On Friday, Kemberlee wrote about the bizarre braggadocio exhibited by sitting Ohio Supreme Court justice and candidate for governor Bill O’Neill.

His attempt to make light of and sweep back under the carpet the serious allegations of sexual assault, rape, and assorted sexual improprieties unleashed in the wake of the Harvey Weinstein scandal fell flat, leaving most people on both sides of the aisle outraged and incredulous.

O’Neill initially wrote:

O’Neill has now issued an apology.  Sort of.

The Hill reports:

Ohio Supreme Court Justice Bill O’Neill apologized on Saturday for posting on Facebook a day earlier bragging about his sexual exploits.

O’Neill, who is running for Ohio governor as a Democrat, received massive backlash Friday for detailing his sexual history with “50 very attractive females,” in response to mounting sexual misconduct allegations against prominent political figures.

He apologized on Saturday in a Facebook post, qualifying his apology by saying he is not sorry if his Facebook post served to “elevate the discussion” about sexual assault, “as opposed to personal indiscretions.”

“If I offended anyone, particularly the wonderful women in my life, I apologize,” he wrote on Facebook Saturday. “But if I have helped elevate the discussion on the serious issues of sexual assault, as opposed to personal indiscretions, to a new level…I make no apologies.”

After delivering his own sorry, not sorry apology, O’Neill went on to defend another sorry, not sorry Democrat faced with allegations of sexual impropriety, Senator Al Franken (MN).

The Hill continues:

O’Neill also offered a defense of Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.), who has come under fire in recent days after allegations emerged that he forcibly kissed and groped a woman in 2006, saying that the allegations against him are far less serious than those against GOP Senate candidate Roy Moore.

“Suggesting the admitted conduct of Senator Al Franken and the alleged conduct of Judge Roy Moore are on the same level trivializes the serious subject at hand,” O’Neill wrote.

“There are Democrats out there who are saying neither one of them pass the purity test to sit in the United States Senate. And that is sad,” he added.

As has become the norm, Democrats are relying on rhetorical gymnastics to apologize not for their deeds but for others possibly being offended.  “I’m sorry you made me hit you,” or “I’m sorry you are offended by/too stupid to understand what I said.”

In O’Neill’s case, he qualifies an already back-handed apology by noting that his apology is dependent on it having the desired effect of “elevating the discussion.”  It clearly did not or he would not be issuing this statement, so why include that qualification?