Uh---a minor point about Ms. Tweeden's veracity---

[Atticus]

I have just watched her account of what she says happened on the TV machine. She not only says that Franken "groped her breasts", she says that the photograph SHOWS him groping her!

Ladies and gentlemen, LOOK at the damn photo. He clearly is not even touching her! Judging by the fact you can see his left pinkie through his other fingers, he appears to be inches away from the woman's chest. Shadows cast by fingers of right hand corroborate this. Talking heads took her bait and are now repeating that the photo shows him "groping her breasts".

I am not saying nothing happened. I am not saying Franken is blameless. But, if she will lie about what the pic shows---and she damn well did---I think we need more than "she said" about the other allegations.

[wryter2000]

1. Honestly

If she's the only one to complain about him, I think there'll be the investigation he's asked for and the issue will be settled. How many pervs go after only one woman? And how many have their picture taken while they do it? I'm also wondering why Roger Stone knew about this in advance. Is he a friend of hers?

I thank Franken for not contradicting what she said, though. I don't want this to become a rallying cry for the "false accusation!" types.

NB: If more women do come forward, he's guilty.

[Blue_true]

49. I agree with you.

One is either a mistake the person regrets or an accident. More than one starts a pattern of behavior that should be unacceptable to any thinking person.

[Hortensis]

95. His or hers? She's WORKING to destroy the ASA, take $4 TRILLION

from Social Security and Medicare and another trillion-and-a-half or so from Medicaid to turn over to dark money donors, along with money from the nonrenewal of the CHIPS program that provided healthcare to millions of children. She helping the dismantling of a regulatory structure meant to protect people in all walks of life from giant powers, including financial institutions, destruction of the VA, persecution of immigrants, religious persecution.

She's working for withdrawal from the Paris agreement, her party's committing what is clearly treasonous activities with Russia against our nation. She's helping take immigrant children from hospitals to prison camps, to pick up others as they leave Sunday School and their fathers who've come to pick them up at school. She's helping cancel a program that provides service dogs to disabled vets, for god's sake. And on and on and on.

I see a pattern of behavior that should be unacceptable to any thinking person, all right. And it IS.

Would a person who would throw in with people like Hannity draw the line at exaggeration and flat-out lies? Especially when it includes needed national exposure with the big boys on Fox?

Remember, we're talking about one of today's Republicans. When is the last time you discussed a political issue with a Republican who could open her mouth without shamelessly and righteously regurgitating four or five despicable lies, much less one?

[Blue_true]

103. And sexual assault has nothing to do with any of that.

I prefer to fight her on policy, not fight her right to the sanctity of her own body.

[Hortensis]

104. It goes directly to her character, and thus her credibility.

She is not only appearing on Fox, whose product is literally 24/7 lies and deception, but in agreeing to serve as a distraction from what congress is doing she is actively involved in perpetrating this incredibly evil crime against America.

I couldn't trust her to feed my cat. With all these warnings of bad character, anything that happened would be my fault.

[Bradshaw3]

58. Posing is the point

Guys who grope for gratification don't pose for pictures while they are doing it.

[kcr]

2. The photo is what did it for me. I was all, "Oh no. Not Franken."

Crap. And there's even a photo? And then I click on the photo and the alarm started ringing telling me something was off about this one.

[OhioBlue]

99. me too! I read he "groped" her and there was a photo

Then I look at the photo and first, I'm thinking she is wearing a flack jacket....kinda hard to grope someone, then I look closer and it looks like his hands are not even in contact with the flack jacket. I'm calling BS unless something else comes out.

Posing for a pic and pretending to tough a woman's breast area that is covered by a flack jacket is not sexual assault or groping.

[lagomorph777]

101. The flak jacket is kind of damning isn't it?

I mean, groping a thick Kevlar shield wouldn't be terribly exciting.

[jberryhill]

3. There's a flaw in your reasoning.

The photograph does not somehow "disprove" the allegation that he touched her.

That's just silly.

LOOK! THIS PHOTOGRAPH PROVES THAT NO HORSES MADE IT TO THE FINISH LINE AT THE KENTUCKY DERBY:



THEY ONLY BARELY MADE IT OUT OF THE GATE!!!!

