General Discussion

herding cats

(20,030 posts)

28. Now apparently its an issue with an overreaching HR and their legal team.

Tue Dec 12, 2017, 12:16 AM

Dec 2017

How cute is this that? It can’t be their favored persons fault, so twist, twist yourself into a pretzel to find an excuse.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

91 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Is Ryan Lizza another set up? [View all] Bibluca Dec 2017 OP

If he's factually innocent he should sue for wrongful termination. DemocratSinceBirth Dec 2017 #1

Virtually impossible to prove. BannonsLiver Dec 2017 #5

Seems very circumstantial ClarendonDem Dec 2017 #2

But he was fired from all 3 of his gigs Bibluca Dec 2017 #3

She has an attorney. herding cats Dec 2017 #10

Thats actually not how things are supposed to work at all and there is no such right stevenleser Dec 2017 #34

He knows who she is as does the New Yorker. herding cats Dec 2017 #63

Lizza has every right to publish her name. He knows exactly who she is. VermontKevin Dec 2017 #73

And he would be rightfully ripped to shreds mythology Dec 2017 #82

It is reported they had a relationship. Corporations will fire employees who cause them trouble Demsrule86 Dec 2017 #38

Me too. This is why we need to demand due process/investigations over anonymous accusations.. anneboleyn Dec 2017 #57

And if it is revenge...then it just sucks. Demsrule86 Dec 2017 #69

The idea that you can run to court is laughable...folks who suggest that have never been to court. Demsrule86 Dec 2017 #72

Lizza can sue if its false. herding cats Dec 2017 #67

That is bullshit...very hard to sue...expensive too...so the idea that anyone wrongly accused...can Demsrule86 Dec 2017 #68

He can sue her with ease if shes lying. herding cats Dec 2017 #70

That is simply not true...nothing easy about suing someone. Demsrule86 Dec 2017 #71

That is not true and a very simple google search will tell you that. stevenleser Dec 2017 #86

You mean Libel or Slander? Do you know how hard it is to meet the three stevenleser Dec 2017 #85

Show me exactly where she has any such right? Loki Liesmith Dec 2017 #51

Exactly. Being anonymous goes against our entire legal system. The whole point is that an accused anneboleyn Dec 2017 #55

She's NOT "anonymous". Lizza, and The New Yorker know who she is. n/t PoliticAverse Dec 2017 #90

He knows who she is as does the New Yorker. herding cats Dec 2017 #64

The me too kwalter66 Dec 2017 #81

She's not "anonymous"; she's "unnamed". lapucelle Dec 2017 #89

And since when did non-criminal sexual antics Bibluca Dec 2017 #4

You know this was outside of work? herding cats Dec 2017 #11

Are we back, so quickly, to assuming all women are liars? mcar Dec 2017 #6

I hope we are at the point where we judge each accusation on its merits, on a case by case basis. woolldog Dec 2017 #7

And you know this is all true how? mcar Dec 2017 #8

All what? woolldog Dec 2017 #9

Stop and reconsider what youre saying. herding cats Dec 2017 #13

You can read his account and the New Yorker's account and it's obvious what happened. woolldog Dec 2017 #15

So, this is all about the fact that he dated a coworker. herding cats Dec 2017 #16

What misconduct did he commit? woolldog Dec 2017 #17

Ask that question of the attorneys at the New Yorker, oh wiser one. herding cats Dec 2017 #18

in other words, woolldog Dec 2017 #19

You're kidding me right? herding cats Dec 2017 #20

This message was self-deleted by its author woolldog Dec 2017 #21

Wow. Youre not being nice. herding cats Dec 2017 #22

I dont understand your mean personal reply to me. herding cats Dec 2017 #23

You're right. On rereading that post, I was too harsh. woolldog Dec 2017 #24

Ok. herding cats Dec 2017 #27

lol woolldog Dec 2017 #29

Peace doggy. herding cats Dec 2017 #30

This message was self-deleted by its author herding cats Dec 2017 #25

Was It Flirting Me. Dec 2017 #26

Now apparently its an issue with an overreaching HR and their legal team. herding cats Dec 2017 #28

... Me. Dec 2017 #31

It's difficult for many people to infer fire when only smoke LanternWaste Dec 2017 #53

Apparently a victim shielding their identity from the public is now wrong, too. herding cats Dec 2017 #12

Yeah, notice how the New Yorker carefully shielded the victim's identity to the public, KitSileya Dec 2017 #32

I saw it. It was completely by design by his legal representation. herding cats Dec 2017 #33

It is called the right to face ones accusser Motownman78 Dec 2017 #36

He isn't facing criminal sanction at this point mythology Dec 2017 #46

Oh who needs that when you can just take the lazy, "all men are pigs" approach? BannonsLiver Dec 2017 #61

+1 OnDoutside Dec 2017 #80

He knows who accused him. herding cats Dec 2017 #65

I think it's time to face the truth. Too many on our side minimize this KitSileya Dec 2017 #37

I totally disagree with you. I believe in due process including appropriate investigations before anneboleyn Dec 2017 #60

Did New Yorker had to announce the reason they fired him? LisaL Dec 2017 #42

Take that up with The New Yorker. herding cats Dec 2017 #66

No, that is not the correct answer. Workplaces can not divulge most personnel actions. nt stevenleser Dec 2017 #88

They most likely can, but choose not to to avoid lawsuits. Just like many businesses these days.. PoliticAverse Dec 2017 #91

It is wrong...people have a right to face their accusers...and I can think of 1000's of ways this Demsrule86 Dec 2017 #74

I Used To Think Like This RobinA Dec 2017 #14

Not all women Motownman78 Dec 2017 #35

Do you think we should assume that all women tell the truth? and any accusation is all that takes Demsrule86 Dec 2017 #40

That is the opposite of what I said mcar Dec 2017 #48

I doubt they investigated at all. They washed their hands of the mess by firing the guy. Demsrule86 Dec 2017 #75

No, we're still stuck in the mindset that all men are liars. n/t Bibluca Dec 2017 #45

Bullshit. We have been stuck in the all women are liars mode for centuries. MrsCoffee Dec 2017 #56

Good question. Here's another one. kstewart33 Dec 2017 #58

No. We hold them to the same standard as EVERYONE ELSE IN OUR LEGAL SYSTEM. SIMPLE. anneboleyn Dec 2017 #59

I think a number of things are happening. One of them is... stevenleser Dec 2017 #84

Sadly, there are and will be women DeminPennswoods Dec 2017 #39

This is what I believe. In the end, this will hurt women Demsrule86 Dec 2017 #41

This is why the accused must be protected as well. This thread is depressing as so many seem to anneboleyn Dec 2017 #62

I find it depressing that people continue to mistake mythology Dec 2017 #83

I find it depressing that folks like you dont know the difference between that stevenleser Dec 2017 #87

any actual evidence? brooklynite Dec 2017 #43

Nope Bibluca Dec 2017 #44

Do you feel the same way when a rape victim isn't named? mythology Dec 2017 #47

Another straw man Bibluca Dec 2017 #49

This is not a sexual crime...this was a relationship outside the office. Demsrule86 Dec 2017 #76

Most employers are within their rights to fire anyone for almost any reason. alarimer Dec 2017 #50

Lizza says there's nothing there Bibluca Dec 2017 #52

Obviously the New Yorker thinks it was enough. alarimer Dec 2017 #54

That doesn't sound progressive... The fact he was fired is meaningless... Demsrule86 Dec 2017 #77

Women don't always lie...women don't always tell the truth. And if you notice ...most people losing Demsrule86 Dec 2017 #78

So little information to go on... PoliticAverse Dec 2017 #79