CDZ Leeann Tweeden's comportment, tone and tenor during her interview with Jake Tapper

Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by Xelor, Nov 17, 2017.

  1. Xelor
    Offline

    Xelor Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Messages:
    8,193
    Thanks Received:
    1,206
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    D.C.
    Ratings:
    +4,241
    Prefatory Note:
    This thread is not about sexual harassment, assault, etc.​

    I watched much of Jake Tapper's interview of Ms. Tweeden wherein she responded to questions about the situation wherein Sen. Franken groped her. (If you haven't watched it, you should. Click the link.) My thoughts pertaining to the incident of the alleged harassment are what they are, and I'm not sharing them here. What struck me was Tweeden's comportment, candor, tone and tenor.

    Watch the interview. Tweeden answers the questions she's asked. She fully and clearly explains her mindset on the matter. It was clear that she'd thought about the matter and her own feelings on it; she wasn't giving "knee-jerk" responses. She responded to the questions about herself and the situation with complete candor. She didn't dance around her answers or give "non-answers."

    Why did her comporting herself that way stand out to me? Well, because I am so weary of seeing interviewees on news programs conduct themselves in ways other than that which Tweeden did. It really isn't that difficult to sit before an interviewer and simply and truthfully express one's thoughts, ideas, intentions, etc about whatever it is that a reporter/anchor might as one, yet doing that is so infrequently seen among the people whose very job is do exactly that.


    Another thing I noticed is Tweeden's manifold willingness to forgive Franken. I think her capacity for forgiveness isn't unique among Americans. Sadly, however, too few, perhaps none, politicians and other leaders are aware that so long as they comport themselves with integrity, thereby showing they are of high ethical/moral character (and I don't mean merely by refraining from assaulting/molesting someone, I mean the whole of one's character), people will look at the situation and forgive one for one's mistakes. They will because forgiveness is for the offended not for the offender. To wit:
    • "Russia" investigation --> Why the hell do the American people have endure this "drip, drip, drip" of revelations? Should not every document, email, attestation, text, etc. have simply been handed over to Congress and a few new organizations well before there was a special counsel appointed? I strongly suspect there wouldn't today be a "Russia" investigation had that happened. Depending on what be in the documentation (right now, we don't even know that all there is to know is known, and that we don't is a major part of the problem), I suspect most people, no matter their political persuasion, could bring themselves to conclude that while mistakes were made, they were "honest" mistakes.
    • "BJ-gate" --> Clinton should have simply said he got some head in the Oval and told the American people that the matter going forward was between him and Hillary. People can relate to that and forgive Bill and Monica because there's no shortage of folks guilty of marital infidelity of some sort (mental or physical), and because nobody invites "the rest of the world" into the peccadillos and problems that beset their marriage and immediate family.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Funny Funny x 1
    • Winner Winner x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. Tipsycatlover
    Offline

    Tipsycatlover Gold Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2016
    Messages:
    15,639
    Thanks Received:
    2,629
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Ratings:
    +18,267
    "I forgive Franken. I just want to talk about it and describe what he did for a few more months. I was angry and humiliated. Did you get that part about humiliated.

    I forgive him.

    Now if you will all excuse me, I have another interview where I can describe this all again.
     
    • Winner Winner x 2
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2017
  3. Oldstyle
    Offline

    Oldstyle Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2011
    Messages:
    23,568
    Thanks Received:
    3,526
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    Florida
    Ratings:
    +9,983
    First of all...you're rather naive if you think that the Democratic "investigation" into Russian "collusion" by the Trump Campaign is about getting to the bottom of what happened in that election! It's not about that...it never was about that and it never WILL be about that! This entire sham of an investigation is nothing more than an attempt by Democratic leadership to divert attention from the fact that they ran an awful campaign with a flawed candidate to something else that excuses what they did! The Mueller team has long since moved on from attempting to prove "collusion"...they're scouring tax returns of anyone remotely connected to Donald Trump trying to find something...ANYTHING...that will justify the millions that they're spending on this farce!

    As for what Clinton "should" have done about Monica Lewinsky? That horse left the barn a long time ago...when Clinton started lying about his affair with Gennifer Flowers back in the Democratic primaries before he was elected. Don't fool yourself into thinking that someone who habitually lied and did so looking solemnly into the camera as he did so...can suddenly start being honest! It isn't who the Clinton's ARE!
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  4. flacaltenn
    Offline

    flacaltenn Senior Mod Staff Member Senior USMB Moderator Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2011
    Messages:
    40,649
    Thanks Received:
    6,436
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
    Ratings:
    +21,813
    The tactic of "defining deviance downward" that has been practiced by 2 inept, corrupt and power mad political clans brought us here. We're at the point where NO SIN is inexcusable because the OTHER SIDE DID IT. It's full salvation and restitution if that card is played.

    This is a "system design" problem. Because (and check my Avie for the graphic help) -- when you only have ALL the power concentrated in 2 polarized camps, it's an inherently UNSTABLE way to get any truths. Voices are COMPLETELY muzzled by the 4 or 5 "party bosses" that can WRECK your political aspirations in an instant. No dissident party voices in the standoffs -- no reconcilation or revelations of truth. Not even admissions of wrongdoing can be made.

