Quote:
Originally Posted by Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
even more apropos since it is the senate.
Here's the Senate Ethics Committee jurisdiction, which you'll see is quite broad: https://www.ethics.senate.gov/public...m/jurisdiction
Yes, if Franken had chosen to move forward he would have been judged by a committee controlled by the opposition. |
Exactly- he could have been "evaluated" by a R-ruled committee.
Senator Packwood was an ancient R from Oregon. He was accused of harassment I believe. But he decided to resign after the start of a senate "investigation"; because the D led senate released his diaries from decades earlier- when he was a younger Senator he had fucked interns, it was consensual (Hi Bill Clinton!) but he spoke about it in the diary in a manner that came off quite creepy given his ancient age. He resigned.
I do not see an R controlled committee doing much to get to understanding of the Franken photo?
For that matter neither do I. The D's wanted to run with the fact that millions of women had marched against Trump's election, and the pussy grabbing- now there was a picture of a Senator (maybe faking but so what?) tittie grabbing a sleeping women. The photo killed him- "get it, it's funny I'm fake grabbing her tits!"
And she could have blown the guitar player on that stage- that doesn't mean he gets to grab her while sleeping- does it?
I take T's point to be what should the standard be? Like I had posted at the time, the current system is stupid- same with the Cavanaugh "hearings." Ideally some objective, unbiased committee should be in place. Say like the state bar exam ethics side-
Threaded Mode