Franken revisited

[Nice Guy Eddie 13411]

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/07/29/the-case-of-al-franken

this article’s investigation should have been the path taken with Franken: take a breath and examine the facts and testimony. While Franken may have been acted inappropriate and in poor taste the evidence doesn’t seem to support him a forced resignation. And is acting inappropriate during a USO tour surprising.  One of the central points of those shows are to objectify women for the entertainment of the male soldiers. Yes as he admitted he shouldn’t have taken a photo with the sleeping model but there were no claims he actually touched her.

I still don’t know what to think in regards to the stories that he groped women on the campaign trail.  Maybe it happened but would a senator grab women in front of other campaign workers or donors while being photographed?  It’s either incredibly recklessly stupid, extremely predatory or made up.  

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

It was an obvious orchestrated hit job from the beginning.  The media took the bait and ran wild without a real investigation.  Politicians seized on the moment and called for his resignation to demonstrate moral clarity in the me-too movement.  Franken was sacrificed for the greater good and we all lost. 

[Js1 85104]

I hope his image rehab runs through a cabinet appointment under the next president.

I don't see him trying for a comeback bid - both of Minnesota's senators are younger than he is (Smith is 61 and Klobuchar is 59) but he'd make an interesting interim appointee if either of them end up in the Cabinet instead. 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13411]

36 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

It was an obvious orchestrated hit job from the beginning.  The media took the bait and ran wild without a real investigation.  Politicians seized on the moment and called for his resignation to demonstrate moral clarity in the me-too movement.  Franken was sacrificed for the greater good and we all lost. 

Yep.  Franken also suffered from having a dem governor in his state who would ultimately appoint a dem replacement. If that governor had been gop, Schumer wouldn’t begged franken to stay.  

Regardless of party, we should all slow down when these stories break.  Gather the facts before making an opinion.  

Edit: based on some interviews in this new Yorker story, even tweeden didn’t have the full facts but I don’t think she intentionally lied.  She didn’t know that franken had twice (at least) performed the same kissing USO skit with other models/actresses that had no problem because they considered it an acting gig.  He didn’t write the skit with her (tweeden) in mind.  

Edited July 22, 2019 by Nice Guy Eddie

[horncyclist 1386]

8 minutes ago, Js1 said:

I hope his image rehab runs through a cabinet appointment under the next president.

I don't see him trying for a comeback bid - both of Minnesota's senators are younger than he is (Smith is 61 and Klobuchar is 59) but he'd make an interesting interim appointee if either of them end up in the Cabinet instead. 

Would like to see this. He always took his job seriously and came to issues with compassion. Well liked by senators from both parties. 

I have no problem blaming Gillibrand.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13411]

In hindsight, the Dems should have “suspended” franken even though I don’t know if that exact punishment is an official option.  Then put franken up before the ethics board. 

One problem with the metoo movement is that some feel that inappropriate behavior is on par with sexual assault.  In some cases, inappropriate behavior can be very close to assault but in others, it can only be a misunderstanding.   Each case should and needs to be reviewed independently and with context.  

And the accused should have some ability to face his/her accusers. I know some people don’t want the spotlight and that alone shouldn’t protect the accused but you can’t just let accusations alone convict/ruin someone. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Reading that piece reminds me of the hoops Dems used to jump through to justify Bill Clinton's behavior.   There's nothing there that we didn't already know; it's just his side of the story, which is that he's a great guy who was innocently doing all of these things out of humor or cluelessness.   Plus an extended attack on one of his alleged victims, none of which undermines her account of how she felt.   It's all "Hey, she seemed to be going along with it all in good fun," which is the defense in virtually all situations of sexual harassment.

The tiny part addressing the other 7 alleged victims — which is really what brought him down — is diced up to minimize their impact.   Only two were after he became Senator!  And that's explainable by him being innocently over-physical, because he's just a big ol' galoot!   Three more were when he was a radio host ... just a big misunderstanding, and besides he's not as bad as Kavanaugh and Trump!  I can't even tell if the writer addresses the other two, it's so unclear by this point. 

If anything, this piece confirms that Dems were right to push him out.  I don't care that his motivation probably wasn't sexual gratification, which is the subtext of the piece.  Nor do I care that women have long had to put up with being groped and kissed by gross men under the "old rules," as the article calls them.  It's inappropriate and below the standard we should require for our Senators — most of whom have not faced similar allegations even though they lived under the "old rules" as well. 

It's not fair that there are some politicians still in office who have done worse.   But the way to improve things is by continuing to go after them, not lowering our standards to conform to the worst. 

[Nice Guy Eddie 13411]

Disagree @Mojo Hand

For the USO actress, her feelings are 100% relevant but you also have to view any situation with a sense of reasonableness. Just because someone is offended doesn’t make an act offensive.  The main public outcry for that was the pic with franken pretending to grab her from a few feet away.   It’s bad or immature behavior but I think falls into the realm that an apology takes care of it, assuming the person is truly sorry.

as for the other accusations, it’s uncertain if they all even occurred.  Perhaps they did, and perhaps there were more. I don’t know.  Do you think franken grabbed a woman’s butt while posing for a campaign photo?   Hell I wouldn’t think Roy Moore would do that. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

6 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Reading that piece reminds me of the hoops Dems used to jump through to justify Bill Clinton's behavior.   There's nothing there that we didn't already know; it's just his side of the story, which is that he's a great guy who was innocently doing all of these things out of humor or cluelessness.   Plus an extended attack on one of his alleged victims, none of which undermines her account of how she felt.   It's all "Hey, she seemed to be going along with it all in good fun," which is the defense in virtually all situations of sexual harassment.

The tiny part addressing the other 7 alleged victims — which is really what brought him down — is diced up to minimize their impact.   Only two were after he became Senator!  And that's explainable by him being innocently over-physical, because he's just a big ol' galoot!   Three more were when he was a radio host ... just a big misunderstanding, and besides he's not as bad as Kavanaugh and Trump!  I can't even tell if the writer addresses the other two, it's so unclear by this point. 

If anything, this piece confirms that Dems were right to push him out.  I don't care that his motivation probably wasn't sexual gratification, which is the subtext of the piece.  Nor do I care that women have long had to put up with being groped and kissed by gross men under the "old rules," as the article calls them.  It's inappropriate and below the standard we should require for our Senators — most of whom have not faced similar allegations even though they lived under the "old rules" as well. 

It's not fair that there are some politicians still in office who have done worse.   But the way to improve things is by continuing to go after them, not lowering our standards to conform to the worst. 

I think the thing most people are wrestling with is, “Did the punishment fit the crime?” 

We never got much clarity on the crime besides some loose reporting at that moment. Women with sexual harassment claims should be listened to.  We didn’t really get an opportunity to listen to them and judge for ourselves, neither did any kind of objective investigation.  The Franken case sets a bad precedent IMO.  

[Mojo Hand 4580]

4 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Disagree @Mojo Hand

For the USO actress, her feelings are 100% relevant but you also have to view any situation with a sense of reasonableness. Just because someone is offended doesn’t make an act offensive.  The main public outcry for that was the pic with franken pretending to grab her from a few feet away.   It’s bad or immature behavior but I think falls into the realm that an apology takes care of it, assuming the person is truly sorry.

as for the other accusations, it’s uncertain if they all even occurred.  Perhaps they did, and perhaps there were more. I don’t know.  Do you think franken grabbed a woman’s butt while posing for a campaign photo?   Hell I wouldn’t think Roy Moore would do that. 

You may be misremembering the pic, but his fingers were either touching her chest or millimeters away; it wasn't a few feet.   Regardless, he survived the picture, as even this article points out.  It was the stream of groping and kissing allegations that followed that brought him down. 

As for whether they really occurred, well, there's no reason to doubt the credibility of the accusers.   But things would have been different had Franken come out and categorically said "I've never groped or tried to kiss any woman in the way described."  Instead it was things like, "I take a lot of pictures, I can't remember this one."  It was pretty clear from his response that he actually did the things alleged, but just felt that he had an innocent or playful intent behind it.   That's not good enough for me. 

[Larry T. Spider 1740]

“Just because someone is offended doesn’t make an act offensive.”

This is the hard part with things related to sexual harassment. All of the trainings I go to say exactly the opposite. I’m careful as hell at work because I work with 90% women and one accusation can sink you.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

I don’t even consider the photograph when evaluating the allegations.  That was a poor attempt at comedy because he was a comedian.    

The other allegations were the ones to take seriously.

[Mojo Hand 4580]

10 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I think the thing most people are wrestling with is, “Did the punishment fit the crime?” 

