to the effort..

Schumer was the nail in the coffin for Franken.

Franken probably would have survived if Gillibrand hadn't hit him amidships.

All of them?

maybe they'll see the error of their ways, unlike some people I know.

Gillibrand was despicably selfserving, but Schumer actually failed horribly in his duty as Leader of the Democratic Senate.

He is a smart guy. He knew exactly what he was doing.

I think Reid perceived the Republican smear/lie machine better & would have been a much, much wiser and braver fighter against ALL the bullshit motives and mob process that took out Franken. Reid could smell Repug double bind machinations a mile away: I never saw him as a RW Sucker or KneeJerk Placater. Schumer now I can only view as the opposite.

Yeah probably "shut down" is too absolute a term. But I believe Reid would have taken a leadership stand & fought fiercely for due process and against such an obviously lose lose lose fiasco for Our Party.

this would have never happened under Harry Reid.
Schumer IS NO Harry Reid.
Gillibrand inserted the knife, and Schumer smirked.

Al Franken and I share a good friend in Washington with whom I discussed this subject at length when I was there in January. He said that Al Franken was still debating whether or not to stick it out until Minnesota Governor Mark Dayton named Tina Smith as Franken's replacement in the Senate before he had even made a definitive decision to leave. That is when he threw in the towel. It was not Schumer's doing.

Nevertheless, Franken was as blindsided by the bandwagon effect among the Democratic Senators as he was by anything. The reason he didn't mount a vigorous defense is because he knew better than anyone that there was nothing to the allegations, and didn't figure there was a pressing need to defend himself against bogus charges, especially not to Senators of his own party.

I will move on, but I will never forget, and I will never again completely trust ANY of the Democratic Senators who urged Franken to leave the Senate. If it was for their own Machiavellian reasons (I'm assuming Gillibrand here) or out of gullibility or poor homework (I'm assuming Warren and Brown here, among others), it doesn't matter. Once the primaries are done, I will support all Democratic nominees for Congress. I will never support ANY of Franken's resignation advocates in a presidential primary.

12/6/17
........Kirsten Gillibrand calls on Al Franken to resign. "I have been shocked and disappointed to learn over the last few weeks that a colleague I am fond of personally has engaged in behavior towards women that is unacceptable. *** I believe it would be better for our country if he sent a clear message that any kind of mistreatment of women in our society isn’t acceptable by stepping aside to let someone else serve."

12/6/17
........Chuck Schumer calls on Al Franken to Resign. "Senator Franken should resign."

12/17
........In an ironic statement, Bob Menendez, under ethics investigation himself, says, "...it seems that he is coming to terms with the implications for his ability to remain in the Senate."

12/7/17
.......After the onslaught of Democratic Senators, including the leader, Chuck Schumer, Franken gives a speech announcing that he will resign in the coming weeks.

What was said publicly and what was known and said by the parties mentioned and when may also be on a different timeline from what we knew as the general public. This guy is very close to Franken, has breakfast once or more times a week with him, and spoke with convincing authority. I'm not claiming infallibility for anyone, of course, including myself, and I only had 45 minutes with my friend in DC in January, but he didn't seem to be speculating.

That's just a fact. Franken even named 3 possible replacements in his speech, one of whom was one the Gov chose 6 days later (altho looks like he may have made that decision a few days earlier).

True, that's just the public version. But consider that the Dem pile-on had just occurred one day earlier. So this wasn't drawn out over days. It was very quick. Once Schumer told him publicly to resign, he announced next day he'd be resigning within a few weeks.

The Gov wouldn't have known to appoint a replacement before Franken's speech, because events just went too fast. Even if the Gov did it behind the scenes, it just went too fast.

Now, it's possible that Franken was hoping he could take back his announced resignation after things died down. But that would have been hard to do, after a replacement was announced. That's possible.

I don't suppose it matters, though. "Who knows what lurks in the hearts of men? Only the Shadow knows."

He's quoted so often publicly, about the last thing he'd be called is a "Shadow"

And I for one will never forget it!

state constituents "she was wrong" - hope so - we have our own problems in AZ..I feel sometimes I should butt out of other state politics..but this action, against Franken, affects all of us...

their decisions and actions. Franken was a huge loss to the Democratic Party. I am hoping NY can discover better representatives for the future.

I can say that nobody in NYS is discussing this. Her "Primary opponent" has $11,237 in the bank, and she has only a nominal Republican competitor. Sorry to disappoint you.

WTH was she thinking..no need to apologize to me - disappointed?? Sure in her, and schumers actions..as how it all went down..doesn't mean I'm a purist..I agree with most of what they believe in...

Not sure what their motivation was to wade into launching Franken...2020 perhaps....

resigned.

That's a rather loose definition of fair. But please continue to not acknowledge Franken himself apologized for mistreating women.

for "mistreating women" in verbatim.

Take your time, I'll wait.

crossed a line for some of the women. He apologized for making them feel badly.

This is the problem with subjective standards for sexual harassment. He might be joking around and 99/100 women won't mind. It's that one woman who claimed to be violated that is the issue.

I recall Sexual Harassment training, in the military, back in the 80's. The line was pretty much black and white. These days, there's a lot of gray area....might be okay for some women, might cross a line with others.

That's why you treat every woman you mean like she might be your mother or grandmother....well, maybe not your own but somebody with whom you wouldn't make that joke.

So I can understand his need to say something regarding his USO days. But remember that Tweeden also engaged in documented questionable behavior during those tours as well, so her allegations were categorically made in bad faith.

But all those manufactured memories about him groping women during photo shoots with a bunch of witnesses, not buying it.

one later gets accused of rape or sexual assault. The Accuser doesn't get held to the same standard as the one who is accused.

Its not fair but when we're going to make it a subjective judgement of where that line is, these are the problems that are going to come up.

The picture is what did Franken in.

for more than a decade, but it's suddenly an issue when trumpanzees want to ratfck a progressive Dem.

Meanwhile, the pussygrabber remains president.

He was thrown overboard because of the Roy Moore stuff.

The GOP doesn't care about women, even the women who vote GOP, so of course they elected Trump.

Then he continued to grill nominees in committee hearings. The Trump camp was tired of him, used folks like Roger Stone to root out an Achilles heel and screwed Franken.

In Gorsuch's hearing Franken was the Senator who methodically led Gorsuch to admit his legal decision that a worker's legal obligation was freeze on the job to protect company property.

doesn't even show Franken touching Tweeden, but rather mimicking the act of touching her breasts. Are thought crimes next?

I'm glad you brought that out. The only thing it shows is him clutching or whatever, air. As far as I know that's not a crime.

Franken had a reputation as being pretty loyal his wife, Frannie. As far as I know, all through the freewheelin' SNL days, when he was touring with wild-ass Tom Davis, I never heard jack about him running around on Frannie.

That is part of the joke in that photo. Were it someone famous for sexual improprieties, then it's not funny but creepy.

Was it a big deal, no.
But you say it was a joke and then someone is offended because you’re joking about sexual assault.

We’ve gone from what a reasonable person would think to whether anyone is offended. What used to be easy to define has now becomes so vague that no one knows if a joke will be taken as a joke.

Any photo op will have to involve the "hover hand"


Yep, that's the future the absolutists want

no human contact without a signed contract

Fucking armor in that photo.

The photographer states she was awake and in on the joke.

This whole episode came to clarity for me when a VERY CONCERNED SUPPORTER of feminism accused me of being a bad liberal for doubting this narrative.

His (of course it was a dude) quote was "so, all 8 women are lying?" followed by loud harrumphing.

Yeah mother fucker. All. Of. Them.

How many sailors were paid to lie about Kerry?

How many sack fondling GOP operators line up to lie about any Democrat - anytime?

Any professional politician who backed that play was either too stupid to walk alone around traffic... Or was obviously trying to cash in for themselves.

Well said. Keep saying it.

because he told a suggestive joke to a female friend of his. Another woman overheard it & she made the complaint.

You never know who is listening

is literally how he began his statement.

He then went on to say:

"For instance, that picture. I don't know what was in my head when I took that picture, and it doesn't matter. There's no excuse. I look at it now and I feel disgusted with myself. It isn't funny. It's completely inappropriate. It's obvious how Leeann would feel violated by that picture. And, what's more, I can see how millions of other women would feel violated by it..."

Edit to add:

In a later statement, he said:

"I feel terribly that I’ve made some women feel badly and for that I am so sorry"

And the picture is only "inappropriate" when taken out of context and lied about, which any fair-minded colleague would have immediately perceived. So why didn't Franken's?

But it does seem like he is apologizing for mistreating women, in that he literally says he is sorry for behavior that made some women feel bad or violated in some way. Those are the precise words he chose to use in his statement.

for knowingly mistreating women. Don't put words in his mouth.

He was working Steps 8 and 9:

Step 8: Made a list of all persons we had harmed, and became willing to make amends to them all.

Step 9: Made direct amends to such people wherever possible, except when to do so would injure them or others.

He apologized, but stated that he did not harass or mistreat or abuse anyone. He said he was sorry that his apology, which was meant to smooth things over so all could move on, was misinterpreted as an admission of harassment, because nothing could be further from the truth.

