Is the pot stirring turning to promoting Gillibrand?

[Thor_MN]

Seems like the Franken bashers have turned to boosting Kirsten, while alerting on posts disparaging her.

[greeny2323]

1. Looks like n/t

[Sneederbunk]

2. No. The pot is stirring to divide the party for 2018.

[FSogol]

15. +1, exactly. n/t

[LexVegas]

3. ...

[Kingofalldems]

17. What's so funny?

[guillaumeb]

5. She certainly has a lot of corporate contributors.

Especially big law firms and Wall Street firms like Morgan Stanley, and JP Morgan Chase, and Goldman Sachs.

[stonecutter357]

6. It's the same MO every time...

[oberliner]

7. I think I'm the only person posting positive threads about Gillibrand

I feel like she is being treated unfairly and I want to highlight the fact that she has been a great champion for DU causes during her time in the senate. She is a Democrat who has fought valiantly against Trump and the Republicans.

[rzemanfl]

8. I know you are. n/t

[ret5hd]

12. ...and Franken.

[lame54]

19. Sounds like you described Franken

[TheCowsCameHome]

20. Too bad she didn't stick to that,

but she turned on one of our best.

[lapucelle]

53. What's a "DU cause"?

[brush]

57. Give it a rest. Gullibility and ambition is not a characteristic we want in a leader.

[bench scientist]

60. Yea, so was Al Franken but I don't see you posting threads about him.

[tblue37]

66. She has posted a lot of threads about Franken--though not positive ones. nt

[avebury]

64. If I have missed it, when and where has she called

for Trump's impeachment or resignation? What about the rest of the Senators that turned on Al Franken? When and where have they called for Trump's ouster? What are they saying about Roy Moore?

While they have zero control in Congress have they even discussed holding their own hearings outside of Congress where the victims of Trump can testify? It is a whole lot easier to attack your own then to conduct a political fight to get Trump out of office. When power is taken away from you, you have to think outside the box to achieve desired goals.

[Drahthaardogs]

65. But does her most successful work

Fighting Clinton and Franken.

[HootieMcBoob]

11. Interesting

[Thor_MN]

13. Careful, it's hideable to speak negative about Democrats and the trolls love to alert.

[tazkcmo]

29. Ironic, huh?

Here on DU, Gillibrand would have been TS'ed for her actions but because she does it in the Senate she gets threads of support.

[MadDAsHell]

59. By DU rules everyone speaking ill of her ought to be TSed as well.

The average post on DU is so bounded by rules and alert triggers that sometimes it’s amazing we have discussions at all.

[FSogol]

14. LOL, gasp, a person running for President might be ambitious? Oh the horrors!

You hit all the key points; wall street, ambitions, and leaving to become an independent!

[Hortensis]

36. Didn't call her Hillary, though. Gotta admit that.

[Cirque du So-What]

18. ...

[Agschmid]

26. Godamn those upity women huh?

[flotsam]

34. You know which women's voices were totally ignored

All those who knew Al Franken best and who had worked with him for years who signed letters of support praising his behavior toward women in the workplace. Instead she listened to anonymous voices who didn't even have to prove their gender to claim a victimhood they claim happened in front of multiple witnesses in 30 second photo ops. But I guess you reckon those colleagues were the uppity ones?

[dhol82]

51. +1

[madaboutharry]

56. +1

[Ligyron]

62. +3

[Agschmid]

78. Except the accusers arent anonymous... so your point is moot.

[flotsam]

90. Actually at least half were...

Two more were easily exposed as republican operatives. But Gillibrand counted to eight without a bit of review and conducted a smelling out for the good of the tribe...

Witch smellers, almost always women, were important and powerful people amongst the Zulu and other Bantu-speaking peoples of Southern Africa, responsible for rooting out evil witches in the area, and sometimes responsible for considerable bloodshed themselves. In present-day South Africa their role has waned and their activities are illegal according to the Witchcraft Suppression Act, 1957.

Ritual
Surrounded by a circle of women and girls who clapped their hands and droned a low, monotonous chant, the rhythm of which changed occasionally with the stamping of feet, the witch smellers proceeded to work themselves up into a frenzy. In this state, they spun, stalked and leapt, eventually touching one or more of the people with their switches, upon which the person was immediately dragged away and killed. All the living things in the accused witch's hut, human and animal, were also killed. Sometimes an entire kraal was exterminated in this way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witch_smeller

[OnDoutside]

91. Great post.

[rzemanfl]

81. +4 n/t

[VOX]

87. + 5

[elleng]

10. Turning to pissing me off.

[Vogon_Glory]

16. It does look that way, doesn't it?

But I'm not inclined to support Kirsten She-who-threw-Al-Franken-under-a-bus for President in the Democratic primaries.