We never got much clarity on the crime besides some loose reporting at that moment. Women with sexual harassment claims should be listened to.  We didn’t really get an opportunity to listen to them and judge for ourselves, neither did any kind of objective investigation.  The Franken case sets a bad precedent IMO.  

Well, the "crime" was grabbing asses and kissing women on the mouth.   The article pretty much confirms he did that, and was generally a pretty handsy and mouthy guy.   So I guess you can judge for yourself whether that's fitting behavior for a US Senator. 

I think the process argument is misguided because he resigned. He wasn't investigated or punished because he chose to leave.  He botched his response from the start.  That's more a political mistake than anything else, but it doesn't set much of a precedent from an investigatory standpoint.  

[Jiggy-Z 3432]

Franken had a history of bringing the behavior found in the writing room of Saturday Night Live to politics.  I was reading my wife's copy of "Giant of the Senate" and in it, Franken detailed a few occasions where risque behavior/comments had gotten him in trouble on the Senate campaign.  I read it after he resigned but, taking all into account I got the feeling that there might have been more there than was reported.  FTR, I found nothing he did during his senate campaign offensive.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

7 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Well, the "crime" was grabbing asses and kissing women on the mouth.   The article pretty much confirms he did that, and was generally a pretty handsy and mouthy guy.   So I guess you can judge for yourself whether that's fitting behavior for a US Senator. 

I think the process argument is misguided because he resigned. He wasn't investigated or punished because he chose to leave.  He botched his response from the start.  That's more a political mistake than anything else, but it doesn't set much of a precedent from an investigatory standpoint.  

I’m not arguing he’s innocent of wrongdoing.  He should be held accountable for malfeasance and abusing his power.  He should also be given a fair hearing instead of prosecution via a media feeding frenzy.  

He resigned because the political pressure created by opportunists among his colleagues made the situation untenable.  The article says many of the senators regret their decision to call for his resignation so prematurely.   

I don’t know if Franken should have resigned because I never felt like I got a fair hearing of the facts.  All I know is the whole situation was poorly handle by everyone involved and if a similar case should arise, I’d hope cooler heads would prevail.  

[Mojo Hand 4580]

23 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I’m not arguing he’s innocent of wrongdoing.  He should be held accountable for malfeasance and abusing his power.  He should also be given a fair hearing instead of prosecution via a media feeding frenzy.  

He resigned because the political pressure created by opportunists among his colleagues made the situation untenable.  The article says many of the senators regret their decision to call for his resignation so prematurely.   

I don’t know if Franken should have resigned because I never felt like I got a fair hearing of the facts.  All I know is the whole situation was poorly handle by everyone involved and if a similar case should arise, I’d hope cooler heads would prevail.  

I hear you, but "prosecution via a media feeding frenzy" is just politics.   Were you not calling for Trump to bow out after the Access Hollywood tape broke, or at minimum saying that it should be a factor in whether people vote for him, even without a trial?   Political decisions aren't "prosecution."  Franken isn't in jail.   He's just a private citizen now.   Nobody has a right to be a leader in government.   The governor of Puerto Rico is on the ropes right now for offensive jokes and comments he said in private.  That's politics.  Kirsten Gillibrand is getting frozen out by Dems for the mere "crime" of siding against Franken, while Kamala Harris is riding high even though she came out against Franken the same day.  That's politics too. 

Public perception, impact on elections, credibility in attacking Trump's sexual predation — all of it matters when you're in politics.  It's what you sign up for, and Franken played the same game until he was in the barrel.  Franken politically botched his public response, and the political result was the pressure to resign.  He still could have resisted that — like Trump, or all of the leaders of Virginia right now — but didn't for whatever reason, maybe even honorable ones.   But them's the breaks. 

Maybe you think politics should be different, but I don't think it can be.   In a democracy, it all eventually boils down to voters and public opinion, and people love salacious stories and villains and heroes and downfalls and comebacks.    This is just human nature playing out on a big stage.  And I think it's a good thing — especially right now — that for one party, unwanted groping and kissing creates such a huge political problem. 

Edited July 22, 2019 by Mojo Hand

[David Dennison 18655]

He didn't have to resign.

[Mdhorn 5911]

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

In hindsight, the Dems should have “suspended” franken even though I don’t know if that exact punishment is an official option.  Then put franken up before the ethics board. 

One problem with the metoo movement is that some feel that inappropriate behavior is on par with sexual assault.  In some cases, inappropriate behavior can be very close to assault but in others, it can only be a misunderstanding.   Each case should and needs to be reviewed independently and with context.  

And the accused should have some ability to face his/her accusers. I know some people don’t want the spotlight and that alone shouldn’t protect the accused but you can’t just let accusations alone convict/ruin someone. 

Franken asked for an investigation and was denied by Democrats.  This was a timely hit job. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

3 minutes ago, Mdhorn said:

Franken asked for an investigation and was denied by Democrats.  This was a timely hit job. 

No, the investigation was opened.  It didn't finish because Franken chose to resign. 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2017/11/30/senate-ethics-committee-launches-its-investigation-al-franken/911503001/

Edited July 22, 2019 by Mojo Hand

[Mdhorn 5911]

58 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

You may be misremembering the pic, but his fingers were either touching her chest or millimeters away; it wasn't a few feet.   Regardless, he survived the picture, as even this article points out.  It was the stream of groping and kissing allegations that followed that brought him down. 

As for whether they really occurred, well, there's no reason to doubt the credibility of the accusers.   But things would have been different had Franken come out and categorically said "I've never groped or tried to kiss any woman in the way described."  Instead it was things like, "I take a lot of pictures, I can't remember this one."  It was pretty clear from his response that he actually did the things alleged, but just felt that he had an innocent or playful intent behind it.   That's not good enough for me. 

And they all dropped when he left office.  That's why I doubt some of the accusations.  If people are serious and felt threatened, press charges. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

1 minute ago, Mdhorn said:

And they all dropped when he left office.  That's why I doubt some of the accusations.  If people are serious and felt threatened, press charges. 

So you think Trump is innocent of the 17+ accusations by women who have not brought charges? 

The standard for proving something in court is much higher than the standard for making political judgments about our leaders.  As it should be, when courts can deprive someone of their property, liberty, and even lives. 

[BrazilHorn 6576]

This is actually a core problem with the Democratic Party. The outrage politics and the speed at which the outrage moves. 

The Twitter-verse and meme built world we all live in just enables it. 

Patton Oswalt has a bit on not being able to keep up with all of the new acronyms and pronouns that change weekly and subsequently trigger outrage. 

I’m not absolving Franken but the guy never even had a chance to defend himself. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

19 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Were you not calling for Trump to bow out after the Access Hollywood tape broke, or at minimum saying that it should be a factor in whether people vote for him, even without a trial? 

Trump admitting to sexual assault on tape goes beyond anything Franken was even accused of.  

 

19 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Franken politically botched his public response, and the political result was the pressure to resign.  

How Franken responded had nothing to do with his colleagues throwing him under the bus.  Franken was calling for a rigorous investigation of himself for crying out loud.  His colleagues wouldn’t even entertain that before calling for his resignation... Nope, “this lady says you grabbed her ass and this one says you tried to kiss her.  We don’t even want to hear your side of the story.  These women could have grabbed your dick shortly beforehand and it wouldn’t make one difference.  Zero tolerance means zero tolerance.”  

The failure was on the democrats all too eagerness to project the appearance of holding themselves to higher standards for political reasons, as if the Republicans haven’t abandoned that high ground long ago.  Politics is about winning and losing.  There were no winners in the Franken debacle except the republicans because they made the democrats look weak again by being too reactionary and trigger happy in the heat of the moment. 

Edited July 22, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Anastasis 23394]

1 hour ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Regardless of party, we should all slow down when these stories break.  Gather the facts before making an opinion.  

Politics via twitter make this notion a thing of the past. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Trump admitting to sexual assault on tape goes beyond anything Franken was even accused of.  

 

How Franken responded had nothing to do with his colleagues throwing him under the bus.  Franken was calling for a rigorous investigation of himself for crying out loud.  His colleagues wouldn’t even entertain that... Nope, “this lady says you grabbed her ass and this one says you tried to kiss her.  We don’t even want to hear your side of the story.  These women could have grabbed your dick shortly beforehand and it wouldn’t make one difference.  Zero tolerance means zero tolerance.”  

The failure was on the democrats all too eagerness to project the appearance of holding themselves to higher standards for political reasons, as if the Republicans haven’t abandoned that high ground long ago.  Politics is about winning and losing.  There were no winners in the Franken debacle except the republicans because they made the democrats look weak again by being too reactionary and trigger happy in the heat of the moment. 

Trump was just "joking" with "locker room talk," according to his defenders. Just like Franken was "joking" in the photo with Tweeden.   Both have numerous other accusers.   The difference in how you interpret it is how you feel about each of them beyond these accusations. 

Why do you and others keep claiming that his colleagues wouldn't entertain an investigation?   An ethics investigation was opened. 

And I couldn't disagree more about the Republicans winning the Franken debacle.  What exactly did they gain?  Making the Dems look weak?   Yeah, so weak that a historic blue wave swept over the House less than a year later, powered by women. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

2 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Trump was just "joking" with "locker room talk," according to his defenders. Just like Franken was "joking" in the photo with Tweeden.

Franken was a COMEDIAN doing comedy.  The photo was intentional to get a laugh.  Obviously in poor taste but you are ignoring context.  If Franken was doing that photo bit in a movie, no one would give a shit. 

 Trump was caught on a hot mic confessing to something he would never admit to in public. Much different deal.

8 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

Why do you and others keep claiming that his colleagues wouldn't entertain an investigation?   An ethics investigation was opened. 

Again, you ignore all the democrats jumping on a bandwagon calling for his resignation before an investigation was completed.  This is why he resigned.  The political pressure created by his colleagues made him resigning the only way to prevent the situation from getting worse politically for him and the party.  The facts no longer mattered at that point.

10 minutes ago, Mojo Hand said:

And I couldn't disagree more about the Republicans winning the Franken debacle.  What exactly did they gain?  Making the Dems look weak?   Yeah, so weak that a historic blue wave swept over the House less than a year later, powered by women. 

The democrats lost one of their strongest, most visible, and publicly vocal advocates in the Senate.  I can’t even tell you who replaced him without looking it up.  That’s a loss for the democrats and in our current zero sum game of politics, a win for the GOP. 

The blue wave was happening regardless of how Franken played out. 

[David Dennison 18655]

1 minute ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

The democrats lost one of their strongest, most visible, and publicly vocal advocates in the Senate.  I can’t even tell you who replaced him without looking it up.  That’s a loss for the democrats and in our current zero sum game of politics, a win for the GOP. 

The blue wave was happening regardless of how Franken played out. 

Because he resigned.

He didn't have to.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

9 minutes ago, David Dennison said:

Because he resigned.

He didn't have to.

He took one for team is the way I saw it.  His resignation was for the greater good.  He made the right decision because he put the party and the county above himself.  The democrats prematurely calling for him to resign thought they were doing the same at the time.  Now they are realizing they miscalculated and they are admitting it, as the article in the OP reports.

Edited July 22, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Mojo Hand 4580]

Just now, Hugo Stiglitz said:

Franken was a COMEDIAN doing comedy.  The photo was intentional to get a laugh.  Obviously in poor taste but you are ignoring context.  If Franken was doing that photo bit in a movie, no one would give a shit. 

 Trump was caught on a hot mic confessing to something he would never admit to in public. Much different deal.

Again, you ignore all the democrats jumping on a bandwagon calling for his resignation before an investigation was completed.  This is why he resigned.  The political pressure created by his colleagues made him resigning the only way to prevent the situation from getting worse politically for him and the party.  The facts no longer mattered at that point.

The democrats lost one of their strongest, most visible, and publicly vocal advocates in the Senate.  I can’t even tell you who replaced him without looking it up.  That’s a loss for the democrats and in our current zero sum game of politics, a win for the GOP. 

The blue wave was happening regardless of how Franken played out. 

Trump wasn't caught confessing to a priest or his lawyer.  He was a reality show host trying to impress a second-rate entertainment reporter.   I don't find Trump's excuse compelling, but his cult supporters don't think he was confessing on that tape.  They think he was exaggerating for effect.   And the process of rationalization they employ is exactly what you are doing with Franken.   Because they like Trump and you like Franken, so you see similar things in a different light. 

The things that you are saying about the process only matter because he resigned.   Trump didn't, nor did the leaders in Virginia, and they've had plenty of time to make their respective cases while still in office.   Franken would have too.   It was his choice not to stick it out. 

[WhatTheBuck 28710]

1 hour ago, Mojo Hand said:

You may be misremembering the pic, but his fingers were either touching her chest or millimeters away; it wasn't a few feet.   Regardless, he survived the picture, as even this article points out.  It was the stream of groping and kissing allegations that followed that brought him down. 

