New York Democrat Governor Kathy Hochul and New York Democrat Attorney General Letitia James already know that the Cornell 7 are guilty of gang rape, but they’re going to conduct an honest and fair investigation.

Sure, and I have a bridge in Brooklyn to sell you.

Remember, James is the woman who ran for state attorney general in 2018 by promising to get Donald Trump for... something. Guilty verdict first, details later, evidence optional. She had already decided he was an “illegitimate president,” which would make her an election denier if she were Republican.

Anyway, Hochul says she’s just the woman for the Cornell case.

“I am deeply disturbed by Cornell University’s police and how they handled this,” Hochul declared on Friday. “In what world would the police learn from a victim that she’d been literally gang-raped while intoxicated by five men in a fraternity house, and not elevate those allegations to the district attorney?”

Like Hochul, James is hardly impartial.

“What this woman has been forced to endure is horrific and unacceptable,” she posted on Facebook last Monday. “I’m holding her in my heart and in my prayers. To her, and to all survivors: you’re not alone. We stand with you.”

James’s comments should disqualify her. For Hochul, they didn’t.

By calling the woman, known only as Jane Doe, a “survivor,” James is affirming that the case was rape — which is precisely what has yet to be determined. Doe only alleged rape two years after the events in question.

As Hot Air’s John Sexton reminds us, “The victim in this case did say in her initial interview that she agreed to a threesome with two other men and seems to have indicated she was okay with that even three weeks later. She also did say that at least two of the men who entered the room were observing[,] not participating. And she did say that she had had a lot to drink and taken drugs, seemingly of her own volition.”

That’s certainly all true, yet as our Emmy Griffin argued last week, “Regardless, evidence shows that a number of fraternity brothers at Cornell were cruel, horrible, and treated this young woman as a plaything. They did not protect, respect, or value her beyond what she could offer for entertainment. They should be ashamed of themselves on those counts alone.”

Griffin offered more details about the case, so I won’t repeat them here, other than to say it’s not clear at all. Maybe this was rape, but it seems more likely that it was a lot of horrifically poor decision-making from the men and the woman alike.

James was asked about her obvious impartiality. A reporter read James’s Facebook post and asked, “Why did you affirm her allegations as fact without doing your own fact-finding investigation? And to the governor, why did you appoint an official who made a public statement affirming those allegations as fact as someone who’s supposed to be doing an investigation?”

Hochul took it first. “I will answer that,” she said. “I have every confidence in our attorney general to do what she has always done: Look at the facts, examine the record, and draw the proper conclusions. That’s exactly what’s going to happen in this case.”

Just like with Trump! James’s anti-Trump case was such a hoax that a New York appellate court threw it out.

Ever the lawyer, James then bravely dodged the question entirely: “I will not comment on a Facebook post.”

It was your Facebook post, ma’am.

Naturally, Trump had thoughts. “Letitia James is a corrupt person,” the president opined. “She’s totally corrupt, and I can’t imagine it. And I feel badly for whoever she’s looking at because they won’t get a fair shake. Letitia James is a corrupt person.”

Jane Doe’s lawyer then said Trump is the one who “politicized” the case. “I think to politicize something like this is just wrong,” Thomas Giuffra said on CNN. “There are Republicans whose daughters are getting assaulted. There are Democrats whose daughters are getting assaulted. It has nothing to do with politics.”

Trump didn’t say anything about politics. He attacked James for her track record of politicizing justice. Others attacked and blamed him.

“I think, starts, you know, we can go to the president for this one,” said The New York Times’s Michelle Cottle. “I mean, we are in a moment in this culture where the glorification of being thuggish, and swaggering, and mistreating women, is kind of making you a cool kid.”

Meanwhile, one of the seven men has filed to have his name withdrawn and allegations dropped. Known as “John Doe” in the filing, he says Cornell University “found him responsible” without charge or opportunity to defend himself. That certainly seems on brand for higher education.

Some notes about New York law and general depravity. The state classifies refused or forced sex as rape, as well as involuntary intoxication. So, the question is whether Jane Doe was voluntarily or involuntarily intoxicated, and whether she could or did consent to sex on October 19, 2024.

“If someone is too intoxicated to consent, it should not matter whether they chose to use drugs or alcohol,” Hochul said. “Voluntary intoxication is not a license for sexual assault or gang rape, period.”

Hochul is right, but there’s still a question of consent — especially when Doe didn’t seem to withdraw consent for quite some time after the fact. It doesn’t and shouldn’t work that way. Regret is not rape.

Frankly, everyone in this whole case deserves rebuke.

Don’t drink to drunkenness or do drugs. Don’t have sex with random people at parties. Don’t report one thing and change your mind two years later. Don’t drop the ball and overlook evidence during investigations. Don’t prejudge conclusions and pretend impartiality. Don’t let the “believe all women” social media mob convict based on scant evidence. And when you have a history of infidelity and a court judgment of assault yourself, however faulty, maybe sit this one out.

Follow Nate Jackson on X

(Updated)