I think that kind of underlines Joluv's statement that the outrage Democrats have for their own isn't nearly the same as for when a Republican does it. Moore is a monster when he does it, Franken has to go but it's really sad because he's a good guy.
To be fair, many Democrats were slow and reluctant to condemn Franken. He was a genuinely well-liked figure, and a lot of the discourse around pushing him out has been focused on avoiding (the perception of) hypocrisy and drawing a political line in the sand. It hasn't seemed to be driven by the same moral outrage that many on the left feel about Moore.
While I agree with this, Franken's reactions to the initial accusation were what I would generally hope for in a case like this--he admitted it, apologized to the accuser (which was accepted), and asked for an ethics investigation into himself. It's a little harder to be outraged at someone who seems to be showing contrition, taking responsibility, and desiring atonement.
And it's also worth pointing out, since Franken and Moore are constantly being juxtaposed, that there is no real equivalence between what they are accused of. Franken is mostly accused of grabbing ass during photos. Not good by any stretch. But we know from all available evidence that Roy Moore was systematically hunting down and preying on teenage girls. These two people did not commit the same type of crime. Both are bad, one is way, WAY worse.
I think that kind of underlines Joluv's statement that the outrage Democrats have for their own isn't nearly the same as for when a Republican does it. Moore is a monster when he does it, Franken has to go but it's really sad because he's a good guy.
You seriously think grabbing a women's ass during a photo opp is the same thing as decades of systematic predatory behavior towards underage girls?? And what is the point of how we FEEL anyway?? The only thing that matters is the outcome. Franken is out the door, and the RNC is funneling money to Roy Moore as I type this. Trump is campaigning for him TOMORROW.
I mean, what is this?? I have been clear from day one on this issue. I was the first person to post about it, despite the fact that I am probably his biggest fan in this thread. I said he should resign that morning. After his apology, I said he should be able to stay BARRING any further accusations. Those accusations came, and now he's gone. And the best we can come up with is that Democrats have conflicted feelings despite doing the obviously right thing?? Supporting his resignation DESPITE those feelings is, in fact, more admirable than you are making it out to be. As a matter of fact, as the outspoken Democrat in this thread, I felt it was my obligation to be the first to call him out and call for his resignation when I thought it was warranted.
It's just like @semiticgod said, it has now turned into a complete Catch-22. Your argument would be different and more strident against the Dems if he hadn't resigned. Now that he has, it's all a cynical ploy, both sides, yadda, yadda, yadda. Even if it WAS a totally cynical ploy, it is a cynical ploy that can ONLY work if Republicans continue to support Donald Trump and Roy Moore. They could erase the issue tomorrow if they want to. But everyone knows they won't.
I think that kind of underlines Joluv's statement that the outrage Democrats have for their own isn't nearly the same as for when a Republican does it. Moore is a monster when he does it, Franken has to go but it's really sad because he's a good guy.
Pedophilia compared to comedic skits that went too far.
I think that kind of underlines Joluv's statement that the outrage Democrats have for their own isn't nearly the same as for when a Republican does it. Moore is a monster when he does it, Franken has to go but it's really sad because he's a good guy.
Pedophilia compared to comedic skits that went too far.
There is a difference.
To be fair, it was the picture, the skit, and then 4 or 5 women who said he cupped their ass while taking photos. That is essentially what we're dealing with here. The consistency in the stories tell me they are likely true. It's bad. It's not child molestation.
There are plenty of Democrats on Twitter today who do think the whole thing was a set-up. I think they're not thinking clearly right now and they need to examine the facts. One of the people accusing Franken is a well-known (among a certain segment of the population that follows left-wing media) liberal activist. She has absolutely nothing to gain by telling this story if it wasn't true. She said Franken cupped her butt while taking a picture. That seems to have been something he did to alot of women. I have no idea why. It's dumb, it's disrespectful, it's a gross invasion of privacy and personal space. It's also the exact same thing George H. W. Bush has been accused of by multiple women (including some from a time period before he started losing his mental facilities).
I think that kind of underlines Joluv's statement that the outrage Democrats have for their own isn't nearly the same as for when a Republican does it. Moore is a monster when he does it, Franken has to go but it's really sad because he's a good guy.
Setting aside the false equivalence you're trying to draw between Moore and Franken, that's not what this says at all:
he admitted it, apologized to the accuser (which was accepted), and asked for an ethics investigation into himself. It's a little harder to be outraged at someone who seems to be showing contrition, taking responsibility, and desiring atonement.
Moore has done none of this, and Franken's actions are a stark contrast to legal threats against your accusers.
