Investigation into accusations against Al Franken (Mayer: lawyers, gated, cost)

[Cida]

Award-winning writer journalist Jane Mayer delved into it. Too bad she didn't do it a year ago.

The Case of Al Franken
A close look at the accusations against the former senator
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...-of-al-franken

[Kayekaye]

Just a rah rah Franken can do no wrong piece. He said she said. He tells a whole different story. Wow. No kidding. Well he sure dropped out quick. If she was so innocent why drop out so easily? He didn’t fight it at all. He is just a bully and I am glad he is gone from my political world. #Metoo not believable when it’s a Democrat.

I did like Stuart though...might watch it again this weekend.

[Cruz Azul Guy]

I didn’t vote for him the first time around because I didn’t take his candidacy seriously but grew to like him when I realized that he genuinely cared about the position and is actually a really bright guy. In reading into the situation at every angle I don’t feel his actions warranted resignation. Sorry Al, best wishes.

[jmgg]

Originally Posted by Cruz Azul Guy

I didn’t vote for him the first time around because I didn’t take his candidacy seriously but grew to like him when I realized that he genuinely cared about the position and is actually a really bright guy. In reading into the situation at every angle I don’t feel his actions warranted resignation. Sorry Al, best wishes.

As much as I consider Al Franken a crackpot, I think the case against him was pretty lame. His resignation was only because he got caught up in the "movement" where every man was guilty unless proven innocent.

[unxpctd]

Originally Posted by jmgg

As much as I consider Al Franken a crackpot, I think the case against him was pretty lame. His resignation was only because he got caught up in the "movement" where every man was guilty unless proven innocent.

Part of me agrees with this assessment. Especially the part about him being a crackpot. Never had my vote. I do however believe he was pushed a bit too quickly into resignation.

[Kayekaye]

Yeah but...he did resign himself without any fight. His choice. Makes me wonder if there wasn’t more under the surface that he didn’t want exposed. I found him hateful personally. But not much different from the hateful attitude of most dems.

[TheGrandViking]

I loved Al's books and thought they were well researched. However, his behavior was a bit creepy if true (I would rate him a 3 on a D. Trump creepy scale with Donald being a 10). I would have liked to see a Senate probe to get to the bottom of some of the accusations.

The fascinating thing about him was his ability to ask better questions on the Senate judiciary committee than most of the trained lawyers. Of course, graduation c-u-m Laude (I guess the filter doesn't like Latin) from Harved in Political science means he was no dummy.

I voted for him twice but would have needed more clarity about the accusations to vote for him a third time.

[duke944]

I liked his character on snl, it seems his self esteem is now on par with Stuart's. Ironic.

[2x3x29x41]

Let me preface this by saying that I am a liberal. These days I vote almost exclusively Democratic, even when I don't (ex: In 2018, I wrote in Mike Hatch for Attorney General instead of voting for Keith Ellison). And I voted for Al Franken in two general elections, and though I preferred Mike Ciresi in the 2008 primary race (though he dropped out before it was held), I was ultimately surprised and pleased at Franken's performance once elected (and once finally seated).

Moving on...

In order to deflect attention from Franken, his apologists focus on Leeann Tweeden, the first of his accusers. She's a conservative talk-radio host. Thus, she must be lying, right? Of course, it is nonsensical to think that a conservative is immune to being the subject of sexual improprieties. But, sure, she has cause to make a false claim. And the timing of the allegation - dropped in the middle of the Me Too synergy - was awfully inconvenient for Senator Franken. But even if the allegation was wielded as a cudgel, so what? That, and the timing, is Oppo 101. I'm reminded of the 2000 election. Some Democratic operatives found an old DWI arrest record for George W. Bush up in Maine. Bush, in reference to his admittedly wild youth, had been asked (I think, point blank, by the late Tim Russert) if he'd ever been arrested. Bush said 'no'. So the operative who found the arrest record sat on it and waited to drop it five days before the election (this late-breaking development might've cost Bush the popular vote, as the aggregated polls - which are inevitably only a snapshot of public opinion a few days before the election - showed him winning it, but in the end he did not). Anyway, much was made of the 'suspicious' timing by the Bush campaign, which sought to make the accuser the bad guy in the story. Classic deflection, just is being done by those who appoint themselves defenders of Franken. But the timing of an oppo drop has absolutely nothing to do with the oppo itself. It does not speak to the veracity of the claim. In a similar, but equally vacuous tack, heaps of abuse are leveled at Senator Kristin Gillibrand and other Democratic Senators for 'denying Franken due process'. This is more attempted sleight of hand (shifting focus from Franken to other convenient targets). So is the 'due process' claim, which is either confused or intentionally misleading. Franken was no more denied due process than was Republican Congressman Trent Franks, who resigned shortly before Franken in the wake of sexual harassment allegations. The one who truncated Franken's due process (the official Senate investigation into the accusations) was Franken himself, by resigning.

Then there's the problem that seven more women proceeded to level allegations of similar improprieties, including touching (which was not alleged by Tweeden). One allegation is a he-said-she-said (though that first allegation did include a photo). A second allegation is a tipping point. Eight in total? Either it's a (vastly implausible) conspiracy, or those accusations are painting an accurate picture of Al Franken's routine inappropriate behavior.

