HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Kirsten Gillibrand answer...

Fri Jan 18, 2019, 10:48 PM

Kirsten Gillibrand answers an Al Franken queation


109 replies, 3035 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 109 replies Author Time Post
Reply Kirsten Gillibrand answers an Al Franken queation (Original post)
brooklynite Jan 18 OP
manor321 Jan 18 #1
hlthe2b Jan 18 #4
ananda Jan 18 #11
Trumpocalypse Jan 18 #12
dalton99a Jan 18 #16
Baltimike Jan 19 #44
suegeo Jan 19 #99
BigmanPigman Jan 18 #2
Shrike47 Jan 18 #6
blueinredohio Jan 19 #31
UpInArms Jan 19 #32
USALiberal Jan 19 #47
Heartstrings Jan 19 #58
Rorey Jan 19 #78
Doremus Jan 19 #80
Qutzupalotl Jan 19 #85
suegeo Jan 19 #100
zentrum Jan 19 #105
msongs Jan 18 #3
Shrike47 Jan 18 #5
ornotna Jan 18 #14
wellst0nev0ter Jan 19 #39
NurseJackie Jan 19 #52
DeminPennswoods Jan 19 #90
democratisphere Jan 18 #7
a kennedy Jan 18 #13
Liberal In Texas Jan 18 #8
wasupaloopa Jan 19 #28
Clash City Rocker Jan 18 #9
dalton99a Jan 18 #15
wellst0nev0ter Jan 19 #41
bitterross Jan 18 #10
Cha Jan 19 #17
Trumpocalypse Jan 19 #20
UpInArms Jan 19 #33
Trumpocalypse Jan 19 #36
UpInArms Jan 19 #38
Trumpocalypse Jan 19 #43
Butterflylady Jan 19 #66
Trumpocalypse Jan 19 #70
Qutzupalotl Jan 19 #86
Trumpocalypse Jan 19 #88
LakeSuperiorView Jan 19 #106
WeekiWater Jan 19 #21
zentrum Jan 19 #103
StevieM Jan 19 #18
oberliner Jan 19 #24
LBM20 Jan 19 #26
USALiberal Jan 19 #49
cwydro Jan 19 #63
Doremus Jan 19 #81
BlueStater Jan 19 #19
LisaL Jan 19 #35
quickesst Jan 19 #22
KelleyKramer Jan 19 #23
SMC22307 Jan 19 #84
LBM20 Jan 19 #25
LisaL Jan 19 #37
krispos42 Jan 19 #27
Newland56 Jan 19 #29
Trumpocalypse Jan 19 #53
Butterflylady Jan 19 #68
Trumpocalypse Jan 19 #71
Butterflylady Jan 19 #101
Trumpocalypse Jan 19 #104
MrsCoffee Jan 19 #74
madville Jan 19 #30
DeminPennswoods Jan 19 #91
madville Jan 19 #109
LisaL Jan 19 #34
Autumn Jan 19 #40
Trumpocalypse Jan 19 #46
Autumn Jan 19 #50
Trumpocalypse Jan 19 #57
Autumn Jan 19 #59
Trumpocalypse Jan 19 #61
Autumn Jan 19 #67
Trumpocalypse Jan 19 #73
Autumn Jan 19 #76
Trumpocalypse Jan 19 #87
Autumn Jan 19 #89
Trumpocalypse Jan 19 #92
Autumn Jan 19 #93
Trumpocalypse Jan 19 #94
Autumn Jan 19 #95
Trumpocalypse Jan 19 #96
Autumn Jan 19 #97
Trumpocalypse Jan 19 #98
dsc Jan 19 #42
Trumpocalypse Jan 19 #45
USALiberal Jan 19 #48
Stuart G Jan 19 #51
NurseJackie Jan 19 #55
The Velveteen Ocelot Jan 19 #54
Butterflylady Jan 19 #69
dalton99a Jan 19 #77
suegeo Jan 19 #107
riverwalker Jan 19 #56
Stuart G Jan 19 #64
Doremus Jan 19 #82
rzemanfl Jan 19 #60
jberryhill Jan 19 #62
jalan48 Jan 19 #65
MoonRiver Jan 19 #72
MagickMuffin Jan 19 #75
LAS14 Jan 19 #79
dem4decades Jan 19 #83
Hoyt Jan 19 #102
VOX Jan 19 #108

Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Jan 18, 2019, 10:57 PM

1. "...by those that investigated them..."?