I think that kind of underlines Joluv's statement that the outrage Democrats have for their own isn't nearly the same as for when a Republican does it. Moore is a monster when he does it, Franken has to go but it's really sad because he's a good guy.
Setting aside the false equivalence you're trying to draw between Moore and Franken, that's not what this says at all:
he admitted it, apologized to the accuser (which was accepted), and asked for an ethics investigation into himself. It's a little harder to be outraged at someone who seems to be showing contrition, taking responsibility, and desiring atonement.
Moore has done none of this, and Franken's actions are a stark contrast to legal threats against your accusers.
Well, this hasn't been much of the part of the discussion, but it is WELL worth talking about, isn't it?? Trump and Moore have both threatened to SUE their accusers and have attacked them relentlessly. Neither of them ever will, because they are chicken-shit assholes who would be deposed by a lawyer for the accuser in the blink of an eye if they did. But both have threatened people they already abused once. Franken has attacked and threatened no one. His reputation is in tatters, he lost a US Senate seat over it. He certainly had as much reason to go on the offensive as Trump and Moore did. And yet, he didn't. He walked away.
I think that kind of underlines Joluv's statement that the outrage Democrats have for their own isn't nearly the same as for when a Republican does it. Moore is a monster when he does it, Franken has to go but it's really sad because he's a good guy.
Pedophilia compared to comedic skits that went too far.
There is a difference.
To be fair, it was the picture, the skit, and then 4 or 5 women who said he cupped their ass while taking photos. That is essentially what we're dealing with here. The consistency in the stories tell me they are likely true. It's bad. It's not child molestation.
There are plenty of Democrats on Twitter today who do think the whole thing was a set-up. I think they're not thinking clearly right now and they need to examine the facts. One of the people accusing Franken is a well-known (among a certain segment of the population that follows left-wing media) liberal activist. She has absolutely nothing to gain by telling this story if it wasn't true. She said Franken cupped her butt while taking a picture. That seems to have been something he did to alot of women. I have no idea why. It's dumb, it's disrespectful, it's a gross invasion of privacy and personal space. It's also the exact same thing George H. W. Bush has been accused of by multiple women (including some from a time period before he started losing his mental facilities).
You know what it was: A joke.
Right before the picture is taken, he attempts to do something that changes their facial expression from a forced smile to one of shock, ruining the picture in the process, and probably hoping to get slapped after.
It doesn't excuse the behaviour, but fills in the why. That excuse wouldnt fly in a public setting however.
Just for the record, if the GOP decides to cut Trump loose as part of some transparently cynical political ploy, I will not question their motives for at least one month. If that happens, I pledge to spend a full 30 days acting like His Royal Highness Rafael Edward Cruz or whoever is a true patriot.
I think that kind of underlines Joluv's statement that the outrage Democrats have for their own isn't nearly the same as for when a Republican does it. Moore is a monster when he does it, Franken has to go but it's really sad because he's a good guy.
Pedophilia compared to comedic skits that went too far.
There is a difference.
To be fair, it was the picture, the skit, and then 4 or 5 women who said he cupped their ass while taking photos. That is essentially what we're dealing with here. The consistency in the stories tell me they are likely true. It's bad. It's not child molestation.
There are plenty of Democrats on Twitter today who do think the whole thing was a set-up. I think they're not thinking clearly right now and they need to examine the facts. One of the people accusing Franken is a well-known (among a certain segment of the population that follows left-wing media) liberal activist. She has absolutely nothing to gain by telling this story if it wasn't true. She said Franken cupped her butt while taking a picture. That seems to have been something he did to alot of women. I have no idea why. It's dumb, it's disrespectful, it's a gross invasion of privacy and personal space. It's also the exact same thing George H. W. Bush has been accused of by multiple women (including some from a time period before he started losing his mental facilities).
You know what it was: A joke.
Right before the picture is taken, he attempts to do something that changes their facial expression from a forced smile to one of shock, ruining the picture in the process, and probably hoping to get slapped after.
It doesn't excuse the behaviour, but fills in the why. That excuse wouldnt fly in a public setting however.
I actually think it is the later allegations from the other women that are the main problem. I've read varying accounts of what the hell happened on that USO tour, and if that was all there was, I definitely wouldn't be ok with him stepping down. For whatever reason, Tom Arnold (yes, that Tom Arnold), who apparently knows the accuser from the photograph is saying she engineered the entire thing as a set-up for weeks with Roger Stone. I am NOT (I repeat, NOT) willing to go there, because it sounds like a very far-fetched conspiracy theory. But it is a story that is making the rounds online, much to my chagrin.
Bill O'Reilly, not a politician but he played one on TV's Fox News for years, also had a problem with sexually harassing women has also been using the Trump/Moore approach of bashing his accusers.
He's been doing this despite the fact that he and fox News have around $40 million in settlements in sexual assault and harassment cases. O'Reilly and Fox have been making public statements that claimed at least one of the victims was a liar and an extortionist and she apparently has had enough of that.
This woman, Rachel Bernstein, is now suing O'Reilly and Fox news for violating the confidentiality terms of the settlement they reached in 2002 and also for defamation.
The Moore/Trump defense really doesn't work when you settle a case and there's an agreement to not discuss the settlement and publicly bash the other party.
"In fact, Mr. O'Reilly is the liar," according to the lawsuit, which was filed in federal District Court in Manhattan. "He mistreated Ms. Bernstein. She was forced out of her job at Fox News and paid a settlement because of the mistreatment."
"O'Reilly portrayed himself as a 'target' and claimed the complaints against him were extortionate," the suit read. "This is false. In fact, he is a serial abuser and Ms. Bernstein's complaints about him were far from extortionate."
A lawyer for Ms. Bernstein, Neil Mullin, asked that O'Reilly and Fox release all victims from their nondisclosure agreements in order to "let the truth out."
1.) Thinks being gay should be illegal 2.) Ignored Supreme Court rulings in his role as a judge, being removed from his position TWICE 3.) Authored a Christian educational course that says that women shouldn't be able to run for office or vote 4.) Slavery apologist 5.) Child molester
It's 2017. I'm not even sure Roy Moore is a good candidate for 1817. If Republicans in Alabama elect this man, it pretty much confirms every negative stereotype there is about southern conservative voters. Democrats certainly have had their share of crooks and deviants (we've seen evidence of such throughout the years). But they don't seem to have a habit of electing full-blown theocratic lunatics to office.
To be fair, many Democrats were slow and reluctant to condemn Franken. He was a genuinely well-liked figure, and a lot of the discourse around pushing him out has been focused on avoiding (the perception of) hypocrisy and drawing a political line in the sand. It hasn't seemed to be driven by the same moral outrage that many on the left feel about Moore.
The important thing is that they landed in the right place. Consciously avoiding hypocrisy is not itself hypocrisy. But I can't blame Republicans for perceiving some degree of cynicism in the process.
To be fair, Roy's a pedophile, and when you involve children you're going to get a stronger emotional reaction.
To be fair, many Democrats were slow and reluctant to condemn Franken. He was a genuinely well-liked figure, and a lot of the discourse around pushing him out has been focused on avoiding (the perception of) hypocrisy and drawing a political line in the sand. It hasn't seemed to be driven by the same moral outrage that many on the left feel about Moore.
The important thing is that they landed in the right place. Consciously avoiding hypocrisy is not itself hypocrisy. But I can't blame Republicans for perceiving some degree of cynicism in the process.
To be fair, Roy's a pedophile, and when you involve children you're going to get a stronger emotional reaction.
Or you can just gloss things over if the child diddler is on your team. He's leading in the polls and going to win. Hey the 19 women who came forward about Trump didn't stop him from getting elected. Hearing Trump say on tape that he could get away with sexual assault was no barrier to people including women voting for him. If you've excused that, what Moore has done is no problem. If you go by character and moral compass this guy should get two votes - himself and his wife maybe.
1.) Thinks being gay should be illegal 2.) Ignored Supreme Court rulings in his role as a judge, being removed from his position TWICE 3.) Authored a Christian educational course that says that women shouldn't be able to run for office or vote 4.) Slavery apologist 5.) Child molester
A single day after Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, Palestinians have begun protesting. There have been reports of injuries but so far no deaths. Hopefully this won't result in another full-blown uprising.
Israeli forces opened fire on Palestinian protestors today, causing the first death of the protests over Trump's Jerusalem decision.
The people who fired the killing shot deserve the blame first and foremost, but I also blame Trump for the death. It's not like nobody foresaw this. The administration should have seen this coming.
Well, actually, pedophilia refers to prepubescent children, not teens. So no, it doesn't look like he's a pedo, but does like the underage girls.
I don't consider that a meaningful distinction, and do consider ephebophilia and hebephilia to basically be pedophilia. Which is to say I'm not going to debate this.
A single day after Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, Palestinians have begun protesting. There have been reports of injuries but so far no deaths. Hopefully this won't result in another full-blown uprising.
Israeli forces opened fire on Palestinian protestors today, causing the first death of the protests over Trump's Jerusalem decision.
The people who fired the killing shot deserve the blame first and foremost, but I also blame Trump for the death. It's not like nobody foresaw this. The administration should have seen this coming.
