On Monday, King weighed in after credible rape allegations surfaced against Maine Democratic Senate nominee Graham Platner. King, a longtime critic of President Donald Trump, appeared to reach for Scripture in an attempt to make a point about sin, hypocrisy, and judgment. It did not go well. “Tell you what–if you knew the whole truth […]

On Monday, King weighed in after credible rape allegations surfaced against Maine Democratic Senate nominee Graham Platner. King, a longtime critic of President Donald Trump, appeared to reach for Scripture in an attempt to make a point about sin, hypocrisy, and judgment. It did not go well.

“Tell you what–if you knew the whole truth about everyone in the Senate and House of Reps, those chambers would be dead empty. Jesus said, ‘Let him without sin cast the first stone,’” King wrote.

To be fair, King’s broader point about Congress being home to more than a few morally compromised people is not exactly difficult to believe. Americans have seen enough scandals from both parties to know that Washington is hardly a sanctuary of virtue.

But that was not the issue. The problem was what King seemed to be implying. His post came in the context of allegations against Platner, and the obvious reading was that the existence of other bad behavior in Congress somehow made this particular allegation less politically disqualifying.

That argument did not sit well with many users on X.

It also drew a Community Note that cut directly at King’s use of the Bible.

“This is referring to Graham Platner, who has been accused of rape,” the note read. “In John 8:7, the woman to be stoned to death was accused of adultery, not rape. It is understood to be a powerful statement against hypocrisy, not a free-pass for politicians to rape women.”

Advertisement

That distinction matters. The passage King referenced is often used by people who remember only the line about casting the first stone while leaving out the rest of the story. Jesus does call out hypocrisy, but the exchange does not end with indifference toward sin. It ends with the command, “Go, and from now on sin no more.”

In other words, the passage is not a blanket defense of wrongdoing. It is not a political shield. And it certainly is not a convenient way to wave off a serious allegation against a candidate for public office.

Users on X quickly seized on that point. Many accused King of applying Scripture selectively, using it only when it helped protect a Democrat from political damage.

The backlash appeared to get his attention. On Tuesday, King followed up with another post.

“Not defending Grah, Platner,” he wrote, apparently misspelling Platner’s first name. “If he committed rape, he should bow out. Just making a comparison.”

But that answer raised its own question. A comparison to what?

If King knows of credible rape allegations against sitting members of Congress, then he should say so. Those allegations should be taken seriously, no matter the party. But if the point was simply that “everyone has done something wrong,” then that argument collapses quickly when the subject is an accusation as serious as rape.

Advertisement

It also lands awkwardly coming from King, who has spent years publicly condemning Trump and his allies with little hesitation. A man who has thrown plenty of political stones cannot suddenly retreat behind a Bible verse when the accused politician happens to be on his side.

The Western Journal