In re John Thompson, Democrats are shocked

I brought the case of John Thompson up to date early yesterday morning in “The mixed-up files of Rep. John Thompson.” I argued for the general importance of his case in the manifestation of the motive force of the Democratic Party. Minnesota Democrats deserve him as their public face. They should be stuck with him good and hard.

By the end of the day, however, Minnesota’s Democratic establishment and its principals were calling for Thompson’s resignation. MPR itemizes and briefly quotes from the leading statements here. My personal favorite is that of Lieutenant Governor Peggy Flanagan, the metropolitan leftist from whose hymnbook Governor Walz has been singing since his election. Flanagan wrote:

As a mom, advocate for children, and survivor and child witness of domestic violence, I know the deeply traumatic impact of the actions outlined in reports against Representative Thompson. Someone who has allegedly demonstrated this violent pattern of behavior, especially in the presence of children, is unfit to serve in elected office. Representative Thompson must resign.

You know these are desperate times for Dems when Flanagan sacrifices the mention of her credential to speak as “a light-skinned Native woman,” as she always puts it.

The Walz are closing in on Thompson — literally. Governor Tim Walz called for Thompson’s resignation. House DFL leadership also abandoned Thompson in a joint statement:

As leaders of the Minnesota House of Representatives we take allegations of misconduct of staff and members very seriously. The recent reports concerning Representative John Thompson’s actions are deeply troubling…We are calling on Representative Thompson to resign immediately.

How could they know that Thompson has a screw loose?, as I put it yesterday morning. Or how could they not know?

Last summer Thompson led the crowd in a deranged demonstration outside the home of Minneapolis police union president Bob Kroll in Hugo, Minnesota. And when I say deranged, I mean deranged. Rebecca Brannon looks back with the video below. (Full video of the Hugo festivities is posted here on Facebook.)

Democrats stuck with Thompson right though his election to the legislature last November and beyond. They only abandoned him after Tom Lyden’s FOX 9 report this weekend on the old charges of Thompson’s sexual misconduct. These were supposedly too much for the DFL. How could they have known?

At Alpha News Kyle Hooten comments: “It is unclear why no such request was made earlier, as Thompson’s pattern of alleged physical abuse has been public knowledge since he entered politics.” In August 2020 Kyle reported for Alpha News: “Apparent record of Dem at center of Hugo outburst shows past charges of domestic assault, terroristic threats.” Those DFL stalwarts couldn’t have cared less.

Lyden’s story filled out the picture with additional charges and graphic details giving expressive form to Thompson’s inner nature. Yet what we have here is the eternal recurrence of the classic scene from Casablanca in which Captain Renault collects his winnings as he shuts down the house for gambling.

Thompson did not immediately respond to a request for comment from the Star Tribune. But his attorney, Jordan Kushner, told the Star Tribune that Thompson “maintains the allegations are false and he was never found guilty of them in a court.” The Star Tribune further quotes Kushner: “It’s a shame that there’s no concern about due process.”

Good point! Hang in there, John.

Thompson himself is big on pretexts, as in his campaign against “pretextual” traffic stops. What we have here is a thin pretext for coldly pulling the plug on a DFL thug whose price has come to exceed his value by an unacceptably wide margin.

Thompson is nevertheless all theirs. He is the man of the hour leading the charge against r-a-a-a-cism. Who can take his place? Getting in the John Thompson spirit, Drew Lee deserves the last word.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.