Well, gosh…surely Republicans get the same one-free-grope policy feminists and Democrats have used for decades.
Trump already used up the GOP’s allotment going into the next century.
This part is so far from reality that it made me laugh out loud.
And? Go ahead, substantiate that claim, or were you just making an utterly predictable rejoinder?
He’s on tape. You remember this, right?
Or read some of the books he pretended to write. He talks at great length about it.
Certainly. In this case we were discussing the reaction of Senate Dems though. The post that started us on this thread said, “According to this, the Dems ARE doing the right thing.” and the linked article was titled “Senate Dems Leave No Room For Ambiguity In Denouncing Al Franken”. The focus of the discussion has been around their reaction to it, and not the Republican Senators. Presumably the Rs are not overly-supportive of Franken, but I haven’t actually heard much about their reactions.
I don’t have a strongly-held position on what should happen to Franken. I’ve got a vague notion that something along RTFirefly’s suggestion seemed to strike a middle ground between permanent banishment from public life and “sanctioned in a meaningless way”, but I’m not married to the position, and freely admit my own feelings on the matter are not yet definitive. OTOH, what I do have a strong position on, and what I’ve been expressing, is that it’s silly to pretend that the Senate Dems are taking some really strong stance against sexual assault when is what they’re really doing will amount to “sanctioned in a meaningless way”. That pretending, which Ukulele Ike and HuffPo are doing, is what I felt deserved to be called out for its silliness.
Oh, please. Bubba raped women, perjured himself, and made a fool of his wife on national TV.
Trump is a saint by comparison.
Trump admitted to countless acts of sexual assault. He’s not clean.
And? Go ahead, substantiate that claim, or were you just making an utterly predictable rejoinder?
It’s general knowledge that he raped Juanita Broaddrick and groped Kathleen Willey. And as we all know, Hillary Clinton has stated “Every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported”
Do you need cites? The man was a sexual predator.
So, no, I wasn’t making a predictable rejoinder, I was just guilty of assuming you were informed on the subject. Was I wrong to do so?
He’s not clean. But he’s a saint in comparison to Bubba. As I believe I mentioned.
And Bubba got reelected so Trump probably will too. I’m looking forward to the next Leftwing SkyScream.
Apparently I’m better informed on it than you are. For example, I actually read the first half of this thread, from which I can determine that it’s not general knowledge at all.
There is no defending Bill Clinton’s reported behavior towards women. There should have been more consequential repercussions.
Trump has assaulted women (admitted to it on tape), perjured himself on TV (Comie firing), has proven himself to be a pathological liar and racist, shown himself to be mentally unfit to serve as POTUS, and made a fool of himself and of the entire nation on multiple international stages.
It’s not an either or thing. Both things are true.
Since this thread title is about Trump (and Clinton), what are your thoughts on the actions being taken by the GOP with respect to standing accusations against Trump? If what Dems are doing amounts to ‘a slap on the wrist’ for Franken, how would you characterize the actions being taken by the GOP with respect to Trump?
I put Clinton in parenthesis because he’s currently a private citizen and I’m not sure what congress can do retroactively. If they decided to vote for some sort of public censure, I don’t think it would be out of place. But they should probably address issues with sitting members of government before going after those in defunct administrations.
I’d describe “the actions being taken by the GOP with respect to standing accusations against Trump” as largely inaction. He has received some public condemnation from Republicans from time to time, like Franken. For example, when the Access Hollywood (?) tape was released, but there doesn’t appear to be any major groundswell of support for impeaching him over it. My thoughts on it? My sympathies lie with iiandyiiii’s vision for a more perfect world, but pragmatism intrudes. I’m not opposed to a President Pence, but, as I told iiandyiiii in our PMs, I think it’s largely a futile effort to try to get him impeached (admittedly, I’m not up-to-speed on the various accusations against Trump), so I don’t plan to spend much time / energy / money on the effort.
I take your response to mean that you think that neither Trump nor Franken should face any censure or related congressional disciplinary action despite standing accusations of sexual harassment. Fair summation?
I don’t think a censure much matters, but I don’t feel opposed to it. I think I said in the Franken-thread (although could be misremembering) that I’m still trying to work out in my own head what I think appropriate punishments are for sexual abuse of various flavors. I’m not on-board with an iiandyiiii-style zero tolerance policy, and thought RTFirefly’s suggestion seems like a reasonable middle ground in Franken’s case, but there are obviously a lot of factors that play into this that I haven’t considered enough to craft some bright line rule.
Bricker, you should be the last person on this forum to be lectured on the inadmissibility of hearsay.
Right, so the Democratic Party will eat itself and the Republicans will keep on as they’ve been going. In the future there will be only one party and I’m sure they will be great supporters of women’s rights. So, congratulations?
I assume that by president Pence’s third term it will be illegal for unmarried men and women to be alone together and the risk of harassment will diminish considerably.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk