Dems Are Accessories In Political Hit Job On Al Franken

Sen. Al Franken: His robust questioning of criminal Repukes was clearly too much, so Dem toadies had to be enlisted to take him down.



"Would Senator Gillibrand resign if several people came forward to allege she sexually harassed/abused them?

Why does Franken have to be forced out of office? What happened to due process? Shouldn't the residents of the state he represents have a say in this matter; not just a contingent of Democratic Senators."   - Comment on  NY Times website

It now appears Sen. Al Franken will resign tomorrow,  marking one of the most successful "dirty trick" jobs the Repukes have ever pulled using trained pawns. This time,  getting Dem Senators to act as accessories after the fact, piling on Franken after a 7th accuser has come forward about "forced kissing",  for god's sake. Thereby putting kisses, a mock grope and some butt pinches (MAYBE- we have no evidence only claims)  on the same level as the child molestations of  Roy Moore.   This followed a coordinated Senate gang up,  compliments of female Dem Senators led by Kirsten Gillibrand - who I used to respect. Not any more, not when she can so easily be manipulated and used as a tool to destroy a fellow Senator's career - merely out of unproven, unsubstantiated claims. And NO -I do not believe them just because a woman or women said them. As Bari Weiss wrote in a recent NY Times piece:

"We don’t owe anyone our unthinking belief. “Trust but verify” may not have the same ring as “believe all women.” But it’s a far better policy."-

Damned straight!

As I wrote in a previous blog post:

Some outspoken feminists and defenders of women's rights  have actually come out in public and insisted "Zero tolerance!"   Meaning that even the slightest perceived infraction must receive the full, maximal weight of penalty. In other words, analogous to putting a jaywalker in a gas chamber.

But this is bonkers and counterproductive. If all infractions major and minor receive the same condemnation and sanction - say expulsion from office and equal destruction of reputation -  then there is total loss of balance, of moral perspective. In that case, what we end up with is a misfiring moralism and an atmosphere of feeding frenzy, not morality.  We end up with absolutism as opposed to conscious interpolation of actions differing in intent and transgressive impact.

What is needed  instead of "zero tolerance" absolutism is to arrive at a weighing or interpolation of actions based on critical thinking combined with the exercise of ethical provisionalism. Just as provisional ethics provides a reasonable middle ground between absolute and  relative systems, it also provides a middle ground for sanctions imposed on a scale of actions or infractions.  Thus, while one may rightly demand a capital punishment (say lethal injection) for a mass murderer of infants in their cribs, one may not do so for a jaywalker.

The scale of infraction is vastly different, hence it is madness to apply the same sanction to both violations.  By the same token, provisional ethics bids us withhold the hand of punitive extremism, say for infractions like Al Franken's,  compared to those of  Roy Moore (sexually assaulting children).  Hence it is also madness to demand the expulsion of Al Franken for his alleged violations, which are nowhere in the same league as Moore's.  It is also nonsense to demand Franken's resignation if you don't also demand Donnie Dotard's for his much more malicious "grabbing pussies".


Former GOP Rep. (FL) Dave Jolly put it well in his appearance on Lawrence O''Donnell's show on Wednesday, that "we have to take care to distinguish fallibility from criminality".  This is especially as Mr. Jolly expects many more allegations to erupt in the coming weeks. As these further accusations pile up one must bear in mind that Roy Moore's advances on underage girls amount to the criminality (pedophilia), but Al Franken's mock grope of  Leeann Tweeden  does not.  Neither do his "inappropriate touches" - construed as such by assorted women who posed with him in takes at the MN state fair.

 -----

  And let us pause here to note again that not all allegations made by women are true, especially if there is no clear evidence of such. While we desire to give women's claims of sexual harassment validation, we cannot ignore the possibility that there may also be ulterior motives in play- and bad actors.  These motives (and strategies) didn't just originate recently but have been around for decades under the guise of "dirty tricks" -  e.g. since the Nixon campaign's tactics against Dems in 1968 and 1972..

Let us note the first to come out and level accusations at Franken was Leeann Tweeden  .  She was clever-  perhaps too clever by half - in also producing a photo. This she likely saved since the transgression occurred to use as a conservative payback, as she looked forward to a career as a conservative talk host. Franken wasn't a Senator yet but Tweeden perhaps had an instinct, or maybe intuition, he might have a future political career. If and when the time came she could then pull out her evidence and lower the boom, in the right circumstances.