Every serious foreign policy expert of the last 30 years has known what a powder keg Jerusalem is. It's why Democratic and Republican Presidents alike have refused to take the final step Trump did. It literally took ONE DAY to find out why.
A single day after Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, Palestinians have begun protesting. There have been reports of injuries but so far no deaths. Hopefully this won't result in another full-blown uprising.
Israeli forces opened fire on Palestinian protestors today, causing the first death of the protests over Trump's Jerusalem decision.
The people who fired the killing shot deserve the blame first and foremost, but I also blame Trump for the death. It's not like nobody foresaw this. The administration should have seen this coming.
Those who call for violent protests, who incite for violence regularly, who send those Palestinians to clash with the IDF in the first place, are to be blamed first and foremost. Trump's decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel at this point of time is controversial, debatable, and history will judge. But it shouldn't grant a free pass for the Palestinians different organizations, or leadership, for calling for acts of violence against Israel and the extreme incitement in their medias.
A single day after Trump's recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, Palestinians have begun protesting. There have been reports of injuries but so far no deaths. Hopefully this won't result in another full-blown uprising.
Israeli forces opened fire on Palestinian protestors today, causing the first death of the protests over Trump's Jerusalem decision.
The people who fired the killing shot deserve the blame first and foremost, but I also blame Trump for the death. It's not like nobody foresaw this. The administration should have seen this coming.
Those who call for violent protests, who incite for violence regularly, who send those Palestinians to clash with the IDF in the first place, are to be blamed first and foremost. Trump's decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel at this point of time is controversial, debatable, and history will judge. But it shouldn't grant a free pass for the Palestinians different organizations, or leadership, for calling for acts of violence against Israel and the extreme incitement in their medias.
That's why I said the person who truly deserves the blame is the one who fired the shot. Ultimately, that's where the end responsibility always lies. Everything else is just an excuse.
I think that kind of underlines Joluv's statement that the outrage Democrats have for their own isn't nearly the same as for when a Republican does it. Moore is a monster when he does it, Franken has to go but it's really sad because he's a good guy.
Setting aside the false equivalence you're trying to draw between Moore and Franken, that's not what this says at all:
he admitted it, apologized to the accuser (which was accepted), and asked for an ethics investigation into himself. It's a little harder to be outraged at someone who seems to be showing contrition, taking responsibility, and desiring atonement.
Moore has done none of this, and Franken's actions are a stark contrast to legal threats against your accusers.
Moore has made legal threats justifably, as today one of his accusers admits to forging the yearbook. Technically she admits to forging half of it, but once you tamper with evidence, your credibility is shot in my view and that is indeed a crime. Unlike in the Conyers case with court documents and Franken with photographic evidence, it has been word vs. word this whole time.
But as we see in this thread, sexual assault will be downplayed when it's a democrat and played up when a republican. The sexual assault itself isn't the issue, the issue becomes which sexual assaulter handles his accusations better, as if that and not the lack of sexual assault is the mark of virtue. I have no need to try and pick apart the colorful defenses of why Franken or Conyers actions don't compare to Moore's actions. The fact they are being made is sufficient for my point.
The violence in Israel and Palestine that's a feature, not a bug to Trump.
He was warned this would happen, he knew this would happen and he did it anyway. Why? Why put people in danger?
It distracts from his and his administrations scandals. It let's him say "oh look they are attacking us. You have to be on my side or you're on their side with the muslim terrorists!" It is also a bone to evangelicals, the one group that he seems to be responsive to exclusively over almost all others. They think this move is part of the warmup to Armageddon and the rapture, oh happy says when people start dying.
But as we see in this thread, sexual assault will be downplayed when it's a democrat and played up when a republican. The sexual assault itself isn't the issue, the issue becomes which sexual assaulter handles his accusations better, as if that and not the lack of sexual assault is the mark of virtue. I have no need to try and pick apart the colorful defenses of why Franken or Conyers actions don't compare to Moore's actions. The fact they are being made is sufficient for my point.
I didn't downplay it. I wanted Conyers and Franken to resign, which they've done.
Moore targeted children, and that is guaranteed to get stronger reactions. Don't pretend otherwise.
I think that kind of underlines Joluv's statement that the outrage Democrats have for their own isn't nearly the same as for when a Republican does it. Moore is a monster when he does it, Franken has to go but it's really sad because he's a good guy.
Setting aside the false equivalence you're trying to draw between Moore and Franken, that's not what this says at all:
he admitted it, apologized to the accuser (which was accepted), and asked for an ethics investigation into himself. It's a little harder to be outraged at someone who seems to be showing contrition, taking responsibility, and desiring atonement.
