I Was Wrong About Al Franken by Michelle Goldberg

[PatSeg]

During the height of the #MeToo movement in 2017, a woman named Leeann Tweeden accused Al Franken of sexually harassing her during his comedian days and produced a photo of him pretending to grope her breasts. I called on Franken to resign from the Senate, not because I thought his alleged actions were irredeemable, but because I thought Democrats should free themselves of the burden of defending him.

My first instinct, I wrote at the time, “is to say that Franken deserves a chance to go through an ethics investigation but remain in the Senate, where he should redouble his efforts on behalf of abuse and harassment victims.” But if that happened, I feared Republicans would be able to use the photo of Franken to deflect from the more serious charges against Donald Trump and Roy Moore, then running for Senate in Alabama while dogged by accusations of sexually assaulting teenagers. “It’s not worth it,” I wrote then. “The question isn’t about what’s fair to Franken, but what’s fair to the rest of us.”

In the years since, I’ve argued with many people who believe that Franken was the victim of a serious injustice. Often, they’d point to Jane Mayer’s New Yorker reporting exposing inconsistencies in Tweeden’s story and describing Franken’s regret and devastation. I feel awful for Franken, and I’m not sure he deserved to lose his job, but I don’t think he was innocent either. Before the Tweeden photo surfaced, I’d heard secondhand about Franken grabbing a woman’s butt at a political event. At the time I didn’t know what to make of it, but when Tweeden came forward, I braced myself for others to follow, and they did.

By the time Franken resigned, eight women had accused him of either groping or trying to forcibly kiss them. Even if you dismiss Tweeden’s account, it seems to me overwhelmingly likely that he acted in a way that left women who’d admired him confused and humiliated.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/21/opinion/michelle-goldberg-al-franken.html

The New York Times invited their Opinion columnists "to reflect on when they have misjudged, predicted incorrectly, let their preconceived ideas blind them to the facts. Eight of them weighed in." Interesting series of articles. I haven't read them all yet.

At first I was impressed that after all this time Goldberg was willing to admit she was wrong, but her response was rather disappointing, as if it was really difficult for her to admit she was wrong. Sounds like she is saying "I was wrong, well sort of, maybe, but, but it wasn't my fault".

[dsc]

1. She is also still wrong on what the problem was

it isn't that Franken, or anyone for that matter, have a due process expectation to be in elected positions, it is that the people who elected them have a due process right for their choice to be respected. MN lost a bunch of seniority when he was forced out. They also lost the person they chose not once but twice to be their senator with nary a thought as to what they did or didn't want.

[PatSeg]

11. Good point

We all lost an important voice in the senate and a good man's career was ruined, because Ms. Goldberg has an bad habit of presuming people are guilty before she knows all the facts. Well, even when she does know the facts, she is still reluctant to let go of her preconceived beliefs.

[hlthe2b]

2. 5, 4, 3, 2, 1: How many Michelle Goldbergs continue to regurgitate her original points, unevolved

every damned time Franken's name is even mentioned--here and elsewhere. Have they learned by now what Goldberg apparently has STARTED to? We feel the loss of Franken from the Senate every damned day. And for what? Merely to destroy his political career for a comedic photo? Project everything he ever said or unconfirmed allegations from those now known to be RW-devoted into horrific behavior to give Gillibrand a cause cé·lè·bre that ultimately hurt efforts to address the REAL problem?

I won't forget. You shouldn't either.

[PatSeg]

12. Nope, I won't forget

And I still don't see where she admitted she was wrong. Sounds like she was just doubling down. An actual genuine apology to Al Franken and the people of Minnesota would be nice. Otherwise she should have just shut up.

[a kennedy]

51. I know, there was NO apology that I heard.

[PatSeg]

56. Maybe she thought THIS was an apology

"I’m not sure he deserved to lose his job, but I don’t think he was innocent either."

Her only regret was calling for his resignation without a senate investigation. In other words, she still thinks he was guilty and she regrets she got so much negative attention for her assumptions.

