General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsKirsten Gillibrands Moment Has Arrived
The New York senator has made sexual assault the focus of her political career. Now, the world has caught up with her.
By DAVID FREEDLANDER December 7, 2017
The Washington sky was darkening outside her window, and Kirsten Gillibrand slumped down in her chair. It had been a long day. In the morning, the New York senator hosted a news conference with a mother whose twin 6-year-old daughters had been allegedly raped by their fathers military commander. As she walked off the podium, shed been confronted by questions about her colleague Al Frankens reported history of groping women, news that broke for the first time that morning. Deeply concerning, she replied, adding that she believed the story of his accusers. I expect to hear more from Senator Franken. And she had just come from a podcast interview with the New York Times in which shed blown through the Democratic code of silence on Clinton misdeeds by saying that yes, if Bill Clinton were president now, he would have to resign after something like the Monica Lewinsky affair.
That last one wasnt a piece of news Gillibrand had planned on making that morning. She had long been a supporter of the Clintons, both of them. She inherited Hillary Clintons seat in the Senate, and credits her with the decision to run for office in the first place. Bill Clinton campaigned for her in her first run for Congress. She strongly supported both of Hillarys campaigns for president. But Gillibrand is no longer a rank-and-file Clinton Democrat. As the nation is convulsed with a deluge of allegations of sexual harassment and assault, one that seemingly every day fells another star, Gillibrand is at the political center of it. For years she has been battling against sexual assault in the military and on campus, and talking about sexual harassment in politics, and now at last it seems as if the rest of the world has caught up to her concerns. And so once the question has been put before you, in this political moment, when at long last it looks like all of that work is finally paying off and progress is being made, what else can you say about Bill Clinton lying about having oral sex with his 22-year-old intern other than that he should have stepped down and things have changed today?
The blowback was immediate. Over 20 yrs you took the Clintons endorsement, money and seat. Hypocrite, wrote Philippe Reines, a longtime Clinton confidant, on Twitter. Interesting strategy for 2020 primaries. Best of luck.
The first half of the tweet was predictable, a Clinton loyalist biting back at a perceived threat to the family. But the second half was telling. The world is paying attention to Gillibrand in a new way. At least since the day after Donald Trumps inauguration, when Gillibrand thrilled the crowd at the Womens March, jabbing the air with her finger and telling them, This is the moment of the beginning of the revival of the womens movement. This is the moment you will remember when women stood strong and stood firm and said never again. This is the moment that you are going to be heard! The 51-year-old Gillibrand has come to represent a rising generation of Democratic leaders, one who came of age in an era when equality of the sexes was something almost taken for granted. And the buzz about her presidential ambitions has only grown.
For years, the issues that Gillibrand has made her name onaid for 9/11 workers, ending "dont ask dont tell" in the military, transgender rightswere important but distinct, touching on segments of American life that most people never interact with. And now, at a moment when the cover has been ripped off toxic workplaces from Hollywood to Wall Street, Gillibrand is finding that the rest of the world has caught up with her crusades.
<snip>
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/12/07/kirsten-gillibrand-profile-feature-sexual-assault-2017-216053
Vidal
(642 posts)I don't think she's a progressive. I think she's an opportunist.
Renew Deal
(81,861 posts)jrthin
(4,836 posts)Utter nonsense. One can quickly move from a crusader to a zealot.
bagelsforbreakfast
(1,427 posts)+1
Hortensis
(58,785 posts)First off, she really seems wired basically conservative, moderate, but definitely not wired liberal.
In a very flattering interview, she said she came to realize the need for government to address some problems AFTER she was appointed to Hillary's seat in her mid-40s and only after being personally faced with specific situations where constituents expected progressive solutions. A shallow awareness of utility only.
Not exactly Jefferson's rousing declaration of the rights of people to progressive government that serves them or Lincoln's when he spoke of government of, by and for the people.
