ChrisWeigant.com

Who Will Be Next?

[ Posted Monday, November 20th, 2017 – 19:18 UTC ]

Who will be next? That's the point we've all gotten to, it seems, on sexual misconduct charges made about powerful men pretty much across the spectrum of fame, journalism, and politics. Just today the news contained eight women accusing television journalist Charlie Rose of what can only be called workplace harassment and sexually predatory behavior. Also today, new accusations were made against New York Times political reporter Glenn Thrush, and a second woman accused Al Franken of groping her. That's merely one day's worth of news, and it follows months of such revelations going back to Harvey Weinstein, who was really the start of this cycle of accusations.

The only consistency among all these allegations is that powerful men -- only some of them, to be sure, but still far too many -- act like pigs, especially when they think they can get away with such swinish behavior. That really dates me, I know, because "pigs" immediately leaps to my mind from the phrase "male chauvinist pigs" which was often used in the 1960s and 1970s to describe patriarchic attitudes -- which were even more prevalent (and more blatant) back then. At some point, this phrase kind of fell out of favor among feminists, but perhaps it's time to start calling a pig a pig again?

Porcine semantics aside, though, at this point it certainly seems like we're in for a lot more weeks like the previous one, where there were so many accusations flying it was hard to keep them straight, at times. Personally, I've even stopped paying attention to the scandals hitting those in the world of entertainment (music, film, television, etc.). There are just too many of them, and I've never been all that big a fan of many of the men accused (although George Takei certainly made an impression, due to me being a longtime Star Trek fan). But the other real reason I've started ignoring the entertainer scandals is that I write about and concentrate on politics and journalism much more than any sports icon or rap star or television personality. This is why I mentioned Charlie Rose, Glenn Thrush, and Al Franken but failed to mention any of the Hollywood idols also currently (and recently) put on the hot seat.

Even limiting the focus to journalism and politics still provides a wide array of sexual misconduct accusations, though. There was the pig sty known as Fox News, for instance. The fall of Roger Ailes and Bill O'Reilly should have been a wake-up call but kind of got lost in political tribalism -- those on the right either ignored it or defended Fox and O'Reilly, and those on the left were so caught up in the schadenfreude that they failed to consider whether they had any pigs within their own ranks of favorite journalists. Then came the fall of Mark Halperin, but few rose to defend him (perhaps because he more than anyone else was the absolute personification of the inside-the-Beltway cocktail party crowd's group-think conventional-wisdom attitudes, which has few actual fans outside of Washington).

Charlie Rose's downfall, however, is going to hit liberals a bit harder. Rose seems to be everywhere on television, from appearing on CBS at 8:00 in the morning to the Charlie Rose show, which airs in my PBS market at midnight. Rose was brought in to CBS in a valiant effort to fight back against the fluffiness of most morning news shows, showing that CBS had a commitment to hard reporting over feel-good nonsense. Rose's self-titled PBS show was a mixture of interviews with journalists, politicians, authors, celebrities, and artists. I personally always found Rose more than a little pompous and a wee bit too willing to parrot political slogans without digging in to the truth or falsehood of such slogans, but maybe that's just me. Rose at least interviewed people for 20 minutes or more on his show, and the "long-format interview" has almost completely disappeared from any other forum on television (for instance, 20-minute-long interviews used to be the bedrock of the Sunday morning political shows, but the interviews have gotten shorter and shorter until now they are no more than the same type of quickie, drive-by interview that cable news is notorious for -- you get less than five minutes to make your point, and that's it, gotta move on to yet another commercial break). So Rose's PBS show was usually worth watching for the sole reason that you got more than just a few soundbites out of whomever was sitting across the table from Charlie.

As I write this, there has been no corporate reaction yet. Charlie was noticeably absent from CBS this morning, because both he and the network had to have known what the Washington Post was going to report this morning. But at this point it seems doubtful that Rose will be on the air much longer, either on CBS or on PBS. The allegations made against him are so severe -- harassing women who worked for him, walking around naked after a shower in front of them as if it were no big deal, and what can only be described as continuing predatory behavior -- that at this point in time it seems impossible for Rose to recover. He'll likely just decide to retire (he is in his 70s, after all, so this was going to happen sooner or later anyway).

Turning to the political world, the second accusation made against Al Franken may be the final nail in his political coffin. This is saddening for many Democrats to admit, but as I said last week if they're going to take the moral high road then Franken may be required to sacrifice himself to continue the purity of the Democratic position. If you're going to set the standard of zero tolerance, then you've got to apply that same standard to one of your own, in other words, in order not to be seen as total hypocrites. Introduction of "gray area explanations" merely weakens your overall cause, obviously.

Personally, what I find depressing about the current atmosphere -- that of "we've reached a turning point" on sexual accusations -- is that we've been here so many times before. Anita Hill and Clarence Thomas was supposed to be such a turning point. Bill Clinton fought back, so it was seen as less of a turning point. But since Clinton's been president, it'd be hard to even tally up how many politicians have been disgraced and run out of office over sexual misconduct. Anthony Weiner's wiener was actually a significant factor in the 2016 presidential election, just to give one example. There are far too many others to even fully list: Larry Craig, Elliot Spitzer, Newt Gingrich, Robert Livingston, Gary Condit, Strom Thurmond, Mark Foley, David Vitter, John Edwards, Herman Cain, Dennis Hastert... the list just goes on and on. And that is not even close to being a complete list, even for the past few decades. It also doesn't even mention our current president, who still has yet to face the music to over a dozen women who have made sexual accusations against him (and were not taken as seriously even a year ago as what we're seeing now).

Of course, not all of those scandals involved sexually predatory behavior, or workplace harassment, or child molestation. Some were just run-of-the-mill affairs with adults the politician didn't happen to be married to at the time. But even winnowing down the list to serious sexual misbehavior (conduct that is clearly illegal, in other words), there are still a lot of names to choose from. Each time we were told that it would be a real turning point in public attitude, but each time as the story faded so did the public outrage.