[inthewind21]

72. Let us not forget

Kiersten Gillibrand was leading that charge as well. Notice she promptly STUF up and faded into the background. As a female, when me too first hit the scene, I was glad finally something might change. I've been there, done that and know what it's like that no one cares or all the fault is mine. But, I also feared it would be taken too far and the whole movement would fizzle. Sadly to say, I was right. These days everything is viewed in black and white, there are no gray areas. And that is not realistic. The issue is the inability to know the difference between annoying, harassment and straight up abuse. One is a nuisance, one a misdemeanor and the other is a felony. Treating EVERYTHING as a felony, does nothing but to lend credibility to those who would call women hysterical and over reactors. Just my 2 cents. Disclaimer, I DO NOT condone any of the 3 categories and believe all should be dealt with. I just disagree with prosecuting EVERYTHING as a felony.

[PatSeg]

84. I totally agree

I like how you broke that down - "annoying, harassment and straight up abuse." Some people are incapable of doing that.

Every situation needs to be addressed individually, not lumped together into one big category. Meanwhile, people do lie, so though they all deserve to be heard, that doesn't mean we should automatically believe them.

And yes, I believe Gillibrand lead the charge and it appeared to be for political reasons. Whenever I see her, the first thing that pops into my head is Al Franken. Some choices cannot be undone and some tags never go away.

[2naSalit]

27. +1

[Tommy Carcetti]

3. Goldberg also wanted to give Juanita Broaddrick the benefit of the doubt.

Even though her claims that Bill Clinton sexually assaulted her back in the 1970s were always dubious, unsubstantiated by any real evidence, and Broaddrick has shown herself to be a truly horrible, horrible hypocritical person and a tool of the right.

[FarPoint]

5. Maybe Goldberg needs to go back into therapy.....

I sense she has abuse issues in her history....transferring her anger in this movement ... This can be good but balance needs to be obtained. She does not have balance....she views all males guilty regardless of evidence and before a trial...

[PatSeg]

14. I agree

If she wants to write about #MeToo issues, perhaps she should write about her own experiences, because clearly she has some issues. It would be cathartic for her and might be helpful to other victims of abuse. Obviously she cannot be objective when writing about such stories.

[FarPoint]

63. I totally agree....

[PatSeg]

6. And recently she wrote an article

about Amber Heard that indicated she had no idea what happened in that courtroom. Goldberg apparently is incapable of being objective when it comes to such issues.

[shrike3]

30. As an assault survivor, I find Broaddrick disgusting.

Last edited Thu Jul 21, 2022, 01:19 PM - Edit history (1)

I don't usually comment on people's looks, but she certainly got the face she deserves.

I remember her sneering as how the officer who shot Ashli Babbitt was black, as if that made a difference.

[Tommy Carcetti]

32. She's gone out of her way to immediately attack any accusers of right wing figures.

Like Christine Blasey Ford, before she even testified.

And when the Access Hollywood tapes dropped, she was literally by Trump's side the next day.

It's just not behavior consistent with legitimate accusers of sexual assault.

[shrike3]

34. Exactly. Why I find her disgusting.

And why I also found it disgusting that she suddenly got sympathetic coverage in the press.

[Solomon]

4. That's not an admission. She's making it worse. She should just stfu about it.

[PatSeg]

8. Exactly

It would have been better for her to just say nothing. She was clearly wrong and should have just said so.

"I called on Franken to resign from the Senate, not because I thought his alleged actions were irredeemable, but because I thought Democrats should free themselves of the burden of defending him."

This was not that long ago and I remember seeing her on many programs denouncing Franken and she wasn't saying it was so the Democrats wouldn't have to keep defending him. She pretty much declared him guilty without due process and contributed to ruining a good man's career and we lost an amazing senator.

[shrike3]

31. Yep. n/t

[2naSalit]

28. +1

[nuxvomica]

7. "overwhelmingly likely"

I would think if something's likeliness were overwhelming it would probably be definite. She's using what someone called "weasel words" to have her cake and eat it too.

[PatSeg]

10. Yep, lots of "weasel words"

She has just made things worse and should have kept her "apology" to herself. Maybe she should consider another line of work, because this time it could be HER career that she is destroying.

