Senator Al Franken Kissed and Groped Me Without My Consent, And There’s Nothing Funny

theprestige said:
Haha oh wow. "Let the liberals take care of this"? Like you took care of Bill Clinton? Like you took care of all the liberal money men in Hollywood who've been getting a free pass for decades?

As much as anything else, Trump's election is a reaction years of hypocrisy and shrill preaching from the left. You lost the option of keeping yourself above it all a long time ago.
Click to expand...

This, excellent post and response.
 
logger said:
Wow, I can’t believe I’m seeing this from you.
Click to expand...

careful, pointing out that this thread contains a NSFW link to the accuser's bikini pictures for absolutely no *********** purpose whatsoever is a "vile" "lie" or something.
 
dudalb said:
I think that what Franken is accused of doing is NOT as bad as what Moore did.
But it's bad enough so that his political career should end.
Click to expand...

Except there isn’t any proof of what Moore is accused of.
 
Oystein said:
While I think that Ginger's arguments are biased and kinda miss the mark, you keep misconstruing them badly.

Ginger certainly did not shame Tweeden by referencing her well-known career in being a sexy model, as in "shame on the victim, she had it coming".

The argument is rather this: Although it is wrong, it is very likely that Tweeden has experienced a number of sexual harrassments and perhaps even assaults in her life - and very likely more than many other women her age because she is a sexy model and many men perceive her as a pin-up more than as a human being with dignity. And therefore, Ginger seems to question why Tweeden has come out to complain about Al Franken, but not about any other instances of having beem harrassed.
Click to expand...

That is the most amazing job of bending over backwards that I have ever seen. I mean, seriously? Her claim is only credible if she mentions the hundred other times some schnook nobody has ever heard of behaved like a jackass to her? What is the point?
 
Ted: Bill, someone from your side has done something wrong.
Bill: Yes I understand that.
Ted: Okay make a statement.
Bill: A member of my side has done something bad....
Ted: Good...
Bill ... but it's not as bad as this thing someone from the other side did!
Ted: No, no. We're not talking about the other side right now.
Bill: *Confused head tilt, like a dog that's just been shown a card trick.*
Ted: Okay let's try this again. What happened?
Bill: Someone from my side did something wrong.
Ted: Good.
Bill: But I need to remind everyone of this think the other side did.
Ted: Okay you were doing good... and then you weren't. Okay I want you to say that someone from your side did something wrong.
Bill: Got it.
Ted: And then... just stop talking.
Bill: Alright I'll try. Someone from my side did something wrong.
Ted: Good, good.
Bill: But....
Ted: No... no...
Bill: *Bites his lip... pounds his fist on the table... starts turning red....*
Ted: Jesus just say it before you explode.
Bill: BUT THE OTHER SIDE! *Collapses back in his chair, gasping and flushed.* Oh I barely survived that.

Seriously it's like watching Jim Carrery try to say "The pen is blue."
 
Oystein said:
Well, that's why.
There were two possibilities:
1. Charged and convicted before statue of limitations ran out. Then he may have gone to jail 35 years ago and would have been out more than 30 years ago - in which case he definitely should not be in jail (present tense).
2. Statue of limitation ran out - can't be charges and convicted, and should not be in jail.

Either way: Should not be in jail, period.

Unless someone is proposing he should have been jailed for 30+ years.
Click to expand...

The trouble is that I don't believe Travis is talking about either of these. Rather that what he did was illegal, and so he should be in prison because that's what happens to people who do illegal things. He's not worrying about the legalities of the issue, just that the action was illegal.

However let's break it down. The first question is, should there even be a statue of limitations on Sexual abuse and assault, especially given that we know that it can take years, if not decades, for victims to come forward, be it due to fear of reprisals,of not being believed, or what it could do to their families. Should abuses be able to get away with things just because they managed to intimidate their victims well enough that they don't get accused in time?

If you were to support the view that there should be no time limit to sexual misconduct allegations, then the statement that "Moore should be in Jail" is not at all nonsense, but rather a statement of position against Statue of Limitations on Sex Crimes.

This seems to me to be quite a legitimate comment to make.
 
Brainster said:
That is the most amazing job of bending over backwards that I have ever seen. I mean, seriously? Her claim is only credible if she mentions the hundred other times some schnook nobody has ever heard of behaved like a jackass to her? What is the point?
Click to expand...

I do not know, it appears that because she worked at hooters and took sexy pictures and was probably groped worse that... uh.... she should not be complaining about Senator Al Franken groping her or something?

