Senator Al Franken accused of unwanted kissing/groping

[Rocco]

If it was about him then he would have stayed in place.

Whether his speech was all one would want it to be is debatable.

It’s a tough position. He is not a perv like Roy Moore who is totally enjoying the support of a hypocritical fundamentalist base. This is a party decision as much as AF’s.

He said that an ethics committee investigation would take him away from his duties and distract from the business at hand.

So instead of being like other selfish politicians who gladly stay on the payroll and hog the position while they undergo lengthily investigations he is stepping aside which sounds like a good thing for Minnesota.

IMO

Right--he said an ethics committee investigation would take him away from his duties. What exactly does resigning do as far as taking him away from his duties? Someone who has done nothing wrong would beg for an ethics committee investigation so they could clear their good name. He knows what an ethics committee investigation would find---that's why he resigned.

 

[Cryptic]

This is a party decision as much as AF’s.

I think you are 110% percent correct. The decision is a strategic decision by the Democratic party. The decision could work out well for them.

The democrats still get to keep AF's vacant seat and even before the scandal, AF's abilities as a Senator could well have been mediocre. Getting rid of AF and Conyers puts the Republicans squarely on the defensive with women voters and well, with nearly all voters in the 2020 presidential elections.

My bet is that the Republicans battle back. Dropping Trump is out of the question. Moore, however, could be allowed to win the election- then quickly booted. The Republicans would still retain his won seat, and Moore may well have been a mediocre senator in even the best circumstances.

In the end, the seats are far more important to both parties than either man is as an individual.

 

[TeaTime]

If it was about him then he would have stayed in place.

Whether his speech was all one would want it to be is debatable.

It’s a tough position. He is not a perv like Roy Moore who is totally enjoying the support of a hypocritical fundamentalist base. This is a party decision as much as AF’s.

He said that an ethics committee investigation would take him away from his duties and distract from the business at hand.

So instead of being like other selfish politicians who gladly stay on the payroll and hog the position while they undergo lengthily investigations he is stepping aside which sounds like a good thing for Minnesota.

IMO

I think he is stepping out because he knows what his accusers are saying is the truth and he doesn't want his family to suffer the embarrassment of hearing the details of his behavior.

But, again, accusations are just that - accusations - and not proof.

 

[Cryptic]

I think he is stepping out because he knows what his accusers are saying is the truth and he doesn't want his family to suffer the embarrassment of hearing the details of his behavior.

AF could well know the accusations are true. He has not truly denied the accusations. Rather, his defense has been- "I well, you know, remember the events differently cough cough...."

I don't think that neither Franklin nor Moore care about their respective families. Franklin would stay on if he could Rather, Franklin is being forced out due to a strategic decision by the Democrats.

My bet is that the Republicans fight back by booting Moore should he win the election. In the end, both parties are interested in winning the seats, not Moore or Franklin as individuals.

 

[Jade]

Right--he said an ethics committee investigation would take him away from his duties. What exactly does resigning do as far as taking him away from his duties? Someone who has done nothing wrong would beg for an ethics committee investigation so they could clear their good name. He knows what an ethics committee investigation would find---that's why he resigned.

Perhaps, then all the better he steps down

By resigning he will not be defending himself on the payroll.

By resigning he lets someone who is not in the hot seat get some work done.

By resigning he can get help in understanding that a wet kiss and not making sure his hand isn’t skimming women’s butts is wrong.

By resigning he is no longer a public figure and saves his accusers from further media pressure and criticism from women haters.

By resigning he is conceding that his unthinking behavior has offended others to the point he has to go.


IMO

 

[TeaTime]

Perhaps, then all the better he steps down

By resigning he will not be defending himself on the payroll.

By resigning he lets someone who is not in the hot seat get some work done.

By resigning he can get help in understanding that a wet kiss and not making sure his hand isn’t skimming women’s butts is wrong.

By resigning he is no longer a public figure and saves his accusers from further media pressure and criticism from women haters.

By resigning he is conceding that his unthinking behavior has offended others to the point he has to go.


IMO

If he needs help to understand that grabbing women's butts or forcing his tongue into their mouths without their consent is wrong, then he shouldn't have been in the Senate anyway.

He isn't saving his accusers, he is saving himself from more embarrassment. He isn't noble, he is just caught.

If all this is true, then he is just as gross as I always thought he was but he didn't get all saintly after he was elected - he is doing what is best for AF and only AF.

Can not stand the sight of him, never could even when he was just a nominal comedy act.

 

[human]

I don't know the laws of every state, but in mine (and likely many others) the statute of limitations does not toll against the minor.

Interesting. So Moore’s situation with statute of limitations is unusual in the US? I doubt it

 

[human]

Anyone familiar with Minnesota knows she meant to say Tim, not Rick. And yes, he was popular. That's why he won the gubernatorial race TWICE.

Won’t go into his popularity because that is not true. It was the circumstances of the other popular candidates that split the vote.