[PJMcK]

9. She consistently disappoints (n/t)

[Sympthsical]

13. Punditry - Where you can be wrong all the time and still keep your job

I admit that, over time, I read less and less Op-Ed pieces in major media. They're simply wrong all of the time. Yet these writers can keep plugging away as if it never happened. Ok, but if you're wrong so often, why am I listening to anything you have to say?

I've seen many studies over the years where pundits end up being wrong about half the time. So basically, they're about as good at predicting and understanding things as you or I.

I love economic pundits. They can be deeply wrong on the regular and yet somehow remain experts. I keep an eye on what the analysts of major banks and management houses say. The people who have a lot of money riding on whether or not their predictions are true. They have a vested interest in not merely saying things they want to be true. Their livelihoods and reputations depend on it.

But your favorite newspaper pundit? They can be wrong all day long and never miss a step. It's not about being objectively good at it. It's about engaging reader interest.

It's a pretty sweet gig if you can manage it.

[PatSeg]

16. Well said

I've only read two of the eight "apologies". One of them was by Paul Krugman, "I Was Wrong About Inflation". I still have a high regard for him, but I wonder if my memories tend to be selective.

[Sympthsical]

33. He's also about 50/50

I think the problem is that pundits have to fill space. They have to have opinions on things and provide content on the regular. I don't think the economy moves quickly enough to really be a good fit for the format. Trying to make predictions day to day or week to week isn't incredibly helpful, because you're only working with a piece of the picture. If you read economic forecasters working for banks, they're looking six months ahead. I was reading an article the other day where they were discussing first and second quarter 2023.

The media may be running a 24/7 cycle, but the predictive profession isn't a good fit for it. On the rare occasion I turn on cable news, no matter who is on, I always have a vague feeling of, "I don't think these people know what they're talking about." It's just filling time with something. Could be right, could be wrong. Doesn't matter. It will be forgotten tomorrow.

For fun, I seek out corrections with places like NYT or WP. They're usually hilarious. Printed a month later, small print, page 265 at the bottom. "We had this headline story entirely wrong. Sorry!"

[PatSeg]

37. I agree, there is a whole lot of "filler" in the news

I watch very little cable news these days and when I do, I hit fast-forward a lot, as each hour there are two or three stories and the rest is the panel providing the "filler" - repeating what has already been said in different words or giving their opinion. Now I appreciate a little opinion and analysis, but not when it means sacrificing actual news stories. So one can watch two hours of Nicolle Wallace and hear about ten minutes of news (probably less). I would really like to hear the phrase "And in other news" more often.

God help us if a major celebrity dies!

[Act_of_Reparation]

53. When you're flanked by David Brooks, Ross Douthat, and Bret Stephens...

50/50 is a pretty good track record.

[Sympthsical]

59. Completely fair point

[karynnj]

78. I would give him far more than 50/50.

Especially if his FULL opinion is read, rather than just a headline or leading paragraph. He is a top economist, who won the Nobel prize for economics.

[DFW]

15. Goldberg is playing a lot of CYA

"In the end, Franken might have had to resign anyway..." Sure, because Corey Booker thought his long shot chances at the 2020 nomination might have been enhanced?

Sure, and "in the end, Trump might have won the 2020 election anyway." Right--except that no, he didn't, and wouldn't have, because some Republicans had more integrity than he did (not hard when realizing that he had none whatsoever).

The one person she might have consulted before writing her article, namely Al Franken, would surely have made himself available to tell her his side of the story, but it appears she wasn't in the slightest bit interested. It's a good thing Goldberg didn't have a one-on-one interview with Franni, or she might have needed a trip to the emergency room before getting around without crutches for a month or so.

For the 99th time, the reason Al didn't respond more forcefully to the accusations at first is the he knew better than anyone that the accusations against him were bogus, and figured his Senate colleagues would figure out that this was a Republican (specifically Roger Stone) coordinated smear campaign with no substance to it. Stone said as much before the whole thing broke ("it's Al Franken's time in the barrel" ). The fact that Stone knew in advance didn't raise warning bells with 33 members of the US Senate? Gimme a break! Al was blindsided by his fellow Democrats jumping on the bandwagon before doing any fact-finding--something he never thought could happen. Some of them have apologized to him in the meantime (notably, Tester, Whitehouse, Nelson), most have not, and certainly not publicly, something I consider reprehensible. I have refused to contribute to any of them that haven't made the gesture. I flat out opposed (and still do) any presidential campaigns of those who trashed him, including Warren, Booker, Gillibrand, Harris and Sanders. Either you have a backbone or you don't. I will vote for any Democrat who wins the nomination, of course, but I sure as hell will not support some of them in their efforts to be the nominee. It has been 5 years now, and Al has moved on, but Franni has not, and nor have I.

