Jump to content


Senator Al Franken accused of sexual assault.


QMany

Recommended Posts

29 minutes ago, NM11046 said:

I can not count how many times the same scenario (being inadvertantly touched on the backside) has happened during photos and the like.  .

 

I had this thought the other day as well.

 

If the floodgates do continue to pour open, what is to stop an unscrupulous accuser with ulterior motives from accusing someone in such a situation when in fact it was only incidental contact & completely innocuous? 

I mean, I assume we've all done this. I know I have, and in some occasions I gave a quick apology, whereas other times I just let it go and briefly felt awkward. 

I know we've fostered a culture where an accuser should be believed. That is a big step and it's important we maintain it. But there's another side to that coin that could be used to irreparably damage innocent people, if wielded malevolently...

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

Franken's apologies are truly flabbergasting. He's not saying he didn't grab ass while posing for these photos. He's saying, and I should just quote here, ""Some women have found my greetings or embraces for a hug or photo inappropriate, and I respect their feelings about that." WTF? That's a "greeting or embrace"? The apology is "Sorry, I didn't realize women object to enduring sexual assault"? 

 

Franken quips that he "crossed a line with some women" in the same apology letter where he tries to place context on this by saying "I'm a warm person; I hug people." 

 

That he can face the backlash he has -- and these photos are the second public incident -- and still have such a blurred views of the lines here, should be utterly and thoroughly disqualifying now. Given Franken's long and respectable record in the Senate, including on women's issues, I'm possibly more shocked by his response than his actions. But I suppose they're necessarily related. If you get it, you probably never did those things in the first place. Then again, Louis CK?...

 

  • Plus1 1
Link to comment

And I read his comments very differently.  

 

He is making a point NOT to belittle the feelings of the women that came forward. If they felt uncomfortable, whether he did something or not, or intentionally made a move or not - then he is sorry and apologizing.  Is it then more admirable Zoogs if someone flatout says he didnt do something?  Its a matter of believing the accuser or the defense of the accused?

 

I’d prefer the apology and the request to have a committee of his peers investigate while he cooperates fully than a flat out denial and discrediting of the accusers.  

  • Plus1 2
Link to comment

I'd say Franken gets marks for being the only politician that I can remember for trying to own the situation - apologizing to Tweeden (she accepted), asking for an ethics investigation into himself & pledging to earn constituents trust back. He's also had former female staffers & female castmates on SNL write letters supporting him. 

 

I just read the latest statement and I lean closer to NM's reaction that zoogs'. I thought his initial statement when this all broke was pretty atrocious, but I don't know that the statement itself is super disqualifying for me. I can only assume that an apparently sizable chunk of the older generation was touchy-feely in a way that perhaps they used to be able to get away with but that society now considers creepy and indeed sexual harassment. 

 

But I just read the accusations of the third and fourth women, which are apparently well corroborated by close friends.

 

So I guess I'm conflicted. He appears to be responding to the situation the best of anyone, but I'm not sure in the grand scheme of things that matters all that much if it means a serial groper is left in the Senate, however contrite.

I will say I also think John Conyers should resign, both due to the allegations against him and his ineffectiveness as a lawmaker due to his age.

Link to comment

@NM11046, that's the thing. Denial and discrediting is an unfortunately good strategy for people who are guilty to employ. Because if you're innocent, you should say so. My point was that Franken obviously isn't innocent, and he knows it. He cannot say he didn't sexually assault these women as they have claimed, because he did.

 

The tack he takes instead is just as bad, or worse, IMO. He wants badly to hold on to his seat of power, one which should have been abdicated or taken from him long ago. In order to maintain his position, it is necessary for him to minimize the fact that he committed sexual assault, serially. To convince us that it's just his warm, huggy personality. To suggest that he meant no harm, and while he's sorry to have put them in that position, it was the women he assaulted who misinterpreted his intent. But this is not a question of subjective feelings about what he did. 

 

The request for an investigation, again, is his means to maintain power. Punishment is by now plainly necessary. There is punishment that is theater and harsh words, where he maybe faces censure and then carries on being a Senator. That is what he is asking for, and wanting to stay is why he is making a good show of asking for this.

 

The only appropriate thing for him to do IMO, is to acknowledge in no uncertain terms what it is that he did. And to show his commitment to the cause by recognizing that this is disqualifying, that it should not be accepted or minimized or explained away by voters. He can set an example by resigning. But he fundamentally doesn't think he did anything "that wrong". He will now have to argue this, and so will his abetters and defenders. To convince people to frame his actions that way is deeply unsettling and undermines those who will both support him and try to make the argument that we need to take this stuff seriously.

 

I get that Franken's politics align with mine (and yours) and he's been an important force in resisting Trump. We cannot be so muddled by that as to start saying "Well, past generations were more touchy-feely and taking advantage of a woman's confidence to grab her butt is basically a similar thing." It doesn't fly for George H.W. Bush, it doesn't fly for the Colorado radio host who did this Taylor Swift, and it cannot fly for Al Franken because he's Al Franken.

Link to comment
  • 2 weeks later...
On 11/27/2017 at 2:04 PM, zoogs said:

He cannot say he didn't sexually assault these women as they have claimed, because he did.

 

Without corroborating evidence you cannot make this statement, about any of these allegations other than Tweeden's.  That whole post is damning Franken without evidence, only taking the word of these women. 

 

Unless I'm mistaken, it seems as if each of the women who have come forward have, essentially, he-said/she-said allegations, meaning there are no witnesses, no photographs, no recordings, nothing showing that he actually did what they say he did - and especially with the intentions they're putting on it.

 

 

On 11/27/2017 at 2:04 PM, zoogs said:

The only appropriate thing for him to do IMO, is to acknowledge in no uncertain terms what it is that he did.

 

This is not an objective statement.  We do not KNOW he assaulted these women. We know what they're saying and we know what he's saying.  Why are the women automatically 100% correct and Franken is a liar?  You have no evidence to support such an allegation, and unless I'm mistaken, you have never heard of all or most of these women prior to their allegations being made public. Why, then, would you take their word for anything?

 

I'll agree that multiple, disparate women making the same or similar allegation is a step toward damning evidence against Franken, but it is not proof. 

 

You state that Franken's call for an Ethics Investigation is an attempt to "hold on to his seat of power."  What do you think an innocent person would do if they were falsely accused?

  • Plus1 3
Link to comment

Remember when the breaking narrative was that the liberal media and hypocritical feminists would forgive Hollywood Dem donor Harvey Weinstein for the kind of behavior they savaged in Trump, Ailes and O'Riely?

 

Weinstein - Out

Charlie Rose - Out

Matt Lauer - Out

Kevin Spacey (Gay!) - Out

John Conyers - Out

Garrison Keilor - Out

Louis C.K. - Out

Michael Oreskes (NPR News Chief) - Out

John Lasseter - Out

 

Donald Trump - still President, now claims Access Hollywood was a hoax

Roy Moore -- winning his election: go get 'em, Roy!

 

 

 

  • Plus1 5
Link to comment
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...