This time feels different, I will admit. This time around the sheer volume and the breadth of public personalities accused seems to show a real rising tide of public opinion to treat such things differently in the future. Also the swiftness of the consequences seems to be different. Just to use one example, everyone knew that Bill O'Reilly was disgusting and predatory a full decade before he was forced off the air. There were transcripts of phone calls he made (the "loofah/falafel tapes") which left no doubt as to what a pig O'Reilly truly was. But he kept his job for another decade, and Fox News continued to pay out millions of dollars in settlements to cover up his piggishness. Now, though, he is no longer on the air even though his show was the highest-rated on cable television. That is a monumental shift in consequences. I have no idea how soon Charlie Rose will disappear from my television screen, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least to hear that, after having a couple hours to think it over, PBS and CBS have decided to pull the plug on him starting today.

I don't really have any sweeping conclusions to offer on the current situation, I have to confess. Other than to express a certain numbness about the volume of accusations that shows no signs of abating. I'm not the only one, either -- even just tracking the Roy Moore story, there was a big splash when the first four accusers hit the news, and then a further cycle of outrage after the Gloria Allred press conference with the fifth accuser. But since then, four other women have come forward but have received much less attention. It's like the situation with Bill Cosby -- at some point, the only really newsworthy part of the story was the total number of accusers ("the number of women making such accusations against Cosby hit X today...").

Which is why, at this point, the only question we may all be asking for months and months to come is: "Who will be next on the chopping block?" Which icon of politics, journalism, or entertainment will be the next to face public shaming for past misbehavior? And at this point, it really could be anyone. We're fast approaching the point -- if we're not already there -- where none of these accusations is going to generate any surprise. Loathing, shame, outrage, disgust, and denunciation -- all of those will be felt for each and every new name added to the list. But little, if any, surprise. The one consistent aspect to the ongoing scandalpalooza is that powerful men everywhere are being exposed for who they truly are. Not just members of your own political "tribe," not just entertainers you love or hate, not just sleazy television executives and personalities, but people you used to respect and cheer for. The only common denominator is that this tidal wave of scandal is going to hit everywhere -- right, left, and center -- and that we have in no way reached the crest of that wave.

-- Chris Weigant

 

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant

 

76 Comments on “Who Will Be Next?”

  1. [1] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    In the vast majority of these cases, particularly among the show-biz crowd and the politicians, it has been more or less 'common knowledge' for DECADES, but mostly nobody talked about it in public, and now everybody's talking about it in public.

    What brought it out into the open?

  2. [2] 
    Paula wrote:

    Al Franken should not resign. You know why? Because his supporters deserve a full accounting. If he has truly been abusive, I want to know it. If he hasn't, I want to know it. This "he has to be the sacrificial lamb to prove Dem purity" is playing directly into the hands of the GOP. It's as much bullshit as the media's constant false-equivalency/both-siderism that has been the response to conservative accusations about the "liberal media".

    I don't agree with doing the GOP's work for them, especially when it comes to character assassination.

    As a fan and supporter of Al Franken I need the case to be made, not via back and forths in the media. I want a real hearing and i want Al to be able to defend himself. THEN I'LL decide.

    Al is willing to undergo an examination. I (and many, many people) think he should do exactly that. Paul Waldman had a piece up at WaPo saying Franken should resign and Greg Sargeant tweeted it. The responses were 99% "no". Al Franken's situation is, at this point, unique. We want our hearing.

    Roy Moore isn't willing to do that. Donald Trump isn't willing to do that.

    Louis C.K. admitted his accusers were telling the truth. Apparently so has Charlie Rose, and Mark Halperin and several others.

    As to the larger point, yes, I fully expect many, many more predators to be outed. Each needs to be seen on the merits. If the person immediately admits fault and quits or whatever, there it is. If they don't, well then we have to go through further steps.

  3. [3] 
    Michale wrote:

    Michigan Rep. John Conyers, a Democrat and the longest-serving member of the House of Representatives, settled a wrongful dismissal complaint in 2015 with a former employee who alleged she was fired because she would not “succumb to [his] sexual advances.”

    Documents from the complaint obtained by BuzzFeed News include four signed affidavits, three of which are notarized, from former staff members who allege that Conyers, the ranking Democrat on the powerful House Judiciary Committee, repeatedly made sexual advances to female staff that included requests for sexual favors, contacting and transporting other women with whom they believed Conyers was having affairs, caressing their hands sexually, and rubbing their legs and backs in public. Four people involved with the case verified the documents are authentic.
    https://www.buzzfeed.com/paulmcleod/she-complained-that-a-powerful-congressman-harassed-her?utm_term=.hcyxv7eBV1#.gl6Gye8NL7

    The only relevant question today is this..

    Will the Democrat Party survive....

  4. [4] 
    Michale wrote:

    New allegation against Franken, this time met with silence

    ST. PAUL, Minn. (AP) — A woman says Al Franken pulled her in tightly and put his hand on her buttocks in 2010 while posing for a picture at the Minnesota State Fair, the second allegation of improper conduct against the Democrat and first involving his time as a senator.

    Lindsay Menz told CNN last week for a report broadcast Monday that the interaction with the Minnesota senator made her feel “gross.” She said she immediately told her husband that Franken had “grabbed” her bottom and that she posted about it on Facebook.

    It's funny how, when it's a Democrat accused, people here want "a case to be made"...

    When it's a Republican accused, the mere accusation is all the case that needs to be made...

    Funny how that is, eh?? :D

  5. [5] 
    Michale wrote:

    In anticipation of the response....

    ROY MOORE!!!! ROY MOORE!!!! ROY MOORE!!!!

    ..... lets lay down the facts...

    1. A 40 year old accusation...

    2. Mere weeks before a major election....

    3. Moore was a Democrat when he was mall-shopping for young girls...

    But, by all means.... Bring up Roy Moore.. :D

  6. [6] 
    Michale wrote:

    Imagine an alternate reality where the Democrat Party actually took action to hold Clinton accountable for his rapes and sexual assaults and sexual harassments..

    Imagine how different the political landscape would be..

    It's entirely likely that the Democrat Party would not be now up Shitz Creek......

    http://www.flatwaterkayaker.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/musky-paddle_6.jpg

    ...... without a paddle...

  7. [7] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    With all these scandals it seems like that days of the sexual predator are numbered, so I may as well come clean.

    All the accusers here were right. One Demand was a scam. I just wanted an organization so I could have some interns.

    But now that you can't use the interns that way you used to there just doesn't seem to be any point in continuing the charade. :D

  8. [8] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Michale-
    It's good to have some new commenters here.

    There used to be a guy here that would quote a Diehard movie to new commenters, but he's not been around for a while so:

    "Welcome to the party, pal."

  9. [9] 
    Michale wrote:

    There used to be a guy here that would quote a Diehard movie to new commenters, but he's not been around for a while so:

    "Welcome to the party, pal."

    Hehehehehe Thanx :D

  10. [10] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Welcome back, I guess.

    :-)

    Hey, what time is it? :)

  11. [11] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Charlie Rose's downfall, however, is going to hit liberals a bit harder.

    That may be true, Chris. But, it won't impact the up-wing gang. They'll just move on and get things done.

  12. [12] 
    Michale wrote:

    Welcome back, I guess.

    Thanx, Liz.. :D

    We have a LOT to catch up on...

  13. [13] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Let's not try to do it all in one day, shall we ...

  14. [14] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    CW-
    Just in case you decide to write about the Stephen Cloobeck threat this week, a good title might be: "Democrats Can Have a Cloobeck or Get a Clue".

  15. [15] 
    Michale wrote:

    Let's not try to do it all in one day, shall we ...

    Oh I dunno.. It might be like ripping off a band-aid.. Doing it all real quick to get it over with.. hehehehe

  16. [16] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    There is that.

  17. [17] 
    TheStig wrote:

    For all the public sanctimony shown by our ruling elite, religion seems to have no impact on their everyday behaviors. I worked The Beltway during the Reagan years and the sexual shenanigans then were roughly comparable to those making headlines now.

    One thing that doesn't get mentioned is that some women are only too happy to take the sexual escalator to a bigger house. *. The White House is currently home to one. If I ever had a male boss that didn't take on a wife one generation younger than he - well I can't remember one. It was/iscommon to the point of normalacy. Women, you have collaborators in your ranks.

    * The male climber is no exactly unheard of, but less common due to male dominated power structure.

  18. [18] 
    Michale wrote:

    One thing that doesn't get mentioned is that some women are only too happy to take the sexual escalator to a bigger house. *. The White House is currently home to one.

    Melania Trump???

    WOW... That's pretty low.. Even by Weigantian standards...

    Women, you have collaborators in your ranks.

    I happen to agree with this...

    Rose McGowan is being touted from the Left as "brave" and a "hero"...

    But let's look at what she really did.. She took a 100K bribe and a career boost to ignore the problem.. And, in doing so, she aided and abetted 2 more decades of Weinstein victimizing hundreds more women...

    That's not the actions of a brave hero.. That's the actions of a selfish, greedy and perversely corrupt scumbag...

    Becoming a victim is usually NEVER a choice...

    CONTINUING to be a victim almost always is...

  19. [19] 
    TheStig wrote:

    RE 17

    My comments are not intended to condone or minimize sexual harrassment/predation in the workplace or any other place. Greater sexual equality in thw work force could reduce the problem - or it might just make for greater equalty among predators. We'll see.

  20. [20] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    The last thing I'd ever want to do would be to let slick Willie off the predator hook, inasmuch as he damn near invented the sport, however on the current theme, I'd mention that Monica was never forced to her knees kicking and screaming, in fact I'm guessing she brought her own foam knee pad, and likely undid Willie's zipper while he wasn't looking.

  21. [21] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Hmmm - an old ID returns to my filter. Just in tine for Christmas.

    Paula-2

    Every case is unique. There is a lot of faux equivalency being made. In reality, there is a continuum of boorish to misdemeanor to felony. Punishment ought to fit the infraction. Maybe the best way to deal with this would be something along the lines of a truth and reconciliation commission.

  22. [22] 
    TheStig wrote:

    'Scuse the typos - tiny glass screen at Starbucks.

  23. [23] 
    TheStig wrote:

    Not that any Moore evidence is really needed, but the news cycle is backing up Darwinian sexual selection theory quite nicely.

  24. [24] 
    Michale wrote:

    Hmmm - an old ID returns to my filter. Just in tine for Christmas.

    {ssiiigghhhhh}

    I am always gabberflasted at the snowflakes ability to actually BRAG about being pussies and having to create safe spaces to avoid hearing the facts that they don't like to hear...

    But hay.. If they want to cede the rhetorical battlefield to me because they have nothing in their intellectual arsenal??? Far be it from me to stop them..

    I just marvel that the actually BRAG about their impotence.. :D

  25. [25] 
    Don Harris wrote:

    Come to think of it, as long as Michale is back that should provide enough cover so that I can continue to comment on One Demand even though the original purpose is no longer valid.

    Who knows, it might actually work. It could be like Viagra, created for one purpose and found to actually serve another purpose.

  26. [26] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Franken was taking a photo with this woman who claims that he pulled her in tightly and grabbed her butt. If you have ever taken a photo with someone shorter than you who (when you go to put your arms around each other’s back) gets their arm above yours, you will end up with your hand on their butt every time! This isn’t about groping, it’s about physics!

