,
21 tweets,
4 min read
Read on Twitter
Gillibrand was right about Franken, and the damage that being right did to her presidential campaign is a reminder of how much work still remains to be done in combating sexual harassment in politics.
(And just to get in before these replies: She didn't act on her own against Franken, and she didn't drive him from the Senate. She was the spokesperson for half a dozen of her colleagues, and Franken made his own decisions.)
And if you're gonna reply with "no, she was wrong," you could at least ... offer some sort of explanation for your opinion, or disagree with something I said. This thread isn't a poll.
Also, if your position is that Franken did nothing wrong, your argument isn't with me, or with Gillibrand. It's with Senator Al Franken, and you should take it up with him.
"I don't know what was in my head when I took that picture. I look at it now and I feel disgusted with myself. It's obvious how Leeann would feel violated by that picture. And, what's more, I can see how millions of other women would feel violated by it." —Senator Franken
Franken's apologies were incomplete and inadequate, in my view. But even he admitted that his behavior in the photo was completely inappropriate and violating. If you disagree, take it up with him if you like, but leave me out of it.
And on whether Senate Dems should have stuck by Franken: He held on for three weeks after the Tweeden allegations surfaced, and in those three weeks he offered no coherent explanation, defense, or apology for the growing list of complaints against him.
As woman after woman came forward—including at least one who was known personally by several senators—Franken gave his colleagues nothing on which to base a defense of him. How long should they have held on, and why?
If they had stuck by him, there was every indication that new accusers would keep coming forward, and no reason to believe that he would ultimately be exonerated.
I wrote last month about what a Franken ethics committee investigation would have looked like. It would have been ugly. Really ugly.
Franken could have gotten such an investigation if he'd insisted on one. Hell, he probably could have gotten his colleagues support for one if he had made a compelling case for it. But he didn't, and he didn't, and he quit.
Hoo boy. And the Falwell tweets from yesterday were just dying down, too.
Closing the computer for a while. Yell amongst yourselves.
A couple last things before I abandon the thread...
1. I didn't say coming out against Franken was why Gillibrand's campaign failed—I said it hurt her. There's lots of evidence for that—in polling, in news reports, and in replies to this thread.
2. Many of Franken's defenders here are ignorant about basic facts of the case. This—again—is a good place to start if you want to get up to speed.
3. He quit tho.
And oh, okay. One more.
4. I honestly believe Franken could have survived this scandal if he'd offered some sort of explanation or apology, and given his supporters confidence that there was a light at the end of the tunnel. That he did neither is, IMO, why he ran out of runway after three weeks.
And what the hell. 5. Kamala Harris, Elizabeth Warren, and Cory Booker all called on Franken to resign when the scandal broke, and they all told the Washington Post last month that they stand by that decision.
(Bernie also called on Franken to resign before he stepped down, but his people didn't respond to the WP's request for comment in time for publication of their story last month.)
