PMB, Slate's legal writer called it a crime.
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_ ... ately.html

What gets me is....how some of you are getting all up in arms over this Franken incident. Doing the exact same thing you accuse the left of doing. It really IS whataboutism to the extreme, and the pot calling the kettle black.

I'm not saying any of this on either side should go unnoticed, but Jesus H Christ, some of you are such hypocrites. You know who you are.

That does mean something. Slate is Far Left on the scale aren't they?
So are they more likely to go the anti-male position? You see where I am going with this.

I disagree with JB on this one too- making repeated unwanted physical contact of the breast or ass/genital area is a crime to me. If she was sleeping- CRIME. If he tried to grab a bit and she slapped him away and he stopped- NO CRIME. If he tried and she made it very clear that it was unwelcome yet he continued- CRIME.
My thinking is pretty simplistic on the topic. I am open to other interpretations.

There were several comments in that article that I also felt were completely ridiculous. To wit:

What if Franken's memory of the event is genuinely different? It is completely reasonable for two people to have different memories of an event, and different feelings about it.
What if he was smitten by Tweeden, and actually was trying to woo her into bed, and was operating under the


Sophomoric humor.
The writer said it is a crime- That does not seem like a legal argument.
I agree that a crime may have been committed. I just don't see evidence of it. I see evidence of a disgusting creeper in the tongue kiss, and of sophomoric actions in the photo.

I actually hope that Franken gets his ass kicked out and a 2A supporter takes his place. I am not sure that that would be "fair" but damn straight I'd take it.

Speaking of the incident in the photo only, are we to assume your belief is that touching a sleeping person in what is widely considered an "intimate only" area (here we're talking about boobs) without their approval is OK? And aren't you the same person who implied that grabbing a woman's ass was acceptable and didn't rank as assault, without providing any context around if the grabee approved the action (or was even known to the grabber)?

To any of you guys on this board who are raising little girls, you might want to consider that these assumptions -- that it's OK to molest a sleeping woman or to grab her ass -- appear to be perfectly acceptable among some segments of society. Apparently your daughters, your sisters, your wives are just soft, curvy little toys out there for the amusement of any guy jonesing for a handful of ass cheek or a little nipple rub.

You cannot see actual touching in that photo. Sorry folks. You can't.

But I agree. Any means to an end is OK when it comes to 2A.

She explains It was practice for the skit...most don't practice the actual act.

She says they practiced already...didnt want to any more.


Not to be a whataboutist but the french kiss didn't work out so well for ol' Senator Bob Packwood....

He did do it to more than one gal though.

Packwood. Just hearing his name makes most people want to take a shower.

Uh oh....here I go.....

WHATABOUT Trump? His behavior towards and comments about women are ok?

Deflecting to Trump doesn't change the content of your posts.

You don't distinguish between saying something and doing something? Because most people agree there's a difference between those 2 things. Me complimenting your ass isn't the same as me grabbing your ass.

There are comments in this thread, made by you, that seem to imply you feel entitled to touch people simply because you want to. The targets of this touching appear to have no room to complain because either a) their gender removes this option, or b) the toucher thought it would be funny.

Do I have that about right? Or have I misunderstood your posts?

Slate was one of Franken's biggest cheerleaders AND they are far left, those make it more likely for them to support him and to try and excuse this, the way they excused Bubba for decades, especially with the stakes of a close Senate split as well as their fear of providing political cover for Trump.
For Slate's legal writer to call this a crime means they were likely very reluctant to do that and probably consulted a lawyer, given that even public figures have SOME libel protections.

Thank you. I had to look it up to see that it was Left leaning. hah
Can you address what you see as a prosecutable crime in this story? Using all of the evidence that we know of, nothing else. The photograph, the accusation and his defensive apology appear to be all of the relevant factors that have been used in this discussion... Are there more facts being consulted during this discussion?... Am I missing anything else?
Is there enough there that a prosecutor could mount a 50/50 or better chance of conviction?

A prosecutor would consider the expected defense also I think, but I'd like to look at this separately. Take out the defense factor for a separate consideration. I want to assume that Franken would mount the most intelligent defense possible (pardon, it is my conservative nature to assume a difficult adversary) which would entail simple denials on his part. His initial apology(s) is/are already out in the public, but assuming he retained solid counsel and kept his trap shut for the rest of it.

I'm saying that this shit is out of control. It has lost all perspective. Take a look at the photo of Franken. Are his hands actually touching her? I see no imprint against cushy humanflesh that would indicate that they are. It would appear that they are hovering, and since the camera angle was to the right, and behind, it gives the impression they are on her tits.

I'm saying some of you sound like the snowflakes you are always bashing.

Sure she can complain. But don't turn it into some sort of sexual assault. And once again, I ask, why didn't this photo surface years ago if if she was so offended?


There is sexual harrassment. There is sexual assault. There is tomfoolery. There is men acting like assjoles. There is sophomoric shenanigans. Lumping them together is bullshit, and is VERY snowflaky. Women desever to not be touched unless they want to be. But this shit is out of control.

I think a case could possibly be made. I blew the photo up and enhanced it. The light source is with the camera, either a room light or a mild flash given the lack of flares on his glasses lenses.
Given the above lighting parameters, a close look at the fingers tells us everything we need to know. The left hand ring finger is making physical contact with her chest. The right hand is likely also given the lack of shadow beyond the very tip of his fingers and the diagonal angle of the camera. He is absolutely touching her and any decent Director of Photography or digital forensics expert would testify to that in court.