Good golly. Some days...

Maybe he did, maybe he didn't. But the photograph does not prove he didn't.

Pretty sure that picture doesn't prove that the Kentucky Derby only ran for a couple of feet.

[Fred Sanders]

4. Good one!

Not to mention a long letter of admission and apology, the conditional acceptance of the apology, which is suspicious, and Franken being the first to ask for an enquiry into himself.

Frankly I think McConnell will now not want one...lot of questions about the manner of dislosure and the timing.

[greyl]

5. Yes, but if

someone said they believe #5 won because of that photo, it would be reasonable to doubt their conclusion, wouldn't it?

[jberryhill]

10. From that photograph...

No one can conclude whether any of the horses finished the race.

[greyl]

14. Right, that's my point...

edit: a photo being purported to be proof of something of which it is not, since I've seen people today saying the Franken photo shows groping.

[Nevernose]

6. So you think the accuser is lying?

She’s the one claiming the photo shows Franken grabbing her breasts.

[jberryhill]

7. I'm saying that the reasoning in the OP is flawed

A photograph of someone not touching someone does not disprove the proposition that they were not touched.

I think the reasoning of the OP is flawed, and I pointed out the manner in which it is flawed.

I have hundreds of photographs of me not touching things.

[XRubicon]

11. How many men do you know that would pose for a picture like that

if he really did touch her?

[jberryhill]

15. Missing the point again

People often confuse "evidence" with "proof" or even "argument".

One can make all kinds of arguments about the photo, based on a variety of inferences.

The photo does not prove that she wasn't touched.

You are saying that the photo + (a set of inferences from it) suggests he didn't.

I wasn't there. I don't know.

[XRubicon]

18. You have no common sense.

There is a guy sitting to the right, someone took the photo and he is posing. It was a joke!

[jberryhill]

23. I'm not sure you understand the difference between "evidence" and "proof"

Yes, by adding additional facts and arguments, one may reach a conclusion. It may not be a conclusion shared by others.

[XRubicon]

24. That's great for you... good luck now...

[OilemFirchen]

46. The OP said nothing about "evidence" or "proof".

In fact, he included a disclaimer that he doesn't know what happened.

I will, though: She has offered as evidence a photograph that does not verify her claim. Silly objection overruled.

[Atticus]

71. Thank you! NT

[scipan]

100. she's the one saying that the photo is proof.

[Nevernose]

16. Then accusers reasoning is flawed

The accuser claims that Franken groped her. She did not know until she had this photographic “evidence.”

The evidence she presented does not show what the accuser claimed it showed. That’s not a problem with the OP’s recitation of the accuser, that’s a problem with the accuser’s assertion.

[jberryhill]

21. Again, you are missing the point

If someone claims "I was robbed at the corner of Oak and Vine yesterday" then which of the following would be "evidence":

1. A picture of me from yesterday, standing at the corner of Oak and Vine.

2. A picture of me from yesterday, standing at the corner of Main and Third.

Picture #1 would be "evidence" - i.e. something that "supports" my story that, indeed, I was at the corner of Oak and Vine yesterday.

Picture #2 is not evidence supporting my proposition. It likewise would not prove that I wasn't at the corner of Oak and Vine at some other time.

Muhammad Ali claims he was punched by Joe Frazier during a fight, and produces this picture:



That picture does not show that Joe Frazier punched Muhammad Ali. It does show they were in the ring together.

[XRubicon]

29. I think it was the mess boys who took the strawberries.

[Bradshaw3]

56. LOl! Good one

We'll see the ball bearings pretty soon.

[Whiskeytide]

86. Youre technically correct, but ...

... you’re rebutting an argument that hasn’t been made. Franken is not claiming that the photo exonerates him of groping. The OP doesn’t really seem to either.

Tweeden, on the other hand, IS claiming the photo proves that he groped her. It doesn’t. The OP is correctly inferring that her credibility is affected by that claim when weighed against other evidence.

[druidity33]

97. Yup, saved me having to reply to

the obtuseness of the comments by jberryhill. For someone who keeps saying "you're missing the point"... they sure were missing the point!

[Whiskeytide]

39. She said she knew nothing ...

... of the groping aspect until after they had returned and someone showed her the pic. She was asleep apparently.

Franken is obviously mugging for the camera. There is another man seated next to her, plus the photographer. So, if he actually did grope her, that would mean that he did so in front of at least two witnesses? I think that’s reasonably unlikely. Perhaps everyone on the plane was perfectly ok with actually feeling up a sleeping woman, but...

And a close examination of the photo does appear to show that he’s not actually touching her. He’s pretending to apparently as a gag. It was juvenile and stupid, and probably is an example of sexual harassment - but it doesn’t appear that the circumstantial evidence supports actual groping.

The OPs point is well taken, I think. She IS claiming the photo proves she was groped. That in and of itself suggests that she is making a misrepresentation. That entitles me to be a little suspect of her other claims. Add that to the fact that this seems to have been a fairly well orchestrated release, and I think it adds up to a political gambit.

That doesn’t excuse Franken for the pic - absurd and offensive to say the least - even for a comedian. And if her allegation of a forced kiss is true - that’s reprehensible. But I think that’s a big if. JMHO.

[tomp]

65. I haven't seen the picture yet, but...

What i get from the OP is that the accuser is SAYING the picture SHOWS him groping but it does not show that, and that that is at least suspicious. Do you understand something else from the OP?

[Drahthaardogs]

89. No. Your reasoning is flawed.

She is stating the photo SHOWS him groping her. It clearly does not.



So, to put it in terms of your horse racing photo, if you said the photo clearly shows a horse winning the Derby, you'd be wrong.

[George II]

91. Do you have hundreds of photographs of you not touching things that you wound up touching afterward?

[jberryhill]

98. Lol

There’s a pretty funny answer to that question.

[GoneOffShore]

9. Have you looked at the damn photo?

Kevlar jacket, feigning sleep, hands not grabbing anything.

Sheesh.

[Nevernose]

12. I agree

Think you might be responding to the wrong post.

[GoneOffShore]

20. Sorry, you're right.

This has cranked me up this afternoon.

[jberryhill]

13. Yes

The photo does not disprove the proposition that he touched her or did not touch her.

I believe you may have misunderstood my point.

People move. A photo is a moment in time. He may have touched her, he may not have touched her. The photo does not prove either proposition.

[GoneOffShore]

22. And she's wearing a Kevlar flak jacket.

He's posing and mugging for the camera.
If he was actually intent on grabbing her breasts, he'd be looking at them.

Grabbing breasts covered by a flak jacket(in her case a flack jacket) gets one a hand full of kevlar.

[jberryhill]

25. At the moment the picture was taken, that appears to be what was going on

But that is beside the point of what the photograph "proves" as to an allegation of what may have happened moments before, or moments after.

[trof]

51. Yeah, I'm pretty sure that an instant after the photo was snapped

he RIPPED off that Kevlar vest, stripped open her blouse, and right there in front of everyone on that airplane grabbed her tits, the saliva running down his chin..

For some unknown reason neither she nor anyone else on the plane complained.
Until now.

[cwydro]

105. Yep.

Can’t believe the Franken haters here.

Kind of worrying.

[tonedevil]

28. So the accuser...

is in fact quite mistaken to say the photograph proves that Senator Franken groped her.

[jberryhill]

30. Here's how things work in the real world of claims and evidence

It could be that lawyers are very sensitive to the distinction between "evidence" and "proof".

It is mistaken to say that the photograph "proves" anything either way.

[tonedevil]

50. That seems to be restating...

what I wrote. Why would you think I don't understand how things work in the real world of claims and evidence?

[Kirk Lover]

63. The photo proves it was a gag..a joke. Now whether one finds it funny or not is another story.

[Dream Girl]

31. Why do you think she now doesnt want an investigation

Al Franken is willing to have an investigation because there were witnesses. She’s not so keen on that for the same reason.

[Nevernose]

36. I agree wholeheartedly

She claimed the photo showed her being groped through her flak jacket. The photo clearly shows he’s not actually making contact.