Remember that the accusation against him by a twerking Republican who broke the news on Fox...that was before the "Me, too" movement. So he didn't realize what was coming & just apologized in the way that many apologize to smooth things over, while the ethics committee would investigate (he thought).

Also at the time, Democratic Sen. Menendez was being sued and under ethics investigation, but he wasn't asked to leave. I think that may be because Menendez posed no threat to those with aspirations for the Presidency or in the Senate.

chris Christie.

Because they have no use for Republicans trying to run as Dems, right?

And that we need a true progressive to fill Al's seats because that's how he ran and that's how he won, and that's how he led in the Senate, right?

Right? Guys? Hello? I said....right?

just like they stood up for Franken

I'll give Painter credit, he did have Franken's back when it counted.

...I'll have no doubt in my mind what really happened with this whole thing.

will have no one to blame but themselves.

Welp, I moved to NY from Minnesota, so at least I can get revenge for Al in the NY primary.

...but I think it goes deeper than just Gillibrand. I think a lot of people who pull the strings (purse or otherwise) in our party are very happy with these maneuvers.

Trust me, now that you are in New York state you'll also have a front row to similar shenanigans at the state level. ie. the "Independent Democratic Caucus" that throws the state to Republicans and who work very closely with governor Cuomo (another third way style Gillibrand-esque shining light of the Democratic party).

are going to be so disappointed.

There will always be someone else to blame. Safe, middle of the road, bland centrism can never fail. It can only BE failed by dirty hippies not clapping loudly enough for it.

A preemptive preemptive strike.



Why do you hate Kieth Ellison?

Link to tweet

Regardless of Al Franken, the Dems cannot nominate a member of the GOP, am I right?
He has to be either a registered Democrat or a registered independent. Has something changed?

look him up.

No one knew who he was until he got some notoriety by attacking Trump. Fuck him. He built it, he owns it. As far as most Minnesota Dems are concerned he is a non starter. Besides the elite are picked a replacement who won't make them look so dumb. Kisses all the right asses.

I am more than happy to support a change to party rules stating that you have to have been a registered Democrat for a minimum of 3 years before you are able to get the party’s nomination for senate and 5 years before you can run for President as a Democrat.

Something tells me you would suddenly change your tune if that were being discussed.

But then again, don't let that get in the way of using a completely unrelated post to bash Sanders.

Something tells me that's your primary goal.

You might want to look into that.

Most of the claims, if not all, had little to no merit.

Most people who understand politics at this level knew what was going to happen to Franken after his initial tepid response.

Shit show all the way around.

If he called the women liars that they were, he'd be branded as a rank, misogynistic pig, pouring gas on the issue.

If he remained quiet, he'd give the allegations credence just the same.

He chose not to malign his accusers, instead opening himself up to an investigation through the proper channels. But the turncoat Dems did not even give him a chance to defend himself, once again prioritizing "optics."

Afterwards, the trumpers tried to pull the same trick with Chuck Schumer, but they got sloppy.

I do think he was caught between a rock and a hard place. The timing was horrible for him.

"If he called the women liars that they were, he'd be branded as a rank, misogynistic pig, pouring gas on the issue. "

I'm not too sure about that. I think a majority were ready for him to fight for himself. That would have involved him questioning the voracity of the claims being made against him. He should have done it forcefully.

"If he remained quiet, he'd give the allegations credence just the same. "

In my eyes that is exactly what he did.

"instead opening himself up to an investigation through the proper channels."

One of the most powerful deliberative bodies in the world. Waiting is not an option. Dear colleagues, just hold tight. That is a losing proposition.

"But the turncoat Dems did not even give him a chance to defend himself"

That is blatantly false. When was the first accusation? When did the turncoats turn? He didn't just have a chance, he had chance after chance after chance.

"Afterwards, the trumpers tried to pull the same trick with Chuck Schumer, but they got sloppy."

Schumer fights.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/chuck-schumer-slams-forged-sex-harassment-documents-phony-allegation-n829076

Franken was an enormous loss. That doesn't mean the reality of the situation should be ignored or flat out fabricated.

He took the Senate investigation route before the accusations mysteriously mounted.

And like I said, he wanted a Senate investigation, but none was initiated before the Dems shivved him.

I will admit that Al was too decent of a guy to pointedly impugn his accusers. He was conscious that questioning accusers would likely silence other rightful victims.

Also, Schumer had an easier case on his side because the fraud was demonstrable. Franken was fighting shadowy accusations, and he couldn't confront half of his "accusers."

Nothing there to disagree with and I feel it bolsters my point. He didn't fight for himself from the start. Just let others define the public discussion while he waited. That isn't going to work.

"And like I said, he wanted a Senate investigation, but none was initiated before the Dems shivved him. "

Again, he could have fought for himself at anytime. He wasn't restricted by any investigation. I feel he did his party a serious disservice by his lack of actions. I do also agree that his colleagues absolutely fucked him over. Seems people think they can only hold one of those thoughts when both were clearly borne out in reality.

"I will admit that Al was too decent of a guy to pointedly impugn his accusers. "

That's not decency. At all. It is the opposite of decency.

"Also, Schumer had an easier case on his side because the fraud was demonstrable."

You brought in Schummer. I clearly pointed out what Schummer was willing to do. Please don't now talk about how much different it was. It was your point in the first place. They couldn't do something so shady to Schummer. What they did to Franken was every bit as obvious.

"and he couldn't confront half of his "accusers." "

Which half did he confront?

I would have preferred a mudfight considering what's at stake, but Franken is more decent than I am.

This is now a new line.

It was already a mud fight. Problem is only one side was throwing up to the point where a majority of dem Senators jumped in.

“But Franken is more decent”

He is a very decent man. There is nothing decent about his initial reaction. Nothing.

from the top of Mt. Hindsight.

Franken did what he felt was necessary in what turned out to be a no-win situation.

From hindsight, I will never forgive the turncoat dems.

I appreciate you getting to the point where you at least recognize what was truly a fatal error. This post of yours here is the first you have been willing to mention you see the error.

I think a lot of Dems are kicking themselves now that the dust has settled, not just Franken.

Never forgiving people who fight along side of us an overwhelming majority of the time is personal. I would even go so far as to say it’s a personal flaw. Somewhat religious in nature.

is trusting the spineless dems

I hope he makes a comeback.

There is process and there is the reality of the situation. Hey colleagues, let this fester for a while as I don't fight for myself, it's the process. I deserve a fair process because that is the way congressional scandals work.

it is so easy to criticize when you are not involved with the Al Franken debacle process. Too bad people here cannot experience what happened from the viewpoint of Minnesota constituents who had their votes taken away from them. The real frightening part of this is that we have a seat up for grabs that did not have to be. We will also be losing a great Democratic governor in 2020. Guess who is considering a rerun at that seat. None other than Tim Pawlenty who already put our state in a financial and social hole. There is a good chance that the Minnesota I have lived in for 75 years will no longer be here in 3 years. That is scary for me and others living in my state. There are Democrats that I no longer have respect for or faith in based on what happened with Al Franken.

Criticise the congressional committee, but it is a lawfully organised group and is even Republican controlled. Franken had been straight up, can some of his colleagues claim the same ?

Every bit as foolish as Franken during the “process”.

None of it was “straight up.” From the accusers to Franken to the Democrats.

He did the right thing. Fighting it in any way, i.e. accusing his accusers, would have dragged him further into the slime. He needed back-up and he didn't get it. There's no way he could have saved himself and lots of ways he could have permanently damaged himself. He would have been painted as a Democratic Roy Moore which I think was the intention.

Last edited Tue May 1, 2018, 09:10 AM - Edit history (1)

Franken could have fought. People were ready for it. This line of argument does nothing more than take away any individual responsibility on Frankens part. Fight for yourself if you expect others to take up the cause.

Please note that I’m not saying that a majority of Senate Democrats don’t have their own issues here.

He could have done the same for Franken but didn't. He also benefited from Franken's decapitation as a kind of exculpatory sacrifice. And there wasn't any USO picture that I'm aware of.

Franken isn't oblivious because he isn't a lawyer. It's not on Schummer. There is no length some won't go to pass the buck.

Schummer fought because he was a lawyer! Franken doesn't understand such things!

That is one of the most offensive things I have seen written about Franken in justification for his lack of fight.

Schumer did what he did for his own reasons. He could have stuck his neck out for Al but he didn't. Those are the facts and absent Schumer's support any "fight" that Franken might have mounted would have done more for Roy Moore than himself. He did the right thing.

Those allegations were so stupid and not substantiated!! Al Franken is a comedian and I'm sure comedians will do anything to get a laugh all they want is to get the laugh. It will not surprise me one bit if Kirsten Gillibrand runs for president. Al Franken was sounding too presidential and she knew that and wanted rid of him.

You may have hit upon an interesting trend.

[link:|]

Democrats wanted any women who made an accusation to be believed. If he said they weren't
Telling the truth he was fucked. If he said they were telling the truth he was fucked. I know people don't like to face the truth but it is what it is.

knowing the dems will cave like they always do.

Who knew the Dems would take the baton and beat him to death?
I remember the startled look on Republican faces.

With profound thoughts expressed through snooze emojis.

Great college, by the way.

With "friends" like these who needs Repubs? They railroaded him out but we'll never forget. I still can't stand or trust the Dems who called for his resig. Keep thinking they must have another hidden agenda.