Conyers Steps Down as Ranking Judiciary Committee Member Amid Sexual Harassment Investigation
But zero tolerance I thought?
Rep. John Conyers (D-MI) has decided to step down as ranking member of the House Judiciary Committee as the ethics committee begins an investigation into sexual harassment allegations against him. He said:
After careful consideration and In light of the attention drawn by recent allegations made against me, I have notified the Democratic Leader of my request to step aside as Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee during the investigation of these matters.
Last week, BuzzFeed had a report that Conyers settled a wrongful dismissal claim with a former employee who accused him of firing her when she refused to cave into his sexual advances.
Other employees described inappropriate behavior and even alleged they flew in his mistresses on taxpayer money.
John Conyers is stepping down as the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee. pic.twitter.com/uLZ9bgyoSW
— Kyle Griffin (@kylegriffin1) November 26, 2017
Conyers said in his statement that he denies the allegations, “many of which were raised by documents reportedly paid for by a partisan alt-right blogger.”
DOG WHISTLE! ALT-RIGHT BLOGGER! Actually, that’s not true. Mike Cernovich had the documents, but gave them to BuzzFeed. The publication didn’t pay for them and as far as I know, Cernovich didn’t either. But BuzzFeed independently verified the documents and spoke with the women involved.
Of course Conyers tries to distract everyone by detailing his involvement in civil rights and how he will not allow that to be forgotten due to these claims.
Sorry, Conyers. But your involvement in the civil rights movement doesn’t give you a pass to treat females and employees like crap. Nor does it allow you to waste tax money on your mistresses or settle sexual harassment claims.
Some Democrats welcomed the decision. From The New York Times:
Representative Jamie Raskin, a Maryland Democrat who holds the recently created position of vice ranking member on the Judiciary Committee, praised Mr. Conyers for making a “wise decision.”
Mr. Raskin is a co-sponsor of legislation put forth by Representative Jackie Speier, Democrat of California, to overhaul the way sexual harassment is handled on Capitol Hill, and to put an end to the practice of paying secret settlements out of the federal Treasury.
“The House is ready to clean house with respect to sexual harassment, and everybody agrees that we need to have a zero-tolerance policy,” Mr. Raskin said in an interview, adding, “We should never normalize sexual harassment in the workplace.”
ZERO TOLERANCE? Zero tolerance obviously means a slap on the wrist. Zero tolerance would mean resignation. Zero tolerance would mean having Conyers step down and shunned from Congress. Zero tolerance would mean unsealing all the deals made in private to payoff the victims.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
Excellent points re “ZERO TOLERANCE.”
This is a good move for Pelosi and Conyers. Wait a while and it will be like the whole thing never happened. More scandals in Congress will get the attention of the media.
We know the dems have an ulterior motive; We just don’t know what it is, yet.
Oh we know what they want. Power, money and whatever they decide they want.
Corrupt bunch of crooks.
Yeah, ok. I guess. How about the lecherous ol’ leach Conyers simply resign the U.S. House because he’s been there since before many readers of this blog were even borned?
This morning Pelosi said Conyers is entitled to due process. I note this is not a resignation from the committee, just “stepping aside” while there’s an investigation.
But Republican candidates or representatives won’t be entitled to due process in Pelosi-land.
— But not resigning.
Conyers is “Mr. Underwear,” Franken is “Mr. Molsetor of Sleeping Women,” and Nancy Pelosi is the new “Madame Enabler” (considering hillary klinton has been kicked to the sidelines.)
But who will now handle his dirty laundry?
I have no problem with Conyers being availed due process. Due process is what we should all wish for, in any case.
What will be interesting is whether the process is transparent and, if a case against Conyers is proven, what the penalty will be. If public funds were used to transport women, with whom Conyers was romantically involved, for his personal convenience and without a valid governmental purposes, then Leavenworth sounds like a good idea.