**** if I know.

Anyway, there is a link to her bikini pictures in this thread for some damn reason, but not for slut shaming.
 
PhantomWolf said:
The trouble is that I don't believe Travis is talking about either of these. Rather that what he did was illegal, and so he should be in prison because that's what happens to people who do illegal things. He's not worrying about the legalities of the issue, just that the action was illegal.

However let's break it down. The first question is, should there even be a statue of limitations on Sexual abuse and assault, especially given that we know that it can take years, if not decades, for victims to come forward, be it due to fear of reprisals,of not being believed, or what it could do to their families. Should abuses be able to get away with things just because they managed to intimidate their victims well enough that they don't get accused in time?

If you were to support the view that there should be no time limit to sexual misconduct allegations, then the statement that "Moore should be in Jail" is not at all nonsense, but rather a statement of position against Statue of Limitations on Sex Crimes.

This seems to me to be quite a legitimate comment to make.
Click to expand...

From what we know now. Franken would be charged and Moore wouldn’t. It’s that pesky evidence thing.
 
logger said:
Except one there is proof, the other there isn’t.
Click to expand...

Actually there isn't, the picture doesn't show what is claimed because a) he's not touching her, and b) she's wearing a flack jacket so what she claimed would be impossible to do anyways. However, while he didn't actually grope her while she slept, he did mimic doing so, and that is still serious, IMO.

There is more proof that Moore did what he is claimed to have done because there are now about 9 claimants, whereas there is one claimant to Franken's kiss.
 
TheL8Elvis said:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leeann_Tweeden

She has also appeared on the political discussion series Hannity, as a member of the "Great American Panel" and occasionally appeared on the panel of Red Eye w/ Greg Gutfeld.[4]

In 1996, Tweeden appeared non-nude in a fitness model pictorial for Playboy magazine. Fifteen years later, at 38 years old, she appeared again in the December, 2011 issue of Playboy, this time posing in a nude pictorial. IIn 2002, she was a guest character in the motocross video game Freekstyle as a motocross rider. The March 2007 Issue of FHM (which was the final printed US issue) featured Tweeden as the cover girl.[5] As part of Hooters' 25th anniversary in 2008, she was named among "The Top Hooters Girls of all time".[6]

More context.
Click to expand...

Wow. The "she wore a short skirt" defense in 2017.
 
logger said:
From what we know now. Franken would be charged and Moore wouldn’t. It’s that pesky evidence thing.
Click to expand...

I seriously doubt that Franken would be charged, with the kiss she did consent, though pressured, but a non-consensual kiss is not actually illegal anyways. On the photo, IMO it is very wrong because you shouldn't treat anyone like that, but pretending to squeeze her boobs isn't illegal. You can tell he didn't actually do it, at least in the photo because a) he's not touching her, and b) the flack jacket would prevent him from doing so. Moore certainly could have been charged had the allegations been made at the time, what he is alleged to have done certainly was illegal.
 
PhantomWolf said:
Actually there isn't, the picture doesn't show what is claimed because a) he's not touching her, and b) she's wearing a flack jacket so what she claimed would be impossible to do anyways. However, while he didn't actually grope her while she slept, he did mimic doing so, and that is still serious, IMO.

There is more proof that Moore did what he is claimed to have done because there are now about 9 claimants, whereas there is one claimant to Franken's kiss.
Click to expand...

A claimant? That is not proof at all. A witness to the kiss along with this photo is all she needs. Not to mention his alleged harassment of her the whole time. The other perv had allegations of over 40 years ago with no proof except allegation. ;)
 
PhantomWolf said:
I seriously doubt that Franken would be charged, with the kiss she did consent, though pressured, but a non-consensual kiss is not actually illegal anyways. On the photo, IMO it is very wrong because you shouldn't treat anyone like that, but pretending to squeeze her boobs isn't illegal. You can tell he didn't actually do it, at least in the photo because a) he's not touching her, and b) the flack jacket would prevent him from doing so. Moore certainly could have been charged had the allegations been made at the time, what he is alleged to have done certainly was illegal.
Click to expand...

We haven’t gotten as far as did he actually grab them. There was also a witness to that. Besides, it looks to me like he’s touching. It’s clearly assault.
 
Last edited:
Giz said:
Wow. The "she wore a short skirt" defense in 2017.
Click to expand...

I have been instructed that pointing that out is a "vile" "lie" because she probably got more groped while working at hooters or wearing a bikini and here are the bikini pictures and therefore ... step two missing...Reelect Al Franken!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom