So, what you are saying is that he should not have agreed to resign. Why do you think he did? He didn’t have to.
No man is an island.
Being ostracized by your own party would be rough.
I worry about that too.
Yep, it would be. Life isn’t fair. News at 11.
As I said earlier, if he did not agree with the party leaders, he should not have resigned. And yet he did. Do you think he should have resigned if he disagreed with the party leaders? Can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen. It looks like he chose to get out of the kitchen.
As others have said, Franken didn’t have to resign. But he’s not an idiot. The fact that he was entitled to a due process hearing doesn’t mean if would have been in his best interests to insist on one. It was clear to him that the allegations were substantial and credible. If he had insisted on being removed from office by a full due process procedure, the best he could have hoped for was to cling to office as a lame duck. And the hearings would have kept this in the news for months.
He said he would resign in early January. Now go find a calendar and look up what month it is.
Smarch?
My larger concern here is that we’re headed for a wave of these and this is how I fear it playing out:
2017-18 - A wave of accusations against politicians in power ends with a relative mass of resignations/loss of party support resulting in failure to win reelection for Democrats. Republicans obfuscate, deny, take refuge in sweet Jesus, or outright ignore the accusers. Result? GOP maintains and possibly even strengthens control of Congress.
2019+ - Firmly in control of Congress (and various statehouses), the GOP begins to slowly and steadily roll-back women’s rights. Result - Women die from back-alley abortions, lack of access to proper health care when not pregnant, abusive husbands/domestic violence. Women who don’t die are subject to increasingly discriminatory workplaces up to and including quid pro quo sexual harassment - their legal options for remedy eroded or outright repealed.
Win the battle, lose the war at its finest.
But we’ll still have the high moral ground!
Now, I agree that we should not tolerate the behavior and a strong ‘fem-power’ wave election (which is not out of the realm of possibility and indeed appears to be gaining steam) could blunt or even reverse the effects listed above, but it seems an awfully big gamble at this point. Hell, a pedophile just polled within 2% of WINNING in Alabama, a groper a la Franken with an R behind his name would have skated to victory.
And the issue, which is so conveniently ignored, is that there is a great danger in the consequences a hysterical mob, unchecked by fact or logic, can inflict based upon allegations. As communication becomes global, rapid, and practically free what was once a minor transgression becomes a national or beyond scandal with no concern about time or other mitigating factors. That’s a real danger.
One of the claims is from 2010, after he had been elected. It’s seemingly credible in that she posted to Facebook in 2010 “Dude – Al Franken TOTALLY molested me! Creeper!” in reference to the photo where he supposedly grabbed her ass while taking the photo. Her husband and father collaborate her talking about it immediately after it happened.
Not that I agree with the premise that hidden facets of your life are now off-limits once you get elected just because you managed to keep them under wraps during the campaign or part of your time in office.
This sounds like a concern that’s irrelevant to this instance, in which there was no “hysterical mob”, and the consequences were incredibly minor (being criticized by one’s fellow Senators).
Sounds like good reasoning for criminal instances. For political instances, different reasoning applies, as it should. The Democrats are harmed by tolerating credible (and photo-backed) allegations of groping or faux-groping among their highest officials.
What’s your evidence for this particular claim? Show me the Democrats were “tolerating” the allegations of groping from the very beginning and show me that Franken’s continued presence in the Senate until 2020 would have any measurable repercussions on the Democratic party.
If Franken stays, the Democrats are tolerating credible allegations of groping (backed by photo evidence) among their high officials. I’m not sure what other evidence you’re asking for.
As far as what harm it would cause, that’s my opinion (not sure what evidence there could be about predicting this kind of effect). One tangible piece of harm would be that folks like me would be far less likely to donate money and effort (and I have been a regular Democratic party contributor for almost 20 years) to support a party that tolerates credible allegations of groping.
It’s also my opinion that tolerating credible allegations of groping would make the charge that Democratic criticism of folks like Trump and Moore for their credible allegations of sexual misconduct is hypocritical far more effective, and thus Democratic criticism far less effective.
And I’ll add once again that this is the morally correct stance, IMO. It’s really not that hard to be a groper-free party in terms of high office. Credible allegations are not easy to fabricate – I think they’re very, very difficult, in fact. Especially multiple credible allegations. In the long term we’ll be far better off by not tolerating gropers, harassers, and assaulters, since IMO society is well on its way to this point.
Why should different reasoning apply? The good people of Minnesota elected Franken twice. I don’t know what thy average voter thought of him, but I’d guess they thought he was a smart driven guy, who was a play hard, work hard comedian in New York city. Probably wasn’t going to be a priest if he lost the election. Millions of dollars were spent, millions of hours spent on the election - twice. Should this all be erased due to “allegations of groping or faux-groping?” If so does it take 10 women? 5? One comment and one pinch? One from column A and two from column B?
I get the impression from you that you see this as a black or white issue but it’s not. On this broad continue, there could be a brutal gang rape that culminates is a murder on one end, and a “heh, you’re pretty, what’s your sign” on the other end. We all have examples of things blown way out of proportion on the latter end. Hell, earlier this week, one of my co-workers told someone that they looked “really nice today” and he’s somewhat worried that he could be in trouble.
In a very short time frame, what would have be though of as “off color” or “cadish” or “knucklehead” behavior is now being called sexual assault. True sexual assault should never be tolerated. But innuendo for other behavior including a hand on a waist in a photo op that is causing Senators to be forced out of Office, this isn’t something we want, is it?
This seem like the quintessential slippery slope.
Yes, sexual assault and groping is a black and white issue – right and wrong. Doesn’t mean everything is the same (rape is worse than groping is worse than verbal harassment, IMO), but groping and sexual assault and harassment are still wrong.
But many of the things you described are not harassment, and are not getting anyone in trouble. Has anyone been fired for a single “you’re pretty” comment? For a single “what’s your sign?” For a single “you look nice today”? Has anyone gotten in any trouble at all for that? Your co-worker is scared for nothing and no reason.
Franken didn’t get criticized and asked to resign because of touching someone’s waist (nothing would have changed if that accuser hadn’t come forward). It was because of a photo of him groping (or faux-groping) a sleeping woman, a credible allegation of a forced tongue-kiss, and multiple credible allegations of groping intimate areas (breast or butt) of women during photographs with constituents.
Taking the Senate, every Democrat there wanted him to be investigated, including Franken. That isn’t tolerating groping at all.
If I had faith in such investigations, conducted by such an old-white-man dominated body, perhaps. But I don’t. Certainly not with the Republicans in charge. Far better, both politically and morally, that he resign now, to avoid extending the story, potentially humiliating the accusers (as well as just forcing them to such an unpleasant task as testifying as to one’s intimate violations), and to draw a clear line that multiple credible allegations of groping are enough that one shouldn’t be a Senator any more.
Many of those things were always sexual assault. We just called them lighter names because no one gave a shit if guys were sexually assaulting women, provided it wasn’t rape. It’s not a bad thing or cause for alarm if grabbing a woman’s ass is being called what it is – assault – and not “Ah, you caddish rake!” We shouldn’t need a prolonged breaking in period where we slowly ease into the waters of not being allowed to paw at women and just get an “Oh, you! Watch out for this one!” in response.
Franken needs to face the Ethics committee as originally planned and then accept whatever sanction they give.
That may require leaving the Senate or perhaps a leaser sanction.
So far 4 Senators are on record supporting Franklin.
It’s probably too little, too late. That’s very unfortunate.
At most what Al did were misdemeanors. Most prosecutor wouldn’t file charges for squeezing a butt taking a selfie.
Franklin got caught up in the political turmoil over Roy Moore and his refusal to drop out of the Election. The Dems were freaking out and Franken was a convenient target.
https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/18/manchin-franken-senate-resign-300843