Anyway, this is a worldwide site and I imagine hardly anyone knows who Pawlenty is,

 

[PaulR]

Interesting. So Moore’s situation with statute of limitations is unusual in the US? I doubt it

In some places (like Washington), the statute is "whenever the victim turns a certain age."

 

[PaulR]

Won’t go into his popularity because that is not true. It was the circumstances of the other popular candidates that split the vote.

Anyway, this is a worldwide site and I imagine hardly anyone knows who Pawlenty is,

Bill Clinton only won with a split vote too, that does not directly reflect upon his popularity.

 

[Jade]

If he needs help to understand that grabbing women's butts or forcing his tongue into their mouths without their consent is wrong, then he shouldn't have been in the Senate anyway.

He isn't saving his accusers, he is saving himself from more embarrassment. He isn't noble, he is just caught.

If all this is true, then he is just as gross as I always thought he was but he didn't get all saintly after he was elected - he is doing what is best for AF and only AF.

Can not stand the sight of him, never could even when he was just a nominal comedy act.

No, but if he was Republican he could have been elected President with those habits

 

[TeaTime]

Interesting. So Moore’s situation with statute of limitations is unusual in the US? I doubt it

I do not understand the question completely but all sexual assaults have a statute of limitations in all states, unlike murder which never tolls. It may be 10 or even 20 years but in no event is it 38 years.

In this case, Ms. Nelson's time to file would have started to run when on her 18th birthday (if that was the age of majority in AL) and now, 38 years later, he can not be prosecuted criminally and she can not bring a civil suit. Her time ran out.

 

[TeaTime]

No, but if he was Republican he could have been elected President with those habits

Accusations are just accusations. As I have written before; anyone can accuse anyone of anything but it doesn't make it true.

I don't see any proof that AF actually did what his accuser(s) said he did, but his resignation tells me he didn't want any more of this to come out into the public fray. It bothers me, even though I can't stand him, that none of these women spoke out when he was running for the Senate and waited until now.

It seems to me that the democratic party is purging itself of the people that it doesn't think can win the next election so as to have appointments made in hopes that those appointments get elected in the next election.

 

[Jennifer17]

Accusations are just accusations. As I have written before; anyone can accuse anyone of anything but it doesn't make it true.

I don't see any proof that AF actually did what his accuser(s) said he did, but his resignation tells me he didn't want any more of this to come out into the public fray. It bothers me, even though I can't stand him, that none of these women spoke out when he was running for the Senate and waited until now.

It seems to me that the democratic party is purging itself of the people that it doesn't think can win the next election so as to have appointments made in hopes that those appointments get elected in the next election.

BBM. It seems to me that the Democratic Party is purging itself of people who have harassed women, unlike the Republican Party who are endorsing them.

 

[rosesfromangels]

He is a disgrace to his family.

 

[Tawny]

Accusations are just accusations. As I have written before; anyone can accuse anyone of anything but it doesn't make it true.

I don't see any proof that AF actually did what his accuser(s) said he did, but his resignation tells me he didn't want any more of this to come out into the public fray. It bothers me, even though I can't stand him, that none of these women spoke out when he was running for the Senate and waited until now.

It seems to me that the democratic party is purging itself of the people that it doesn't think can win the next election so as to have appointments made in hopes that those appointments get elected in the next election.

Because winning an election is better than doing what's right and getting rid of harmful people? The election and appointment is more important than the victims and potential victims?

 

[PaulR]

BBM. It seems to me that the Democratic Party is purging itself of people who have harassed women, unlike the Republican Party who are endorsing them.

Franken is being safely thrown under the bus because his seat can be kept by the party. If the governor was a Republican, there is no way he would have resigned. MOO

Also see Trent Franks (R) who resigned under similar circumstances to Franken. I don't think any party can claim the high ground here.

 

[K_Z]

While discussing Franken accuser, Mika Brzezinski says she’s not sure all women should be believed

http://www.theblaze.com/news/2017/1...ys-shes-not-sure-all-women-should-be-believed

Do all women need to be believed? Mika Brzezinski questions the blanket belief in all sex accusers after Sen. Al Franken resigns over allegations from 'Trump voter who goes on Hannity'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...zinski-women-need-believed.html#ixzz50iSYDLej
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

After saying she was troubled by Senator Al Franken’s resignation on Thursday, Brzezinski questioned the sincerity of Leeann Tweeden, Franken’s first accuser, who wrote that he had groped and tried to forcibly kiss her during a USO tour in 2006.