And certainly not even my own orientation to the left when I was far too young to know what progressive government was because understanding and appreciation for its great virtues came with my genetic wiring.
octoberlib
(14,971 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)to address problems of her constituents, for her to really appreciate the value of and need to use government for that.
Scientists say conservatives, generally speaking, are every bit as altruistic and caring as liberals, but they tend to feel a duty to fairly limited groups of those they see as their own people, such as can be helped at least somewhat by groups they personally belong to. They'll often give of themselves and their means very long and generously.
Liberal altruism typically embraces far larger and more diverse groups, whole cities, nations, continents, not just neighborhoods, which leads us naturally to ask how government can be used to create big solutions.
And signs of both patterns start manifesting when we're very small.
NYgal
(6 posts)Hate Immigrants as a Congresswoman, was against sanctuary cities, opposed a path to legalization, opposed illegals getting licenses so they could work; loved guns, said she slept with 2 guns under her bed. Then, when Hillary's seat opened and Hillary and Schumer cleared everyone else out of the way for her, she changed every position she had taken. Immigrant groups were up in arms at the time.
And after Hillary did that for her, and also threw her first fundraiser for her first Congressional race, a $1000 per person fundraiser in NYC which basically knocked everyone else out of the race, she throws Bill C under the bus a few weeks ago.
I would NEVER vote for her. I write in Mickey Mouse or leave it blank.
rzemanfl
(29,565 posts)Hortensis
(58,785 posts)Even if we don't understand the games being played and frown at not always admirable seeming feints and runs, we need to be able to trust underlying principles and goals to remain essentially the same.
I do for Obama and Hillary, but they're both well identified by their own records as solid liberals like me. Her long history in public service, especially, the policy wonk passions she's always worked toward, belie the constant lies about what those principles and goals are.
Gotta say I'd trade either of our betraying hard core, plutocracy serving Georgia senators gladly for the current version of Gillebrand, though, even if I had to hold my nose all the way to the polling place and out again to do it. A frequent experience for a liberal in Georgia.
gopiscrap
(23,761 posts)Jane Austin
(9,199 posts)And I agree.
ck4829
(35,077 posts)I mean, if Franken is out and Moore is in, then the number of sex offenders in the Senate has remained static.
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)And then felt bad because they had recently gained weight?
How is that even close in your mind to a 30 year old trying to have sex with teenagers?
stonecutter357
(12,697 posts)avebury
(10,952 posts)ever vote for her. I would never trust her and would expect her to say whatever she thinks the people want to hear with no real conviction.
Response to avebury (Reply #3)
Post removed
jrthin
(4,836 posts)The less we like her.
JimBeard
(293 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)We will all die pure as social security is killed next year and the nuclear winter from the NK war takes effect.
JimBeard
(293 posts)InAbLuEsTaTe
(24,122 posts)in light of recent events. My first question: has she called for the Pussy-Grabber-in-Chief to step down yet? If not, why not?!
avebury
(10,952 posts)That they are masterful at continually destroying themselves. They have a propensity for committing knee jerk reactions without bothering to stop and think about the consequences. They never learn.
Roger Stone is the 2017 version of Lee Atwater, king of the dirty political games. I think that there are more than enough reasons to question the allegations made against Al Franken. Did the Democratic Party allow Al Franken due process and a chance to clear his name? No. Like Brutus to Cesar, they hauled out their knives and committed political murder, thus finishing Roger Stone's work. He must be having a pretty good laugh at them about now.
Gillibrand and all the rest should have realized immediately that Roger Stone would go after Al Franken because Al was one of most effective Senators when it came to dealing with the Trump crime family.
Before they turned on Al Franken I had become quite impressed by a lot of the Dems in Congress, particularly after watching the hearings. There sure looked like a lot of young Dems with great potential. And then they act stupid. Gillibrand is coming across as opportunistic and only interested in her own political future. I don't trust her and I most certainly would not vote for her (or any of the other idiots) if the make it onto a Presidential ticket.
