2017 Democratic Thread

[ptatc]

You're somewhat right - the Congress needs to develop a better way to deal with this and a clear path by which this can be treated as an ethics violation. If that isn't done, it does set up an opportunity for someone to do a James O'Keefe setup where they try to bring down a Congressperson based on false accusations.

 

There are unfortunately, a number of other issues with this though, including the fact that Congress has made it nearly impossible to report harassment by their members, and the fact that you can't really set up something like this that would police Congress without having to deal with the dozen+ credible claims against the President.

 

At some point, Al Franken had to go and yesterday's was the straw that broke the camels back. Even if some of these are invented, there's photographic evidence of a couple of them, and he was not going to be in a position to do his job or represent the people of Minnesota any more.

This is exactly the case that needs to be made. He is maintaining he did nothing wrong but because of public pressure he is resigning. This is a cop out arrangement. If he is truly innocent, this is the wrong way to handle it. If he is guilty he should be prosecuted.

 

With Moore they are truly going to let public opinion determine his fate With Fraken they basically did the same thing. The party didn't think he was going to be effective going forward so they forced him to resign. The GOP still thinks Moore can be effective so they let him go on.

[ptatc]

Normal this is true. Most politicians have skeletons in their closet. That being said, the last thing we need is a a politician with a very suspect history of being a predator with more power.

I agree. If the number of allegations are real, he would get convicted which is what should happen. He should not be allowed to skate away with just a resignation.

[Balta1701]

I agree. If the number of allegations are real, he would get convicted which is what should happen. He should not be allowed to skate away with just a resignation.

Welcome to the world men have built.

[bmags]

I agree with all of this.

 

Everyone should their chance to tell their story. however, it appears that once allegations are leveled there is pressure for them to resign without them being able to defend themselves.

 

No doubt that many of them should resign if they are true and many seem to be admitting it. If this is the case the should be forced to resign and prosecuted. However, they should also be afforded the chance to defend themselves and shouldn't be forced to resign, if they deny the allegations and want to fight it.

 

I understand what you are saying but I do think it will be case by case. I was out on Franken right away because his response was such a tell and so typical of other cases where "the other shoe drops".

[Soxbadger]

I agree. If the number of allegations are real, he would get convicted which is what should happen. He should not be allowed to skate away with just a resignation.

 

Convictions are really hard to begin with. Convictions for something that happened years ago are even harder.

 

For example, if we took ever accusation against Franken as true, you are likely looking at a charge of batter or sexual assault.

 

http://www.icasa.org/docs/sol%20charts%20for%20web.pdf

 

In IL if wasnt reported within 2-3 years its not a viable prosecution. Which is why the possibility of conviction doesnt really mean much for most of these allegations. Even if Franken said "Yeah I assaulted her 10 years ago" they couldnt convict.

[Reddy]

This is exactly the case that needs to be made. He is maintaining he did nothing wrong but because of public pressure he is resigning. This is a cop out arrangement. If he is truly innocent, this is the wrong way to handle it. If he is guilty he should be prosecuted.

 

With Moore they are truly going to let public opinion determine his fate With Fraken they basically did the same thing. The party didn't think he was going to be effective going forward so they forced him to resign. The GOP still thinks Moore can be effective so they let him go on.

A lot of the GOP are terrified of what a Moore win means for them in the Senate and elsewhere going forward. He'll be one hell of an albatross.

[ptatc]

This is the key part. Even if he maintains his innocence, even if an ethics committee couldn't find hard proof (and what would that even look like in this case beyond what we already know?), he had clearly lost the confidence of his colleagues. This is one of the highest profile political positions in the country, and perception and public/colleague confidence is crucial to your ability to serve.

This is where I'm skeptical. Did the others really lose confidence in his ability do his job? I doubt it. They knew he was making to party look bad and wanted to distance themselves from him. This has nothing to do with his ability as a Senator and everything to do with public perception and they fact that they might lose his seat in the next election if he wasn't replaced. It's the same thing that the Republicans are doing with Moore. It's all about maintaining power, instead of truly punishing the people who are gulity.

[StrangeSox]

Your ability as a Senator is almost entirely about your ability to be good at politics, public perception, and deal-making. Making the party look bad and giving your fellow party members a reason to distance themselves from you means you can't effectively advocate for your constituents.

 

 

Think of what would happen if say the CEO of Target was caught on tape ranting about minorities. They haven't done anything illegal at all, but they'd have done massive damage to the company they're heading's public perception. So out they'd go. Few if any employees have due process protections, anyway, though that's not a good thing.

Edited December 7, 2017 by StrangeSox

[Balta1701]

This is where I'm skeptical. Did the others really lose confidence in his ability do his job? I doubt it. They knew he was making to party look bad and wanted to distance themselves from him. This has nothing to do with his ability as a Senator and everything to do with public perception and they fact that they might lose his seat in the next election if he wasn't replaced. It's the same thing that the Republicans are doing with Moore. It's all about maintaining power, instead of truly punishing the people who are gulity.

Frankly, yes. The Minnesota Star Tribune had a piece on that in their op-ed page as sort of a "last straw" piece last week saying he was right on the verge of not being able to do his job in the Senate during the tax bill because he was off replying to allegations.

Franken has declared himself ready to get back to work — and well he should. While he was busy reflecting, his voice was absent from important issues — a damaging Senate tax bill that may be hurtling toward a floor vote this week; an effort to undo net neutrality — of which he has been the most prominent critic; a dismantling of the State Department, and on and on. At least in the short term, Franken's effectiveness will be hampered by persistent questions about the allegations, the ethics investigation and the lingering possibility that other women may come forward — something Franken does not dismiss.