Moore has done none of this, and Franken's actions are a stark contrast to legal threats against your accusers.
Moore has made legal threats justifably, as today one of his accusers admits to forging the yearbook. Technically she admits to forging half of it, but once you tamper with evidence, your credibility is shot in my view and that is indeed a crime. Unlike in the Conyers case with court documents and Franken with photographic evidence, it has been word vs. word this whole time.
But as we see in this thread, sexual assault will be downplayed when it's a democrat and played up when a republican. The sexual assault itself isn't the issue, the issue becomes which sexual assaulter handles his accusations better, as if that and not the lack of sexual assault is the mark of virtue. I have no need to try and pick apart the colorful defenses of why Franken or Conyers actions don't compare to Moore's actions. The fact they are being made is sufficient for my point.
How in the hell does that justify anything against the other EIGHT accusers?? Entire communities recall him trolling malls for teenage girls. Beyond that, money talks, bullshit walks. Trump never sued, and neither will Moore. Because they'd perjure themselves in the deposition they would be subject to.
Also, it isn't "evidence" because it's not a criminal case. Erase the yearbook woman from the equation. Let's see your excuses for all the other ones. And I don't what your point is. If you are referring to the so-called equivocation of liberals, despite the end result, I addressed it last night in a post you choose not to respond to. Here is another shot.
I'm not gonna sit here and allow the actions of liberals who called for Franken and Conyers to step down be downplayed because of some amorphous feelings we may have about the issue. Who cares what our feelings are?? It happened regardless. One of your main points in most of your posts is how the country is too PC, and the core thrust of that movement is that feelings don't matter. NOW feelings matter?? This is why I can't possibly even keep up with the rules of debate in regards to the "new right" online (and I won't call you alt-right because that isn't fair and holds a very negative connotation). It's because the goalposts don't just move, they shift from stadium to stadium on a dime, and it's impossible to even know the ground rules for the conversation. Franken not resigning is bad, Franken resigning is just as bad because of the motives (which are absolutely impossible to prove). Now it's also just as bad if you do the right thing (call for him and Conyers to resign), but, deep down, kinda feel a little bad and sad about it because you liked them and they disappointed you. I mean, shit, you might as well just throw your HUMANITY away if you are trying to have a debate within these kind of parameters. I have no idea how we can be accused of downplaying anything when the Conyers and Franken are out the door, and Trump and Moore are moving forward in lock-step. This is like Doublethink. Well, I have news for you, I can't be gaslighted. I'm immune.
All the other ones are word vs. word and unverifiable. Accusations aren't made believable by virtue of their number but by the good reasons you have for believing them. For Conyers and Franken, like I mentioned, there were court documents and photographic evidence. The Yearbook was the only available evidence for this and was the reason I originally stated he should step down.
I now retract that statement until a piece of not-forged evidence comes to light.
You mention feelings, and right now, feelings seem to be the only thing that ties Moore to any accusation as of the current moment. I wouldn't have said that a day ago but it's funny how little things like new evidence have a tendancy to change minds.
All the other ones are word vs. word and unverifiable. Accusations aren't made believable by virtue of their number but by the good reasons you have for believing them. For Conyers and Franken, like I mentioned, there were court documents and photographic evidence. The Yearbook was the only available evidence for this and was the reason I originally stated he should step down.
I now retract that statement until a piece of not-forged evidence comes to light.
You mention feelings, and right now, feelings seem to be the only thing that ties Moore to any accusation as of the current moment. I wouldn't have said that a day ago but it's funny how little things like new evidence have a tendancy to change minds.
And you have now just made it seem like the yearbook woman is the only accuser, when she is actually one of (I believe) NINE women. And as I just said, I am willing to throw her accusations out the door. I will let someone else post the reams of personal eyewitness and recollections of Roy Moore that don't even come from the accusers themselves, because frankly I'm sick of this conversation. Someone else can lift this boulder.
@WarChiefZeke: The distinction in the quality of evidence is worth pointing out. For what it's worth, the key allegations against Franken are also based strictly on witness testimony, just like Moore. The photo showed Franken pretending to grope a woman; the allegations of actual groping weren't documented. Personally, I believe the witnesses against both Moore and Franken.
That said, your other points do a disservice to your fellow forumites:
But as we see in this thread, sexual assault will be downplayed when it's a democrat and played up when a republican.
This is simply not true. @jjstraka34 was the first in this thread to bring up the allegations against Franken and @jjstraka34 called for Franken's resignation in the very same post.
The sexual assault itself isn't the issue, the issue becomes which sexual assaulter handles his accusations better, as if that and not the lack of sexual assault is the mark of virtue.
This is simply not true. No one in this thread ever suggested that Franken's apologies were a "mark of virtue." The only people who acknowledged their existence, including myself, said that it merely indicated that Franken was not a complete scumbag, that he was not so craven as to deny everything to preserve his own position. On top of that, people in this thread have not just drawn a distinction between Franken's and Moore's responses; they've drawn a distinction between the severity of the allegations as well. No one has said or implied that the sexual assault is not the real issue. So it's not just how the accused handles the accusations; it is in fact about the assault itself.
I have no need to try and pick apart the colorful defenses of why Franken or Conyers actions don't compare to Moore's actions. The fact they are being made is sufficient for my point.
By that reasoning, you can equate virtually any allegations of any crimes against any persons and say there's no difference. Because the moment somebody says the allegations are different (as @jjstraka34 has said), or the evidence is different (as you have said, @WarChiefZeke), or the response is different (as I have said), you can always just say, "You're splitting hairs. You're just trying to defend your guy. The fact that you make any distinctions is proof that you hold a double standard."
I think we should be able to discuss the details of the allegations without being accused, by default ("the fact they are being made"), of splitting hairs.
If you think the Democratic response to the Franken allegations is just us trying to protect our own, ask yourself why no one in this thread has defended Anthony Weiner's conduct or John Conyer's conduct. Because both of them were Democrats, too, and if we were trying shield our guys, we'd have defended them.
Even if I disagree with what you say and believe I can substantiate it, I won't argue further about the consistency of standards since it's clearly doing more harm than good to discussing the issue and I don't want anyone feeling personally attacked.
The quality of the evidence isn't just not the same, at this point, it doesn't exist on Moore's end anymore, it's guilt by accusation. When it does or if i'm missing something key, i'd happily revert positions again.
You say Franken's accuser had a story to go with the photo, but her story was made belivable *by* the evidence. It corroborated the behavior she was accusing him of. if it turned out the picture was fake, would you also believe her story? I know I wouldn't.
Also, from what I can tell, the accuser with the yearbook only added the date and place to what Roy Moore had already written. I have looked at a picture of it, and it is clear even on a laptop computer screen they were written by different people, and the first part (the bulk of it) clearly matches Roy Moore's handwriting when placed side by side with a note he wrote. She added a date and time to it. There is no visual evidence I can see that the actual message Roy Moore wrote in the yearbook was altered. As a matter of fact, FOX News has RETRACTED (after the purposeful damage was done) the word "forged" in the article and replaced it with "wrote". Go figure. Another massively (purposefully) misleading ratf******g to protect a child predator.
It's also entirely disingenuous to claim that Roy Moore supporters were buying the accusations of these nine women BEFORE this story broke this morning. It is debatable as to why or when she added the date/time stamp (and possibly the letters DA), but it isn't even remotely plausible Roy Moore didn't sign the yearbook. And there will be a press conference today focused on this very subject. But FOX News, as usual, knew exactly what they were doing, and why. Cursive handwriting is often tough to distinguish and read. The MOST plausible explanation for this discrepancy is that she added who wrote that note as a child so she would remember who had written it. The issue was never about the content of that message. It was the fact that a 30+ year old man was writing messages in high school yearbooks AT ALL.
Comments
I mean, what is this?? I have been clear from day one on this issue. I was the first person to post about it, despite the fact that I am probably his biggest fan in this thread. I said he should resign that morning. After his apology, I said he should be able to stay BARRING any further accusations. Those accusations came, and now he's gone. And the best we can come up with is that Democrats have conflicted feelings despite doing the obviously right thing?? Supporting his resignation DESPITE those feelings is, in fact, more admirable than you are making it out to be. As a matter of fact, as the outspoken Democrat in this thread, I felt it was my obligation to be the first to call him out and call for his resignation when I thought it was warranted.
It's just like @semiticgod said, it has now turned into a complete Catch-22. Your argument would be different and more strident against the Dems if he hadn't resigned. Now that he has, it's all a cynical ploy, both sides, yadda, yadda, yadda. Even if it WAS a totally cynical ploy, it is a cynical ploy that can ONLY work if Republicans continue to support Donald Trump and Roy Moore. They could erase the issue tomorrow if they want to. But everyone knows they won't.
There is a difference.