[PatSeg]

17. Yes, if she'd met with Al Franken

and gotten his side of the story, it would have been a lot easier to take her seriously. AND if she wanted to write a really good story, she could have written about how callous political operatives used the #MeToo movement to destroy a good man's career and naïve gullible journalists cheered them on. THEN apologize for being one of those gullible journalists.

She did not admit she was wrong and she certainly didn't apologize. She did herself no favors writing that article.

[Tree Lady]

42. My senator in Oregon was one of

Those who piled on and I have read articles where he apologized and said he wished he hadn't rushed to accuse.

[DFW]

48. That is (good) news to me

I hadn't heard about any of the Senators from Oregon making any apologies to Al (I haven't exactly asked him for a list--maybe I should).

[DFW]

87. Can you tell me which one?

I get contribution requests with assembly line regularity. If I know it was a Senator who trashed Al publicly, the trash is where such requests for contributions land unless I know for sure that they have made an apology. Although I haven't seen a public apology from either Wyden or Merkley, I will start considering requests if I know for a fact that an apology has been made.

[Tree Lady]

88. You know what? I was wrong

When I looked back it said Jeff Merkley regretted what he said but didn't apologize. That was from 3 yrs ago.

I thought I saw something more recently but couldn't find it.

[DFW]

89. Ugh!

Sorry to hear it.

[betsuni]

49. +1

[867-5309.]

18. Kamala, Bernie, and Schumer called on him to resign

along with a majority of Democratic senators.

I loved him and his work, but that shouldn't negate the eight accusers.

[Demsrule86]

21. The eight accusers were full of shit

and anonymous in most cases.

[PatSeg]

23. And probably paid to make those claims

The one complained because he put his arm around her as they had their photo taken - said it made her "uncomfortable". She looked really happy to be photographed with a celebrity in the picture.

[Demsrule86]

44. I agree and they were anonymous too...I remember one said Franken looked at her funny

when she was singing in a church choir... bullshit lies. If you won't put your name on an accusation then no one should listen to you. She weighed in with, Biden as you pointed out, and with LT Gov Fairfax as well...another career destroyed thanks to bullshit GOP lies. I can't believe that she actually said 'she heard'. Her opinion was based in large part on gossip...no one should hire her and she should be fired. We know the first one was Sean Hannity's buddy. I never read anything she writes, believe anything she says, or watch anything she participates in. I hold grudges. On an aside, haven't seen you in a while...How are you? Great post.

[PatSeg]

54. Oh, I've been here everyday

We probably just miss one another in the threads.

I really think Goldberg made a bad career choice. She is not very good at this one. Last month she wrote an article about the Johnny Depp-Amber Heard verdict and it was as if Michelle lives in a different reality. She is really angry about something and she keeps taking it out on other people without doing any real investigation. It appears to be personal for her and perhaps she should write about THAT.

[BannonsLiver]

61. It actually does.

They were all full of shit.

[Buckeyeblue]

19. Franken had two things going against him

The timing of these allegations and the fact that Minnesota's governor was a Democrat.

It was safe to go all in for his resignation.

If Minnesota's governor had been a Repug, Franken would still be in the Senate.

[Demsrule86]

45. The Senator from New York might have a different opinion...she will never be president.

[867-5309.]

67. Kamala and Schumer might as well

It seems silly to blame Gillibrand. It was a majority of Democratic senators.

[inthewind21]

73. Not silly at all

Gillibrand was eyeing the presidency. She jumped right out there all over the news to bring attention to herself.

