# Now, Al Franken **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [November 16, 2017, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770 "2017-11-16T15:42:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 85
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1682 "2019-07-26T01:11:45Z")
> [@madmonk28](#): > > This thread is evidence that Al Franken needs to stay gone. He’s a divisive figure and his supporters have to twist themselves in to such ethical pretzels that they sound like Republicans. “Like” > [@filmore](#): > > For a politician, there is actually the larger issue than was the person okay with the joke. The constituents get to decide if they want to be represented by a person who jokes about something like that. At a minimum, he was joking about sexual objectification or even sexual assault. For some people, those subjects are so serious and offensive that they don’t even want it to be joked about. In a similar vein, people might also be offended if he was joking about racism or the Holocaust. Whether or not he was intending it to be a joke and regardless of if his audience was okay with it, many constituents will not be okay with handling those subjects in a joking manner. “Like” > [@Thudlow\_Boink](#): > > Well, duh. Of course it’s an asshole thing to do. That’s part of the joke. She wasn’t in on the joke in that particular picture, but reportedly they did jokes onstage involving Franken (or, more properly, Franken’s comic persona) sexually objectifying her, repeatedly, and she fully cooperated with those jokes. > > See, that’s the thing: it looks like maybe they _did_ have something like this kind of relationship, or he reasonably thought they did. That she actually was okay with it at the time, but only later retroactively became offended as a way of taking him down politically and/or punishing him for his mockery of Sean Hannity and Fox News. > > I don’t know if that’s true, but it looks like it’s a possibility; and it’s the theory that the _New Yorker_ article seems to be presenting, with some justification. I think it’s pretty obvious, even from the article, but he already disliked her at that time. He was drawing devil’s horns on her photos and such. It seems pretty clear that he felt she was a stupid right wing bitch. Not without some justification, but that tends to undermine your rationalization for his actions. > [@asahi](#): > > Here’s the thing, Franken can serve the country in other ways than being a Senator. He’s not entitled to that role. Moreover, he should have known all along that politics is a bare-knuckle sport and he’s an idiot (or deluded) if he thought for a moment that he could run in the party that has historically represented women’s rights and not have that lurking in the background as a potential problem. “Like” ETA: > [@Sherrerd](#): > > See the post itself: The post refers to “largely discredited accusations by Tweeden”. I’m not talking about those. Just the photo. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1683 "2019-07-26T01:21:28Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > You don’t see the right-wing connections as having any relevance to her credibility on thmis? Sure. My more cynical theory is some how the rumors of Franken’s roaming hands reached Tweeden and she agreed to chum the waters since she had this pic. But for those reading along, I wouldn’t call that a frameup. Nobody tricked him into taking that photo. The other accusers don’t seem like Republican stooges. And on the other hand, given how different their politics are and Franken’s comedy style, I could see him being a bit of a dick to her during the trip. So her being so right wing in a way makes her story kind of believable to me. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1684 "2019-07-26T01:28:29Z")
Sherrerd, I see you are still claiming that the Franken case is fundamentally about uncorroborated accusations. It’s like you can’t even see that photo or something. And although I feel I’m being repetitive, I think maybe I need to emphasize again that I don’t mean the photo corroborates accusations. I mean it’s really bad all by itself, even if she posted the photo without comment and without claiming anything else, and even if no other women came forward. That photo is resignation-worthy all by itself, given that it was the year before he ran for Senate and on a military plane. ---
**Author:** ![Sherrerd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sherrerd/32/8_2.png) [@Sherrerd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sherrerd)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1685 "2019-07-26T01:33:16Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > The post refers to “largely discredited accusations by Tweeden”. I’m not talking about those. Just the photo. Oh, okay. I haven’t read my old posts in this thread, but I suspect that my position hasn’t changed: the photo was intended as a joke, and the joke was on Franken himself, not on Tweeden. As mentioned a few dozen posts back, Franken was known for making ‘look at me being an asshole’-style jokes. It wasn’t a good joke. Using a sleeping person as a prop was a major error in judgment, and I think Franken has said as much. It wasn’t funny. But it also wasn’t evidence that Franken is a woman-groper. If it had been a photo catching him in the act of groping, _he wouldn’t have been looking at the camera_. It’s amazing how many discussions of that photo miss that simple but crucial fact. In sum: taking the photo was a terrible error. Is it properly a career-ending error? In my opinion, no. Someone in one of the articles I read recently suggested that instead of resigning, Franken should have taken a three-month leave of absence. He should have announced that he would be educating himself about sensitivity and boundaries and respect for women----all the issues that his accusers had brought up. And then he could have made public apologies that would actually have shed light instead of heat on all these matters. But that’s not the way it went down. ETA: you changed your post somewhat while I was writing. My view is still that the photo alone isn’t damning. It’s an error in judgment, without a doubt. But given all the circumstances—the fact that the USO show was quite smutty and filled with sex references, for example—I don’t think it, on its own, merited resignation. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 1:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1686 "2019-07-26T01:46:09Z")
> [@Sherrerd](#): > > But it also wasn’t evidence that Franken is a woman-groper. If it had been a photo catching him in the act of groping, _he wouldn’t have been looking at the camera_. It’s amazing how many discussions of that photo miss that simple but crucial fact. Wait, what? 😕 I live in Minnesota and follow the news closely, and I have never heard of anyone interpreting the photo as a candid shot catching him in the act. Do you have a cite for that or is that just your impression? If the latter, I think it’s a mistaken one. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 2:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1687 "2019-07-26T02:31:12Z")
Okay. Broad agreement that what Franken did was not “okay”. And I think broad agreement that it wasn’t assault or anywhere near close. It was some unwanted social kissing level, a poor taste unfunny joke, and _possibly_ a hand a few times landing where it should not have landed. Behaviors that should _not_ occur but way short of the masturbating in front of people, walking in naked, and grabber-in-Chief behaviors. Or close to some of the crude what if he had done THIS that some posters make up here. And broad agreement that he lost his career as a result of that with some with high profiles immediately calling for his resignation on nothing more than the first picture at first sight. That his punishment was in fact much worse than that meted out to some who are guilty of more severe offenses. The majority of Americans feel women have real reasons for concern about sexual harassment and that it needs to be addressed in a very serious manner. Pretty sure everyone posting here agrees. The majority of Americans (MC data already linked) are\* also\* uncomfortable with punishment without due process, with careers being destroyed on the basis of accusations, and with less severe offenses being punished as severely as, if not worse than, horrific ones. Are the vast majority of Americans, including most younger voters and most Democrats, wrong to have that discomfort, to have those concerns? I don’t think so. (Voters of course could use whatever they want to vote someone out, including not liking the jokes someone has told in the past. His departure was not being voted out. It was colleagues who thought it better politically, for the party or for their own interests, for him to go, that led to his ouster.) I think Franken will eventually run again and that voters in his state will vote him back in. Up to them. Please though Al just lay low for now! ---
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 3:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1688 "2019-07-26T03:38:21Z")
Franken supporters have to > [@madmonk28](#): > > …twist themselves in to such ethical pretzels that they sound like Republicans. I’m not sure what you mean and if the following misrepresents you, my apologies because I don’t want to put words in your mouth, but let me just pose this question: Stephanie Kemplin [says](https://www.salon.com/2019/07/22/what-drove-the-new-yorkers-jane-mayer-into-al-franken-denialism/) Franken groped her breast while the two “took a photo”, yet in the photo, you can clearly see that Franken is not groping her breast. Since no other physical evidence has come to light to support her claim (that I am aware of or could find), am I twisting myself into a pretzel if I suggest she isn’t necessarily telling the truth and said claim should not be taken at face value? I do want to add that while I have by no means done an exhaustive investigation of her story, I am aware that her sister has [said](https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/30/politics/al-franken-groping-allegation/index.html) that Kemplin told her of the incident back then. And certainly, others weigh in, if in fact this is not what madmonk was getting at. ---
