeffrey Epstein, the Associated Press reports.”

“In our democracy, no one—no matter how powerful or well-connected—is above the law,” Harris said in a statement released by her campaign last Tuesday. “Yet Epstein’s deal, secured by his lawyers at Kirkland and Ellis, calls into question the integrity of our legal system and undermines the public’s confidence that justice will be served.”

Just hours before the statement was released, Harris’s husband, lawyer Doug Emhoff, was in Chicago at a fundraiser for Harris hosted by six partners at Kirkland and Ellis. Her campaign told the AP it decided to go ahead with the fundraiser despite her attack on the firm’s previous work.


Is only her husband guilty of underage prostitution? She condemned Epstein but she is married to someone who associates with associates of his. Where does the guilt by association end?

The point is, if progressive Democrats aren’t really careful, they may find themselves trapped by their own need to destroy. Again.

And the bigger point is, given the relative seriousness of the offenses, Trump’s tweets don’t even enter the same stratosphere as the Epstein crimes. So if you’re going to roll those dice, progressives, it might benefit you to do a cost/benefit analysis to make sure you don’t have a whole lot more to lose.


Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Trending on RedState Videos