Should Roy Moore win his election, should the Senate take any action against him?

[radcen]

Should Roy Moore win his election, should the Senate take any action against him?

Questions presumes that no legal action will have been concluded prior to his swearing in.

A) Yes, work to boot him out.
B) Yes, less than booting out, but something.
C) No, let him serve.
D) Undecided/Other.

I say no. Option C, though Option B could be warranted if he does admit. Why?

1) His alleged transgressions at this point are just that, alleged. Is he guilty? I think so, but a higher standard is at play here. Innocent until proven guilty, you either believe in it or you don't, and if you believe in it it should apply both inside and outside a courtroom. At this point nothing has been proven, nor has he been convicted of anything.

Believing someone is guilty based on available evidence is one thing. Using that belief to guide your actions absent actual proof or conviction is quite another.

2) Per above, his alleged transgressions are well-known and public... and the people voted him in anyway. Barring a conviction, or an incident while IN office, respect the results of the vote.*

3) Barring a conviction of something that would disqualify a person from even being elected, I do not favor punishing a member for something that happened prior to their time in office. Senate punishments for Senators should be reserved for time in office only.

*-Same could hold for Al Franken, if his transgressions were public knowledge before he was elected. His primary incident was prior, but I don't think it was public knowledge at the time of his initial campaign for Senate, though I'm not 100% sure of that. If it was not public knowledge, this would negate my reason #2 for him, but reasons #1 and #3 would still remain, though I could consider Option B since he did admit.

(Dammit! I went to check 'Make votes public', and it didn't take, and I hit submit too fast to catch it.)

 

[Dittohead not!]

First of all, the voters who elect him, if they do, need to be given some sort of award for abject stupidity.
Second, let the Senator who is without sin throw the first stone.

 

[haymarket]

I strongly oppose the election of Moore to the Senate. The man is a disgrace to what it means to be a man. If he should win, he must be seated and allowed to serve according to the wishes of the people who legally elected him.

 

[Mycroft]

Unless there is evidence that shows, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that he has committed some crime...let him serve.

btw, I will apply standard that to ANY Congressman.

 

[Dirt Sands]

If he's elected, it would be just one more example of the voters screwing things up. That's not fake news. No blame to the establishment. None to the anti-establishment. They already had less government from their candidates. Why isn't it working. I wonder if they hate women since they don't believe what they say.

Sent from my Z833 using Tapatalk

 

[OlNate]

I don't think anyone can say right now, so I went with "Other". An investigation should take place, and if he's guilty, he should get the boot, and if not, he should serve.

 

[Waddy]

40 years ago...... comes out right before an election..... smells fishy. Why didn't the accusers come out, say, a few years ago, when he wasn't running for anything?

 

[MTAtech]

40 years ago...... comes out right before an election..... smells fishy. Why didn't the accusers come out, say, a few years ago, when he wasn't running for anything?

I'll turn this around. What did these women, who aren't Democrats, have to gain from speaking out? They are now being subjected to all kinds of ridicule and abuse.

 

[What if...?]

40 years ago...... comes out right before an election..... smells fishy. Why didn't the accusers come out, say, a few years ago, when he wasn't running for anything?

The woman in the franken incident says a report about Moore reminded her of her experience with franken and she decided the time was right to come forward.

LOTS of guys have old victims coming forward right now.

So there's a good chance that its just "bandwagon" behavior. Other women are coming forward so now's the time kind of thing.

And some of it is probably false. But that doesn't mean none of it is real.

 

[lurchadams]

A good many Alabamians believe Moore's accusers and are voting for Moore, nevertheless. The GOP is in a tough place. If the GOP senate expels Moore (assuming he's elected) they'll be nullifying the wishes of Alabama voters and there will be a backlash by both Alabamians and anti-establishment US citizens, nationwide.

If Moore is seated and allowed to serve people running for office as a Democrat at every level of government nationwide will be painting the GOP as supporters of a pedofile and they will benefit from this. Moore will be a weight around the neck of the GOP.

Hopefully this will be a last time in this nation's history this dilemma will ever exist.

 

[Waddy]

I'll turn this around. What did these women, who aren't Democrats, have to gain from speaking out? They are now being subjected to all kinds of ridicule and abuse.

But FORTY years ago? And we don't know that they have nothing to gain. In fact, we have very few details to cross examine on.

And if it took a report about Moore to get another accuser to remember her encounter with Franken, that encounter couldn't have meant much if she didn't even remember it until now. This whole thing is becoming a witch hunt.

I think in the future sexual harassment will become a weapon to get back at a co-worker, destroy a rival political candidate, and even as a tool of coercion to get what you want. It doen't have to be the truth, it just has to look plausible. Or as an attorney friend of mine said, "it isn't about what actually happened, it's about how it can be made to look". That's where this is heading.

 

[MrPeanut]

DNA evidence seems to be the standard that we are applying to Moore here. He was banned from a shopping mall, and police officers were told to keep him away from cheerleaders at games. He called schools to get girls pulled out of their classrooms so he could ask them on dates, and every day it seems more and more like all of this was open knowledge in the area. We've seen voters vote for predators over and over again, but what we are seeing now is a cultural shift. It is no longer okay, for a vast number of Americans, to shrug off claims of sexual harassment/ assault. Right now we are making a moral decision in this country. How we treat Roy Moore will dictate how seriously we actually take these issues.

 

[Waddy]

They're putting up a statue to Marion Barry...... why not vote for Moore?

 

[jamesrage]

Should Roy Moore win his election, should the Senate take any action against him?

Questions presumes that no legal action will have been concluded prior to his swearing in.

A) Yes, work to boot him out.
B) Yes, less than booting out, but something.
C) No, let him serve.
D) Undecided/Other.

I say no. Option C, though Option B could be warranted if he does admit. Why?

1) His alleged transgressions at this point are just that, alleged. Is he guilty? I think so, but a higher standard is at play here. Innocent until proven guilty, you either believe in it or you don't, and if you believe in it it should apply both inside and outside a courtroom. At this point nothing has been proven, nor has he been convicted of anything.

Believing someone is guilty based on available evidence is one thing. Using that belief to guide your actions absent actual proof or conviction is quite another.

2) Per above, his alleged transgressions are well-known and public... and the people voted him in anyway. Barring a conviction, or an incident while IN office, respect the results of the vote.*

3) Barring a conviction of something that would disqualify a person from even being elected, I do not favor punishing a member for something that happened prior to their time in office. Senate punishments for Senators should be reserved for time in office only.

*-Same could hold for Al Franken, if his transgressions were public knowledge before he was elected. His primary incident was prior, but I don't think it was public knowledge at the time of his initial campaign for Senate, though I'm not 100% sure of that. If it was not public knowledge, this would negate my reason #2 for him, but reasons #1 and #3 would still remain, though I could consider Option B since he did admit.

(Dammit! I went to check 'Make votes public', and it didn't take, and I hit submit too fast to catch it.)

Until he confesses,a video of him doing the deed comes out or has been found guilty in a criminal court then he should be allowed to serve.

 

[Unitedwestand13]

Until he confesses or been found guilty in a criminal court then he should be allowed to serve.

What about the court of public opinion?

 

[Skeptic Bob]

I'm not sure. I think investigating the accusations would be merited. But I don't think he should be booted unless the result of the investigation merits charges.

 

[Skeptic Bob]

What about the court of public opinion?

That is carried out at the election booth.

 

[jamesrage]

What about the court of public opinion?

Conservatives who think he is guilty should not vote for him. Conservatives who think he isn't guilty should vote for him. I am not a lesser of two evils voter. So I will not say pick whoever you think is less evil. I Am not party victory at all costs voter. So I will not say if you a democrat then vote for the democrat and if you are a republican then vote for the republican.

 

[VanceMack]

DNA evidence seems to be the standard that we are applying to Moore here. He was banned from a shopping mall, and police officers were told to keep him away from cheerleaders at games. He called schools to get girls pulled out of their classrooms so he could ask them on dates, and every day it seems more and more like all of this was open knowledge in the area. We've seen voters vote for predators over and over again, but what we are seeing now is a cultural shift. It is no longer okay, for a vast number of Americans, to shrug off claims of sexual harassment/ assault. Right now we are making a moral decision in this country. How we treat Roy Moore will dictate how seriously we actually take these issues.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

THATS how we determine if we take this kind of thing seriously.

Now.

 

[Verax]

If the people of Alabama think a right wing child molester is what they want in an elected official then by all means let them have it. I just feel bad for the victims of Alabama.

 

[jimbo]

The woman in the franken incident says a report about Moore reminded her of her experience with franken and she decided the time was right to come forward.

LOTS of guys have old victims coming forward right now.

So there's a good chance that its just "bandwagon" behavior. Other women are coming forward so now's the time kind of thing.

And some of it is probably false. But that doesn't mean none of it is real.

Lots of guys have old alleged victims coming forward. Very few claims get proved or are provable. I think bandwagon is often the motive.

 

[Tangmo]

Constitution says the Senate is the final judge of its members.


Article I, section 5 of the U.S. Constitution provides that each chamber of Congress “shall be the Judge of the Elections, Returns and Qualifications of its own Members.”


In disciplining its members, the Senate has two basic forms of punishment available to it: expulsion, which requires a two-thirds vote; or censure, which requires a majority vote.

Since 1789, the Senate has expelled only 15 of its entire membership, all for disloyalty to the United States. Fourteen (14) expulsions were of Senators charged with supporting the Confederacy during the Civil War. In several other cases, the Senate considered expulsion proceedings but either found the Senator not guilty or failed to act before the Senator resigned.

Censure is a formal statement of disapproval. The Senate has censured nine of its members between 1811 and 1990 for transgressions ranging from breach of confidentiality to fighting in the Senate chamber and more generally for “conduct that tends to bring the Senate into dishonor and disrepute.”

https://www.senate.gov/reference/reference_item/election_book.htm


Either discipline means Moore has to be admitted to the Senate if he might win the election before it would be possible to discipline him as a U.S. Senator. Whether Moore wins or loses this is an election and not a trial in a court of law. Whatever the outcome I think of the Moore candidacy as a Godsend.

 

[radcen]

What about the court of public opinion?

You mean an election?

 

[worksforpigs]

If Moore is seated and allowed to serve people running for office as a Democrat at every level of government nationwide will be painting the GOP as supporters of a pedofile and they will benefit from this. Moore will be a weight around the neck of the GOP.

Yes, he's being accused of pedophilia left and right by liberals who don't know what pedophilia is.

This is about opportunity, not crime. Franken hasn't met with much resistance among his own regarding his refusal to resign, and Democrat voices calling for it are few and far between.

And we have more reports against other Democrats, such as John Conyers, who likewise refuses to step down and likewise has met with little internal pressure to do so.

 

[lurchadams]

Yes, he's being accused of pedophilia left and right by liberals who don't know what pedophilia is.

This is about opportunity, not crime. Franken hasn't met with much resistance among his own regarding his refusal to resign, and Democrat voices calling for it are few and far between.

And we have more reports against other Democrats, such as John Conyers, who likewise refuses to step down and likewise has met with little internal pressure to do so.

Yep, this thread is about Roy Moore. If all you want to do is bash Democrats, there are plenty of threads on this forum where you're welcome to do that. #Whataboutism

Happy Thanksgiving.