That statement is utter bullshit and she knows it. There was no due process.

We have plenty of people who want to run for president. We don't need her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to manor321 (Reply #1)

Fri Jan 18, 2019, 11:03 PM

4. +1000

She wants to be the one person arbiter of all that is right and just--sans following any of the procedures set forth to fairly investigate.

Still defiant and hasn't learned a GD thing. Poor judgement is only the first of many reasons I won't support her in any Dem Primary election for President.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to manor321 (Reply #1)

Fri Jan 18, 2019, 11:09 PM

11. Agree

I will never vote for her.. period

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to manor321 (Reply #1)

Fri Jan 18, 2019, 11:42 PM

12. Due process refers to criminal proceedings

not to a Congressional investigation. So since Franken never committed a crime, he would have never gotten due process.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to manor321 (Reply #1)

Fri Jan 18, 2019, 11:57 PM

16. We lost a great Democratic senator

but I suppose she got rid of one potential contender for good

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to manor321 (Reply #1)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 10:47 AM

44. + me. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to manor321 (Reply #1)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 03:56 PM

99. Gillibrand blew an opportunity to expose that shithead Roger Stone & the GOPee

And missed an opportunity to be a heroine, exposing dirty machinations of pigs like Stone.

Tweeden was working with that asshole Sean Hannity, too. Michael Cohn is/was Hannity's attorney. Cohn passed out cash to shut up porn stars and playboy bunnies.

Did Cohn give cash to Tweeden to get her to falsely accuse Franken? And release a gag photo that shows Al (a comedian on a raunchy USO tour) NOT touching Tweeden, who herself was shown groping a male performer's ass on same USO tour?

Did Cohn give cash or something else valuable to other accusers?

We will never know because an investigation was never done.

The smart thing for Gillibrand to do was allow an investigation proceed, an investigation that might've exposed Roger Stone for the rat-effing creep that he is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Jan 18, 2019, 11:00 PM

2. "His decision was to resign...."

....

My decision is to not vote for you unless you are the only Dem candidate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BigmanPigman (Reply #2)

Fri Jan 18, 2019, 11:05 PM

6. Ditto.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BigmanPigman (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 08:44 AM

31. Agreed 1000 percent!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BigmanPigman (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 08:48 AM

32. +me

nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BigmanPigman (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:13 AM

47. +1000! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BigmanPigman (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:22 AM

58. Me, either.....nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BigmanPigman (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 12:27 PM

78. That's where I'm at too

If she's the eventual nominee, then of course she'll get my vote. She'll likely be my LAST choice in the primary.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BigmanPigman (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 12:41 PM

80. This. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BigmanPigman (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 01:03 PM

85. "His decision" -- after she started an avalanche.

More like her premature decision to bypass an investigation kept Roger Stone’s hit job from becoming widely known.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Qutzupalotl (Reply #85)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 04:02 PM

100. She blew the chance at a teachable moment: Republicans suck

She could have exposed Roger Stone as a dirty guy, and shown that fact to people who might not even know who Stone is.

Pro-tip: when Roger Stone pre-tweets that tomorrow is "insert Dem. name here"'s time in the barrel, stop, take a deep breath, and investigate. Stone's up to no good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BigmanPigman (Reply #2)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 04:20 PM

105. Me too.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Jan 18, 2019, 11:03 PM

3. what did she say? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Jan 18, 2019, 11:04 PM

5. 'Credible allegations?' Bullshit.

She sounds defensive and, to me, offensive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shrike47 (Reply #5)

Fri Jan 18, 2019, 11:53 PM

14. This right here

'Credible allegations' my ass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shrike47 (Reply #5)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 09:19 AM

39. "And for me, that eighth allegation..."

I stopped reading after that, such pure and unadulterated horseshit.

Reminder that the eighth allegation was Tina Dupuy giving a dramaticized account of how Franken held her at the waist during a photo op.