“We’ve never really talked about the woman who first came out against Al Franken — a performer, a Playboy model who goes on Hannity, who voted for Trump. I see some politics there, but I haven’t brought that up,” she said, bringing it up. She added:

In this #MeToo environment, you must always just believe the women and I think that there’s a lot of reasons why we need to look at the women seriously and believe them. […] I’m just wondering if all women need to be believed. And I’m concerned that we are being the judge, the jury and the cops here and so did Senate Democrats getting ahead of their skis.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5160133/Mika-Brzezinski-women-need-believed.html

**The same thing a number of reasonable people have been saying for weeks now. Reasonable people from BOTH party ideologies. This is going to backfire SPECTACULARLY for "feminists", IMO. For more than 20 years, every environment I have worked in, from the U.S. Air Force, to civilian hospitals and universities, has had some version of "The Pence Rule" in place to protect men from baseless accusations made by vindictive women. It's is very commonplace where I have worked for chaperones to be requested and used for office meetings, etc-- not just GYN exams.

As I said pages earlier, we have no proof that Franken actually did what the accusers said he did, except ONE very obviously prank photo, with no body contact, from a highly dubious accuser, who has questionable motives "coming forward" after 10+ years. And a bunch of unverifiable anonymous #metoos.

Exactly how far back into someone's life is it fair game to pile on "anonymous" accusations? Should we go back to when a man was a toddler and running around naked?

This article, by a very progressive liberal, has a lot of thoughtful insight about where we are "going" with these lynch mobs. IMO, it will backfire spectacularly on WOMEN (at all income ranges), because WOMEN will be less likely (especially attractive women) to be hired over a man in a male dominated workspace, with the very realistic worry about baseless accusations taking down someone's career.

https://www.the-american-interest.com/2017/12/06/the-warlock-hunt/

*This is a huge article, and this is less than 10% copied.

But speak I must. It now takes only one accusation to destroy a man’s life. Just one for him to be tried and sentenced in the court of public opinion, overnight costing him his livelihood and social respectability. We are on a frenzied extrajudicial warlock hunt that does not pause to parse the difference between rape and stupidity. The punishment for sexual harassment is so grave that clearly this crime—like any other serious crime—requires an unambiguous definition. We have nothing of the sort.

The things men and women naturally do—flirt, play, lewdly joke, desire, seduce, tease—now become harassment only by virtue of the words that follow the description of the act, one of the generic form: “I froze. I was terrified.” It doesn’t matter how the man felt about it. The onus to understand the interaction and its emotional subtleties falls entirely on him. But why? Perhaps she should have understood his behavior to be harmless—clumsy, sweet but misdirected, maladroit, or tacky—but lacking in malice sufficient to cost him such arduous punishment?

In recent weeks, I’ve acquired new powers. I have cast my mind over the ways I could use them. I could now, on a whim, destroy the career of an Oxford don who at a drunken Christmas party danced with me, grabbed a handful of my bum, and slurred, “I’ve been dying to do this to Berlinski all term!” That is precisely what happened. I am telling the truth. I will be believed—as I should be.

If I were suddenly to feel as Ms. Portman now feels, I could destroy them all—just by naming names and truthfully describing a flirtation or moment of impropriety. All of the interchanges I’m replaying in my mind would meet the highly elastic contemporary definition of “harassment,” a category vague enough to compass all the typical flirtation that brings joy and amusement to so many of our lives, all the vulgar humor that says, “We’re among friends, we may speak frankly.” It becomes harassment only by virtue of three words: “I felt demeaned.”

Do not mistake me for a rape apologist. Harvey Weinstein stands credibly accused of rape. He must face a real trial and grave punishment if convicted, not “therapy and counselling.”

We now have, in effect, a crime that comes with a swift and draconian penalty, but no proper definition. It seems to be “sexual behavior” or “behavior that might be sexual,” committed through word, deed, or even facial expression; followed by a negative description of the woman’s emotions. Obviously this is inadequate. Human beings, male and female, are subject to human failings, including the tendency to lie, to be vengeful, to abuse power, or simply to misunderstand one another. It is hard to define sexual harassment precisely, because all of these human frailties are often involved. But we must nonetheless reason out together a definition that makes sense. Mass hysteria and making demons of men will get us nowhere we should want to go.

Your computer can be hacked. Do you want to live in the kind of paranoid society where everyone wonders—Who’s next? To whom is it safe to speak freely? What would this joke sound like in a deposition? Do you think only the men who have done something truly foul are at risk? Don’t kid yourself. Once this starts, it doesn’t stop. The Perp Walk awaits us all.

Given the events of recent weeks, we can be certain of this: From now on, men with any instinct for self-preservation will cease to speak of anything personal, anything sexual, in our presence. They will make no bawdy jokes when we are listening. They will adopt in our presence great deference to our exquisite sensitivity and frailty. Many women seem positively joyful at this prospect. The Revolution has at last been achieved! But how could this be the world we want? Isn’t this the world we escaped?

Women, I’m begging you: Think this through. We are fostering a climate in which men legitimately fear us, where their entire professional and personal lives can be casually destroyed by “secret lists” compiled by accusers they cannot confront, by rumors on the internet, by thrilled, breathless reporting denouncing one after another of them as a pig, often based only on the allegation that they did something all-too-human and none-too-criminal like making a lewd joke.

 

[Tawny]

Wow..

 

[Jennifer17]

Wow, indeed.