It was only a matter of time until the effort to officially rehabiliate Al Franken and relaunch his political career was underway in the media.

In this regard, the media is just doing what the lefty grassroots wants it to. 

And the New Yorker is a perfect platform for launching Franken’s rehab.

Jane Mayer’s name on this toxic hit piece aimed at Franken’s accusers is particularly significant considering her role in #MeToo journalism as Ronan Farrow’s partner. 

Is this a sign that #MeToo itself is being purged? Yes and no.

Accusations of sexual harassment can still be useful. But if the Left can rehab Al Franken, it can show that, just as in the Clinton era, they don’t really matter.

Jane Mayer has always been a hack and her elaborate article is really just a hagiography of Franken and an attack on Leeann Tweeden, tjhe first woman to accuse Franken and provide photographic evidence. 

Mayer’s obsession with destroying Tweeden is typical of the Frankenfan’s conviction that taking her out will destroy the case against Franken.

The problem is that there are 8 accusers. Most or all are on the Left.

And Mayer has no response there except to claim that they misunderstood what Franken was trying to do when he was groping them.

And you thought the Clinton era was over.

Jane Mayer spends much of her hit piece going after Tweeden. “Franken’s fall was stunningly swift: he resigned only three weeks after Leeann Tweeden, a conservative talk-radio host, accused him of having forced an unwanted kiss on her during a 2006 U.S.O. tour,” she begins.

The bias is obvious.

Tweeden, Mayer reminds her lefty audience, is a bad right-wing person. “Tweeden had also taken some controversial political stands. In 2011, in an appearance on “Hannity,” she sided with “birthers,” calling on President Barack Obama to produce a birth certificate to prove his citizenship, and praised Trump, who had been stoking racist suspicions about Obama’s identity. “I think Donald Trump is brilliant,” she added. “Who knows how far he could go?””

But the women who accused Franken include a feminist choir member. A number were lefty fans who wanted to take pictures with him.

Attacking Tweeden is meaningless to any rational person. But Jane Mayer and the New Yorker are counting on lefty political tribalism to obscure the facts. And they will no doubt succeed. It’s the old Clinton playbook.

Make it appear that Franken is the victim of a vast right wing conspiracy and that it’s time for him to make a comeback.

Some of the accusers made the right decision not to cooperate with Jane Mayer. And her own extended hit piece shows why it’s the right decision. 

Her agenda, to defend Franken and undermine his accusers, to bring back his political career, is as subtle as a rainstorm in July.

Not long ago, I asked the woman if she thought that Franken had been making a sexual advance or a clumsy thank-you gesture.

“Is there a difference?” she replied. “If someone tries to do something to you unwanted?” From her standpoint, because she was at work—a professional woman deserving respect—his intentions didn’t matter.

Franken has maintained that the woman’s story was the allegation “that killed me.” I asked her if his behavior was bad enough to end his Senate career.

“I didn’t end his Senate career—he did,” she said.

Franken was stricken when I related her comments to him. 

This is not journalism. This is PR.

It’s pathetic. 

This article should follow Jane Mayer wherever she goes. And follow the New Yorker as well.