Really? Holding people at the waist is now a crime? And THAT was what made Gillibrand lynch Franken? It's not enough that she believed a bunch of lying trumpanzees over a good man, Gillibrand has to lend support to what is obviously an attention grab?

I held my nose and voted for Gillibrand last year. This type of rhetoric is making me regret that vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shrike47 (Reply #5)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:19 AM

52. I'll never support her. I'll never forgive her. I'll never trust her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Shrike47 (Reply #5)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 02:18 PM

90. That stuck out to me also

Not one of the allegations was credible. Her presidential hopes goose is cooked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Jan 18, 2019, 11:05 PM

7. Men are often assumed guilty until proven innocent.

Unfortunately "until" is often not allowed to be done properly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to democratisphere (Reply #7)

Fri Jan 18, 2019, 11:50 PM

13. He sure was......ugh.....and come on...

he was tried and convicted in less then a month. I won't say anything good about her, will vote for her if she, and come on, she won't be the nominee in 2020, but I will vote for her IF she gets that far, but I do not care for what she did to one of the smartest Senators. *plug nose and vote*

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Jan 18, 2019, 11:06 PM

8. She won't last past the second primary.

Just sayin'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Liberal In Texas (Reply #8)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 05:55 AM

28. She won't last passed the first debate. She will sit at the kiddies table. I doubt she will

get above 5% support.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Jan 18, 2019, 11:07 PM

9. She set a standard that any Democrat, if accused, must resign without an investigation

Any Democrat, by her standard, is guilty until proven innocent. If that standard continues, Trump will win re-election, just by convincing someone to accuse his opponent of sexual harassment. Trump’s opponent will be expected to stand aside, a standard that apparently is only expected of Democrats. Trump, who has faced a similar accusation by 19 women (last time I checked), will be allowed to say they all just lied, and will win.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Clash City Rocker (Reply #9)

Fri Jan 18, 2019, 11:54 PM

15. +1. Summary execution without investigation or trial

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Clash City Rocker (Reply #9)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 09:25 AM

41. Then she flip-flopped by saying Kavanaugh

required a full and fair investigation into his sexual assault allegations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Fri Jan 18, 2019, 11:08 PM

10. Ms. Big Tobacco 1990's should quit now. She sold her soul long ago.

The very fact she was a defense attorney for Philip Morris is enough to disqualify her. At the time she was defending them the truth about Big Tobacco's cover up of the health risks and their manipulation of the formulas for cigarettes to make them more addictive were known.

She sold her soul early in her life.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 12:01 AM

17. My take from that is..

Al Franken is a Team Player and when she and Schumer and all the other Dems + BS(Ind), said he had to resign.. well, he thought it best to leave.

Just my take from what I know about Al Franken.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #17)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 12:43 AM

20. True

Franken took one for the team.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #20)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 08:49 AM

33. And, the team lost

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UpInArms (Reply #33)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 09:11 AM

36. In the Senate

but the team did take the House.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #36)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 09:13 AM

38. I was merely referring to the loss of his powerful voice

Remember that he was the one who nailed Sessions to the Russians

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UpInArms (Reply #38)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 10:33 AM

43. There are other voices

in the Senate and House.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #43)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:35 AM

66. No way like Franken!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Butterflylady (Reply #66)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:40 AM

70. True

Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar were never cast members on Saturday Night Live.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #70)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 01:07 PM

86. Nor were any of them able to embarrass Sessions into recusal.

Last edited Sat Jan 19, 2019, 05:27 PM - Edit history (1)

THAT’s why Roger Stone targeted Franken. Gillibrand was duped into jumping the gun and short-circuiting an investigation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Qutzupalotl (Reply #86)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 02:14 PM

88. Nor were any of them on the Senate Judiciary Committee

at that time. Plus the Special Counsel was appointed in response to the firing of Comey, not Sessions recusal. Which is moot anyway since Sessions resigned.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to UpInArms (Reply #33)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 04:45 PM

106. But certain people got exactly what they wanted...

 

Some have even said that here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #17)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 12:52 AM

21. I think this is accurate. NT

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cha (Reply #17)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 04:16 PM

103. Good point. Agree. That is Al.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 12:04 AM

18. Regardless of what one thinks about Al Franken, Kirsten Gillibrand is a liar.

It wasn't Al Franken's decision to resign. He was pressured out of the Senate. He was told he would not be able to get anything done and would have no opportunity to serve the interests of the people of Minnesota.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to StevieM (Reply #18)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 05:03 AM

24. No, she's not

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #24)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 05:42 AM

26. "8 credible allegations."??? BULLSHIT! Total LIE! They were NOT "credible."