We can absolutely expect the Rethugs to turn on us but we have every right to expect the Dems won't. I won't waste my time, energy or money on an undeserving candidate.
sabbat hunter
(6,829 posts)Did Moore get due process? Weinstein. Louie CK?
My default is to believe the woman in cases like this. It is a hard reality that almost every woman I know has been sexually harassed in one way or another.
avebury
(10,952 posts)role in 99% of the claims of sexual harassment.
The first woman is a right wing birther known to be working with Roger Stone (as well as a friend of Trump Jr). She is also on video sexually harassing a musician who clearly did not like the attention. Her claim has no credibility.
Most of the other claims are from anonymous sources. Given Roger Stone's already involvement with the hit to take out Al Franken with the first claim, common sense should have dictated a thorough investigation of the allegations. The Democrats refused to give Franken his right to confront his accusers and clear his name.
I don't care who the allegation is against. If anybody is going to make public statements accusing another person of a crime, under our legal system the accused has the right to confront his/her accuser. Innocent until proven guilty. Failure to do that can result someone carrying out a vindictive action against an innocent person just because the accuser hates or is pissed off at the accused.
The problem with the Me Too movement is that everybody is jumping right to executing the accused. I am sure that there are a lot of valid claims out there but I don't for one minute believe that 100% of the allegations would be proven true if properly investigated. That is the same attitude that has put innocent people on death row. If you execute an innocent person sitting on death row that is an action that you can never take back.
I find it disturbing that there is so much rush to judgment without investigation and the fact that the Me Too movement can end up evolving into a boy who cried wolf too often scenario.
I can see a lot of law suits down the road with one side or the other suing the other side for defamation of character.
In the case of Al Franken I think that there is more than enough evidence of the very real possibility of political dirty tricks to assassinate him politically. On that basis, I am pissed off at the Dems for turning on him like Brutus turned on Cesar and finishing the job for Roger Stone. They had no right to deny him the ethics investigation he requested and everyone that turned on him have damaged his/her reputation. Rush to judgment over rode common sense.
jrthin
(4,836 posts)I hope she gets primaried. I don't trust her nor do I like her.
Johonny
(20,851 posts)If somehow she's the candidate...obviously we all are because no one here is allowing Trump a second term.
avebury
(10,952 posts)wants a 2nd term I doubt we will be able to stop it. Our only hope rests with Mueller.
rainin
(3,011 posts)if he keeps slurring his words. I'm trying to imagine the looks on the MAGA crowd when he gets up there and says "United Stash". I believe he is going down. My only hope is he hangs on long enough to see his wealth disappear, his daughter, son, and son-in law go to jail, and move into his new 10X10 home with a toilet on the wall. Let him live that long. After that, I don't care.
Gillibrand is sleaze.
Trumpocalypse
(6,143 posts)you still wouldn't vote for her, in effect voting for Trump.
vi5
(13,305 posts)Gillibrand was willing to use the Clinton's and take their help when it was useful to her. Now that it's not, out the door they go.
I'm not a fan of the Clinton's outsized role in our party and have many issue with them and in particular how they handled their own scandals. But Gillibrand comes off as an opportunist more than someone with deeply held principles. I had that suspicion when she first came to prominence (probably sooner than most because I'm in the NY news market) but recent events have solidified that impression for me.
Renew Deal
(81,861 posts)And she still stands against it while the political opportunists are willing to dismiss indescretions by their own side
Egnever
(21,506 posts)vi5
(13,305 posts)..that was undercut by her accepting Bill Clinton's help when she needed it. It is a perfectly valid point and position to take umbrage at how Bill Clinton handled himself while in office and the degree to which his actions constituted and abuse of power and sexual harassment. I would wholeheartedly agree with that position. But then take that stand consistently and not just when it's convenient to your political career.
avebury
(10,952 posts)She should have realized that Roger Stone, the heir to Lee Atwater's dirty tricks throne, would be totally capable of pulling a political hit on Al Franken. She, and the rest of the Dems, should have granted Al Franken due process, the ethics investigation and a chance to clear his name. They denied him that right and aided and abetted Roger Stone's political assassination. She was a total fool.