STOP DOING ROGER STONE'S DIRTY WORK FOR HIM! YOU DON'T TURN ON YOUR OWN WITHOUT DUE PROCESS!!!

[oberliner]

21. The insanity is that posting supportive threads about a Democrat on DU is viewed negatively

Whereas posts trashing Democrats seem to be OK.

[FSogol]

23. Some people can't wait to start bashing any perceived front runner for 2020 whether they are

actually running or not. They are desperate to bash.

[Renew Deal]

71. Remember all the craziness over Cory Booker a few months ago?

Anyone perceived as a threat to the exalted one shall be attacked. To be fair, they know Gillibrand is likely to beat anyone they can conceive. She’s that good. People are just starting to figure out that she is the top of the class for 2020.

[FSogol]

85. Yup. Kamala Harris and Terry McAuliffe too. n/t

[Vogon_Glory]

24. The truth behind Al Franken's accusers' claims still haven't been proven.

Kirsten was too quick to pile on. I not only wouldn't not support her in the presidential primaries, but if someone runs against her in her senatorial primary, I may very well donate to her opponent.

[Denzil_DC]

25. How many threads have you posted trashing Franken, a Democrat? n/t

[tblue37]

68. + a brazillion. nt

[Thor_MN]

30. Got a mirror handy?

[Vogon_Glory]

33. The mirror of Erised n/t

[Alice11111]

32. !!!

[Kingofalldems]

22. The pot stirring is to disrupt Democrats in general.

Fact.

[Hortensis]

38. +1000. But to be fair, we have plenty of fractious factionaists

who don't need much stirring to boil over.

[Kingofalldems]

45. Very true and and don't have much of a problem with that.

I do have a problem with republican disruptors though.

[Hoyt]

27. I'm fine with DUers boosting any Dem candidate, but alerting on opposition posts ticks me off.

85% of time I'm on a jury, the alert is just petty BS and a waste of DUers' time.

[Alice11111]

31. Same here.Yesterday, I got one to review that was brilliant satire.

I was thinking, what kind of moron would have alerted on her. There are aliens among us.

[Ms. Toad]

35. Some of us who have experienced the kind of harassment alleged against Franken

did not find caricaturing, trivializing, and treating our lived experiences as a hypersensiive snowflake fantasies humorous.

This kind of ridicule makes it much harder for women who have similar experiences to come forward out of fear that such ridicule will be directed at us - as it has routinely been until very recently.

[Hortensis]

39. You keep hitting that note, Ms. Toad.

No matter how traumatized you once were by some man's uninvited hand on your buttocks, or even really bad, something many times worse than anything any claimed of Sen. Franken, it doesn't excuse unjust behavior toward others.

[Ms. Toad]

46. No matter how unjust you feel the behavior was toward Franken,

It does not excuse trivializing the experiences of women who have been harassed by suggesting that minor experiences are equivalent to rape fantasies - which is what the referenced piece does.

[Alice11111]

40. I have represented sex harassment victims for 30 years,

often without pay. My daughter was a rape victim as a child, the worst experience in my life, that will never leave me. Like every women, I can't even count the number of times I have been sexually harrassed.

I respectfully disagree about Sen Franken. As one all too familiar with the issue, IF you look at tbe underlying facts and RW set up, his case is very different. We need to be able to have due process to find the truth, and make distinctions, or it sets back women who have truly suffered, as it sounds like you have.

[Ms. Toad]

48. My comment was addressed to the referenced "brilliant satire" piece.

Regardless of whether you believe the women, it unquestionably sets rape and sexual abuse survivors back to ridicule the accusations as - in essence - rape fantasies, or as blowing minor things they should have just shaken off into somethign significant.

As to Franken, even if every single word of the accusers is true, I still do not believe he should have resigned. I happen to believe the women - you apparently don't. We both believe he shoudl not have left office because of it.

We are not supposed to be the party of black and white thinking. There are levels of offense - and if we drum out every man (or even person) who has behaved inappropriately toward women, there will be very few males left who we deem worthy to serve/be employed/etc. Far too many, especially in their teens/young adulthood think with their small head rather than their big one. We're smart enough to fashion a punishment to fit the crime, and to distinguish between serial rapists, pedophiles, etc. and inappropriate non-consensual touching -even if it is repeated. We can tell the difference between an arrogant denial of the most credible accusations - and the humble willingness to listen, acknowledge at least some level of bad behavior, and learn. Here, as in most circumstances, zero tolerance is - frankly - a stupid policy.

My most significant problem is that rather than treat the women respectfully - DU seems to be driven by a belief that the only way Franken can stay in office is if we prove the women liars. Almost from day 1, DU has been in classic pre-70s blame the victim mode. The women have been attacked for what they are wearing, for what they have done earlier in their lives, for their willingness to be publicly identified (even when they are known to reporters - as have been many whistle blowers who choose not to be publicly identified - they have been derieded as anonymous), for their political beliefs, for not behaving as an abuse victim should, etc. That is unacceptable, as is the "brilliant satire" ridiculing and treating their accusations as milder versions of a rape fantasy.

[Alice11111]

94. The "brilliant satire," I referred to had nothing to do with rape

or even sex abuse. I would have NEVER called such a thing brilliant, and I would have stated that it strongly broke the rules. I actually do pretty much have zero tolerence for those things, particularly when the victims are under aged. Sometimes, with adults, there is confusion or questions regarding consent. With kids, consent is irrelevant.

With sex harassment, it can be more complicated. Since I have pretty much devoted my life to representing victims, I certainly am aware of the problems, fear, and pain of coming forth, as well as the usual attempt to blame or discredit the victim, often in abusive ways. I have lived it.

You make a good point about some offenses at early ages or situations may deserve to be looked at differently.

We obviously disagree about Franken. Had he had a proper hearing/investigation and a chance to confront his accusers and the "evidence," against him, and had it been credible (and to my knowledge, IMO, and I have researched it a lot, it was not, and at least part of it was consentual), I would have said, he is out. I guess, what we have learned from good investigative reporting, unfortunately, is all we have. IMO, as I have stated, a good and ethical man, with a very strong voice for our party, was initially the victim of a well planned RW hit job.
Following that, in a frenzy, many people joined a lynch mob to take him out asap BEFORE an investigation could reveal all of the facts. It leaves me suspicious.

Also, he himself immediately called for an investigation. He was denied his constitutional right. We disagree about his guilt. As far as beliving the victims, 99pc of the time, that is my default position. They too, should have told their stories in the investigation, and upon proper investigation, the messy truth would have likely emerged. Some things would have probably been a surprise to both of us, as is often the case, when due process prevails.

I'm not going to re-argue my points, any more. It has been fully covered on many threads, on which we have both participated. I do appreciate that you made distictions. These things, regarding sex harassment, are not sometimes black or white. In this case, we just disagree. Let's do it respectfully.

[dhol82]

54. You had a picture taken by your husband where some guy had his hand around your waist?

Tell us about it.

[Drahthaardogs]

67. You were in a USO Tour?

What was Bob Hope like?

[Renew Deal]

72. A DUer shares a personal story and this is the best you can come up with?

Your post illustrates that there is a problem that needs to be dealt with.

[Drahthaardogs]

75. The USO story has already been proven full of lies

And when I point that out, I get "Well, memories are subjective. " or my favorite, " She made untrue assumptions, that doesn't make her a liar."

We are talking about destroying a human beings reputation and career based upon "untrue assumptions" and a person who feels that a hand around your waist during a photo is a sexual assault.

With all due respect, the problem is not victim blaming. The problem is zero tolerance ridiculous standards that never hold up when viewed through a lens of common sense.

I would NEVER try to legitimize sexual abuse. However if a ridiculous argument substantiated by nothing, and refuted by video and photographic evidence hoists you by your own petard, don't blame me.

[Renew Deal]

76. The fact my own actions have given people a good reason to doubt that makes me feel ashamed

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/11/16/us/politics/al-franken-sexual-harassment-groping-forcible-kissing.html

He didn’t have to resign

[Drahthaardogs]

84. Don't do that.

It's dishonest. Al was purposely doing his best to avoid calling the women liars because he is a decent human being.

I, on the other hand, spent a good portion of my life practicing killing people, so I am not nearly as decent. I will call them liars when they lie.

The USO tape clearly shows the ski had been on existence for at least three years before Tweeden toured. Yet she still felt compelled to write that Franken "was writing the skit just so he could kiss me."

It's bullshit. It's a lie. It was a setup.

The other woman said Al had his hand on her boob. It is clearly on her back in the photo.

The final woman ASKED for a picture, and then said a hand around her waist was an assault.

I'm not suffering bullshit. These are lies (I suspect the last woman has mental issues)

Furthermore, in his resignation he DENIES ALL.

He did have to resign. He stated he was told the other Senators would no longer work with him.

These stories would not win in a CIVIL court, with a 51% burden of proof, let alone a criminal one.

Provide real evidence or let it go.

[OnDoutside]

92. Fantastic points, thank you.

[Alice11111]

95. Yep, if he had been given due process, the whole messy

Truth would have come out. For some reason, the lynch mob wanted to prevent tne truth from being exposed. I suppose, a lot of it was timimg to the Alabama election.
Moral highground. Ha,Ha, like the Repubs won't take advantage.of every scientilla of revenge and distortion that they can get from that. Al overboard, fast before the truth comes out. No time for a hearing.
Hell, why not suspend him a month until they get time for a due process hearing. Many of these folks in the lynch mob were lawyers even. No excuse for a lawyer.

[rzemanfl]

82. I know the one you mean. It was brilliant. n/t

[nocalflea]

37. I've gotten to the point where I ignore the"hides" in my inbox.

Last edited Sat Dec 9, 2017, 10:01 PM - Edit history (1)

I know the types doing the alerting. Not worth an argument.

Seems petty , but it's also meant to silence and intimidate.

[Alice11111]

43. Yep, I got on a clickbait thread, defended a Dem Senator,

and his right to due process. I was alerted right and left.

[nocalflea]

47. The irony for me is that I won't alert on anyone.

I want to see all opinions. I also like to study the trolls.

I'm an adult and can handle open debate, even when it gets nasty.

[Alice11111]

49. I have never alerted on anyone either. I like to engage in

Discussion and learn from others. Some just seem to alert on anyone they think they disagree with, without even reading the whole post.

[nocalflea]

50. +1

[Drahthaardogs]

69. How do you know if a post is alerted

If not hidden?

[Alice11111]

28. That's exactly what they did to me. Clickbait, then alert.

[left-of-center2012]

41. How can someone post a critique of any Democrat and ...

... not be (rightly or wrongly) 'alerted on' for bashing?

[Alice11111]

44. !!!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

80. Yes, but what if you have Democratic politicians bashing another Democratic politician...

and you want to defend his right to defend himself? What are you sposed to do then?

[bluestarone]

42. oh yea

for sure

[Lunabell]

55. This is just what they want

Division and you're giving them fuel.

[Thor_MN]

58. Kind late to be singing that tune...

Or are you of the "get over it" camp?

Sorry, but when I see the same people that called for a really stupid move jump onto another bandwagon, I'm going to ask why.

Exposing dumb things is not a waste of time.

[Renew Deal]

73. How is it divisive to support a Democrat?

[Kirk Lover]

77. People are so very easily played.

[rzemanfl]

83. Look for a PM from me. n/t

[vi5]

61. I'm not sure why she's being singled out...

...there were plenty of others falling over each other for camera time to see who could turn on Franken the fastest and the loudest.

Maybe she was starting from a worse position due to 1) Her history as a blue dog 2) Her turning on the Clinton's (after using them when it suited her, and 3) Her seemingly positioning herself for a 2020 run against which Franken was a formidable opponent.

Honestly I'm just as pissed at Booker for some similar reasons.

[Drahthaardogs]

63. Comrade, in Russia POT stirs YOU!

[KT2000]

70. jury duty

is a conundrum. Don't bash Democrats - but what if the Democrat has bashed another Democrat? Which Democrat deserves the non-bashing? I knew there would come a time when this would become an issue. Shouldn't we be able to hash it out here when something like this happens without an alert?

[Sophia4]

74. I sure hope it isn't.

Last thing we need is another loser candidate for the presidency.

Went to an exclusive private school, pampered by her parents and ignorant of the real world.

Uggggggh!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kirsten_Gillibrand

Maybe that goes over in New York State, but in the rest of the country, it doesn't.

We need a real person who has led a real life, not some protected, cuddled upper middle class . . . . . . .

Gillibrand is too conservative for me. A blue dog per Wikipedia.

Not who I want in the White House.

[Tatiana]

79. I seriously think Gillibrand miscalculated.

She saw a hot issue and thought she would raise her name recognition and "brand" by leading the charge against Franken. She doesn't know if the allegations are true or not -- and it looks like she didn't care. She thought she'd come across as a brave leader.

Instead she looks like a calculating, manipulative, back-stabber. Not exactly someone I would trust to do right by me. I think her hopes for 2020 are done. Good luck trying to fund raise from all the people who donated bigly to Clinton!

[flamingdem]

88. She didn't take the time to look at the evidence, which is flimsy at best

and she's a lawyer!

[dflprincess]

86. One of the twists in all this is the Clare McCaskill who was one of those who

helped throw Franken under the bus helped to kill Gillibrand's bill to finally do something about sexual assault in the military while Franken stood with her in supporting the bill.

Really, if Gillibrand were honest she'd throw McCaskill under the bus, not Al. McCaskill has done more to hurt women and encourage predators while Al has tried to protect us.

[OnDoutside]

93. Wow, that's a very perceptive post. Great point.

[flamingdem]

89. I want to know Schumer's role in all of this

He was calling Franken all day before the resignation badgering him to resign.

What does he get out of it?

Was he as sloppy as Gillibrand, not looking at the evidence?

Why in the world would he risk losing a senator?