    I cannot remember many group photos where someone wasn’t trying to squeeze people in as close as possible. This wasn’t Franken trying to get a cheap thrill, it was a freaking photo! That wasn’t sexual harassment; that was someone tired of having to pose in group photos every few minutes!

    Al Franken should NOT step down, because he has done nothing that warrants that! The first incident was him being immature and occurred prior to him running for Congress. Nothing he did came anywhere close to being a violation of law. Chris, I am disappointed that you are suggesting that he should resign.

    Personally, I think it looks like the GOP is trying to make sure that Franken won’t try for the White House in 2020!

  27. [27] 
    Elizabeth Miller wrote:

    Hmmm - an old ID returns to my filter. Just in tine for Christmas.

    Wrong holiday.

    Heh.

  28. [28] 
    Michale wrote:

    Franken was taking a photo with this woman who claims that he pulled her in tightly and grabbed her butt. If you have ever taken a photo with someone shorter than you who (when you go to put your arms around each other’s back) gets their arm above yours, you will end up with your hand on their butt every time! This isn’t about groping, it’s about physics!

    The woman said her butt cheek was grabbed tightly..

    I thought all women were to be believed..

    I guess it's only women who accuse Right Wingers are the women to be believed...

    That wasn’t sexual harassment; that was someone tired of having to pose in group photos every few minutes!

    The woman says different...

    Al Franken should NOT step down, because he has done nothing that warrants that! The first incident was him being immature and occurred prior to him running for Congress. Nothing he did came anywhere close to being a violation of law. Chris, I am disappointed that you are suggesting that he should resign.

    If Franken doesn't step down, the Democrat Party loses the moral high ground...

    It's that simple...

  29. [29] 
    TheStig wrote:

    CW - "The fall of Roger Ailes and Bill O'Reilly should have been a wake-up call..."

    I would say it was more like a smoke alarm with a snooze button that got hit a bunch of times by a drowsy Murdoch. He ultimately got out in time, but you could argue this snooze function ultimately killed Roger Ailes, while O'Reilly is still suffering from smoke inhalation and working out of his neighbor's garage. Murdoch collected the insurance (minus a sizeable deductible) and is repairing his damaged network.

    SNL could make an amusing Farmers Insurance Hall of Claims commercial out of this incident("We know a thing or two because we've seen a thing or two").

  30. [30] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Roy Moore was a perv who hit on high school girls when he was a local prosecutor. He liked younger girls; probably needed to aim for ones that he could easily impress since women his age wouldn’t fall for his lines.

    Moore doesn’t deny going out with high school girls — he admitted to doing so with the disclaimer that it was always with the parent’s permission! His bride was 14 years younger than him when he married at 38yo. He is accused of giving underaged girls alcohol and sexually molesting them.

    Moore used to always claim that homosexuals were child molesters. I wonder if that was his way of trying to come out?

  31. [31] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Roy Moore was a perv who hit on high school girls when he was a local prosecutor. He liked younger girls; probably needed to aim for ones that he could easily impress since women his age wouldn’t fall for his lines.

    Moore doesn’t deny going out with high school girls — he admitted to doing so with the disclaimer that it was always with the parent’s permission! His bride was 14 years younger than him when he married at 38yo. He is accused of giving underaged girls alcohol and sexually molesting them.

    Moore used to always claim that homosexuals were child molesters. I wonder if that was his way of trying to come out?

  32. [32] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Roy Moore was a perv who hit on high school girls when he was a local prosecutor. He liked younger girls; probably needed to aim for ones that he could easily impress since women his age wouldn’t fall for his lines.

    Moore doesn’t deny going out with high school girls — he admitted to doing so with the disclaimer that it was always with the parent’s permission! His bride was 14 years younger than him when he married at 38yo. He is accused of giving underaged girls alcohol and sexually molesting them.

    Moore used to always claim that homosexuals were child molesters. I wonder if that was his way of trying to come out?

  33. [33] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    If Franken doesn't step down, the Democrat Party loses the moral high ground...

    It's that simple...

    What high ground? Donald Trump and the entire GOP Congress make me feel gross every day! If that’s all it takes to get rid of someone, I will gladly pack Franken’s luggage for him!

  34. [34] 
    Paula wrote:

    [21] TS: good idea. Or some variation thereof.

  35. [35] 
    Michale wrote:

    He is accused of giving underaged girls alcohol and sexually molesting them.

    Key word being ACCUSED.....

    Are you of the opinion that ACCUSED = GUILTY when the person has a -R after their name???

    What high ground?

    Yea, I agree.. The Democrat Party lost the moral high ground with Bill CLinton and never got it back..

    Good point...

  36. [36] 
    Paula wrote:

    The rightwing spigot is back. Which convinces me these hits, especially on Al Franken, are rightwing hitjobs. I suspect more leaks will happen and all the operatives will spread the dirt. I want EVERY NAME of Congressmen/Senators who have paid off victims. ALL OF THEM.

    AND we want every woman BLOTUS attacked to be able to tell her story to the world again and this time be heard. WE heard them last year. Blotus called them all liars. And, of course, Bannonites are trying to muddy the waters re: Roy Moore. Only Al Franken has been willing, so far, to hold public hearings.

  37. [37] 
    Michale wrote:

    The rightwing spigot is back.

    And HELL is coming with me!!! :D

    . I want EVERY NAME of Congressmen/Senators who have paid off victims. ALL OF THEM.

    Michigan Rep. John Conyers, a Democrat and the longest-serving member of the House of Representatives, settled a wrongful dismissal complaint in 2015 with a former employee who alleged she was fired because she would not “succumb to [his] sexual advances.”

    The response from Weigantians??

    {{{cchhhirrrrrpppppp}}} {{{ccchhhirrrrpppppp}}}

    AND we want every woman BLOTUS attacked to be able to tell her story to the world again and this time be heard. WE heard them last year.

    Yea, and it's funny how they ALL disappeared once Trump won the election...

    Funny how that is, eh??? :D

    Only Al Franken has been willing, so far, to hold public hearings.

    Yea, that was when ONE woman complained...

    Now we have two... He has been silent since the 2nd one popped up...

  38. [38] 
    Paula wrote:

    And here we go: https://www.rawstory.com/2017/11/arianna-huffington-denies-al-franken-touching-her-inappropriately/

    The article is about a hit-job in the New York Post that used images from a skit Al and Ariana were in on Bill Maher. They LOOK bad until you get the explanations. Ariana says it's bullshit and explains the skit.

    Republicans/Bannonites/Trumpers are going to gin up accusations everywhere they can. That's what they do. They accuse, accuse, accuse. Gotta try to even things up! Roy Moore calls teenagers in Trig class and is so sleezy girls hide from him at the mall so gotta find a Dem.

    Dems must NOT lay down for this.

    Not saying Dems won't be found who are guilty. If John Conyers is, he is. If there was a settlement, there was. There are others, from both parties. If they leak ONE then they have to leak them all. ALL.

  39. [39] 
    Michale wrote:

    The article is about a hit-job in the New York Post that used images from a skit Al and Ariana were in on Bill Maher. They LOOK bad until you get the explanations. Ariana says it's bullshit and explains the skit.

    Huffington had her own issues with her staff committing sexual assaults and sexual harassments..

    She did nothing about it...

    Arianna Huffington Ignored Sexual Misconduct at The Huffington Post
    https://gizmodo.com/arianna-huffington-ignored-sexual-misconduct-at-the-huf-1820389889

    The Party is over, Democrats....

  40. [40] 
    C. R. Stucki wrote:

    How about a dose of outrage today? I just heard that the sexual abuse claims of women molested by congressmen are payed of with TAXPAYER $ FOR GAWDSAKE!!

    How about the congressmen should be kicked out of office, and made to pay the claims with their OWN money!!

  41. [41] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:


    Key word being ACCUSED.....

    Are you of the opinion that ACCUSED = GUILTY when the person has a -R after their name???

    Nope. Every case is different and should be judged on its own merits. When what a person is being accused of is criminal, then those accusations definitely deserve closer scrutiny! If they aren’t criminal, then it really shouldn’t matter.

    Franken’s actions were not criminal, and that is based solely on what these women have accused him of doing! The kiss he gave, while rehearsing a scene in a skit that called on Franken to kiss her, was rougher than she liked. She says she was unaware that he was going to kiss her — so I guess sometimes the pretty ones really are stupid as the script called for him to kiss her!

    This is nothing but the GOP’s attempts to destroy the political career of someone that scares the crap out of them!

    And drop the “ButwhataboutBillClinton” blubbering! If you want to talk about things that occurred 30 years ago that do not involve anyone currently in politics, we can talk about that AFTER we get finished discussing things that are presently in the news.

    Moore was the prosecutor in the town where he was accused of trolling for teenie-boppers. He’s running for office. He claims to be a “Christian warrior”, but there is nothing about the man that I would call Christ-like except his gender!

    His campaign has compared the accusations he is facing to the persecution that Jesus Christ faced. The unbelievably massive arrogance they show in attempting to draw comparisons between the two just makes me hope they get their wish....with both stories ending the same way!

  42. [42] 
    Michale wrote:

    And drop the “ButwhataboutBillClinton” blubbering! If you want to talk about things that occurred 30 years ago that do not involve anyone currently in politics, we can talk about that AFTER we get finished discussing things that are presently in the news.

    Fine.. Then we can ignore the Moore accusation that occurred almost FORTY years ago....

  43. [43] 
    Paula wrote:

    And another attempt by GOP: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/alabama-local-police-chief-suspended-over-child-molestation-sarcasm

    An Alabama sheriff claims Doug Jones molested him as a child. On Facebook, where no doubt it was shared like crazy. Then he claims he was being sarcastic.

    This idiot "retracted" his "sarcasm" but the accusation will probably be floated all over rightwing web outlets, etc. He's been suspended.

    The floodgates have been opened for women with genuine complaints to come out. Rightwing operatives found a perfect opening for their dirty tricks.

    They can only win by cheating.

  44. [44] 
    Michale wrote:

    And to say that Bill Clinton isn't currently in politics is to ignore reality...

  45. [45] 
    Michale wrote:

    CBS FIRES ROSE
    Charlie Rose Gets Hammered by Norah O’Donnell and Gayle King

    https://www.thedailybeast.com/charlie-rose-gets-no-pass-from-cbs-this-morning

  46. [46] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    Paula [2] and LWYH [26]: I couldn't agree with you two more. These 'accusations' against Franken were made by 1) a frequent Fox News contributor, and 2) a woman who admits that she and her husband voted for Trump.

    And no one on the networks has yet broached the question of how Roger Stone happened to know before the fact that the Franken accusations were coming.

    Looks like another 'dirty tricks' operation in progress to me, an effort to establish a false equivalence, and to take down a liberal threat.

  47. [47] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    And to say that Bill Clinton isn't currently in politics is to ignore reality...

    Repubs just don't want to let go of their favorite punching bag. Maybe they need therapy.

  48. [48] 
    Michale wrote:

    Paula [2] and LWYH [26]: I couldn't agree with you two more. These 'accusations' against Franken were made by 1) a frequent Fox News contributor, and 2) a woman who admits that she and her husband voted for Trump.

    So, in other words.. ALL WOMEN ARE TO BE BELEIVED...

    EXCEPT women that work for Fox News and/or voted for Trump..

    Of course, that exception doesn't apply when women who work for Fox News and/or voted for Trump are accusing someone with a -R after their name..

