Anybody else following this? We've reached a point where House of Cards writers would have called this ridiculous.
I can't hate on a woman who wants to have a 3 way with another woman. If she wanted to bring another dude in, that's a different story.
The whole thing is just bizarre. The one staffer, now another. And she divorced her husband. And apparently likes to both smoke weed and brush hair while naked.
I don’t give a shit who she slept with, as long as it was other consenting adult(s), and don’t believe she should have been investigated or resigned. My $.02
1. It is against congressional rules to have a relationship with staffers (minor deal) 2. It creates opportunity to be compromised/bribed, and she has a security clearance (big deal) but 3. She is actually the victim of a crime, as those nude photos being shared surely count as "revenge porn" which is illegal to distribute in many states. I'm sure we will hear more about that later.
Congressfolk sleeping with staffers is verboten for very good reasons. This isn't just freaky threesome slut tabloid fodder, although it is. It's a power dynamic at the highest levels of government that can't be allowed. Hell, next thing you know, the president will be getting Hummers from his teenage interns.
So if this was a male Republican caught in a sex pyramid with his wife and secretary, would you be pretending to allege that the photographic evidence of it is a crime, or are you just being a hypocritical piece of detrius again?
if one of them shared naked pictures of him and it occurred in one of these states, ya. stay mad, though.
All fair, and I get it. I don’t think that Congress (or anyone) should give a shit who screws who, between consenting adults. That she could be compromised as a result, and which is a fair point, is only made possible by Congress’ attempts to regulate and prohibit it, and which is sort of a cyclical perpetuated argument, at best. Congress: By Congressional rule, you’re prohibited from sleeping with staffers. Hill: Why? Congress: To keep you from being compromised. Hill: Compromised in what way? Congress: For violating Congressional rules. Hill: So, simply removing the rule would prevent my being compromised? Congress: Get out. Personally, I don’t care for her bent to aim this as some sort of right-wing conspiracy (see: Clinton, Hillary). First, because any media outlet would have ran with this, for any member of Congress whom they disagreed with or disliked. Secondly, it skips the objections to the Congressional rule, previously mentioned. Third, and finally, it seeks to disingenuously make a martyr of herself. It may or may not be wrong and/or illegal that these photos were leaked and published, and if so it should be punished - but it’s her engaging in a prohibited relationship (even if the rule is unjust) which served as the impetus for all that followed. I’m not saying that it’s right that it got her ran from Congress (I’m actually saying exactly the opposite), that the rule is just, that her husband isn’t wrong and perhaps criminally liable in having leaked the info / photos, or that some may argue that the media shouldn’t have ran with and published it. I am saying that she’s primarily responsible for having committed the acts which she knew were against the rules, and which created the situation to begin with.
