Franken may resign tomorrow; Dems taking his alleged harassment seriously

[Basil the Great]

Today was a day like no other that I can remember. This morning CNN reported 8 Democratic Senators were calling for his resignation. The day is now almost over and MSNBC reported last hour that the figure had climbed to 35 Democratic Senators! I guess that pretty much says it all.

 

[Tom 1]

I can't imagine why...



So if I accuse you of pedophilia, you should lose your job and be ran out of town without evidence?

Are you suggesting that that is all that has happened in these cases? That some random person has made a fictional accusation and that’s all there is to it?

 

[Rion]

Are you suggesting that that is all that has happened in these cases? That some random person has made a fictional accusation and that’s all there is to it?

No, I am suggesting that one doesn't automatically assume each and every accusation is true or false.

 

[Archivist]

Considering a strong faction of them do not apparently believe in due process, why would anyone say they aren't taking allegations seriously?

This is a political matter, not a court of law. Due process does not apply.

 

[Rion]

This is a political matter, not a court of law. Due process does not apply.

Yeah, and I meant that in the legal sense.

 

[Archivist]

Yeah, and I meant that in the legal sense.

So what legal proceeding are underway to remove Franken? I am not aware of any cases that have been filed against him.

 

[Rion]

So what legal proceeding are underway to remove Franken? I am not aware of any cases that have been filed against him.

I am not talking about Franken. I said that a strong faction doesn't believe in due process in relation to these sorts of things, and so I am not surprised that they are demanding that he resigns.

 

[Archivist]

I am not talking about Franken. I said that a strong faction doesn't believe in due process in relation to these sorts of things, and so I am not surprised that they are demanding that he resigns.

And, again, due process doesn't apply to "these sorts of things" because we are not talking about legal proceedings.

 

[Rion]

And, again, due process doesn't apply to "these sorts of things" because we are not talking about legal proceedings.

...let's take this slowly.

Group A thinks that due process shouldn't apply for these situations, legally.

A member of Group A is accused of this.

Group A demands that the accused steps down, regardless of proof.

People act like Group A is doing because of high moral fiber.

Me: no, it's an ideological issue.

You: but it is not a legal issue.

We are here.

 

[Archivist]

...let's take this slowly.

Group A thinks that due process shouldn't apply for these situations, legally.

A member of Group A is accused of this.

Group A demands that the accused steps down, regardless of proof.

People act like Group A is doing because of high moral fiber.

Me: no, it's an ideological issue.

You: but it is not a legal issue.

We are here.

You are not getting this. Due process applies to legal matters. Due process does not apply to political issues. There is no burden of proof in a political matter. Now, if the political issue becomes a legal matter then due process does apply. Until then it does not.

This is not rocket science...

 

[Sistrin]

I can't imagine why...

That article is a real hoot, written by a small-minded shrill-partisan harpy wailing the sky is falling toward an Atwoodian Dystopia because Republicans believe all women are nothing more than sex objects and therefore save the Democrat who actually treated women as sex objects because that Democrat is the one who really holds women's issues dear because he once said so.

Feminist. They fell to their knees in submission during the Clinton/Lewinsky affair and they have yet to stand back up.

 

[Sistrin]

You are not getting this. Due process applies to legal matters. Due process does not apply to political issues. There is no burden of proof in a political matter. Now, if the political issue becomes a legal matter then due process does apply. Until then it does not.

This is not rocket science...

What you are advocating is mob rule. Aside from making a truly ridiculous charge. No burden of proof in a political matter? Then why have a Special Counsel? According to you, Trump should have immediately been removed from office the instant the first charge of collusion was made because hey, who needs proof?

 

[Ancient of Days]

I think some folks tend to use, due process and burden of proof interchangeably. No harm no foul...

 

[Tom 1]

What you are advocating is mob rule. Aside from making a truly ridiculous charge. No burden of proof in a political matter? Then why have a Special Counsel? According to you, Trump should have immediately been removed from office the instant the first charge of collusion was made because hey, who needs proof?

Not really, it’s just about being rational and weighing up what evidence is presented. That’s what juries do - there’s nothing magical about the context in which evidence is presented, the difference is in the degree of formality. To be clear we’re not talking about a gossip column, Chinese whispers or some other whispy, unclear rumour here, this is a large number of people, from the women and girls assaulted, to the managers who warned them about this guy and his predatory behaviour, to the security staff who apparently banned him from the mall at some point, put together with care by serious, professional investigative journalists, a profession that has brought a great many crimes to light over the decades. Dismissing it out of hand because it hasn’t yet been through the court system is just a cop out. Maybe the phrase ‘no smoke without fire’ is overused but to ignore smoke pouring out of a building is irresponsible, and so is voting for someone credibly accused of paedophilia, whose response is ‘I don’t recall’

 

[Archivist]

What you are advocating is mob rule. Aside from making a truly ridiculous charge.

No, I am not advocating "mob rule" nor am I the one who is being "truly ridiculous" here. Oh, and I have not leveled and charges in this thread. I have made simple statements of fact.

No burden of proof in a political matter? Then why have a Special Counsel? According to you, Trump should have immediately been removed from office the instant the first charge of collusion was made because hey, who needs proof?

Because once a Special Counsel is appointed, a matter moves from a political issue to a legal issue. Due process applies to a Special Counsel. It does not apply to voters who demand that their Senator resign. Voters can demand that their elected Senator or Representative resign for any reason or for no reason. There is no required due process.

 

[Archivist]

This reminds me of when people on FB post that their employer is violating their right to free speech. The fact is that employees don't have a Constitutional right to free speech or freedom of expression at work. The Constitution's right to free speech only applies when the government is trying to restrict it. Due process is much the same. In the judicial system one must be given due process. But the public can demand that an elected official resign for any reason. Colleagues and party officials can likewise demand that an elected official resign. That doesn't require due process. If that official refuses to do so and the matter winds up in the courts or if impeachment proceedings are started then he or she must be given due process.

 

[Dave-W]

I don't like this attitude. Not everything has to do with politics. Some things have to do with human decency.

Sorry - but in DC, EVERYTHING is politics.

 

[Dave-W]

Mental Illness has my vote here.

Not really. The common thread between all of these accusations is that a person in power felt a sense of entitlement and took advantage of it for their own gratification. That has been happening in a million different ways forever. Rather than mental illness, it is just straight up the fallen human nature. But now that false sense of entitlement is changing (for the better).

The problem we are now faced with is the history that has gone on. Everyone back in the 1960s was familiar with the term "casting couch" in the movie and TV industry. We knew what it meant. But nothing was done. Those in the power stayed in power.

Now the tendancy is to not only look to current situations but dig back into history. That means that Bill Clinton's stuff will be examined; perhaps even LBJ's comment "I have had more women on accident than Jack (John Kennedy) ever had on purpose."

 

[DZoolander]

It’s so cute watching people who believed that Obama was born in Kenya and that Hillary ran a child sex ring out of the basement of a pizza joint talking about “being careful what you believe” - lol

 

[Phil 1:21]

It’s so cute watching people who believed that Obama was born in Kenya and that Hillary ran a child sex ring out of the basement of a pizza joint talking about “being careful what you believe” - lol

That would be hilarious. But...who on this thread fits that category?