To automatically assume that every complaint of sexual misconduct is always valid is foolish. Just like not everyone that ends up on death row deserves to be there, you can expect that not all allegations will be truthful. There are times that is could be about vindictiveness and a desire to harm the person who you level the charges at.
Failure to conduct proper investigations of complaints results in the true victims not getting valid recognition nor victims of erroneous charges a chance to clear their names. As a result the Me To movement runs the risk of running themselves in the ground, particularly if it can be proven that not all claims are valid. The movement runs the risk of turning into a fake news endeavor.
Think about it, the most effective Senator is finished off by his own party without due process while a sexual predator sits in the WH and a serial child molester might get elected the next Senator from Alabama. I seriously doubt that Gillibrand's and the other Dems' tactics to clear out the sexual abusers will have any impact on their Republican colleagues. The Repubs just cry out that they are victims of fake news and Democratic dirty tricks (projection in psychology).
Demit
(11,238 posts)But she felt it was an either/or choice. That says something to me, that she is more calculating than truly thoughtful & intelligent.
brush
(53,787 posts)aid and endorsements to run for Hillary's Senate seat and suddenly became a progressive.
vi5
(13,305 posts)What other choice did we have in a red state?
We can't make perfect the enemy of the good and in such a conservative state she was the best we were going to do!
What's that? New York you say? Blue? Huh.
Well then, I....uh.....
JUST SHUT UP AND SUPPORT DEMOCRATS!!!!!! PUTIN LOVER!!!!!
brush
(53,787 posts)that seat.
I think I'm detecting sarcasm.
Gillibrand went from blue dog to progressive and tossed out a rival for 2020. Boy, she's good.
vi5
(13,305 posts)...and yes I was being HIGHLY sarcastic.
Red state? We have no choice but to elect and support and thank Blue Dogs/Conservadems!!
Blue State? Well........what are you gonna do vote for the REPUBLICAN?!?!?!
Heads they win, tails we lose.
The best we can get in a red state is a conservative dem but yet in deep blue states like NY and NJ............conservative Dems!!!
Demsrule86
(68,586 posts)Skittles
(153,169 posts)fuck that shit
Wwcd
(6,288 posts)"Money & Media"
Gee, where have we seen this same b.s. before?
Birds of a feather run together.
Our Revolution loves her.
I'm sure she'll come up with a reason as to her support of corporate, wall street Big Tobacco.
And she'll quickly move off that subject.
Like the Magnitsky vote was dismissed.
Renew Deal
(81,861 posts)Egnever
(21,506 posts)Yipee
BootinUp
(47,165 posts)LexVegas
(6,067 posts)I like and support Gillibrand.
bullwinkle428
(20,629 posts)"Ugly underbelly" for sure...not a good look at all for DU.
LexVegas
(6,067 posts)bench scientist
(1,107 posts)Irish_Dem
(47,131 posts)Women were treated badly and were told to shut up about it.
Other causes were more important.
And yes, not a good look for Dems at all the past couple of days.
MrsCoffee
(5,803 posts)bagelsforbreakfast
(1,427 posts)BannonsLiver
(16,396 posts)Irish_Dem
(47,131 posts)Doing the right thing is what separates us from the GOP crime syndicate.
NewJeffCT
(56,828 posts)She had a reputation as a centrist in the House, but ran as a progressive for the Senate and won. And, early on in her career, she was one of the small handful of Democrats that did not rush to condemn and defund ACORN and that had caught my eye. In the Senate, the vote was something like 89-6 to defund ACORN with a Democratic majority, and she was one of the six.
I think she also voted "no" on more Trump cabinet nominees than anybody else in the Senate - Franken, Sanders, Merkley, Brown, etc, included.
So, I'm surprised at her rush to judgment here with Franken, and also her condemning Bill Clinton. If she aspires to be president, turning off parts of the base where Franken and Clinton are popular is not a wise decision.
jalan48
(13,870 posts)It pays well at least.
Renew Deal
(81,861 posts)You'll be fine with her
jalan48
(13,870 posts)And we wonder why we have lost power all over the country.
Arazi
(6,829 posts)Renew Deal
(81,861 posts)Arazi
(6,829 posts)Her "silence" is really notable
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Oh that's just for liberal democrats only, my mistake.
octoberlib
(14,971 posts)Paladin
(28,264 posts)....against Al Franken. If she does that, I'll consider rejoining her fan club. Frankly, I don't think it will happen.
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)Renew Deal
(81,861 posts)workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)will have nothing to fear from Kirsten Gillibrands, I have no doubt.
hatrack
(59,587 posts).
workinclasszero
(28,270 posts)Mike Nelson
(9,959 posts)...her issue. I reverse my thought about her bringing up Bill Clinton - now, I'm thinking maybe it was planned to get the attention it got... and, that was only the beginning...
BannonsLiver
(16,396 posts)And this puff piece is barf inducing. She should probably enjoy that kind of coverage...while she can.
dalton99a
(81,515 posts)Certainly a coincidence
BannonsLiver
(16,396 posts)nolabels
(13,133 posts)How many recent startups can you find with their own Journalism Institute?
BY KATIE PUDWILL | APRIL 28, 2017
Arlington, VA POLITICO today announced the 2017 class of the POLITICO Journalism Institute (PJI), an educational initiative focused on supporting diversity in Washington newsrooms.
PJI, now in its fourth year, will be held May 30 to June 9 and will offer 12 university students intensive, hands-on training in government and political reporting and reflects POLITICO's ongoing support of journalism education and recruitment of up-and-coming top-notch talent. Two students will be selected at the end of the program for a three-month residency in the POLITICO newsroom where they will write, edit and produce content
From the POLITICO blog, back in 'about us'
Bleacher Creature
(11,257 posts)And I'd be proud to have her as the nominee.
rainin
(3,011 posts)to discern the content of the allegations. She fell for the trap of the number of allegations. That's lazy thinking. And it worked. I saw senator after senator repeating the same arguement...that there were many women. It didn't matter if any one of them was credible. It was a witch hunt all right -- on one of our own.
I don't want her there. What is she after? Power at any cost? Is that a virtue in the Democratic party now?
LisaM
(27,813 posts)It's nonsense. They have both given their whole working lives to the Democratic party and that seems to send some people around the bend. They have certainly not shaped the party in their mold. The fact that they are, ultimately, pragmatists, is apparently upsetting to some.
Vogue Magazine profiled Gillibrand last month and she came off as kind of unlikeable.
zipplewrath
(16,646 posts)I mean, not as voters, but as political operatives. Many, MANY people saw the Clinton administrations as their "ticket" to higher offices and appointments. Someone commented last summer that there were more people who THOUGHT they were "Clinton insiders" than there were positions within the White House. I suspect those days are over however and not only are they "moving on" but probably the future of the party will come from new sources.
LisaM
(27,813 posts)But one needs only to look at 2008 to see how quick the Dems were to toss the Clintons to the curb for a relative newcomer. The Dems have been bleeding seats ever since then.
There were a fair number of Clinton era people that ended up in the Obama administration. And of course her work as SoS allowed her to continue to support various people. Bernie tapped into some of the same people she faced in the 2008 cycle, but he couldn't leverage the one serious constituency that she ultimately had all locked up.
There are democrats that were in the "Clinton Camp". It wasn't a majority of democrats for sure, except maybe at the DNC.
Bettie
(16,110 posts)it is going to fizzle out pretty darned quickly.
She's shown herself to be an opportunist at best.
I will not be voting for her in any primary. Never.
If she becomes a nominee, I will hold my nose and vote for her, with little hope that she'll fight for anything.
MineralMan
(146,317 posts)She'll gain some support from some people, but will lose support of others. I think it will end up being a wash, but I don't believe it will catapult her into the presidential race in 2020, if that's what she's thinking.
In fact, being divisive at this time is probably not a good idea for anyone thinking of tossing a hat into that cockfighting ring. That's just my opinion, of course.
uponit7771
(90,347 posts)... someones waste getting squeezed too hard, 4 anonymous accusers, a claim he denies outright and a birther.
They'll be more than one or two oppurtunities for trolls to come dem politico base and say "what about these guys"
I can see Mueller's accusers O'Keefe et al has paid getting the side eye from the Franken get out crew already.
kcr
(15,317 posts)Huh.
Demsrule86
(68,586 posts)I will never vote for her ever. I think she jumped on Franken to end his chances to run as president.
delisen
(6,044 posts)Demsrule86
(68,586 posts)delisen
(6,044 posts)Demsrule86
(68,586 posts)GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)Senator Gillibrand for supporting the national party's agenda, just like every other high-profile Democrat right up to Tom Perez, and calling for Franken to resign
and
how many people are upset with her for departing from the national party's agenda, unlike all but a handful of Democrats, and saying that Bill Clinton should have resigned?
Just curious.
BootinUp
(47,165 posts)in 2017. Some probably wonder why she brought it up. Hope thats helpful.
GaryCnf
(1,399 posts)to see the level of defensiveness.
Makes one wonder how badly the values-centered campaign we tried to run was undercut by our continuing unwillingness to confront the 500 pound gorilla in the room.
BootinUp
(47,165 posts)Anyway? Never mind I figured it out. When does she call for more Clinton investigation s?
bagelsforbreakfast
(1,427 posts)Dawson Leery
(19,348 posts)In Gillibrand World, the tobacco industry gets due process, but Al Franken (who has done F--A--R less damage than Phillip Morris)
gets railroaded.
Disgusting that she dragged the party along with her.
She needs to face a primary.
tenderfoot
(8,437 posts)Just no.
Pachamama
(16,887 posts)....Visionary and fighter of womens rights.
I dont want to hear shit about this opportunist phony. I will happily watch her demise and contribute gleefully to her opponent that will go against her in the primaries.
Would especially enjoy it if her opponents initials are HRC.
Thor_MN
(11,843 posts)If she runs for higher office, she does not have my support.
JimBeard
(293 posts)With Friends like these...
http://www.newser.com/story/252623/2/dems-kirsten-gillibrand-hero-for-women-or-hypocrite.html
Meowmee
(5,164 posts)And I had serious reservations about voting for her due to her being a lawyer for tobacco. I did because she was the dem. I wont vote for her for anything now. She has done serious damage she should resign and appoint a dem who is fit for office.
onecaliberal
(32,863 posts)Blue_true
(31,261 posts)power centers take sexual assault seriously. She has fought for years for LGBTQ rights when doing so was not popular. Yet by your standards, she is a opportunist. Let fill you in, opportunists don't fucking work for years on issues that the public at large are either ignoring or are mostly hostile toward.
onecaliberal
(32,863 posts)Money influence and contacts until it was no longer comvenient. Shes an opportunist,
Period.
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)in the cases that she worked on. As a young engineer, I worked for a company that made stuff that was useful in medicine, communications, entertainment, but also pioneered the first guidance system for guided munitions that have killed lots of people. Some of my early work as a young engineer from a poor family helped make those guidance systems reliable. According to your logic, I am a soulless murderer. Sorry, real life does not work to your fantasy world of absolute moral supremacy.
onecaliberal
(32,863 posts)Who helped her get where she is are no longer necessary. Your points are pathetic excuses for someone who will make it much more difficult to win back the senate. Im done replying .
Blue_true
(31,261 posts)Sorry that has your undies all bunched, but I guess that is how real life often works.
awesomerwb1
(4,268 posts)nothing more.
GoneOffShore
(17,340 posts)McCamy Taylor
(19,240 posts)JI7
(89,252 posts)Most effective senators to expose trump admin.