**Author:** ![Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/heffalump_and_roo/32/7691_2.png) [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Heffalump_and_Roo)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 4:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1689 "2019-07-26T04:33:27Z")
If this is how people [defend you](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/07/29/the-case-of-al-franken), it’s not a good look. > [@](#): > > James Downey, who spent decades writing for the show, told me, of Franken, “He’s lots of things, some delightful, some annoying. He can be very aggressive interpersonally. He can say mean things, or use other people as props. He can seem more confident that the audience will find him adorable than he ought to. His estimate of his charm can be overconfident. But I’ve known him for forty-seven years and he’s the very last person who would be a sexual harasser.” > . . . > James Downey said, “Much of what Al does when goofing around involves adopting the persona of a douche bag. When I saw the photo, I knew exactly what he was doing. The joke was about him. He was doing ‘an asshole.’ ” or > [@](#): > > Christine Zander, who wrote for “S.N.L.” between 1987 and 1993, said, “It was a mockery of someone acting in bad taste,” adding, “It’s so absurd she turned something that was written—these were trunk pieces, old sketches—into something improvised just for her.” Surprise. Sometimes when people are acting like they’re behaving in bad taste or using people as props, people might mistake them for behaving in bad taste or using them as props. Also, this is how some women feel when they’re sexually harassed or assaulted and can’t tell anyone for fear of reprisal. > [@](#): > > He told me that his therapist had likened his experience to “what happens when primates are shunned and humiliated by the rest of the other primates.” Their reaction, Franken said, with a mirthless laugh, “is ‘I’m going to die alone in the jungle.’ ” Nice that he can empathize. Sad that he thinks he’s special or unique about it. I agree that Franken should be given due process. He could call for an ethics investigation. His resigning doesn’t preclude that, does it? Instead of a one-sided magazine article, both sides could give their side of the story in an open ethics investigation. Then others could come forward if they choose as well. For the people who want due process, I don’t see people demanding this. That’s what makes me wonder if those people are seeking justice for both sides. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 6:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1690 "2019-07-26T06:08:20Z")
> [@Heffalump\_and\_Roo](#): > > . > I agree that Franken should be given due process. He could call for an ethics investigation. His resigning doesn’t preclude that, does it? Instead of a one-sided magazine article, both sides could give their side of the story in an open ethics investigation. Then others could come forward if they choose as well. For the people who want due process, I don’t see people demanding this. That’s what makes me wonder if those people are seeking justice for both sides. This sounds like a bit of a break from reality. The time for due process is long past. Calling for an open ethics investigation now, as a private citizen, would shift him into the “crazy” column in everybody’s mind. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 6:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1691 "2019-07-26T06:15:51Z")
Wanted to add: this column probably signals he will try a come back at some point but whatever contrition he shows will be narrowly scripted. My WAG. ---
**Author:** ![UltraVires](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/ecccb3/32.png) [@UltraVires](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/UltraVires)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 8:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1692 "2019-07-26T08:39:36Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > Okay. Broad agreement that what Franken did was not “okay”. > > And I think broad agreement that it wasn’t assault or anywhere near close. It was some unwanted social kissing level, a poor taste unfunny joke, and _possibly_ a hand a few times landing where it should not have landed. Behaviors that should _not_ occur but way short of the masturbating in front of people, walking in naked, and grabber-in-Chief behaviors. Or close to some of the crude what if he had done THIS that some posters make up here. > > And broad agreement that he lost his career as a result of that with some with high profiles immediately calling for his resignation on nothing more than the first picture at first sight. That his punishment was in fact much worse than that meted out to some who are guilty of more severe offenses. > > The majority of Americans feel women have real reasons for concern about sexual harassment and that it needs to be addressed in a very serious manner. Pretty sure everyone posting here agrees. > > The majority of Americans (MC data already linked) are\* also\* uncomfortable with punishment without due process, with careers being destroyed on the basis of accusations, and with less severe offenses being punished as severely as, if not worse than, horrific ones. > > Are the vast majority of Americans, including