I was just making the point that “the photo doesn’t prove she WASN’T groped” is silly, because that’s not what the accuser said. She said the photo was proof.

Or maybe she can’t see shadows do to a very strange medical disorder.

[XRubicon]

8. He was posing for a picture!

You haven't "proven" anything.

[jberryhill]

17. What is it you believe I was attempting to "prove"

My goodness.

Let's review.

I stated that the photo does not prove either proposition.

Your response is "You haven't 'proven' anything."

Well, duh.

[XRubicon]

19. Your photo was offered as proof

Your photo proved nothing.

[rainin]

38. I agree. n/t

[XRubicon]

42. He admitted it was wrong and apologized, but it was a joke.

a bad joke, that I am sure he wishes he could take back now.

[rainin]

48. Did I confuse the meaning of the comment?

I meant to agree that it was a juvenille move in bad taste, and it was not a sexual assault.

Yes, he apologized, she accepted his apology, it's over.

[XRubicon]

53. No, that is what I was trying to say

It was in bad taste, and he does regret it.

[Atticus]

69. There would, indeed, be a flaw in my reasoning IF I had suggested that the photo

"disproved" anything. I did not. Read the OP. She urged that the photo PROVED that Franken groped her. My point is that it proves no such thing as it clearly shows no contact.
The horse pictures were nice.

[srobertss]

81. She doesnt know whether he actually touched her either

because she said that she didnt even realize the photo was taken until after she saw it when she got home. That being said, I would have felt a line had been crossed if I had found a photo like that with myself in her position. It would have angered me. It was clearly bad behavior and very disappointing. But that by itself doesnt mean he should resign. Im waiting for more accounts backing up her story that he was physically aggressive. But even then, I think he should use it as leverage first. "I'll resign if Trump resigns!"

[guillaumeb]

82. This photo clearly shows that the horses were standing still.

All the proof that I need to see that HRC rigged the Kentucky Derby.

[Denzil_DC]

26. If you're reduced to arguing "his hands weren't on her breasts, they were hovering over them,"

YOU'RE NOT HELPING.

[rainin]

37. Hovering over her breasts for a picture is juvenille

but it is NOT sexual assault.

[Denzil_DC]

40. That is not the basis on which Franken himself is basing his response. n/t

[rainin]

45. I'm pretty sure

he said it wasn't funny and he shouldn't have done it. He now recognizes what he did was wrong. But it was not sexual assault and I didn't see anywhere that he said it was.

[Atticus]

83. If she is reduced to saying that a photo shows what it clearly does not, SHE IS NOT HELPING and

I, for one, question her motives.

[Denzil_DC]

87. Rehashing what may or may not have happened,

which today has often led to a number of DUers making some pretty ugly statements, just keeps the story going.

Franken's made his response, apologized and called for an ethics inquiry. Tweeden's accepted the apology and doesn't want an inquiry, now saying she didn't want anything particular to happen as a result of her revelations.

Franken hasn't relied on any interpretation of the photo in his response. I trust him to handle this with the intelligence that is just one reason I respect him.

The media will make of it what they will. RWers who no doubt still think the old photoshop of Franken in diapers is real are shrieking for him to be jailed, let alone lose his seat. Let them froth and look stupid and hypocritical.

[Atticus]

88. Agree with your entire response. Thanks for your civility. nt

[Denzil_DC]

90. You're very welcome.

And thanks for yours.

[MFM008]

27. An investigation

Will show she has a MOTIVE? ?

[TexasBushwhacker]

32. I think we need to hear from the photographer

Al's hands are NEAR her Kevlar protected breasts. She appears to be sleeping. But the photographer would know if she was in on the joke and if Al's hands actually touched her body.

[bagelsforbreakfast]

34. Are we selling Al Franken's superpowers short? Maybe he has to ability to

penetrate Kevlar and Steel at will?

[rainin]

35. She is a Republican.

Remember how Nelson had to say she was a Trump supporter to remove the argument that this was a political attack?

Double standard.

[doc03]

41. I see all these posts about a photograph. Why in the

hell can't they post the photograph? I haven't been glued to the TV all day I haven't seen any photograph!