    THEN they join the ranks of the TO BE BELIEVED women..

    I wish you could take a step back from your hysterical religious-esque Party zealotry and see how utterly and completely ridiculous you sound....

  49. [49] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    So, in other words.. ALL WOMEN ARE TO BE BELEIVED..EXCEPT women that work for Fox News and/or voted for Trump..

    I certainly never said "all women are to be believed". My own brother was once falsely accused by a girl who later admitted that she was just trying to break up his relationship with a rival.

    But I think that if we're going to seriously have this debate that some distinction must be made between seriously criminal behavior, boorish behavior, and merely awkward situations.

    Franken's behavior is probably in the latter category, at worst in the 'boorish' category. He absolutely shouldn't resign for such petty alleged offenses.

    But the behavior of Moore, and the admitted assaults of Trump fit into the 'criminal' category, and should be assessed accordingly by voters.

    As for the GOP, as Paula said the other day, given their history, no dirty trick seems to low for them to consider, so anything that emanates from those quarters should be taken with a mountain of salt.

  50. [50] 
    Michale wrote:

    But the behavior of Moore,

    You mean, the ALLEGED behavior of Moore..

    and the admitted assaults of Trump

    What "admitted" assaults would those be???

    So, to sum up...

    Franken's behavior is simply boorish..

    Moore and Trump should be taken out and shot..

    And the fact that Franken is a Democrat and Moore and Trump are Republicans has NOTHING to do with your assessment, right???

    Com'on, Balthy...

    I was born *AT* night...

    Not LAST night...

  51. [51] 
    Michale wrote:

    John Lasseter Taking Leave of Absence From Pixar Amid "Missteps"
    https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/john-lasseter-taking-leave-absence-pixar-missteps-1057113

    And ANOTHER Democrat goes down in flames...

  52. [52] 
    Kick wrote:

    CW: Who Will Be Next?

    Not sure who will be "next," but Benedict Donald is going to get his turn when all the dust settles. Poor Donald has gone and admitted to peeping at underage teens in various states of undress when he was owner of the Miss Teenage America pageant... and a host of other admissions. He also owns a modelling agency where a whole lot of teens who worked for him are beginning to speak up. Those women Trump promised to sue have gone nowhere, and Donald is being sued by one of them as we speak, with who knows what's ahead? He's already paid off one accuser named Jill Harth, and she's gone nowhere either.

    I agree with Paula and Balthy. I also think a problem with the #MeToo exercise is the false equivalency and assuming that everyone that speaks up is telling the truth, and I don't give a hang what political party someone belongs to... I'm not taking anyone's word regardless. Anyone regardless of party affiliation who is being accused better have an accuser who is willing to prove their case.

    Bill Clinton and Donald Trump: Old news. Clinton no longer president, Trump president. I don't believe all the women who accused Clinton because I know who pays some of them to lie. I definitely believe enough of them to label Clinton an abuser regardless of the ones who are paid to embellish their stories. Trump is an admitted abuser, bragged several times about it and has paid off an accuser. Clinton and Trump used to be "friends" and share "friends" who can bury them both and it's sickening. Enough said.

    Dennis Hastert: Old news. Proof he is a pervert is now obvious.

    Newt Gingrich: More old news. Obvious hypocrite and stay tuned. Would not surprise me if some of Newt's victim's started singing. We'll see.

    Roy Moore: Old news. Roy liked them young, but the age of consent in Alabama is 16. What he did with the 14-year-old child is inexcusable, and I believe her story but not all of Roy's accusers. Body language gives some of them away. Perhaps the 14-year-old lied about her age? Regardless of all that, Roy would be a lousy Senator because he's already been thrown off the Alabama high court for refusing to follow the law. I hope Roy wins, though, because that would be awesome for reasons I won't enumerate. Enough said.

    Al Franken: His accuser admitted that she agreed to "practice the kiss." He did nothing without her consent in that regard, but it was pretty stupid taking the picture where he pretends to touch her through the flak jacket. Had he actually touched her, she would have felt nothing through the jacket. Stupid but hardly worth resigning over. Franken's accuser also said that she regrets that she did that skit over and over through the entire run of that USO tour. She consented to something that she wishes in retrospect that she hadn't agreed to do. I would say that describes a whole lot of us. In my opinion, her story is embellished (body language).

    Who else? Might it be easier to list who is NOT next?

    Paula: Not saying Dems won't be found who are guilty. If John Conyers is, he is. If there was a settlement, there was. There are others, from both parties. If they leak ONE then they have to leak them all. ALL.

    I agree... leak them ALL... both parties and more than one POTUS. Trump/Bannon/Stone and their ilk will be clinging tightly to their whataboutism as if it excuses their actions, and it's going to get really cold because winter is coming. :)

  53. [53] 
    Kick wrote:

    LWYH
    40

    Preach. Amen, brother. :)

  54. [54] 
    ListenWhenYouHear wrote:

    Michale:

    So, to sum up...

    Franken's behavior is simply boorish..

    Moore and Trump should be taken out and shot..

    And the fact that Franken is a Democrat and Moore and Trump are Republicans has NOTHING to do with your assessment, right???

    No, it is the fact that Franken apologized directly with his one accuser for his actions while Moore and Trump have not only refused to apologize; they have actively attacked the reputations of their accusers — that has EVERYTHING to do with my assessment!!!

    The fact that the Democrat responded to the accusations properly and with humility while one Republican chose to attack and humiliate women that had simply corroborated his pussy grabbing claims and the other Republican chose to humiliate and trash women he won’t directly deny having asked out when the women were teenagers is why they should be treated differently! That there is an (R) after the names of the two we should be most critical of is sadly not shocking to anyone!

    Paula, Balty, & Kick:

    It’s nice to see so many of us on the same page with this one.

  55. [55] 
    goode trickle wrote:

    Just a quick pass through...

    Didn't any one see the recent re-branding message of the GOP to the party of OPP?

    So the GOP will now become the party of Old Pedophiles and Pederasts; they will be using the Naughty by Nature song O.P.P. to appeal to a wider audience to bring them into a tent...

  56. [56] 
    Michale wrote:

    Another Woman Accused Rep. John Conyers Of Sexual Harassment In Court Filings This Year

    A former scheduler for the Democratic congressman said she faced daily harassment from him, in a suit she later abandoned after a court denied her request to keep it sealed. A BuzzFeed News investigation on Monday showed that Conyers had settled a sexual harassment complaint with another former staffer.
    https://www.buzzfeed.com/paulmcleod/another-woman-accused-rep-john-conyers-of-sexual-harassment?utm_term=.wyy9mLA26w#.mcyyYp4vkb

    HA!

    We're gonna get rid of 2 Democrat CongressCritters!!! :D

  57. [57] 
    Michale wrote:

    Not sure who will be "next," but Benedict Donald is going to get his turn when all the dust settles.

    TRUMP IS TOAST Prediction #28,901

    yyaaaawwwwmnnnnnnn

    I agree with Paula and Balthy.

    Shocker... Collective group-think....

  58. [58] 
    Michale wrote:

    No, it is the fact that Franken apologized directly with his one accuser for his actions while Moore and Trump have not only refused to apologize; they have actively attacked the reputations of their accusers — that has EVERYTHING to do with my assessment!!!

    Whatever you have to tell yourself to make it thru your day.. :D

    I know better...

    The fact that the Democrat responded to the accusations properly and with humility while one Republican chose to attack and humiliate women

    Of course the Democrat did.. Democrats are pure as the driven snow...

    :^/

    Yer so transparent...

  59. [59] 
    Michale wrote:

    Thank liberals if Roy Moore survives the charges against him
    https://nypost.com/2017/11/14/thank-liberals-if-roy-moore-survives-the-charges-against-him/

    Yep... Yep... Yep....

  60. [60] 
    Michale wrote:

    Ya know, ya just have to wonder..

    What with Hollywood Dem Donors dropping like flies....

    One has to wonder where the Dems are going to get money to finance their 2018 campaigns..

    Maybe One Demand will finally come into it's own.. :D

  61. [61] 
    Michale wrote:

    NFL owners could change anthem policy next season if protests continue
    https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/sports/wp/2017/11/21/nfl-owners-weighing-change-to-anthem-policy-for-next-season-if-protests-continue/?utm_term=.f4a1ea143771

    OK, so here's what I don't get...

    The NFL won't order their employees to stand for the anthem because it takes away their so-called Right to Free Speech...

    So, to solve the problem the NFL is considering taking away EVERY employees' right to freedom of expression...

    Left Winger liberal "logic" at work...

    If the NFL thinks that this is going to stave off the MASSIVE bad publicity and MASSIVE loss of revenue... The NFL doesn't know it's target audience at all...

  62. [62] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    56

    TRUMP IS TOAST Prediction #28,901

    yyaaaawwwwmnnnnnnn

    Yes, your mischaracterization of posters' comments and regurgitating the same one-note argument over and over is rather tiresome; good of you to let us know you're boring to yourself as well. I didn't say Trump was toast; I said he was going to get his turn when all the dust settles, and I was talking about his accusers who will not be silent and are in court against him even now.

    Shocker... Collective group-think....

    People agreeing on one issue isn't "collective group-think." For an illustration of group-think, please refer to the Trump cult of personality of which you belong to wherein Trump can do no wrong because of your worship and whataboutism. :)

  63. [63] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    60

    OK, so here's what I don't get...

    The NFL won't order their employees to stand for the anthem because it takes away their so-called Right to Free Speech...

    So, to solve the problem the NFL is considering taking away EVERY employees' right to freedom of expression...

    Left Winger liberal "logic" at work...

    You're right; you really don't get it if you actually believe that the NFL, a group that consists almost entirely of Republican owners belonging to the 1%, is an example of "liberal logic" when it is demonstrably exactly the opposite.

    Trump is using the NFL to create division and encourage people to pick sides, and this concludes today's lesson in "Fascism 101: Divide and Conquer." Tune in next week to "Fascism 101: Distraction," when we'll discuss authoritarianism and keeping the masses divided against each other so they won't notice how badly you're screwing them and unite against you. :)

  64. [64] 
    Michale wrote:

    You're right; you really don't get it if you actually believe that the NFL, a group that consists almost entirely of Republican owners belonging to the 1%, is an example of "liberal logic" when it is demonstrably exactly the opposite.

    And yet, the vast majority of these "Republican 1%" owners are allowing their employees to shit on the flag, the military and the national anthem. And, in doing so, costing their brand HUNDREDS of MILLIONS in lost revenue...

    Yea.. THAT is logical...

    Trump is using the NFL to create division and encourage people to pick sides, and this concludes today's lesson in "Fascism 101: Divide and Conquer."

    Which is EXACTLY what the Dumbocrats did in the 2016 election and is still doing so today..

    Funny how you don't have a problem with the Dumbocrats doing it...

  65. [65] 
    Michale wrote:

    Political media engulfed by sexual harassment crisis

    Glenn Thrush of The New York Times, Charlie Rose of CBS, author Mark Halperin, NBC’s Matthew Zimmerman, NPR’s Michael Oreskes, Vox’s Lockhart Steele, the New Republic’s Hamilton Fish and the Atlantic’s Leon Wieseltier have all been suspended or fired in the last month over varying degrees of alleged harassment or assault.
    http://thehill.com/homenews/media/361422-harassment-allegations-shake-political-media

    The decimation of the propaganda arm of the Democrat Party...