[shrike3]

75. Gillibrand tried to make hay out of it.

The others, including Booker, wisely kept their mouths shut. Gillibrand was showcasing herself on Full Frontal as a champion of women and gave an interview about her right to "speak out" on 60 minutes. Did not do for her brand what she thought it would.

[867-5309.]

76. Hard to see why Gillibrand thought this would help her

Being out front wasn't exactly popular with a lot of Democrats.

But regardless, are you suggesting the others wouldn't have come out for Franken's resignation if Gillibrand had been low profile? It's hard for me to see her role as determinative in Franken going.

[shrike3]

81. No, I'm not saying they'd not have come out for Franken's resignation.

I think there was a consensus among senators to call for his resignation. But Gillibrand put herself and her opinions out there in a way that others did not. I don't see her doing that unless she thought it would help her career in some way. We used to watch "Full Frontal," and I remember Samantha Bee came out beaming like Christmas morning, rejoicing that Franken had been brought down and cuing to Gillibrand, who made a little speech about how women needed to be believed. Not that I disagree with the sentiment. I just wasn't sure that a hit hadn't been done on Franken. At the moment, I think one was done.

Maybe I missed it, but I never saw other senators go on comedy shows or talk shows to express their opinions. Gillibrand also gave a 60 minutes interview during which she discussed why she thought Franken needed to resign.

[PatSeg]

86. Yes, it was primarily Gillibrand

who was the public face for pushing Franken out of the senate.

[Demsrule86]

20. She is still fucking wrong. She relied on

innuendo and gossip to destroy Franken and of course anonymous sources. The fact she doubled down and refuses to see the truth makes me dislike her more. She heard he grabbed someone’s butt. Fuck you Michelle Goldberg.

[PatSeg]

24. Yes, I still don't see where she actually admitted

she was wrong. She just used the opportunity to say the same things she said years ago. She really needs to find a different career because she is a terrible journalist and her misguided articles do a disservice to real victims of sexual assault.

[2naSalit]

29. +1

[malaise]

22. He should never have resigned

That is all

[PatSeg]

25. I know

and I'll bet he has regretted that ever since.

[LexVegas]

26. Franken....

[Ligyron]

35. Roger Stone played the Dems like a fiddle.

He knew they’d stumble all over themselves to be the first to“Me too” it all over the media.

Loudly.

We’re supposed to be smarter than our actual GrOPer opposition too.

[PatSeg]

38. When the whole #MeToo movement started,

I had a really bad feeling about it. I knew it was only a matter of time before it would be used against us. Sadly, it happened much faster than I'd expected. The world is full of Roger Stone types and too often we underestimate them. Stone has been an admitted "dirty trickster" his entire life and he is a real pro.

[Ligyron]

66. The #Me Too was a much needed epiphany for many.

There’s not one female I’ve had a serious relationship with who has not shared a personal story about sexual abuse - some much worse than others but all damaging to some extent. One who was sexually abused as a child had some serious issues to work through. It really helped to know you’re not alone in this.

Leave it to the GrOPer dirty trickster squad to weaponize something that was so helpful to so many people, whatever their political leanings.

But leave it to some Dems to fall for it and eat their own, Probably imagining how fair and principled it would look to the Republicans.

They could care less … being fair is just a sign of weakness to them and an opportunity not to be missed. Just like all our other attempts to show how fair we are by appointing Republicans to positions within Dem administrations.

Like the DOJ for instance. If President Biden had appointed Glenn Kirschner to head the DOJ instead of Garland, Trump would be in jail by now along with Roger Stone and a few others.

[PatSeg]

68. Yes, it is very rare

to find any woman who has not experienced some kind of sexual harassment or assault and the fact that so many victims were able to speak out openly was very cathartic for us all. Unfortunately, there will always be people who will take a positive movement and use it dishonestly for their own purposes. In the process, the many real victims suffer. If it is discovered that one woman lied for money or political advantage, then many people will assume that is true with every accusation.

[Demsrule86]

82. Me Too was not good because there was no due process...and now it is discredited by so many

because of situations like Franken or Biden...when she tried to use Juanita to destroy him. It has been used to destroy Democrats but...guys like Matt Gaetz don't care. I am a survivor and I hate women like Goldberg who use Me-Too for political reasons.