 

There has been other damage. Abby Honold, brutally raped by Daniel Drill-Mellum, a former Franken intern, had earlier this fall asked Franken to sponsor legislation to help rape victims. Honold sought a different sponsor after the Franken allegations came to light. But that has triggered a wave of vitriol from Franken's supporters. Franken has said publicly he supports Honold's decision, but he is unable to stop her from becoming collateral damage.

[ptatc]

Frankly, yes. The Minnesota Star Tribune had a piece on that in their op-ed page as sort of a "last straw" piece last week saying he was right on the verge of not being able to do his job in the Senate during the tax bill because he was off replying to allegations.

Again this is purely based on allegations and is it fair? everyone around made it impossible for him to do his job. It has nothing to do his ability to do his job as his skills as a negotiator, deal maker or anything else. It's pure based on other people dealing with him. While all of it is accurate it doesn't mean it's right.

 

I also know none of it will change. But it just irritates me that it's really more about maintaining the power base rather than truly convicting the people who deserve it.

[pettie4sox]

If I understand correctly, Roy Moore is a creep not necessarily a criminal.

[Reddy]

If I understand correctly, Roy Moore is a creep not necessarily a criminal.

Wat. Sexually assaulting 14 year olds is.... even a crime in Alabama.

[Balta1701]

Again this is purely based on allegations and is it fair? everyone around made it impossible for him to do his job. It has nothing to do his ability to do his job as his skills as a negotiator, deal maker or anything else. It's pure based on other people dealing with him. While all of it is accurate it doesn't mean it's right.

 

I also know none of it will change. But it just irritates me that it's really more about maintaining the power base rather than truly convicting the people who deserve it.

There's an old saying in politics - don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. While it would be perfect if anyone who violated a woman wasn't just removed from office but instead actually faced charges, as of right now violating women still gets you elected President and Senator. As of right now we're back to having, for example, a Department of Education rolling back protections for women who bring assault cases to their universities. Things are going in the wrong direction in a number of ways. This is a case where it is going in the right direction. It's not perfect, but it's better than nothing.

[pettie4sox]

Wat. Sexually assaulting 14 year olds is.... even a crime in Alabama.

 

Yep just read that he was accused of sexual assault not just having a relationship.

[StrangeSox]

Yep just read that he was accused of sexual assault not just having a relationship.

 

 

Accused of sexual assault by two minors. The rest of the allegations weren't of illegal behavior, just of a 30-something guy creeping on so many high schoolers that he got banned from a mall.

[Reddy]

There's an old saying in politics - don't let the perfect be the enemy of the good. While it would be perfect if anyone who violated a woman wasn't just removed from office but instead actually faced charges, as of right now violating women still gets you elected President and Senator. As of right now we're back to having, for example, a Department of Education rolling back protections for women who bring assault cases to their universities. Things are going in the wrong direction in a number of ways. This is a case where it is going in the right direction. It's not perfect, but it's better than nothing.

+1 times a thousand. So I guess +1,000.

[StrangeSox]

I don't know that anyone actually expected Facebook's "fact checking" to be good, but they've announced that they've added neoconservative rag Weekly Standard to their team of fact checkers against the recommendations of independent reviews in the name of "fairness."

[Harry Chappas]

Roy Moore should not be elected senator becasue he was kicked off of the Alabama Supreme court........twice. The current sexual misconduct allegations are just the icing on the cake.

 

 

[StrangeSox]

Roy Moore should not be elected senator becasue he was kicked off of the Alabama Supreme court........twice. The current sexual misconduct allegations are just the icing on the cake.

 

This seems like a pretty good reason too

 

[Reddy]

This seems like a pretty good reason too

 

Sweet lord.

[CrimsonWeltall]

Yes that "headed towards civil war" direction was fantastic.

[GoSox05]

Guys, I'm starting to think this Roy Moore is bad.

[pettie4sox]

Guys, I'm starting to think this Roy Moore is bad.

 

Do tell what gave it away.

[caulfield12]

I just can’t see a legal mechanism for proving or disproving any of these things in a court of law.

 

Pictures? Yearbooks? Signatures? Graphic notes/letters from the past that may or may not be forgeries?

 

The thing that brought down Lauer was supposedly incontrovertible photographic/visual evidence that got him fired within 24 hours of disclosure. Same thing with Rep. Joe Barton’s photographic scandal, or Anthony Weiner, for that matter.

 

As the first couple of Franken cases showed, there was bad optics but at least the possibility of explaining part of that away due to the comedic sketch element. That argument eventually disappeared when a pattern developed.

 

With Moore, you have physical/sexual conduct, but not rape. Yet one wonders how many GOP Senators or Reps would allow their daughters to be left unchaperoned with that guy? How can you be a US Senator and uphold the Constitution when your morality is clearly being questioned by even your own party?

Edited December 7, 2017 by caulfield12

[pettie4sox]

I just can’t see a legal mechanism for proving or disproving any of these things in a court of law.

 

Pictures? Yearbooks? Signatures? Graphic notes/letters from the past that may or may not be forgeries?

 

The thing that brought down Lauer was supposedly incontrovertible photographic/visual evidence that got him fired within 24 hours of disclosure. Same thing with Rep. Joe Barton’s photographic scandal, or Anthony Weiner, for that matter.

 

As the first couple of Franken cases showed, there was bad optics but at least the possibility of explaining part of that away due to the comedic sketch element. That argument eventually disappeared when a pattern developed.

 

With Moore, you have physical/sexual conduct, but not rape. Yet one wonders how many GOP Senators or Reps would allow their daughters to be left unchaperoned with that guy? How can you be a US Senator and uphold the Constitution when your morality is clearly being questioned by even your own party?

 

Who at this point is anti-Moore? I thought most of the Republicans jumped on board after Trump said, YES TO MOORE!