Mister Feminist

Keith Ellison says cops shouldn’t be the ones responding to rapes.

Emphasis added:

“If you’re a woman who’s been a victim of a sexual assault and the assailant has ran away, wouldn’t you rather talk to somebody who is trained in helping you deal with what you’re dealing with as opposed to somebody whose main training is that they know how to use a firearm, right?” he asked.

Ellison posed this question during a broadcast featuring himself, Democrat Congresswoman Karen Bass and Yamiche Alcindor, PBS’s White House Correspondent on July 17. As he spoke, both the congresswoman and reporter looked downward and did not interrupt.

The Republican National Committee research team discovered the clip and posted it across social media.

Side note – “…the assailant has ran away?”

He went to law school, for chrissake.

But yes – he think social workers, not investigators, should be the first to respond to rapes.

“Keith Ellison clearly is not even aware of the MN Post Board standards for police training. Licensed police officers receive a variety of training in multiple subjects including how to interview a rape victim. As a state leader he should be more familiar with state standards before he makes assumptions,” says the officer. This is the same officer who has delivered verifiably factual information to Alpha News previously.

The fact that Ellison apparently doesn’t believe there’s an investigative component to responding to sexual assault should make everyone in Minnesota with a female in their life really, really angry.

11 thoughts on “Mister Feminist

  1. A good start down that road would be to elect a State Attorney General who is not a rapist.

  2. Well, survivors/victims are starting to joke that if they were going to start dealing drugs or weapons, they’d hide them in a rape kit box, because the police never touch those. So maybe he’s got a point.

    Seriously, given that the police theoretically are trained to collect and analyze evidence, and social workers are not, this could be the biggest setback in the prosecution of sexual assault in years. No doubt that many departments need more people with the “soft” skills needed to interview accuser/victims well, but my goodness….

  3. Minneapolis has had a sex crime unit for at least 30 years, so one would expect well trained sympathetic officers when reporting a rape there. Other, smaller agencies do not have such resources, and therefore would not have the resources that our woman beating AG speaks of.

    Read this for what it is, a ploy to shovel more money to the radical left.

  4. Alex, I’ll take law enforcement for $500. Clueless. Tone deaf. Incompetent. What are adjectives that describe Keith Ellison?

  5. face it, this isn’t about the welfare of the rape victim its about finding jobs for all those baristas and telemarketers who graduated from college with Soci@logy Degrees – they need to pay off those loans (and move out of the basement). In addition to expanding the ranks of government bureaucracy (and SEIU/AFSCME) this is also a full employment push for a generation of underachievers.

  6. Greg, you might be surprised about the MPD. Last November, they confessed to having 1500 rape kits sitting unprocessed on the shelf, and accusers not too long ago accuse them of various kinds of victim-blaming and not doing a very good job.


    No time or funding for processing rape kits to put rapists in prison, but they sure do a great job issuing parking tickets and pulling over guys who are speeding, not to mention arresting kids caught with a joint!

    That noted, doing the job with social workers instead of investigators would make the problem worse because they’re not trained to collect actionable evidence. Again, the argument being made here is that all the experience, capital, culture, and such of the actual police doesn’t count for squat. Very dangerous assumption.

  7. Greg, you might be surprised about the MPD. Last November, they confessed to having 1500 rape kits sitting unprocessed on the shelf, and accusers not too long ago accuse them of various kinds of victim-blaming and not doing a very good job.

    Simple question.

    What is the purpose of a rape kit?

    1) Identify the accused.
    2) Prove that sex took place.

    Question: If the accused is known, which is true is most cases, why test for DNA? See answer #2.
    Question: If the accused stipulates that sex took place, why run the test?
    Question: Of the 1,500 kits, how many involved cases where the perpetrator was known.

    So again, what is the purpose of the test: investigation or prosecution?

    I cannot speak to who is in the wrong here, the police for not testing kits that needed to be tested or TIME magazine, whose reporters are mostly under 25 years old, know nothing and are dumber than a box of rocks.

    It could be both.

  8. not to mention arresting kids caught with a joint!

    If I am not mistaken and correct me if I am wrong, but possession of a small amount of marijuana is a petty misdemeanor in Minnesota which does not constitute a crime and for which a sentence is a fine of not more than $300.

    I doubt if anyone actually gets “arrested” for non-crimes in Minneapolis. It is my understanding that they are simply given a citation. The court may order attendance in a drug program.

    The full law is here 152.027 OTHER CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE OFFENSES.

  9. I don’t think that the unprocessed rape kits issue is unique to Minneapolis, either.

    Further, we have seen an abject failure of the MeToo movement, because it was bastardized by the left.

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.