most younger voters and most Democrats, wrong to have that discomfort, to have those concerns? I don’t think so. > > (Voters of course could use whatever they want to vote someone out, including not liking the jokes someone has told in the past. His departure was not being voted out. It was colleagues who thought it better politically, for the party or for their own interests, for him to go, that led to his ouster.) > > I think Franken will eventually run again and that voters in his state will vote him back in. Up to them. Please though Al just lay low for now! Here’s the problem: I agree with everything you said. But the issue is that sexual assault allegations are almost always “he said, she said.” Typically and historically, we dismiss those allegations unless one party has documentary proof because we don’t value the word of one good citizen versus the other. This type of action in the wake of #metoo has changed the calculus. But why should it have? I recognize the historical inequities of this issue, but the new model allows people without proof to destroy the lives of someone without evidence. That may suck for someone who really was abused earlier, but do we still want to have due process? If we do, we must have more than “she was there and he was there, so he’s guilty” type of shit. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 10:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1693 "2019-07-26T10:51:53Z")
> [@UltraVires](#): > > Here’s the problem: I agree with everything you said. > > But the issue is that sexual assault allegations are almost always “he said, she said.” Typically and historically, we dismiss those allegations unless one party has documentary proof because we don’t value the word of one good citizen versus the other. This type of action in the wake of #metoo has changed the calculus. But why should it have? > > I recognize the historical inequities of this issue, but the new model allows people without proof to destroy the lives of someone without evidence. That may suck for someone who really was abused earlier, but do we still want to have due process? If we do, we must have more than “she was there and he was there, so he’s guilty” type of shit. Franken has not had his life destroyed. Even if he feels that way. He’s a wealthy man in America with, presumably, a family who loves him. Most Americans would love to be in such a situation. Further, he still has a chance to actually get on the right side with some humility and contrition. But he can’t stop blaming others for the consequences of his own actions. ---
**Author:** ![Scumpup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ce73a5/32.png) [@Scumpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scumpup)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 11:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1694 "2019-07-26T11:22:01Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Franken has not had his life destroyed. Even if he feels that way. He’s a wealthy man in America with, presumably, a family who loves him. Most Americans would love to be in such a situation. > > Further, he still has a chance to actually get on the right side with some humility and contrition. But he can’t stop blaming others for the consequences of his own actions. Franken can go hang himself in his fucking closet, for all I care. You didn’t address, though, whether or not we really want due process. That is a much more interesting question than whether or not Franken has had his life ruined. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 11:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1695 "2019-07-26T11:32:21Z")
> [@Scumpup](#): > > Franken can go hang himself in his fucking closet, for all I care. You didn’t address, though, whether or not we really want due process. That is a much more interesting question than whether or not Franken has had his life ruined. For criminal action? Absolutely. For political action? I don’t know what that would even mean. From a purely political perspective, having Franken stay in the Senate was hurting the Democratic party. ---
**Author:** ![SlackerInc](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/slackerinc/32/275_2.png) [@SlackerInc](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SlackerInc)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 11:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1696 "2019-07-26T11:42:46Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > And broad agreement that he lost his career as a result of that with some with high profiles immediately calling for his resignation on nothing more than the first picture at first sight. That his punishment was in fact much worse than that meted out to some who are guilty of more severe offenses. What other member of the Democratic caucus can still be found in the Senate cloakroom despite having done something more egregious than that photo? > [@UltraVires](#): > > But the issue is that sexual assault allegations are almost always “he said, she said.” Typically and historically, we dismiss those allegations unless one party has documentary proof because we don’t value the word of one good citizen versus the other. This type of action in the