There are plenty of Democrats on Twitter today who do think the whole thing was a set-up. I think they're not thinking clearly right now and they need to examine the facts. One of the people accusing Franken is a well-known (among a certain segment of the population that follows left-wing media) liberal activist. She has absolutely nothing to gain by telling this story if it wasn't true. She said Franken cupped her butt while taking a picture. That seems to have been something he did to alot of women. I have no idea why. It's dumb, it's disrespectful, it's a gross invasion of privacy and personal space. It's also the exact same thing George H. W. Bush has been accused of by multiple women (including some from a time period before he started losing his mental facilities).
There are plenty of Democrats on Twitter today who do think the whole thing was a set-up. I think they're not thinking clearly right now and they need to examine the facts. One of the people accusing Franken is a well-known (among a certain segment of the population that follows left-wing media) liberal activist. She has absolutely nothing to gain by telling this story if it wasn't true. She said Franken cupped her butt while taking a picture. That seems to have been something he did to alot of women. I have no idea why. It's dumb, it's disrespectful, it's a gross invasion of privacy and personal space. It's also the exact same thing George H. W. Bush has been accused of by multiple women (including some from a time period before he started losing his mental facilities).
You know what it was: A joke.
Right before the picture is taken, he attempts to do something that changes their facial expression from a forced smile to one of shock, ruining the picture in the process, and probably hoping to get slapped after.
It doesn't excuse the behaviour, but fills in the why. That excuse wouldnt fly in a public setting however.
Seems like a good time for this rundown: The 19 Women Who Accused President Trump of Sexual Misconduct
Right before the picture is taken, he attempts to do something that changes their facial expression from a forced smile to one of shock, ruining the picture in the process, and probably hoping to get slapped after.
It doesn't excuse the behaviour, but fills in the why. That excuse wouldnt fly in a public setting however.
I actually think it is the later allegations from the other women that are the main problem. I've read varying accounts of what the hell happened on that USO tour, and if that was all there was, I definitely wouldn't be ok with him stepping down. For whatever reason, Tom Arnold (yes, that Tom Arnold), who apparently knows the accuser from the photograph is saying she engineered the entire thing as a set-up for weeks with Roger Stone. I am NOT (I repeat, NOT) willing to go there, because it sounds like a very far-fetched conspiracy theory. But it is a story that is making the rounds online, much to my chagrin.
He's been doing this despite the fact that he and fox News have around $40 million in settlements in sexual assault and harassment cases. O'Reilly and Fox have been making public statements that claimed at least one of the victims was a liar and an extortionist and she apparently has had enough of that.
This woman, Rachel Bernstein, is now suing O'Reilly and Fox news for violating the confidentiality terms of the settlement they reached in 2002 and also for defamation.
The Moore/Trump defense really doesn't work when you settle a case and there's an agreement to not discuss the settlement and publicly bash the other party.
https://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/sexual-misconduct/women-sues-bill-o-reilly-fox-defamation-over-sex-harassment-n826306
"In fact, Mr. O'Reilly is the liar," according to the lawsuit, which was filed in federal District Court in Manhattan. "He mistreated Ms. Bernstein. She was forced out of her job at Fox News and paid a settlement because of the mistreatment."
"O'Reilly portrayed himself as a 'target' and claimed the complaints against him were extortionate," the suit read. "This is false. In fact, he is a serial abuser and Ms. Bernstein's complaints about him were far from extortionate."
A lawyer for Ms. Bernstein, Neil Mullin, asked that O'Reilly and Fox release all victims from their nondisclosure agreements in order to "let the truth out."
So let's review Roy Moore, shall we??:
1.) Thinks being gay should be illegal
2.) Ignored Supreme Court rulings in his role as a judge, being removed from his position TWICE
3.) Authored a Christian educational course that says that women shouldn't be able to run for office or vote
4.) Slavery apologist
5.) Child molester
It's 2017. I'm not even sure Roy Moore is a good candidate for 1817. If Republicans in Alabama elect this man, it pretty much confirms every negative stereotype there is about southern conservative voters. Democrats certainly have had their share of crooks and deviants (we've seen evidence of such throughout the years). But they don't seem to have a habit of electing full-blown theocratic lunatics to office.
The people who fired the killing shot deserve the blame first and foremost, but I also blame Trump for the death. It's not like nobody foresaw this. The administration should have seen this coming.
But as we see in this thread, sexual assault will be downplayed when it's a democrat and played up when a republican. The sexual assault itself isn't the issue, the issue becomes which sexual assaulter handles his accusations better, as if that and not the lack of sexual assault is the mark of virtue. I have no need to try and pick apart the colorful defenses of why Franken or Conyers actions don't compare to Moore's actions. The fact they are being made is sufficient for my point.
He was warned this would happen, he knew this would happen and he did it anyway. Why? Why put people in danger?