 

It was a BULLSHIT right wing hitjob at the height of the so called "Me Too Movement" and she helped the right wing witch hunters who saw an opportunity to conjure up a load of BULLSHIT and take down Franken during that time of hysteria. He was found guilty until proven innocent, and he never got a chance to prove his innocence. And she was at the front of the line leading with the biggest torch. She will NEVER win the nomination. In fact, I bet she flames out VERY soon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #24)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:15 AM

49. Yes, she is! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #24)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:29 AM

63. Funny how all these accusers just vanished after he resigned.

Never heard another peep from them.

She’ll never get my vote.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oberliner (Reply #24)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 12:43 PM

81. She just proved that she is. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 12:16 AM

19. Pardon my French, but what a bunch of fucking shit.

Giving him an investigation like he asked for is not "carrying his water". It's his basic right as an accused person.

Just go away. Ugh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BlueStater (Reply #19)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 09:11 AM

35. Yes, exactly. It's innocent until proven guilty.

He has a right to an investigation at the very least.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 03:29 AM

22. her statement...

...seems about as credible as the accusations against Al Franken. Contrived and hollow. I don't believe for one damn second that her fifteen-year-old son asked her,"Mom, why are you being so mean to Al Franken?" The first thing it reminded me of was, "It's my right as an entertainer!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 03:44 AM

23. "they were corroborated in real time"


By who, Sean Hannity and Roger Stone?

She is a liar and her excuses are full of sh*t



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to KelleyKramer (Reply #23)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 01:01 PM

84. Exactly. Gillibrand was duped by right-wing dirty tricksters.

We're to trust her as President against them? What a laugh. We lost a powerful progressive voice because some nobody whined about Franken touching her "love handles" during an innocuous photo op. Screw Gillibrand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 05:40 AM

25. "8 credible allegations."??? BULL FUCKING SHIT!

 

BULLSHIT!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LBM20 (Reply #25)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 09:12 AM

37. And the last one was from a lady who claimed he squeezed her waist

during a photo. As far as I am concerned that's not molestation.
Still counted as one of 8 credible allegations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 05:47 AM

27. I like how every day she demands Twitler' s resignation.

Oh, wait...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 07:27 AM

29. Reality

Actually at the time she called for his resignation, I’m going by memory but I think there were only 2 accusations known, I think the others came out between her calling for resignation and him resigning
The lady at the fair that he hugged and the lady from the uso tour. The one that in multiple occasions sexually assaulted men by grabbing their asses during performances without asking or getting permission.

Also, earlier in her political career she had different political stances when she needed to attract conservative votes from upstate NY she was a gun advocate and social conservative and on the record as anti marriage equality and lgbt rights.

When she needed tons and tons of money she defended Phillip Morris

Two of these positions literally helped to put people in their grave.

When she no longer needed the conservative vote she somehow “evolved” her political views. I personally think it’s a sham. I believe she recognized the opportunity to garner a hardcore base with the tough rhetoric and demonstrating it by no discussion, no due process your accused, your out.

Aspects of her character contribute to my opinion of her.
The Phillip Morris thing = I’ll do anything for a buck
The gun thing = I’ll do anything for a vote
The Franken thing = I’ll do anything to secure my base

And her integrity
Recently asked if she would commit to serving her 6 years as a senator she answered multiple times in the affirmative
That is called a lie when you go back on that commitment so quickly after making it

The biggest thing is LEADING the charge to expel Franken did more damage to the party than any nationally prominent democrat has done in recent memory.one of the most affective dem senators was removed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Newland56 (Reply #29)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:19 AM

53. Sorry

But you are mistaken. Gillibrand and the over 30 other Senators did not call for Franken to resign until after the 8th woman accused him.

