Fresh air and sun light is a very good disinfectant, (It took a while before the coin dropped, compared to Franken, this guy seems like a creep ).
Typical Gillibrand âwind-sockâ political move.
Once it becomes politically embarrassing, she gives a trusted aid the heave-ho.
Hey, Al Franken, did you hear the one about Gillibrand ignoring sexual harassment claims, and only fires the guy many months later after a mere 2-week Politico report finds multiple allegations?
Pretty funny, huh, Al?
How ⌠ironic.
I take this opportunity of emphasizing that there is no harassment in my office. Absolutely none, and when I say none, I mean there is a certain amount, more than we are prepared to admit, but all new staffers are warned that if they come to work and harassment happens, theyâre to tell me immediately so that I can immediately take every measure to hush the whole thing up.
I like K-Gill. I think the McSally story will make people take a second look at her because it makes people realize that K-Gill did take on something that was quite politically treacherous. On this matter, I suppose people will criticize her for hypocrisy but I think the nation views this issue of changing the standard on sexual harassment with more nuance than that. I donât think most people believe that Frankenâs resignation was wrong or that it was wrong to call for it. I also think that most believe that there has to be some role for due process. At the same time, people believe the standard we had in the 90s/80s etc is not acceptable. It doesnât work and K-Gillâs role in stating that realization will age well.
I think if K-Gill gives a speech or interview in which she captures that nuance sheâll come out the better for it.
Ewww.
And Yikes!
I guess that spikes Gillibrandâs momentum. (If any.)
May as well burn this thread down now to save time later.
Gillibrand lost two staffers over this nonsense. To me, it doesnât seem like the officeâs initial response was all that bad. They demoted the guy and warned him. But, she of all people should know that #MeToo requires firing for any offense or perceived slight.
She claims he retaliated, but I donât see information regarding whether she notified the office about the retaliation or what their response was. In what form was the retaliation?
I applaud you for going counter to the conventional wisdom out here.
But failing to address this issue when the woman resigned (if thatâs what happenedâor didnât) is really damaging, given the way Gilibrand turned on Franken. Given that she seems to have built little organization or got any notice so far, I donât see how she gets beyond this.
Itâs not just this issue and the Franken history. I heard an interview with her on, I think NPR, where she was challenged on changing her positions over time. I didnât get the sense that sheâs very grounded in her politics, maybe too much of an opportunist? I dunno. Iâd have to learn more about her, but sheâs not in my personal top tier of announced or pending 2020 candidates.
She hasnât done well in polling to date so she doesnât really have further to drop. But what she can do is turn it into an opportunity and capture where the country really is on the issue. Weâre not zero tolerance for anything that someone may allege as sexual harassment. Weâre not for firing people on a hair trigger allegation. We are for recognizing that the old standard has been discredited, that there is much rot in our society on this issue and we need a new way of looking at this that deals with it from the perspective of the existential crisis and threat that women face when they are powerless to deal with harassment/hostile work environment situations.
That said there are degrees. For example, is ranking women by looks in the office a firing offense? Iâve never been in an office setting where that didnât happen by both men and women. There are circumstances where it could rise to the level of harassment but thatâs a fact based inquiry. I think an approach that the country could get behind is to start with the low hanging fruit worst offender types like the Matt Lauer, Bill OâReilly types. If we had a standard that people could trust would root out such folks more quickly and efficiently, then there would be more nuance permitted on things that many feel are grey areas.
I donât care about Gillibrandâs campaign. I care about fairness. I want Gillibrandâs model of how to handle sexual harassment (âbelieve the womenâ) to crash and burn.
We should take allegations seriously, but not presume guilt and not overreact.
Ugh, she has completely undermined everything you wrote there. She has been very clearly for zero tolerance and presuming guilt (âbelieve the womenâ).
Yeah well, Gillibrand isnât even on my top pick list out of the 20 (Holy shit, did I say 20?) anyway. Sheâs not coming in at number 4, 3, 2 or 1 either. My motto this timeâŚNo one from NY. Sorry NY, you blew it.
This is sure to blunt enthusiasm among the Gillibrand campaignâs tens of supporters.
You canât be serious. Is this snark?
Gillibrand is a toxic swamp of dreadful self-interest. She was an EXCELLENT tobacco lawyer, and coached executives in how to lie to Congress. You good with that?
She was a total asshole about Franken. And now we find that she was concealing someone who did as much or worse?
Wow, dude, you got some âsplaininâ to do.
What a pile of SHIT!! Franken - zero tolerance. Lizza - zero tolerance. Brokaw - zero tolerance. Keillor - zero tolerance.
Case after case after case, accusations are the ONLY thing that is needed, and NO DEFENCE was allowed. ZERO FUCKING TOLERANCE IS THE DEMOCRATIC POSITION.
And you are defending this piece of crap Gillibrand? I am stunned and appalled.
They donât call her Tracy Flick for no reason.
I think I disagree. I think what sheâs doing is shifting the standard. âBelieve the womenâ means put appropriate scrutiny on the alleged perpetrators and force them to explain themselves. You just canât be able to get away with a He Said/She Said situation. That hasnât worked. You canât have a system where women know what happened to them but they lose 90% of the time when they come forward. Thatâs what #metoo is about - addressing the failure of our justice system to deal with this issue. How is it that Bill OâReilly and Matt Lauer got away with egregious behavior for so long? Because of that failure, we have a systemic problem and donât know what the right standard is.