Indeed, it also appears Nixon- era dirty trickster Roger Stone might have put Tweeden up to it, and yeah, you can call me conspiracy -minded if you want, see:

  Roy Stone knew well ahead of time that Al Franken was going to be accused of something. 


 We know also Tweeden's background has indeed been exposed as "a Conservative talk show host, conservative commentator on many shows,  Trump supporter, model.:"   Left blogger Amanda Marcotte, in a recent salon.com piece,  suspected a Reepo dirty trick or political stunt after Tweeden came out with her claims. However, Amanda perversely invoked that to insist Franken resign -which was total bollocks  - on the fear the Reeptards might employ it later.. According to Marcotte "if this is a political stunt then the people behind it surely want Franken to stay".

Of course! And Tweeden and her conservo allies can now point to a victory enabled by Dem weaklings acting as accomplices because they insist on a stupid, conflationary,  "zero tolerance" policy.   Thus Sen. Gillibrand's exclaiming "I think when we start having to talk about the differences between sexual assault and sexual harassment and unwanted groping you are having the wrong conversation."   Adding:

"You need to draw a line in the sand and say none of it is O.K. None of it is acceptable."

So the moral scolds like Gillibrand appear to have won.  In this new climate of moral absolutism and "zero tolerance"  I guess  we can expect child rapists and wanton kissers (like Franken)  to suffer the exact same sanctions. Wifey conjectures that the Dem Senate women were emboldened and triggered into action by TIME's earlier selection of the #MeToo movement as "Person of the Year". Who knows? . I hope they are all satisfied in their exultation after tomorrow,  but are also aware of the can of worms they've opened with their imperious hyper rectitude.

 That is, now anyone's past from years ago- including minor sexual indiscretions -  can be dredged up and re-litigated by the pseudo-moral scolds to destroy their current careers. How many of us really, seriously, would be able to withstand such scrutiny?  Let's please let all those pure as the driven snow, without any moral blemishes, cast the first 'stones'.

Lawrence O'Donnell ruminated on his 'Last Word' show that "perhaps the Democrats have now risen to a higher moral standard."  Maybe. But cynic that I am, I suspect it is more about political expediency - and believing that if they can just ditch their "Roy Moores" (never mind the violations weren't the same) they can expect a huge, unencumbered wave win in the mid terms next year. Let us hope they're right - though I won't be donating any more $$$ to their campaigns.

What was really choice yesterday is seeing and hearing guppy mouth  Sen. Mitch McConnell also calling  for Mr. Franken to leave the Senate. This barely days after he did a 180 and has now opted to temper his opposition to pederast Roy Moore. He will "let the people of Alabama decide" Moore's fate in that state's Dec. 12th election. What a gracious POS.

Way to go, Sens. Schumer, Gillebrand and company!   You stupid, effing dupes!

See also: 

https://www.liberalforum.org/topic/221984-a-coordinated-hit-job-against-democrats-is-underway-and-al-franken-wont-be-the-last/

Update: Dec. 7th - Sen. Franken to resign:

His statement:

“I of all people am aware that there is some irony in the fact that I am leaving while a man who has bragged on tape about his history of sexual assault sits in the Oval Office, and a man who has repeatedly preyed on young girls campaigns for the Senate with the full support of his party,”

Thanks for your stalwart service, Senator! And you did hit the nail on its proverbial head. It is a pity the Democrats took the easy road of adopting zero tolerance (for political expediency) , rather than exercising their presumed intellectual capacity to make the case that the acts of Moore and yourself amount to comparing chalk and cheese.  As Bill Maher put it in his last show - it should not have been that difficult to do.  See also:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/07/us/politics/al-franken-senate-sexual-harassment.html

Amidst The Tide Of Abuse Allegations - The Risk Of Trivialization & Overkill

"What we owe all people, including women, is to listen to them and to respect them and to take them seriously. But we don’t owe anyone our unthinking belief. “Trust but verify” may not have the same ring as “believe all women.” But it’s a far better policy."- Bari Weiss, NY Times

As more allegations of "inappropriate touching" come from female accusers of Sen. Al Franken, the whole abuse meme threatens to get out of control and bring down the entire #MeToo  movement by trivialization.  This isn't just whistling Dixie either. After more accusations of "verbal bullying put downs" came from a former female staffer (Melanie Sloan) of Rep. John Conyers, even wifey had appeared to have had enough saying: "This is ridiculous! All these women coming out with these trivial complaints (compared to those against Roy Moore) now risk degrading and trivializing the whole movement!"

She has a point, and whether people want to hear it or not there is such thing as indignation overkill.  Right now as the allegations of sexual harassment and minor abuse ("butt pinching", "verbal abuse' etc.) continue,  the whole impetus is threatened by implosion if  serious violations get conflated with minor or trivial ones.  Some outspoken feminists and defenders of women's rights  have actually come out in public and insisted "Zero tolerance!"   Meaning that even the slightest perceived infraction must receive the full, maximal weight of penalty. In other words, analogous to putting a jaywalker in a gas chamber.

But this is bonkers and counterproductive. If all infractions major and minor receive the same condemnation and sanction - say expulsion from office and equal destruction of reputation -  then there is total loss of balance, of moral perspective. In that case, what we end up with is a misfiring moralism and an atmosphere of feeding frenzy, not morality.  We end up with absolutism as opposed to conscious interpolation of actions differing in intent and transgressive impact. 

While I've been tempted to describe what's happening now as bordering on hysteria, my great niece Shayl (completing her psych Ph.D.) disagrees and compares the incipient atmosphere to the witch burning frenzy of the Middle Ages. While "hysteria" suggests individuals affected, the frenzy denotes an atmosphere of imbalance and unreason. For example, one beheld mainly elderly women led to dreadful torments based on mere allegations, including (Malleus Maleficarum , p. 68):

i) Her spouse (if any) being unable to “perform the carnal act”

ii) A female friend is prevented from conceiving or miscarries after she conceives.

iii) Possession of specific herbs such as “savin”.

Later, the ownership of a cat or cats was deemed evidence of  consulting a "familiar" or minor demonic entity.  In the age of witch burning, the "MeToo" meme (mind virus)  manifested as "She cursed me too!" Or "Her cat looked at me in an evil way!"

In each case, for each type of witch,  Kramer and Sprenger's  book gave the formula for extracting the confession. Worse was how easily a poor innocent woman could be suspected of being a witch since the threshold criteria were so low and subjective.  Shayl observed the same low criteria apply now, say in the case of the "inappropriate touching" allegations made by Franken's recent accusers. "It's too subjective!" she asserted, "What does that mean anyway? It could mean different touches for different women. The most innocent contact could be construed as 'inappropriate'!"

Let me add in conjunction with this that new polls disclose males are less likely to give cardio-pulmonary resuscitation to a female because of the possibility she will later cry 'Foul'. In other words, this frenzy about touching is no laughing matter, it could cost a young, single woman her life!

What is needed  instead of "zero tolerance" absolutism is to arrive at a weighing or interpolation of actions based on critical thinking combined with the exercise of ethical provisionalism. Just as provisional ethics provides a reasonable middle ground between absolute and  relative systems, it also provides a middle ground for sanctions imposed on a scale of actions or infractions.  Thus, while one may rightly demand a capital punishment (say lethal injection) for a mass murderer of infants in their cribs, one may not do so for a jaywalker.

The scale of infraction is vastly different, hence it is madness to apply the same sanction to both violations.  By the same token, provisional ethics bids us withhold the hand of punitive extremism, say for infractions like Al Franken's,  compared to those of  Roy Moore (sexually assaulting children).  Hence it is also madness to demand the expulsion of Al Franken for his alleged violations, which are nowhere in the same league as Moore's.  It is also nonsense to demand Franken's resignation if you don't also demand Donnie Dotard's for his much more malicious "grabbing pussies".


Former GOP Rep. (FL) Dave Jolly put it well in his appearance on Lawrence O''Donnell's show on Wednesday, that "we have to take care to distinguish fallibility from criminality".  This is especially as Mr. Jolly expects many more allegations to erupt in the coming weeks. As these further accusations pile up one must bear in mind that Roy Moore's advances on underage girls amount to the criminality (pedophilia), but Al Franken's mock grope of  Leeann Tweeden  does not.  Neither do his "inappropriate touches" - construed as such by assorted women who posed with him in takes at the MN state fair.

If Franken did cross a line in his accusers' minds it more likely was an  instance of over familiarity and perhaps fallibility.   It is also an overstep a male teacher can easily make - say in the jubilant moment a female student exceeds beyond all expectations in a science fair project - and hugs her without thinking. Is he guilty of "inappropriate touching" for being spontaneous?  As Shayl would put it "Give me a break!"

 And let us pause here to note again that not all allegations made by women are true, especially if there is no clear evidence of such. While we desire to give women's claims of sexual harassment validation, we cannot ignore the possibility that there may also be ulterior motives in play- and bad actors.  These motives (and strategies) didn't just originate recently but have been around for decades under the guise of "dirty tricks" -  e.g. since the Nixon campaign's tactics against Dems in 1968 and 1972..

As I pointed out to wifey (and she agreed) what better way  - in the wake of the  Roy Moore tarnishing of the GOP - to bring down Dem efforts to take back the House next year?  All the Roger Stone- trained hit team would need to do is hire dozens of female moles to come out of the woodwork at different times and make all kinds of allegations against sitting Dems.   At the very least - even if the accused parties weren't forced to resign - those less substantive allegations ("He pinched my ass!") would cast such a pall as to make their lives and service almost unmanageable.  Worse, most of this could be done - in the current climate- without demanding one scintilla of hard evidence. Just validate whatever accusations as part of #MeToo.

As John Conyer's lawyer Arnold Reed put it yesterday:

"If people were required to resign over mere allegations a lot of people would be out of work in this country, including the president."

This is exactly why we have a standard of jurisprudence in this country that says a person is innocent until proven guilty. But with the tidal wave of new allegations we are expected to dismiss or forget that standard and just toss Franken and Conyers  (to start) out based on sketchy, subjective allegations.

Unlike Franken's photo showing him mock groping  Leeann Tweeden  there isn't anything - other than his latest accusers' words - to prove Franken's "butt pinches" or "inappropriate touching"  occurred.  We have no distaff side images of his hands doing any gropes or pinches, only what they claim. That simply isn't good enough given : 1) it risks conflation of serious abuse with minor forms, and 2) it risks degrading the whole effort of women who've been seriously violated - to come forward, and 3) it risks casting suspicion of a political hit job or dirty tricks, with the 2018 mid terms approaching.

Even Left blogger Amanda Marcotte - after Tweeden's more justified accusation (with an actual photo to back it up) - has suspected her claim of being a Reepo dirty trick.  However, she's perversely invoked that to insist Franken resign -which is total bollocks. According to Marcotte "if this is a political stunt then the people behind it surely want Franken to stay". Thus, she tried to make the case that Franken "take one for the team"- which, of course,  would demonstrate to the GOP the dirty trick worked.

Bottom  line: it's critical now to distinguish between minor and serious violations, as Dave Jolly noted . If you got your butt pinched in a one off  ten years ago, deal with it, don't make a federal case out of it  now .  Unless the violation is of the most egregious type, don't turn it into a capital crime just to jump on the #MeToo bandwagon. Be conscious then that we are in a conflationary environment or a "frenzied atmosphere" to use Shayl's parlance.

Even political contributor Michelle Goldberg, on All In Wednesday  evening, seemed to be dithering with respect to Roy Moore's serious abuse of young girls, and Franken's (alleged) butt pinches of adult women. She actually whined at one point: "I  just don't know if I can go on splitting hairs about these things".

Sorry, Michelle, but you do have to keep making distinctions and it's NOT "splitting hairs"!  Franken's mock groping of Leeann Tweeden and assorted, alleged butt pinches (if true) of adult women - while immature and disrespectful  emphatically are NOT on the level of what the Alabamy slime ball Roy Moore has been doing, including to a young girl of 14. Anyone who tries to equate those two things on a moral spectrum is guilty of false equivalence. It is also up to those of us capable of critical thinking to make that distinction clear.

So let's not talk of 'splitting hairs' - let's talk of separating a cholera bacteria from one that maybe causes salmonella.

The worst thing we can do now is get intellectually sloppy with our categories of offense, and become too lazy to make the necessary distinctions. 

Moral Scolds Will Try To Take Sen. Al Franken Down - But They Will Lose

In any eruption of moral indignation - justifiable or not - there will always exist scolds who play the game of false equivalence: equating one brand of misdeed (say Roy Moore's groping of under-aged girls) with a comedian's skylarking before he even became a Senator. That latter refers to the case of Sen. Al Franken, recently "exposed" by Leeann Tweeden in a photo showing a comic "hands on breasts" photo taken while she was sleeping - on the way to an overseas gig (USO tour) for the troops.   MSNBC’s Capitol Hill Correspondent Kasie Hunt reported to viewers that Franken was “not actually groping” Tweeden, he was "mock groping" as in barely placing mitts over her chest to create a joke image.  There is a difference, but one wonders how many will process it before going ape shit hysterical.

But that hasn't stopped Left scolds like Amanda Marcotte - in her latest salon.com piece- to call on Franken to resign and "take one for the team" just in case this is all a Reepo dirty trick. According to Marcotte "if this is a political stunt then the people behind it surely want Franken to stay" adding "every day Franken remains in the Senate as  visible symbol of liberal hypocrisy, Republicans get a free pass to grope, harass and abuse women."  This cowardly willingness and pseudo-moralistic pose would be bad enough but then she expects nothing to come from robust Dem or media defense of Franken and distinguishing it from Trump's and Moore's antics, writing: "Any effort by Democrats or journalists to hold them accountable will be met with 'what about him?'  

So Marcotte would wave the white flag of surrender, like your typical surrender monkey, before even firing a shot - or in her case "digging in a heel". How pathetic! But as Bill Maher put it this evening such a move is a non-starter, and if Repukes do play that game it's on them. And if they try to use Franken's case to justify more groping we HOLD THEM To ACCOUNT!  We don't turn tail, cry and whine how terrible the Reepo bullies and exploiters are. WE KNOW THAT! Truth be told, Marcotte ought to be ashamed for even writing such tripe.

But it is possible we can make some allowances for her based on unresolved, deep-seated anger issues and neuroticism.  She's already been called out on a different issue by LA Times blogger Charlotte Allen who cited a "hilariously off-the-wall -- earlier Slate post of hers in which she, citing a sociological study, denounced the idea of cooking for your husband and children as an imposition on women’s time, money and emotional well-being."    Marcotte claimed:  “The main reason that people see cooking mostly as a burden is because it is a burden. It's expensive and time-consuming and often done for a bunch of ingrates who would rather just be eating fast food anyway,”  Her post originally bore the title “The Tyranny of the Home-Cooked Family Dinner".   Tyranny?  Methinks she needs a chill pill.  So does Ms. Allen who adds:

"Marcotte is known all over the blogosphere for her virulent tirades against almost everybody she deems to harbor sexist misogyny -- and that’s a lot of people."

This elicits the question of whether she suffers from "noisy kettle" neurosis  (my niece Shayl's term): always 'whistling' in order to be heard over everyone else by writing the most atrocious, despicable attack posts.  If this is the case, and I'd like to give her the benefit of the doubt (despite how she went after Bernie's people last year),  maybe we can just ignore this particular whistle over Franken.

Look, no one is asserting Franken - back in his comedian past- was doing any noble action in this USO incident, and yeah, it disrespected Tweeden. But it is emphatically NOT on the level of what the Alabamy slime ball Roy Moore has been accused of doing, including to a young girl of 14. Anyone who tries to mate those two things on a moral spectrum is guilty of false equivalence. It is also up to those of us capable of critical thinking to make that distinction clear, not to confound it by playing into the Reepos' false equivalence hands like Amanda Marcotte would like to do.

But you can be sure in the current climate of #MeToo, there will be many who make an effort to brand Franken with a red letter for "misogynist" or worse, and even attempt to drive him from the Senate in an "ethics committee investigation".  Franken himself, obviously hoping to be pre-emptive, has called for such an investigation. But as Michelle Goldberg put it on 'All In' last night:

"What does that even mean to investigate a sitting Senator before he became a Senator?

Well, no one seems to know, and even Steve Kornacki - appearing on Rachel Maddow last night-  couldn't recall a single instance where that ever happened.  But one thing we DO know is that there once was a Repuke House member (David Vitter) who was involved in a D.C. prostitution ring, and actually WON a seat in the Senate. My beef then: if a so-called "ethics committee" was fine with overlooking that:  they also need to overlook (in the sense of forcing expulsion)  Franken's one off transgression now. Not to do so is to flagrantly accept a double standard.

And again, what Franken did is in no way comparable to what Vitter did, let's get that straight. We have to because in the midst of the cumulative clouds of high moral dudgeon it is easy to lose sight of perspective. Without moral perspective everything becomes relative ("one act is as bad as another"), and also everything becomes absolute-  in the sense that the groping of bare breast or pussy by a Dotard is judged absolutely equal to the mock groping (and rehearsed deep kiss) by a Franken.

For sure,  politicians who acknowledge frequenting prostitutes usually don't get elected to any office - especially Senator.. Except that Vitter went public with his ties to the "D.C. Madam" way back in 2007. And, in 2010, he won reelection to the Senate by 19 points over a sitting Democratic member of Congress.  Subsequently nothing ever came of Vitter's ascension though he did lose a later race, the take at that time being he finally had a real "hard seed"  primary opponent.

The other aspect is why hold Franken - as a current sitting Senator - accountable for something he did as a comedian 11 years ago. Likely as not at that time he hadn't the foggiest notion of ever going into politics or becoming a U.S. Senator. People in their earlier stages of life often do things ridiculous or untoward not thinking it will affect them later, but they do. Should people forever be punished for past minor moral transgressions or sexual skylarking? (Again this is not what Vitter or Roy Moore are guilty of).

Yes, "conduct unbecoming" is something to reckon in - as was the case with former Sen. Bob Packwood.   The Republican resigned from the Senate in 1995 amid multiple allegations of sexual harassment and assaulting women. The Senate ethics committee had voted unanimously to recommend his expulsion.   BUT he was already a Senator!  

There seems to be no standard at all for going after a guy like Franken, who committed his "misdeeds" against one woman (a 2nd has since come forward - but I'm not buying a one off  'butt pinch' at a state fair, sorry) while a comedian. As Ms. Goldberg said: "What would that ethics investigation even look like?"  Well, a joke, to be sure. Steve Kornacki correctly observed this could even be tested in the courts if Franken decided to play hardball- and not roll over for the pseudo morality scolds.

Meanwhile, we had the likes of Donnie Dotard- who kept his twitter shut down on child predator Roy Moore-   tweeting about Franken:

"The Al Franken picture is really bad, speaks a thousand words  Where do his hands go in pictures 2,3, 4, 5 & 6 while she sleeps?"

Well, obviously Dotard would be thinking "grab her pussy" - because that's what HE would do in the same situation. After all, we heard him on the Access Hollywood tape bragging about "grabbing pussy."  Let's also recall more than a dozen women came forward during the campaign - including Miss Universe contestants - who complained about Trump's attempts at fondling- including of their bare breasts. Yet this asshole became a sitting president!  So, I don't want to hear any BS now from moral scolds going after Franken's mock grope  when they don't also demand Trump resign.. If Marcotte wants to be taken at all seriously, then she places a demand for Trump to resign before making any demand Franken do so.

No one is saying that in this new climate of sensitivity to sexual harassment Franken deserves to get off Scot free. But at the same time, whatever sanction has to be both judicious and sensible for misdeeds done before even assuming political office. The only one that stands out as just, to my reckoning, is censure. Anything more -  like expelling him from the Senate - is analogous to using a gas chamber to punish a jaywalker.  Bottom line: any sanction must have temperance built in  especially in light of the Vitter precedent.

If Sen. Franken is proactive in his own defense, and invokes the preceding - especially how David Vitter escaped any expulsion  -  he should not lose his seat. If Dems, instead of acting the part of incessant moral scolds, come to his defense by exposing the double standards at work,  this is even more probable. What they can't do is appease noisy neurotics  like Amanda Marcotte - who appears so terrified of GOP "dirty tricks" in Al Franken's exposure that she can't think straight. At least before she writes.  Bill Maher was correct that it is time people learn to tell the difference between two wholly different classes of actions. Unlike Marcotte, they also need to assess the dramatic consequences of tossing a Senator - who made one mistake - under the political bus merely to seek safety from the Reeptard bullies. Short answer: There is no safety, you have to stand and fight!


See also;

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/jordan-riefe/76290/sexual-harassment-and-accountability-al-franken-vs-roy-moore

Excerpt:

President Trump, who has remained silent on the accusations leveled against Moore, was quick to comment on Franken’s case through Sarah Huckabee Sanders, with the spokesperson telling reporters the Senate ethics probe is the “appropriate action.”