[Paladin]

36. Thanks for absolutely nothing, Michelle Goldberg.

No credits awarded for living down to expectations...

[PatSeg]

39. Saying nothing at all would have been preferable

She has only made things worse and reminded many people why they were so pissed off in the first place.

[Paladin]

41. Bullseye. Thank you.

I'm not even bothering with the belly-crawling efforts of David Brooks or Brett Stephens---my assholery quotient for the NYT opinions section is more than met.

[PatSeg]

46. Actually David Brooks' piece

was quite good. He even admitted that he was wrong about a lot of things over the years and explained it without appearing to be "covering his ass".

Goldberg didn't really admit she was wrong and certainly didn't apologize. It was like listening to a fifteen year old trying to justify her actions when she gets caught making a mistake. She just repeated the same allegations but with slightly different wording. At 47, one would expect a little more maturity and honesty. Words matter and when your profession is words, you should choose them more carefully.

[Paladin]

52. Glad you got something out of Brooks' piece. I'll pass. (nt)

[PatSeg]

57. Sometimes people surprise us

Not often, but it does happen.

[betsuni]

62. David Brooks is often wrong but I can't dislike him, he has a niceness about him.

"Bobos in Paradise" is a wonderful book.

[PatSeg]

64. Yes, there is a willingness to admit

he might have been mistaken, unlike many conservative elites who look down their noses at the rest of us mere mortals. I found a certain self-awareness in his piece that I rarely see in other conservative pundits and writers.

[Iggo]

40. Yeah. We know.

Call Dr Birx. Maybe be she gives a shit.

[Wounded Bear]

43. A little late Ms Goldberg...

a little fucking late.

[PatSeg]

47. She didn't really admit she was wrong,

so nothing would have been better.

Perhaps it would have been more constructive if she'd interviewed Al Franken and wrote an article about that.

[JHB]

50. Shorter Goldberg:

Last edited Thu Jul 21, 2022, 12:27 PM - Edit history (1)

No.

But yes.

But no.

Say, have you seen those amazing space telescope pictures?

[PatSeg]

60. It should have started out:

"My boss is making me write this, but I know I didn't do anything wrong."

[LakeArenal]

55. The are many Senators I would like to hear from on the ruin of Franken.

Senators who fell in line for what I believe was fear of Franken’s popularity and their own lack of such.

I will not vote for any of them.

[betsuni]

58. Not even a so-so sorry.

"But I heard from my sister's dog-walker's baby-sitter's brother's aunt that he grabbed someone's butt in full view of the public at a political event once because he's obsessed with asses." Okay then. Case closed.

[geardaddy]

65. You're right

I don't see anywhere where she says she was wrong. She's just regurgitating her reasons why she thinks Al is a groper.

[PatSeg]

69. Yep, she was just saying:

"I was right all along, but my boss made me write this article."

[geardaddy]

70. Exactly!

[flying_wahini]

71. Too little, too late. I am not impressed by her, either.

[shrike3]

74. Broaddrick (mentioned above) tweeted, "Bannon is working on it. Good things are coming."

Then suddenly Franken had eight accusers. His questioning had forced Jeff Session to accuse himself, paving the way for Mueller. I'm sure this was payback. Then we had Trump Jr. mocking Franken after he resigned.

[PatSeg]

77. Oh, I didn't know that about Broaddrick

If I did, I'd forgotten. There was so much going on at the time and right-wing operatives weren't terribly subtle about what they were doing.

[shrike3]

80. I didn't recall about Stone. Lord knows we can't remember everything.

[PatSeg]

83. I remember hearing about Stone and Hannity

They didn't even try to hide what they were doing and people like Goldberg fell for it.

[Novara]

79. What the hell kind of "I was wrong" was this?!?!?

She doubled down! That's not a fucking apology, you twat!

I'm still pissed off and still feel that Gillibrand railroaded him out of the Senate.

[PatSeg]

85. There was no acknowledgement of wrongdoing whatsoever

It was just an opportunity to double down on her previous allegations. It appears that to this day, she does not believe she made a mistake. Or she is just incapable of saying, "I am sorry, I was wrong".

Whatever her problem, she should take it up with her therapist.