wake of #metoo has changed the calculus. But why should it have? > > I recognize the historical inequities of this issue, but the new model allows people without proof to destroy the lives of someone without evidence. That may suck for someone who really was abused earlier, but do we still want to have due process? If we do, we must have more than “she was there and he was there, so he’s guilty” type of shit. I agree with all of that. My best friend in college had his life ruined by a false accusation of rape (and I know it was false because she claimed he raped her on Saturday night, but I was with him the entire weekend 200 miles away). But what does this have to do with Franken? The prank photo on a US military plane (at the expense of someone he quite obviously disliked) _is_ the offense. He does not claim it is fake, and in fact says it is the thing he truly feels ashamed of, as he should. It also shows incredibly poor political judgment from someone mulling a run for Senate. We cannot have someone with that baggage in the Senate Democratic caucus. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 12:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1697 "2019-07-26T12:41:38Z")
> [@SlackerInc](#): > > What other member of the Democratic caucus can still be found in the Senate cloakroom despite having done something more egregious than that photo? … I would very very very shocked if there were not _quite_ a few. But if so or not it has nothing at all to do with what I questions I asked, which are of a much broader nature than Democratic Senators. I get the argument that _politically_ some highly positioned Democrats wanted to be able to take a pure zero tolerance black and white absolutist position, so Franken had to go, in order to undercut the potential of any accusation of whataboutism and partisan hypocrisy. But can we at least start with the understanding that most of the American public finds it possible to understand both the seriousness of the issue of sexual assault and harassment in the workplace AND to have concerns over career execution for all offenses of all severities upon accusation? And this is an American public that usually does very poorly with nuance and greyness. In terms of addressing the seriousness of sexual assault and harassment that women face and will face, that my now 18 year old daughter will likely have to face, that women of less privileged socioeconomic positions are facing serious examples of with great frequency every day without any recourse … celebrity zero tolerance examples being made is not a serious approach at a solution. **UltraVires** is correct to some degree: we cannot just replace one unjust and unfair approach with another. Having a process in which judgement is slowed down but actually investigated, and in which punishments are graded to severity of offense and not so much a Procrustean bed … but more so with emphasis on prevention in the future with education and awareness along with system improvements, like any good Quality Improvement program … that is something that would have the support of the majority of Americans **iiandyiiii** , at the time it seemed reasonable to think so, that it was the politically expedient thing to do for the sake of the party. (And his life wasn’t destroyed, just his political life publicly executed.) But it backfired. Overplaying a purity hand, giving an example in which large numbers of voters began to see the career ending based on accusations without any process or consideration of how severe the offense(s) were, made more more skeptical and more sympathetic to the accuseds. Americans still dislike being in the grey and pushed off from complete agreement on one side they can overshoot to the other pretty easily. > [@Slacker](#): > > … We cannot have someone with that baggage in the Senate Democratic caucus… Seriously dude. That is always a decision to be made by the voters. You want only people with no baggage, nothing that could be construed as baggage, who have made no mistakes, had no episodes of poor judgement, then vote for one of those people, assuming you can find them. IF he ever runs again (again, _please_ not now) then it will be up to the voters in MN to decide if they think his baggage is disqualifying or not. Not you, not me, not even other Senators. ---
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 12:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1698 "2019-07-26T12:47:38Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > For criminal action? Absolutely. For political action? I don’t know what that would even mean. From a purely political perspective, having Franken stay in the Senate was hurting the Democratic party. The first defintion I see online for due process is “fair treatment under the law.” Given that Franken wasn’t on trial, clearly he simply meant he deserved to be treated fairly and given a chance to defend himself through an ethics investigation. Do you think he deserved that? ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1699 "2019-07-26T14:38:35Z")
NPR Fresh Air interview with Jane Mayer from July 25, 2019: [Fresh Air: Jane Mayer On The Case Of Al Franken](https://www.npr.org/2019/07/25/745256311/jane-mayer-on-the-case-of-al-franken) I listened to part of this interview driving home last night, and just read the _New Yorker_ [article](https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2019/07/29/the-case-of-al-franken). My take is that Franken got a raw deal. One thing that stuck with me from the interview is that Mayer made that point that what Franken is accused of is in a completely different category from the behavior of people like Harvey Weinstein. For one thing, back in 2007 Franken was counseled by an aide that his overly friendly physical interactions with people might be misinterpreted, and after that point, he changed his behavior. Your typical harasser/assaulter like Weinstein doesn’t change their behavior when called on it or when it is brought to their attention. It’s my understanding that most of the accusations against Franken date from before 2007 – and the two alleged incidents that date from after Franken entered the Senate (in 2009 and 2010) are photo-op allegations that are, “even if true, are of a different magnitude than the kind of grotesque misconduct that has often been exposed in the #MeToo era.” As the article concludes: > [@Jane Mayer](#): > > The lawyer Debra Katz, who has represented Christine Blasey Ford and other sexual-harassment victims, remains troubled by Franken’s case. She contends, “The allegations levelled against Senator Franken did not warrant his forced expulsion from the Senate, particularly given the context in which most of the behavior occurred, which was in his capacity as a comedian.” She adds, “All offensive behavior should be addressed, but not all offensive behavior warrants the most severe sanction.” Katz sees Franken as a cautionary tale for the #MeToo movement. “To treat all allegations the same is not only inappropriate,” she warns. “It feeds into a backlash narrative that men are vulnerable to even frivolous allegations by women.” ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1700 "2019-07-26T15:08:58Z")
> [@DSeid](#): > > **iiandyiiii** , at the time it seemed reasonable to think so, that it was the politically expedient thing to do for the sake of the party. (And his life wasn’t destroyed, just his political life publicly executed.) But it backfired. Overplaying a purity hand, giving an example in which large numbers of voters began to see the career ending based on accusations without any process or consideration of how severe the offense(s) were, made more more skeptical and more sympathetic to the accuseds. Americans still dislike being in the grey and pushed off from complete agreement on one side they can overshoot to the other pretty easily. I don’t think it backfired – I think it directly contributed to both the victory of Doug Jones, and the increased scrutiny of Kavanaugh. But there’s no way to know for certain. > [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > The first defintion I see online for due process is “fair treatment under the law.” Given that Franken wasn’t on trial, clearly he simply meant he deserved to be treated fairly and given a chance to defend himself through an ethics investigation. Do you think he deserved that? He was treated fairly, IMO. Being asked to resign after such circumstances is entirely “fair”, IMO. Even if he only did what he said he did, and what he had a photo taken of, that’s enough to resign, IMO. We can find senators who have not pretended to grope a sleeping woman on camera. > [@](#): > > The lawyer Debra Katz, who has represented Christine Blasey Ford and other sexual-harassment victims, remains troubled by Franken’s case. She contends, “The allegations levelled against Senator Franken did not warrant his forced expulsion from the Senate, particularly given the context in which most of the behavior occurred, which was in his capacity as a comedian.” She adds, “All offensive behavior should be addressed, but not all offensive behavior warrants the most severe sanction.” Katz sees Franken as a cautionary tale for the #MeToo movement. “To treat all allegations the same is not only inappropriate,” she warns. “It feeds into a backlash narrative that men are vulnerable to even frivolous allegations by women.” The most severe sanctions would be criminal prosecution. So much of this is coming from the entitlement of the wealthy and successful. No one is entitled to a senate seat. No one is entitled to public adoration. Franken screwed up, and he’s not a senator any more, and he’s not as popular as he used to be. Living the life of a wealthy man with a loving family is nothing close to “severe sanctions”. ---
**Author:** ![CarnalK](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnalk/32/486_2.png) [@CarnalK](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CarnalK)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2019, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/1701 "2019-07-26T15:27:20Z")
You’re playing word games. He didn’t commit a crime, so the most severe sanctions is not criminal prosecution. The most severe sanction was expulsion from the Senate and that’s what happened even if it was technically voluntary. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770.md?page=84) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770.md?page=86)