Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Look, I read it, I considered it, it focused mostly on one of several instances, and was by a credible writer. but frankly other issues matter more to me. I also think we had a fair bit of that information (not all of it, but a fair bit) at the time. I've posted a couple times on it because people were discussing it, but, really, Al is a big boy and this is a side show.
|
Forget Franken for a minute. He's fine. He's rich and getting richer.
My larger point is that I understand that we were at the beginning of a movement to hold people accountable--the same ones who had used the system to game it since the dawn of time. Again, there may have been some unfairness as we moved to a new way of handling these allegations. And Democrats (as opposed to Republicans) actually care about hypocrisy. But this can't be how we operate. "What is best for the Party?" cannot be the only question. We actually have to deal with stuff and figure out a way to be fair to the accused and accuser.
People keep comparing this to Roy Moore, which is ridiculous. Moore wasn't deprived of anything. People were given information to use when voting. If he were in office, I would expect that an investigation be performed before removing him. And I think he's absolute trash.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
But, I'll answer your questions - what would have changed things then? Franken made what was a gracious response but a response which was also cautious and very much a non-denial denial on much of this - at the end of the day, there a picture of him "misbehaving" with a passed out woman. The lack of a picture certainly would have helped me feel more strongly about letting some form of process play out.
|
So, does this photo of Tweeden squeezing someone's ass at a USO event give you some context of the atmosphere in which that photo of Franken
not touching Tweeden was taken?
Do the many accounts of the people who were there change the way you feel about that photo at all? Does the fact that she clearly lied about his intentions change anything? Maybe not. But I would rather know all of that stuff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
The presence of true denials rather than non-denial denials, so I felt like there was some good chance that we weren't going to have more of these coming out of the woodwork.
|
Come on. The other allegations were basically:
"I met him and he grabbed my butt."
"I met him and he grabbed my boob."
"He grabbed my waist during a photo."
"He wanted to kiss me but didn't."
I think all of those allegations should have been investigated. And I'm not trying to minimize any of them (especially not the first two, each of which, unfortunately, seem very plausible). But how does one deny accusations of this type if you don't remember them and don't sexually assault people? If someone accused me of grabbing their ass 20 years ago, how the fuck would I deny it? There is no way of flat-out denying it and I think Franken didn't want to show disrespect to any of his accusers (for a number of reasons, not the least of which was the atmosphere and thoughts of his own survival).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
There's also a local case where I did argue, for about two to three weeks, that someone who had done great work in politics was "entitled" to a bit more deference and more time to have a process because of that work in the past.
|
I don't think this is how it should work. Either you figure out what happened or you don't. Their good work, non-work, or crappy work shouldn't determine whether or not accusations should be looked into and punishment levied.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
But second guessing these decisions or looking for someone else to blame them on doesn't and shouldn't work in politics. Better to own them and move on, which is what I originally thought Franken was doing.
|
Again, I do not think this is a healthy way to operate, even in politics.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
By the way, folks are having a great time throwing shit at Gillibrand. She has done some great work, especially on rape in the military, and this wasn't some one-off opportunistic thing.
|
Sure she has. But some of her answers when it comes to this stuff have been woeful.
“We had eight credible allegations, and they had been corroborated, in real time, by the press corps.” She acknowledged that she hadn’t spoken to any accusers, to assess their credibility, but said, “I had been a leader in this space of sexual harassment and assault, and it was weighing on me.” Franken was “entitled to whichever process he wants,” she said. “But he wasn’t entitled to me carrying his water, and defending him with my silence.” She acknowledged that the accusations against Franken “were different” from the kind of rape or molestation charges made against many other #MeToo targets. “But the women who came forward felt it was sexual harassment,” she said. “So it was.”
And it doesn't cancel out her good work. But if she gets credit for that stuff, she can take the scrutiny when it comes to her rush on this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Indeed, I suspect it's got a lot to do with why she isn't getting traction in the Presidential race, so it's been politically damaging in very important ways.
|
I think that people who were upset with how she handled Franken won't support her. She made that political calculation. She's living with it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
I'm really finding the attacks on her from many people rather precious.
|
I don't know what this snarky shit means.
TM