It distracts from his and his administrations scandals. It let's him say "oh look they are attacking us. You have to be on my side or you're on their side with the muslim terrorists!"
It is also a bone to evangelicals, the one group that he seems to be responsive to exclusively over almost all others. They think this move is part of the warmup to Armageddon and the rapture, oh happy says when people start dying.
Moore targeted children, and that is guaranteed to get stronger reactions. Don't pretend otherwise.
Also, it isn't "evidence" because it's not a criminal case. Erase the yearbook woman from the equation. Let's see your excuses for all the other ones. And I don't what your point is. If you are referring to the so-called equivocation of liberals, despite the end result, I addressed it last night in a post you choose not to respond to. Here is another shot.
I'm not gonna sit here and allow the actions of liberals who called for Franken and Conyers to step down be downplayed because of some amorphous feelings we may have about the issue. Who cares what our feelings are?? It happened regardless. One of your main points in most of your posts is how the country is too PC, and the core thrust of that movement is that feelings don't matter. NOW feelings matter?? This is why I can't possibly even keep up with the rules of debate in regards to the "new right" online (and I won't call you alt-right because that isn't fair and holds a very negative connotation). It's because the goalposts don't just move, they shift from stadium to stadium on a dime, and it's impossible to even know the ground rules for the conversation. Franken not resigning is bad, Franken resigning is just as bad because of the motives (which are absolutely impossible to prove). Now it's also just as bad if you do the right thing (call for him and Conyers to resign), but, deep down, kinda feel a little bad and sad about it because you liked them and they disappointed you. I mean, shit, you might as well just throw your HUMANITY away if you are trying to have a debate within these kind of parameters. I have no idea how we can be accused of downplaying anything when the Conyers and Franken are out the door, and Trump and Moore are moving forward in lock-step. This is like Doublethink. Well, I have news for you, I can't be gaslighted. I'm immune.
I now retract that statement until a piece of not-forged evidence comes to light.
You mention feelings, and right now, feelings seem to be the only thing that ties Moore to any accusation as of the current moment. I wouldn't have said that a day ago but it's funny how little things like new evidence have a tendancy to change minds.
That said, your other points do a disservice to your fellow forumites: This is simply not true. @jjstraka34 was the first in this thread to bring up the allegations against Franken and @jjstraka34 called for Franken's resignation in the very same post. This is simply not true. No one in this thread ever suggested that Franken's apologies were a "mark of virtue." The only people who acknowledged their existence, including myself, said that it merely indicated that Franken was not a complete scumbag, that he was not so craven as to deny everything to preserve his own position. On top of that, people in this thread have not just drawn a distinction between Franken's and Moore's responses; they've drawn a distinction between the severity of the allegations as well. No one has said or implied that the sexual assault is not the real issue. So it's not just how the accused handles the accusations; it is in fact about the assault itself. By that reasoning, you can equate virtually any allegations of any crimes against any persons and say there's no difference. Because the moment somebody says the allegations are different (as @jjstraka34 has said), or the evidence is different (as you have said, @WarChiefZeke), or the response is different (as I have said), you can always just say, "You're splitting hairs. You're just trying to defend your guy. The fact that you make any distinctions is proof that you hold a double standard."
I think we should be able to discuss the details of the allegations without being accused, by default ("the fact they are being made"), of splitting hairs.
If you think the Democratic response to the Franken allegations is just us trying to protect our own, ask yourself why no one in this thread has defended Anthony Weiner's conduct or John Conyer's conduct. Because both of them were Democrats, too, and if we were trying shield our guys, we'd have defended them.
We didn't.
The quality of the evidence isn't just not the same, at this point, it doesn't exist on Moore's end anymore, it's guilt by accusation. When it does or if i'm missing something key, i'd happily revert positions again.
You say Franken's accuser had a story to go with the photo, but her story was made belivable *by* the evidence. It corroborated the behavior she was accusing him of. if it turned out the picture was fake, would you also believe her story? I know I wouldn't.
It's also entirely disingenuous to claim that Roy Moore supporters were buying the accusations of these nine women BEFORE this story broke this morning. It is debatable as to why or when she added the date/time stamp (and possibly the letters DA), but it isn't even remotely plausible Roy Moore didn't sign the yearbook. And there will be a press conference today focused on this very subject. But FOX News, as usual, knew exactly what they were doing, and why. Cursive handwriting is often tough to distinguish and read. The MOST plausible explanation for this discrepancy is that she added who wrote that note as a child so she would remember who had written it. The issue was never about the content of that message. It was the fact that a 30+ year old man was writing messages in high school yearbooks AT ALL.