[panader0]

43. Yeah! I see many here talking about it but can't anyone post it?

[doc03]

54. I did a search and was directed Brietbart. It just looks like a gag picture,

it's an joke. Frankin's hands are both open possibly his fingers are touching the jacket but how in the hell do you
grope someone through a damn flack jacket, it is ridiculous.

[Tactical Peek]

60. It's a silly gag.

My understanding is that Franken did it as a gag, mailed or emailed (?) the pic to her so she would see it when she returned to the states after the USO.

"Locker Room" or "fraternity prank" - I think that is the Republican term for it.


Juvenile in the worst sense, but if that pictured is the extent of that particular incident, I am left unentertained. Chalk it up to young and foolish things.

Let the full ethics committee investigation establish the facts and then go from there. And all Senators should get any sex harassment or abuse they have committed off their chest now and submit that to the ethics committee also.

But to call for Franken to resign is wholly ridiculous.

[Corgigal]

44. Not only this

but, how does this work? Yeah, while you were asleep I grabbed your boobs. Look, here's a picture for you. Helpful for women, but has this ever happened without criminal charges somewhere?

[Hoyt]

47. Well, Al is making light of "groping" in that photo. It's certainly not a crime, but I wouldn't

advise doing that again.

What we don't know for sure is what happened when alone and during the rehearsal. But, I don't think it is fair to just dismiss the lady. She does sound upset about the incident, but even said things supportive of Franken. She just didn't like it and I can understand that.

The whole thing is not anywhere near what Moore, Trump, Weinstein, etc., did. There is some room for misunderstanding between the two in Franken's incident. That's not the case with Moore, etc.

[XRubicon]

57. Making light?

"For instance, that picture. I don't know what was in my head when I took that picture, and it doesn't matter. There's no excuse. I look at it now and I feel disgusted with myself. It isn't funny. It's completely inappropriate. 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—women who have had similar experiences in their own lives, women who fear having those experiences, women who look up to me, women who have counted on me."

[Hoyt]

64. If I had room, I would have put "at a minimum, he's making a joke of something inappropriate."

I think most folks would read "Well" that way, and that I'm disagreeing with the OP.

[rainin]

52. Is anyone asking where her witnesses are?

Did she tell anyone at the time how upset she was? Have those people been interviewed and given their names and gone on the record?

[kag]

68. In her press conference...

She specifically said she never told anyone; not at the time, not ever, not until now.

[rainin]

70. LOL

I just read this comment on another post:

"I listened to his show on the drive home today.He said Tweedem told him about the incident 11 years ago. He's setting himself up to be a contemporaneous witness."

Wow! This is dead fish stink!

[Pathwalker]

73. And yet Hannity said he showed her the photo years ago.

Someone's lying...hmmm.

[pnwmom]

79. There are at least two witnesses. The man sitting to the right, and the photographer.

I wonder what they would say.

[boston bean]

55. A picture is less than one second in time. Less than a second later he could have been touching her.

Do I think he touched her. Probably not but it is possible. But does it really matter. He shouldn't be acting like that toward women.

[CincyDem]

59. Listening to Leeann Tweeden's account during her press conference and some phrases stuck out...

1) Re: the kissing rehearsal - sounded like the Harvey Weinstein tape.

2) Re: grabbing the back of her head - not unlike the young girl describing how Roy Moore grabbed the back of her head.

3) Re: apology accepted - of course I accept his apology.


I guess I'm weird but it sounds like someone walking through the talking points.

I can't wait for the ethics investigation. I didn't see the entire interview so it's possible I missed the part where she said "and I'm ready to testify anywhere/everywhere under oath on this topic". IIRC, several of the women involved in the Roy Moore controversy have offered to do so. I'm hope Leeann Tweeden will be as cooperative as Al Franken has implied he will be.

[Soph0571]

61. What I hear in this thread.....

.....is 'victim blaming'. Chaps we all love the Senator for being a righteous human being, but he acted like a dick. Even if he did not touch her he treated her as an 'object'. It was crass, vulgar and incredibly uncool. I do not believe it is a sacking offence, but seriously, trying to silence any woman, at this time? Calling any woman a liar, at this time? I am uncomfortable with that.