    It's TOO LATE for common decency and reason to prevail. These 2 Brand Name entities are locked into a death match. And they are DETERMINED to bring our country down with them as they CLING to the power infrastructure that THEY designed. The "Russians" didn't bring us to this point. The PARTISANS who were only concerned with "winning" did. And it would only take a mild push to send us into historical oblivion at this point. And our strategic "frenemies" in Russia --- would love to get even for the collapse of the Soviet Union that WE helped along when THEY screwed up their political structure and made it irrelevant to the lives of the people that lived therein..

    So don't expect an outbreak of Glasnost or "forgiveness" BEFORE the collapse. We're going down the hard way. By our own power greedy hands.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. FA_Q2
    Offline

    FA_Q2 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    16,013
    Thanks Received:
    2,363
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Washington State
    Ratings:
    +5,502
    It's not that simple. The point of an investigation is to acquire evidence that we simply do not have and that involving things like leveraging what you do have to get more.

    That is why there needs to be an investigation. Clinton's should have gone along as you stated - that was a much simpler issue. Russian involvement in our election is a much larger issue with a lot more legal implications for anyone that was involved.
     
  6. CrusaderFrank
    Offline

    CrusaderFrank Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 20, 2009
    Messages:
    89,726
    Thanks Received:
    16,384
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    NYC
    Ratings:
    +49,575
    That's just where he got caught...ah, I really don't care, it was stupid, juvenile picture
     
  7. Xelor
    Offline

    Xelor Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Messages:
    8,193
    Thanks Received:
    1,206
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    D.C.
    Ratings:
    +4,241
    I guess I wasn't clear enough. What I was getting at is that had the actors involved simply disclosed everything they had -- document, emails, etc. -- the investigation would not have lasted so long.
    I think an investigation was going to happen in both the Clinton and Trump situations. I think it appropriate that there was/is an investigation of both.

    What's not kosher by me is that people whom we've made the country's fiduciaries don't honor the privilege they've been given and not "dick around" withholding information and "spinning," i.e., making be political, that which really isn't. One either did or did not "have sexual relations with that woman;" one either was or was not party to an unlawful yet mutually-beneficial set of interactions with a national adversary. The injustice that I find most reprehensible is that our government leaders drag the nation though all manners of "who struck John."

    No matter one's political persuasion, nobody, other perhaps than "psychos," relishes putting up with that sort of BS. And as taxpayers, none of us should have to fund the excess costs of elected/appointed leaders dragging "sh*t" out the way our leaders have done, both currently and in the past.

    Quite frankly, were the parties involved clearly forthright with the nature, timing and extent of proffering everything they have to share about a matter, I'd be willing to "write-off" a fair number (but not all) of honest mistakes, even if I don't care for the politics of the person involved. (That's why the concept of mens rea exists; we all make honest mistakes and nobody should be penalized for doing so.) Once the official(s) involved are shown clearly to be "dicking" the American people around by not being completely forthright, well, hell no. At that point, I'm not willing to overlook anything because I don't take kindly to politicians by their paltering, "spinning," taradiddling and prevarication wasting my and everyone else's time and treasure.


    If you don't make me hunt for things, it's unlikely you'll get "shot" as a consequence of my doing so.
    -- My father.​
     
  8. FA_Q2
    Offline

    FA_Q2 Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 12, 2009
    Messages:
    16,013
    Thanks Received:
    2,363
    Trophy Points:
    290
    Location:
    Washington State
    Ratings:
    +5,502
    Of course the system is essentially forced to operate in that manner by the electorate. A politician is expected to have an utterly clean slate - no transgressions of any king or they are eviscerated in public before they gain office. Then, once they are there, the name of the game is deny, deny and deny. Act in any other manner and you will be ousted instantly.
     
  9. Toronado3800
    Offline

    Toronado3800 VIP Member

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2009
    Messages:
    4,308
    Thanks Received:
    334
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +590
    I disagree to some extent. The majority who voted for Hillary probably think she didn't screw up something with the emails. Same with Trumpsters and his bankruptcies. Or Reagan and the Contras or B. Clinton and sex in the Oval Office.

    There is a trick to making people not care about what you got caught doing.

    For some reason I barely care if a President is having an affair for example. Its a minor national security issue on a blackmail front I suppose and that's why I care. To be bi-partisan, I suspect G.H.Bush authorized some terrible things as CIA Director for that year. That barely bothers me more.
     
  10. Xelor
    Offline

    Xelor Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2017
    Messages:
    8,193
    Thanks Received:
    1,206
    Trophy Points:
    255
    Location:
    D.C.
    Ratings:
    +4,241
    I care about such things in light of what they say about one's character, one's trustworthiness. I don't care that one actually has an affair.

    If one's committed to one's spouse that one will forsake all others and then one engages in an extramarital affair, one has betrayed the trust given by one of the most dear persons in one's life. How am I as a total stranger to trust one if one's spouse cannot? I know damn well that in the "cheater's" hierarchy of relationships I don't rate anywhere near as highly as a spouse. If one's capable of and willing to betray a spouse's trust, one will surely have the same capacity and more willingness to betray mine. On the other hand, if one attests to having a so-called open marriage, well, then I could not care less about one's extramarital affairs, and the ideas I just outlined would not apply.
     

Share This Page

Search tags for this page

leean tweeden political persuasion