If it weren’t for double standards, we wouldn’t have any, I suppose. When the FBI found no substantiation for allegations from two women about Brett Kavanaugh, Democrats declared that they “believe the women” anyway and demanded his withdrawal. When a DFL investigation run by the law partner of the party’s general counsel reported they could find no substantiation for Karen Monahan’s much more recent claim of domestic violence by attorney general candidate Keith Ellison, party chair Ken Martin called Monahan a liar:

For the past two months, DFL Party Chair Ken Martin has walked a tightrope when it comes to both supporting a woman’s right to bring domestic abuse allegations against state Attorney General candidate Keith Ellison and also supporting the candidate. …

But when pressed by a reporter on whether or not he believes Monahan’s allegations, Martin now says he does not.

“We took them seriously,” he said of the allegations. “We conducted an outside, independent investigation, and that investigation showed we could not substantiate her claim of domestic abuse. And so I do not believe her, I believe our investigation.”

Martin called the press conference to highlight donations given to Ellison’s opponent Doug Wardlow by a for-profit education company. Unfortunately, Martin buried the lead with this answer and might have buried the DFL along with it. Even their own voters might wonder why the party insisted that Al Franken resign over sexual harassment allegations that preceded his election to the US Senate but are standing by Ellison while much more substantive and recent charges of domestic abuse remain unresolved.

The investigation, by the way, was nonsensical from the start. It wasn’t independent at all, despite Martin’s claims. As the Daily Caller reported a month ago, the DFL set it up as a way to provide Ellison cover until after the election:

Minneapolis lawyer Susan Ellingstad took over the Ellison investigation from the state party’s attorney following Ellison’s primary victory in August, the Associated Press reported Tuesday.

Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party Chairman Ken Martin told the AP they hired Ellingstad to make sure the investigation “wouldn’t be colored by people with associations with the party.”

Ellingstad is a legal partner with the state party’s attorney, Charlie Nauen, who the AP reported handled the early stages of the investigation. Ellingstad and Nauen are partners at Lockridge Grindal Nauen P.L.L.P., which bears the DFL attorney’s name.

KSTP notes that Monahan’s attorney claims that the “independent” Ellingstad investigation ignored evidence supplied to it by Monahan. The probe “was not objective, unbiased, or impartial,” Andrew Parker wrote to the TV station. Of course it wasn’t; attorneys aren’t hired to prove the guilt of their clients. And in this case, the DFL itself was clearly Ellingstad’s client, and Ellison is definitely the DFL’s client.

So here we have Democrats arguing that a probe by a law partner of their counsel effectively clears Ellison of wrongdoing by finding no substantiation, and therefore Monahan lied, while their counterparts argue that an FBI probe that found no substantiation of allegations against Kavanaugh means the women told the truth. Could they please pick one standard and stick with it?