view the rest of the comments
politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
I guess people do only what their lawyers tell them to say and not actually go through personal growth; learn that their actions may have negatively affected someone, learn from that experience and grow as a person to become better from what they were before.
They accused him of inappropriate touching and kissing. Am I supposed to believe he didn't know that would negatively affect people, but now he's learned better?
If those things actually happened I want him in prison. If they didn't and those women are all liars, why does he avoid calling them out?
Why does he avoid calling them out? IDK, I can't speak for him or put words in his mouth and I'm not going too either. The cynic in me says he knows he is a high profile political figure that he has gotten on the bad side of dems and republicans and saw him a strong political contender. So strong that if you had ambitions of higher offices he could easily get in your way. But if a convenient opportunity arrived to oust him from office, and get him out of the way so be it, all the better.
Well if he did grope and kiss them, if he called them liars they could take him to court for it. Then, because the burden of proof is lower in civil court, he'd risk actually being found liable even if there isn't enough evidence to convict him of a crime. So, if the allegations are true, then he has a lot of incentive to use this mealy mouthed legaleeze to keep it out of civil court.
And then that swings the other direction! Why hasn't he sued for defamation? The legal burden of proof is lower so he should be able to prove they're lying. Yet he didn't do that.
We'll probably never know for sure, but it really doesn't look good for him.
Franken did say, "I would have sworn that I’d never done anything to make anyone feel uncomfortable, but it’s clear that I must have been doing something." That alone is reason enough not to call them liars. It's clear that he admits he did something to make these women feel uncomfortable, but he himself at the time didn't feel like there was any inappropriate actions at the time. Men are often oblivious to things they do that make women feel uncomfortable, trust me I know, been there before.
Now, for why he hasn't sued them for defamation? The burden is wildly different for public figures vs. private figures in the U.S. The bar for defamation is higher and harder to prove for political figures, to the point it's almost impossible for politicians to prove, so they don't even bother with it. Who knows though, with this Supreme Court I guess that's subject to change now tbh.
He was accused of groping and kissing. Unless he was raised in a literal sex cult there's no fucking way he wouldn't know that would make people uncomfortable.
There in lies problem. With there being no Senate investigation into the allegations we will never actually know the truth of the matter. Truth is Franken was a sacrificial lamb. Dems could claim the moral high road, justice or not, while republicans could continue to try to defend trump after multiple allegations that were of a much more serious degree.
Yeah uh no shit? We've gotten pretty far afield - my only point is a bribery scandal isn't going to sink Menendez because Democrats don't actually care about that, but Democrats will whine extremely loudly about it until it's out of the news cycle.
Maybe they'll launch a Senate investigation against him if this stays in the news? But so far, its just whining.
Yeah, sure, whatever you say.