Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
The idea of seizing something for political opportunity suggests that she is somehow insincere; I don't think that's right. You may disagree with her, you may diminish her arguments (I don't), but do you really this is not an issue she cares deeply about? She's been in the fray on every sexual assault issue in front of the Senate (the debates between her an Claire McCaskel on some of these issues are worth paying attention to). One of my friends has done a couple documentaries on rape in the military and on campus, and Gilli was very helpful on them, including in opening up doors to get them access.
|
I don't think anything I've said indicates that I think she was being insincere. I think it is an important issue to her. But I also think that (i) she wanted to make this her thing and forcing Franken out was part of that and (ii) I don't think she was particularly thoughtful about Franken in particular.
If I ask whether or not Franken should be heard and investigated, and if the behavior warrants banishment (as compared to other types of harassment), and you respond, "I can't tell my son it's okay to touch someone here, but not here," you are giving me a bullshit answer. Period. I watched her do it. She wanted to own the issue, but she didn't want to deal with any nuance whatsoever. Maybe that's not particular to her; maybe that's just what politicians do. But refusing to engage in a thoughtful discussion about how we deal with different levels or types of harassment and leading the charge to oust someone no matter what, is not what I want in a politician.*
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Look, Franken clearly engaged in bad behavior, he's admitted it and apologized for it. There were also a lot (and I mean a lot) of allegations he didn't admit to but generally indicated he didn't remember.
|
Yeah. It's incredibly difficult to remember circumstances surrounding completely anonymous accusations. To the extent they weren't I believe Franken was completely respectful of the accusers and did not simply dismiss them. I do think he wanted an opportunity to dig in to them a bit and address them. He was not given that opportunity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
They were coming out in a consistent stream, and his attorney was trying to dismiss them because he was acting like an "entertainer" instead of a politician (should we start talking Harvey Weinstein and whats acceptable in entertainment here?)
|
Are you fucking kidding with this shit?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
If he had stuck around for the investigation, I suspect the incidents would have kept coming for a while. People started to cry "enough", and Gilli was definitely at the lead of those within the Senate, but I suspect Franken also realized that resigning was the way to get it to stop and retain some dignity. And its convenient to blame the people calling him on the shit instead of himself for doing all the shit.
|
You say this like you're not just redrafting your entire argument. Franken clearly wanted an inquiry and a chance to address the allegations formally. Gillibrand (and others, but her, the most and loudest) didn't want to give him that opportunity. I think that's wrong. You don't. I honestly don't understand how anyone (especially on this board) can be advocating for punishing people without giving them some sort of opportunity to get to the bottom of the truth and an opportunity to defend themselves.
Notice I have yet to defend Franken. You keep saying I'm blaming Gillibrand. That's kinda true, I guess. But I'm blaming her for trying to sweep the guy out before an ethics inquiry was carried out. That's what she tried to do and what she helped achieve.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
I'm fine with giving people some room, but I also think it was clear that Franken was going down and it was a relief that he chose to cut it short.
|
It is only clear that he was going down because Gillibrand and a chorus of others decided that was what was going to happen. If Gillibrand and Bernie and Harris had said, "These allegations are extremely concerning. Let's conduct a thorough investigation before rushing to declare our colleague
persona non grata. Make no mistake, he will not receive special treatment as a Democrat, friend, or colleague. Etc., etc., etc." it would only be clear that he was going down based on the results of the inquiry.
TM
*That said, if she's the nominee, she'll get all of my support.
Threaded Mode