In fact in a radio interview after only 6 women had accused Franken, she refused to call for him to resign. https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/kirsten-bill-clinton-shouldve-resigned-gillibrand-cant-bring-herself-to-call-for-al-franken-to-resign

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #53)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:39 AM

68. The Washington Examiner

Is your source, oh good grief!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Butterflylady (Reply #68)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:41 AM

71. Is there anything

in the article that is not true?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #71)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 04:04 PM

101. Well,

I guess if you believe in fake news.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Butterflylady (Reply #101)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 04:17 PM

104. What is fake?

Please point out the factual errors.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 07:35 AM

30. Sanders, Booker, Harris, and Warren all found the allegations credible

As well. It was a steamrolling and he should have fought it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madville (Reply #30)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 02:19 PM

91. Not sure that's true, they just jumped on the bandwagon

imo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DeminPennswoods (Reply #91)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 09:12 PM

109. That's even worse if they didn't believe it

And still railroaded him for their own benefit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 09:09 AM

34. And my decision is not vote for her.

I also feel very strongly about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 09:20 AM

40. Who the fuck "investigated" them?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #40)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:08 AM

46. The media maybe

The accusers spoke with various media outlets like CNN, Huffington Post, Politico, etc. I would hope that they did some vetting before releasing their stories.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #46)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:17 AM

50. The media doesn't investigate. They report talking points given to them. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #50)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:22 AM

57. That's true of FAUX

But not of CNN, the Atlanta, the Huffington Post and most others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #57)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:23 AM

59. YMMV. If the media investigated anything our country would not be in the shape it is. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #59)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:26 AM

61. While a nice thought

it is just not reality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #61)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:37 AM

67. That your opinion and I'm not buying . If the media reported fact and not just

talking points the e mail bullshit about Hillary would have been nothing. Trumps business dealings and contacts with Russia would have been covered during the primary and he would likely not been president. That's the reality of the media doing so called "investigative reporting". All the shit trump is connected to and that he has done in his business is all out there but no one bothered to report it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #67)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:46 AM

73. So the media can't be trusted

by the people? Where have we heard that before?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #73)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 12:20 PM

76. Pure deflection. You can't refute my opinion that the media reports what gives them ratings

and doesn't investigate the facts so you go with "you're just like Trump". By the way, the media going with their talking points instead of facts and investigations has been documented here time after time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #76)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 02:04 PM

87. That's not what you said.

True the media does report what gives them ratings. But they do investigate and they don't slander or libel people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #87)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 02:14 PM

89. Whatever, they did a lot of investigative reporting on Trump, didn't they? If they had done any

investigative reporting on Hillary's emails those emails would never have been an issue. They didn't slander or libel her but they sure as hell clouded the issue to where what bit of truth they did report about them didn't matter. They do just enough to cover their asses but not enough to open the eyes of the gullible. I never said they slander or libel people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #89)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 02:26 PM

92. But in the case of Franken

If they hadn't done some investigating, they would have opened themselves up to charges of slander and libel.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #92)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 02:41 PM

93. They reported what was told to them by the women. That was about it, not a lot of detail or proof

and in some cases not even the names of the women. Not much else in the way of "investigating". I'm done with this conversation I see no reason to go round and round, have a great day.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #93)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 03:09 PM

94. And no one can just walk in off the street

and make an accusation against a Senator that they would publish without some vetting. That is just not how things work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #94)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 03:11 PM

95. All they have to do is talk to a reporter, or someone like Roger Stone. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #95)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 03:17 PM

96. And no reporter

would bring a story like that to an editor without some vetting. It is just not how things work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Trumpocalypse (Reply #96)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 03:28 PM

97. Dan Rather? Vetting doesn't always work and vetting is not investigative reporting. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Autumn (Reply #97)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 03:32 PM

98. Well there were several women

talking to several news organizations. Are you claiming that none did any vetting?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 09:27 AM

42. That answer is rather dishonest

There was no investigation at all. I concede her point about rules applying to those who like as well as those we don't but there wasn't an investigation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dsc (Reply #42)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:04 AM

45. Would there ever had been?

An ethics committee hearing is not something like the Mueller investigation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:14 AM