Count me out. I am not interested in that whitewashing. It's wrong. And let's be honest, most of the resistance comes from the fact that Franken is more than just another Democratic Senator. Not only was he a very effective one (and one of the party's best fundraisers), he was a celebrity politician. He did not (does not) just have supporters, he has fans. If he was some boring apparatchik 'D' from nowhere, California/Illinois/New York, few would have bothered. Like I said, count me out.

This is on-point:
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/st...09044985602048

Let's remember that Nate Silver is a liberal. When I first started reading his stuff (in 2008), he was just some anonymous poster (going by the handle 'poblano') at DailyKos who was producing these extensive data-crunching articles that kept accurately predicting the results of primaries that year. Criterion of embarrassment applies here.

Personally, I am pleased with the overall reaction to the Franken allegations. He should have been pressured to resign. What happened should not be tolerated within the party. One does one's 'side' no favors by making excuses for its failings, by denying them, by pointing the finger at everyone but the person who is the problem.

I will say this for Franken: he could have ridden out the allegations. He had three years left in his term, plenty of time to make a comeback. But he saw that he was damaging the party. And so he did the right thing and ended the party's association with the allegations through him by resigning. He did the right thing for the party and thus for the cause of what he believes.

Some of his supporters would do well to consider the lesson therein.

[Glenfield]

Originally Posted by 2x3x29x41

Let me preface this by saying that I am a liberal. These days I vote almost exclusively Democratic, even when I don't (ex: In 2018, I wrote in Mike Hatch for Attorney General instead of voting for Keith Ellison). And I voted for Al Franken in two general elections, and though I preferred Mike Ciresi in the 2008 primary race (though he dropped out before it was held), I was ultimately surprised and pleased at Franken's performance once elected (and once finally seated).

Moving on...

In order to deflect attention from Franken, his apologists focus on Leeann Tweeden, the first of his accusers. She's a conservative talk-radio host. Thus, she must be lying, right? Of course, it is nonsensical to think that a conservative is immune to being the subject of sexual improprieties. But, sure, she has cause to make a false claim. And the timing of the allegation - dropped in the middle of the Me Too synergy - was awfully inconvenient for Senator Franken. But even if the allegation was wielded as a cudgel, so what? That, and the timing, is Oppo 101. I'm reminded of the 2000 election. Some Democratic operatives found an old DWI arrest record for George W. Bush up in Maine. Bush, in reference to his admittedly wild youth, had been asked (I think, point blank, by the late Tim Russert) if he'd ever been arrested. Bush said 'no'. So the operative who found the arrest record sat on it and waited to drop it five days before the election (this late-breaking development might've cost Bush the popular vote, as the aggregated polls - which are inevitably only a snapshot of public opinion a few days before the election - showed him winning it, but in the end he did not). Anyway, much was made of the 'suspicious' timing by the Bush campaign, which sought to make the accuser the bad guy in the story. Classic deflection, just is being done by those who appoint themselves defenders of Franken. But the timing of an oppo drop has absolutely nothing to do with the oppo itself. It does not speak to the veracity of the claim. In a similar, but equally vacuous tack, heaps of abuse are leveled at Senator Kristin Gillibrand and other Democratic Senators for 'denying Franken due process'. This is more attempted sleight of hand (shifting focus from Franken to other convenient targets). So is the 'due process' claim, which is either confused or intentionally misleading. Franken was no more denied due process than was Republican Congressman Trent Franks, who resigned shortly before Franken in the wake of sexual harassment allegations. The one who truncated Franken's due process (the official Senate investigation into the accusations) was Franken himself, by resigning.

Then there's the problem that seven more women proceeded to level allegations of similar improprieties, including touching (which was not alleged by Tweeden). One allegation is a he-said-she-said (though that first allegation did include a photo). A second allegation is a tipping point. Eight in total? Either it's a (vastly implausible) conspiracy, or those accusations are painting an accurate picture of Al Franken's routine inappropriate behavior.

Count me out. I am not interested in that whitewashing. It's wrong. And let's be honest, most of the resistance comes from the fact that Franken is more than just another Democratic Senator. Not only was he a very effective one (and one of the party's best fundraisers), he was a celebrity politician. He did not (does not) just have supporters, he has fans. If he was some boring apparatchik 'D' from nowhere, California/Illinois/New York, few would have bothered. Like I said, count me out.

This is on-point:
https://twitter.com/NateSilver538/st...09044985602048

Let's remember that Nate Silver is a liberal. When I first started reading his stuff (in 2008), he was just some anonymous poster (going by the handle 'poblano') at DailyKos who was producing these extensive data-crunching articles that kept accurately predicting the results of primaries that year. Criterion of embarrassment applies here.

Personally, I am pleased with the overall reaction to the Franken allegations. He should have been pressured to resign. What happened should not be tolerated within the party. One does one's 'side' no favors by making excuses for its failings, by denying them, by pointing the finger at everyone but the person who is the problem.

I will say this for Franken: he could have ridden out the allegations. He had three years left in his term, plenty of time to make a comeback. But he saw that he was damaging the party. And so he did the right thing and ended the party's association with the allegations through him by resigning. He did the right thing for the party and thus for the cause of what he believes.

Some of his supporters would do well to consider the lesson therein.

tl;dr