As for whether they really occurred, well, there's no reason to doubt the credibility of the accusers.   But things would have been different had Franken come out and categorically said "I've never groped or tried to kiss any woman in the way described."  Instead it was things like, "I take a lot of pictures, I can't remember this one."  It was pretty clear from his response that he actually did the things alleged, but just felt that he had an innocent or playful intent behind it.   That's not good enough for me. 

Go back and look at the pic. The shadows of his hands are too far away from his hands for them to have been that close. He was clearly not touching her. His hands were several inches away from her chest. I think we all know about what distance away we'd hold our hands if we were taking a gag photo of fake grabbing a sleeping woman's breasts. That's how far away they appeared to be. 

[Mojo Hand 4580]

1 minute ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Go back and look at the pic. The shadows of his hands are too far away from his hands for them to have been that close. He was clearly not touching her. His hands were several inches away from her chest. I think we all know about what distance away we'd hold our hands if we were taking a gag photo of fake grabbing a sleeping woman's breasts. That's how far away they appeared to be. 

I don't agree, but it doesn't really matter.  He wasn't a few feet away, as the poster claimed.  And he survived the pic alone. 

[hobbes2702 12805]

1 hour ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

I think the thing most people are wrestling with is, “Did the punishment fit the crime?” 

We never got much clarity on the crime besides some loose reporting at that moment. Women with sexual harassment claims should be listened to.  We didn’t really get an opportunity to listen to them and judge for ourselves, neither did any kind of objective investigation.  The Franken case sets a bad precedent IMO.  

People who commit sexual assault shouldn’t be in Congress.

[David Dennison 18655]

2 minutes ago, Hugo Stiglitz said:

He took one for team is the way I saw it.  His resignation was for the greater good.  He made the right decision because he put the party and the county above himself.  The democrats prematurely calling for him to resign thought they were doing the same at the time.  Now they are realizing they miscalculated and they are admitting it, as the article in the OP reports.

That's on him.

No big deal.

Moving on.

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

7 minutes ago, hobbes2702 said:

People who commit sexual assault shouldn’t be in Congress.

I agree, but you have to acknowledge the bad precedent it sets if every anonymous accusation in the media is assumed credible without and equitable assessment of the facts from all the parties involved.  

We didn’t even get the perfunctory he said, she said on the subsequent allegations.  Nope, Franken was deemed guilty immediately.  I have no reason to doubt the allegations from the women but I’d at least like to hear from them directly and hear Franken’s account of the events before making a judgment on whether or not his immediate resignation was warranted.  

The allegations against Franken seemed borderline as to whether or not they constituted sexual assault or just grossly inappropriate behavior.  Both are bad and shouldn’t be tolerated but there should be some levels between making an unwanted pass based on mixed signals and forcible rape.  

It’s a difficult conversation to have because whether you’re a man or a woman, most everyone has experienced unwanted sexual advances and we respond to each one differently given the situation.  

[immortal13 4059]

2 hours ago, horncyclist said:

Would like to see this. He always took his job seriously and came to issues with compassion. Well liked by senators from both parties. 

I have no problem blaming Gillibrand.

 

[RDCanecutter 26253]

Back when Franken resigned, people were compulsively certain that Roy Moore was going to enter the Senate. I wonder if that didn't weigh in on it. Either way, it seems tactically unnecessary.

[DixonHur 11199]

Classic example of the GOP's superior marketing abilities, and the Dems trying to appeal to an imaginary constituency by showing how "principled" they are. 

A year and a half later, we still have a sexual predator in the WH, a sexual predator on the Supreme Court, and half the country thinks that's great.

Yet another example of the Dems fumbling on the 1 yard line.

[Nivek 16858]

“Just because someone is offended doesn’t make an act offensive.”
This is the hard part with things related to sexual harassment. All of the trainings I go to say exactly the opposite. I’m careful as hell at work because I work with 90% women and one accusation can sink you.

Your shirt offends me. Get some style man.

[pyrohornIII 4809]

First off, as far as Tweeden is concerned, she made her place in the world being a sex symbol (playboy, hooters, etc.).  So her making a big deal out of this is pretty lame and doesn't hold much water.

But more to the Franken point,  it could be he simply had enough,  and realized he wasn't going to win, so the best thing to do is step back and let the place burn.   Sometimes there is just no fighting.  To take steps to attain a leadership position and do that job, especially when you are trying to right a badly listing ship is hard.  But it's harder when you have to deal with a lot of people who'd rather let the ship sink and run off with the plunder.  Then think if while you were fighting, you realized people you trusted had actually been sabotaging your efforts, and were willing to throw you under the bus because they felt inferior to you or had other ulterior motives that knew would run counter to yours.  Who knows why they turn?   

Yeah, from reading that article, that seems entirely possible.  The depression, the lack of desire to do anything.  His silence on the subject, or on the government at large now.  I imagine he feels disgraced and is pissed.  Yeah it was a hit job.  What got to him, I am betting is how those who he felt had his back, didn't.   In fact he found some of their knives in his back.   That takes more out of you than the fight against the known foe. 

I have been through similar, but obviously on a smaller scale.  It hurts, that betrayal.  Maybe that's not all of it, but i bet it's a big part of it.

[wildcat09 29237]

3 hours ago, Mojo Hand said:

Reading that piece reminds me of the hoops Dems used to jump through to justify Bill Clinton's behavior.   There's nothing there that we didn't already know; it's just his side of the story, which is that he's a great guy who was innocently doing all of these things out of humor or cluelessness.   Plus an extended attack on one of his alleged victims, none of which undermines her account of how she felt.   It's all "Hey, she seemed to be going along with it all in good fun," which is the defense in virtually all situations of sexual harassment.

The tiny part addressing the other 7 alleged victims — which is really what brought him down — is diced up to minimize their impact.   Only two were after he became Senator!  And that's explainable by him being innocently over-physical, because he's just a big ol' galoot!   Three more were when he was a radio host ... just a big misunderstanding, and besides he's not as bad as Kavanaugh and Trump!  I can't even tell if the writer addresses the other two, it's so unclear by this point. 

If anything, this piece confirms that Dems were right to push him out.  I don't care that his motivation probably wasn't sexual gratification, which is the subtext of the piece.  Nor do I care that women have long had to put up with being groped and kissed by gross men under the "old rules," as the article calls them.  It's inappropriate and below the standard we should require for our Senators — most of whom have not faced similar allegations even though they lived under the "old rules" as well. 

It's not fair that there are some politicians still in office who have done worse.   But the way to improve things is by continuing to go after them, not lowering our standards to conform to the worst. 

Esto.

Was it a GOP hatchet job? Yeah. Does that impact whether someone accused of what he was accused by many women of doing should resign from the Senate? No.

Yes, he was an effective Senator, but that doesn't mean he was irreplaceable.  Nobody has a right to be a Senator and we should actually have high standards for who gets to be one.  It may not be the smartest short-term move, and I know actually living the principles the party espouses isn't going to magically win over a ton of Republicans, but I have to think it helps win over some moderates who aren't all the way down the Fox News hole.  And if that's not the case, well, we're already fucked and it doesn't really matter either way.

[Rougarou 594]

"First off, as far as Tweeden is concerned, she made her place in the world being a sex symbol (playboy, hooters, etc.).  So her making a big deal out of this is pretty lame and doesn't hold much water." 

You can't say things like that, according to the feminists in the article.

Also those saying "just because it feels to you [the victim or "victim"] like assault doesn't mean it is, it could just be grossly inappropriate humor" also don't seem to understand that there are some schools of feminist and new age thought that, actually, if you identify it as such as the victim, it absolutely is assault. The article also speaks to a few propononets who think that way and still stand by the resignation.

This is one of those very sticky situations where it could have really gone either way. It sounds to me like it was a lot of dumb luck that sunk him, though.

[wildcat09 29237]

23 minutes ago, Rougarou said:

"First off, as far as Tweeden is concerned, she made her place in the world being a sex symbol (playboy, hooters, etc.).  So her making a big deal out of this is pretty lame and doesn't hold much water." 

You can't say things like that, according to the feminists in the article.

Also those saying "just because it feels to you [the victim or "victim"] like assault doesn't mean it is, it could just be grossly inappropriate humor" also don't seem to understand that there are some schools of feminist and new age thought that, actually, if you identify it as such as the victim, it absolutely is assault. The article also speaks to a few propononets who think that way and still stand by the resignation.

This is one of those very sticky situations where it could have really gone either way. It sounds to me like it was a lot of dumb luck that sunk him, though.

The legal definition of battery (which most non-lawyers think is assault) includes offensive contact based on an objective standard of what a reasonable person would consider offensive, so while some distinctions can be drawn between battery and sexual assault, "would this be considered by the victim to be a form of assault" isn't exactly some brand new legal theory modern feminists invented.

[Nice Guy Eddie 13411]

3 hours ago, Larry T. Spider said:

“Just because someone is offended doesn’t make an act offensive.”

This is the hard part with things related to sexual harassment. All of the trainings I go to say exactly the opposite. I’m careful as hell at work because I work with 90% women and one accusation can sink you.

Agree 100% is a dangerous area but I meant more that a phrase or act was misinterpreted.  We’ve all heard someone say X but when they repeat themselves, you realize it’s Y. The person saying it doesn’t get fired over that.  Or you bump into someone accidentally. In both cases someone (HR, boss, voters) apply some level of reasonable check.  

And like I said do we reasonably think Franken groped women while posing for photos?  If he really did that, I’m glad he’s not senator but I actually doubt any serious candidate does that while running for the senate.   We do know that GHWB did this late in life but it came across as an extremely old man doing it. 

Edited July 22, 2019 by Nice Guy Eddie

[Horn Dog 9671]

2 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Go back and look at the pic. The shadows of his hands are too far away from his hands for them to have been that close. He was clearly not touching her. His hands were several inches away from her chest. I think we all know about what distance away we'd hold our hands if we were taking a gag photo of fake grabbing a sleeping woman's breasts. That's how far away they appeared to be. 

 

2 hours ago, Mojo Hand said:

I don't agree, but it doesn't really matter.  He wasn't a few feet away, as the poster claimed.  And he survived the pic alone. 

 

 

 

Not feet, but several inches away for sure based on his left hand

Edited July 22, 2019 by Horn Dog

[Mojo Hand 4580]

8 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

Agree 100% is a dangerous area but I meant more that a phrase or act was misinterpreted.  We’ve all heard someone say X but when they repeat themselves, you realize it’s Y. The person saying it doesn’t get fired over that.  Or you bump into someone accidentally. In both cases someone (HR, boss, voters) apply some level of reasonable check.  

And like I said do we reasonably think Franken groped women while posing for photos?  If he really did that, I’m glad he’s not senator but I actually doubt any serious candidate does that while running for the senate.   We do know that GHWB did this late in life but it came across as an extremely old man doing it. 

The credible allegations against Bush's groping go all the way back to 1992.  It wasn't just an extremely old man thing.   Yeah, I believe it about Franken.  Especially after he didn't issue a denial saying "I would never and have never groped someone, on the rear or elsewhere," but rather said something like "I take a lot of pics with people, I don't remember." 

Grabbing women's asses is a thing that plenty of men think is playful and no big deal.  Freaking Elie Wiesel did it to someone.  

[Mojo Hand 4580]

1 minute ago, Horn Dog said:

 

 

 

 

Not feet, but several inches away for sure based on his left hand

The palms, but not the fingertips.  They're all clearly either touching or just millimeters away from it.   Though, again, this doesn't matter to the larger point. 

[Rougarou 594]

56 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

The legal definition of battery (which most non-lawyers think is assault) includes offensive contact based on an objective standard of what a reasonable person would consider offensive, so while some distinctions can be drawn between battery and sexual assault, "would this be considered by the victim to be a form of assault" isn't exactly some brand new legal theory modern feminists invented.

Fair point.

I thought this excerpt was interesting, given that the story seems to be a "hindsight is 20/20" regret-piece (if not justification piece), given how much more horrible behavior has been normalized since:

For some activists in the women’s movement, Franken’s resignation was a welcome milestone. Linda Hirshman, the author of the recent book “Reckoning: The Epic Battle Against Sexual Abuse and Harassment,” told me, “Franken clearly intended to touch these women, and in doing so he violated their right to bodily integrity.” She argues that the Democratic Party has belatedly made up for having excused Bill Clinton’s treatment of women, adding that it’s “finally starting to be the party that protects women from having their asses grabbed.”

[bad_teammate 13132]

[Nice Guy Eddie 13411]

2 hours ago, Mojo Hand said:

The palms, but not the fingertips.  They're all clearly either touching or just millimeters away from it.   Though, again, this doesn't matter to the larger point. 

Agree that its closer then I recalled the photo.

[WhatTheBuck 28710]

8 hours ago, Horn Dog said:

 

 

 

 

Not feet, but several inches away for sure based on his left hand

Yeah, that appears a little closer than I remembered. But you don't get drop shadows like that if you're making actual contact. He's clearly not touching her.