[rainin]

72. What would you have him say

if the story is mostly untrue? Hypothetically speaking.

[Soph0571]

75. Hhhmmm

I acted like a dick?

[kag]

77. I disagree.

I don't believe most of these comments constitute "victim blaming" (maybe one or two, but not most). What I'm hearing is that yeah, Franken did a spectacularly stupid thing once, made a woman feel pretty shitty, and shouldn't have done it.

Coincidentally those happen to be the same sentiments that Franken himself expressed in his public apology to Tweedle.

But there ARE a few things that make this accusation substantially different than the ones against Moore or Weinstien or even Spacey. The most obvious one is that as yet there have been no other accusations and nothing to indicate that this is a pattern of behavior rather than an isolated incident. Also, this is the only time we've had the accused person requesting an investigation. What that tells me is that while what he did ten years ago was dickish and stupid, the way he's handling it now is honorable and respectful of his accuser (again, unlike Moore).

I don't think that pointing these things out constitutes "victim blaming".

[Atticus]

96. Very well said. nt

[Mr.Bill]

62. The lesson to be learned here,

is if your date shows up wearing a flak jacket, your relationship may be in trouble.


Sorry, couldn't resist a little levity in the interest of lowering this thread's blood pressure a bit.

[Honeycombe8]

66. No, he's not touching her. It's a joke. The gang would punk each other when asleep.

That's what one of the women on The Talk said. She toured with the USO, with Tweeden. She said it was joking...they all did it. But Tweeden was conservative, is what she remembers, altho nice & got along with everyone.

I would say about the practice of the kiss...I don't know what to think about that. The groping is definitely not harassment or molestation. A surprise french kiss is something else. She didn't think they needed to practice that. He did. He was very good at being a comedian. He was also one of the SNL writers. I can see where he probably practiced to a level that Tweedon did not.

But did he surprise french kiss her? Hmmmm. That was out of line. Maybe he had a crush on her. He was not in a power position on the USO tour, though, I would think.

[ancianita]

67. She's following her paymasters' script. Now, who can follow the money.

[Mountain Mule]

74. I saw that too!

That picture may have been in poor taste, but it doesn't prove what Franken may or may not have done. It's obvious that the picture was just taken for the comic effect and Franken IS a humorist.

[ClarendonDem]

76. Been reading various threads on DU about this topic for the past few hours

And my general impression is that DU members are just as quick to blame the victim and excuse the assailant as anyone on Fox or World Net Daily.

[SoCalDem]

78. We used to take pictures during our annual summer bowling tournaments

they were passed around before our annual fall meeting while people arrived.People enjoyed looking at them, and were free to take the ones they were in ..

EVERY year there were MANY pictures like the one with Al Franken.. Lots of men (and women too) like to take/be in spoof pictures like these..

were they high-brow? were they funny? were the women offended?
no...sometimes...rarely

The fact that she was asleep is the part that bothers me

[weissmam]

80. I have to make a point

she is wearing body armor , you could hit her with a bat and she wouldn't feel it

[TalenaGor]

84. wasn't the whole bit consentual?...I haven't read up on it I admit...

Work cutting into my DU time lol

[ananda]

85. My take.

This sexual assault accusation stuff is entering some weird, crazy territory. If you look at the Al Franken phot, it's clearly a stupid publicity or rehearsal shot -- hardly the stuff of anything more than seriously bad taste. An apology here is good enough for me. As for Roy Moore, he should be held accountable for criminal pedophilia.

[George II]

92. And in his apology and statement, I don't think he said he touched her.....

....just that the picture was taken.

I was skeptical about this thing early this morning, then after he issued his apology (it seemed honest, sincere, and perfect) I backtracked about the picture, now I'm wondering about it again.

[.99center]

93. Save the image and zoom in.

Al's not touching her in the photo.

[NCTraveler]

94. Its a picture, not a video. Nt

[The_Casual_Observer]

102. I would say that the whole story was cooked up around that one photo by

roger stone. The longer this goes on the more I'm convinced.