    YES!!!!!!

  66. [66] 
    Balthasar wrote:

    The decimation of the propaganda arm of the Democrat Party...

    Dream on, Drumpf Drone. Plenty more where they came from.

  67. [67] 
    Michale wrote:

    Dream on, Drumpf Drone. Plenty more where they came from.

    Yea, but they can't seem to keep their hands to themselves or their wee-wees in their pants.. :D

    Your Democrats are going to have to go ONE DEMAND in 2018 because all of yer donors are going to be toxic... :D

  68. [68] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's annoying when yer lousy ZERO TOLERANCE attitudes come back and bite ya on yer wee-wees, eh?? :D

  69. [69] 
    Michale wrote:

    U.S. Rep. Joe Barton apologizes for graphic online photo

    Texas Congressman Joe Barton released a statement Wednesday apologizing for a graphic nude photo of him that circulated on social media earlier this week. He announced his re-election bid earlier this month.

    BY ABBY LIVINGSTON NOV. 22, 2017 12:21 PM
    https://www.texastribune.org/2017/11/22/us-rep-joe-barton-deciding-how-respond-after-graphic-photo-circulates-/

    And Republicans are not immune from doing stoopid stuff...

  70. [70] 
    Michale wrote:

    Sebelius: The Clinton White House doubled down on 'abusive behavior' and it's fair to criticize Hillary Clinton
    http://www.cnn.com/2017/11/...

    The END of the Clintons!!!

    Bummer.. I was really hoping she would run again in 2020... heh :D

  71. [71] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    63

    And yet, the vast majority of these "Republican 1%" owners are allowing their employees to shit on the flag, the military and the national anthem. And, in doing so, costing their brand HUNDREDS of MILLIONS in lost revenue...

    Yea.. THAT is logical...

    So what? Who gives a hang about the NFL "brand" and how many dollars the owners lose? Did you give two shirts about it before Trump encouraged you to pick sides? You're allowing Benedict Donald to push your buttons and con you still.

    [Spoken in your best Jeff Foxworthy drawl]: If you've bought "all-in" to the utter nonsensical fantasy that football players kneeling in silent protest during the part of a football game that most people don't even watch is the equivalent of "shitting on the flag, the military and the national anthem," you might be a "Drumpf Drone" (props to Balthy for that one). :)

    Which is EXACTLY what the Dumbocrats did in the 2016 election and is still doing so today..

    Funny how you don't have a problem with the Dumbocrats doing it...

    Funny how you don't have a problem making up utter BS about posters on a chat board, and all you've demonstrated is your willingness to make stuff up and your ever present reliance on whataboutism. :)

  72. [72] 
    Michale wrote:

    So what? Who gives a hang about the NFL "brand" and how many dollars the owners lose?

    Uh... THE OWNERS...

    Which is who you were talking about...

  73. [73] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    71

    Uh... THE OWNERS...

    Which is who you were talking about...

    It's actually you who were talking about the owners and accusing them of "liberal logic" when they're obviously exactly the opposite and contemplating censorship in order to appease Trump and his cult of personality drones who suddenly are concerned with NFL profits.

    I said it before, and I'll say it again. If the players on the sidelines wanted to show some real "respect" to America, they could cease with the silent protests and wear those red Trump campaign hats that insinuate in all capital letters that America isn't a great country, and as Paula rightly points out, they could also prove how much they respect the American flag by waving their confederate battle flags that so many of the Trump followers favor. /sarcasm off

  74. [74] 
    Michale wrote:

    It's actually you who were talking about the owners

    Actually, I was talking about the NFL, not the owners.

    YOU brought up the owners, saying that they are Republicans and that they CAN'T be using liberal logic..

    I pointed out that they are NOT acting like Republicans because what kind of Republican would make such bad business decisions as to let their players shit on the country.. Ergo, they are using "liberal logic"...

    Face the facts, sweetie...

    You're wrong and I am right...

  75. [75] 
    Michale wrote:

    The TV audience for NFL games steepened its slide in Week 11, losing 1 million viewers versus last year’s season-to-date average.

    The 6.3 percent slump — worsening from comparable declines of 5.6 to 5.7 percent during the previous three weeks — plagued a week whose off-the-field drama made gridiron tackling seem almost tame by comparison.
    https://nypost.com/2017/11/22/the-nfl-ratings-slump-is-getting-worse/

    It's really simple..

    Order your employees to quit shitting on the flag, the anthem, the military and the country or the hemorrhaging will continue and accelerate...

  76. [76] 
    Kick wrote:

    Michale
    73

    Actually, I was talking about the NFL, not the owners.

    *LOL*

    You said, and I quote: OK, so here's what I don't get... The NFL won't order their employees to stand for the anthem because it takes away their so-called Right to Free Speech...

    So if you're not talking about the owners there, exactly who is it that you're referring to that "won't order their employees"? Who is it that you think actually makes the rules in the NFL?

    Let me put that in perspective for you: Congress will not order the repeal of the ACA... I was not talking about the legislators; I was talking about Congress.

    YOU brought up the owners, saying that they are Republicans and that they CAN'T be using liberal logic..

    You said you didn't understand and whined about the NFL not ordering their employees to do something, and I agreed you didn't understand if you actually thought a group that was made up of almost entirely Republicans represented the thinking of liberals.

    I pointed out that they are NOT acting like Republicans because what kind of Republican would make such bad business decisions as to let their players shit on the country.

    In answer to your question: Donald Trump. There's a reason I call him "Benedict Donald." Whatever your definition of a "Republican" used to be is long gone, and as I have already stated above, if you think a silent protest is the equivalent of "shitting on the country" while you ignore the fact that Donald Trump wears and sells a hat that insinuates that America isn't already a great country (in all capital letters), then you just might be a Drumpf Drone (props again to Balthy).

Comments for this article are closed.