48. I'll give you credit for trying. It's not working. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:19 AM

51. There are many of us who respect Al Franken more than Gillibrand will not vote for her.

...We will not send money to her, and we are not interested in anything she has to say. The accusations against Franken were many years earlier. I don't know much about her, but she spent her time destroying a career over a few pictures. It will be awful if she gets nominated, because she is disliked greatly because of this..she will not help us win, not now or ever...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stuart G (Reply #51)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:21 AM

55. I just can't trust her judgement. Honestly, I can't even stand to LISTEN to her.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:20 AM

54. There was *no* investigation. There were anonymous allegations

and a claim by a pal of Roger Stone and Sean Hannity. I don't know how anyone can claim there was an investigation when there wasn't one. Please stop trying to sell Gillibrand; nobody is buying.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #54)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:40 AM

69. Thank you!!!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #54)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 12:23 PM

77. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to The Velveteen Ocelot (Reply #54)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 04:51 PM

107. Michael Cohn was Hannity Attorney, passing cash

Cohn paid off porn stars and Playboy bunnies to shut them up

Did Cohn give cash to Tweeden' or other accusers to lie, share USO photo, spread smears?

We will never know of any other shennagans, corruption because there was never a proper investigation

Gilli blew the opportunity to expose the assholes. She could have been a hero

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:22 AM

56. Never. She blew it.

Nothing was ever “investigated”. She still doesn’t get it. Her knee jerk response and defensive “explanation” have me seriously questioning her judgement and critical thinking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to riverwalker (Reply #56)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:29 AM

64. Kirsten Gillibrand is dead in the water...There are consequences when you destroy someone's career.

And you destroy someone's reputation. If I recall the info on this came from Republican operatives. It doesn't matter, because Gillibrand took up the torch and lead the parade. She can be a senator, but as far as I am concerned, not our leader. I have read she worked for Phillip Morris as a lawyer? What kind of product does that company sell..?
...Oh no.......right here in this thread it says she worked for Phillip Morris...way above this post...
..................Well, there are consequences of working for a company like that..She hasn't got a clue..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Stuart G (Reply #64)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 12:44 PM

82. Well said. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:24 AM

60. Yawn. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:28 AM

62. Next, please

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:33 AM

65. No thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 11:44 AM

72. BULL SHIT! She railroaded him out of office.

to Gillibrand.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 12:19 PM

75. Quit while you're ahead Kirsten


You will only get hammered constantly by your knee-jerk decisions.


We need someone who will encourage and motivate the electorate. She is NOT that someone, p e r i o d!!!


And her announcement on Colbert and the interview left me wondering if she even has personality, because she was BORING as hell. I wasn't motivated by her at all. She came across as a cold dead fish.






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 12:40 PM

79. Where can I find Franken's response to the individual...

... allegations? I've always assumed there was some basis in fact and that what we were seeing was inflated responses to "jerk" behavior or inadvertent behavior in mostly a show business environment that should never have risen to the level of getting a guy fired years later. Certainly the flight jacket photo was true.

I'm just curious, as I can't remember seeing any responses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 12:45 PM

83. I feel Gillibrand did the bidding for Roger Stone. I don't care what she said

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 04:08 PM

102. Love Franken. But if we want zero tolerance when a GOPer is charged, it's kind of

hard to give a Democrat a break. While in humor, the photo did him in. I hate it, but won’t hold it against Gillibrand, who I am not supporting because it’s way to early to jump on any bandwagon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to brooklynite (Original post)

Sat Jan 19, 2019, 05:40 PM

108. To hell with Gillibrand. Al Franken was the victim of a coordinated right-wing attack.

If she can't grasp the fascist puke-politics involved, to hell with her. And if she DOES grasp it, then she's an opportunist, and to hell with her.

This is the kind of self-righteous, stab-in-the-back shit that keeps Democrats from winning elections. The party needs discipline to pull together, something the Rethugs actually possess, as they rarely, if ever, turn on one of their own, no matter how egregious the misdeed (alleged or otherwise).

Not saying that Democrats should tolerate genuinely bad apples. But the "race for purity" is a self-defeating exercise that causes irreparable damage -- in this case, to Franken's career, and Gillibrand's candidacy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread