Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** A new one on me
Next Post: Massive school superintendent lawsuit lines up with massive ISBE budget request
Posted in:
* A few headlines and tidbits…
* Tribune: Madigan under fire again over handling of sexual harassment claims, asks for watchdog investigation: Porter’s contract originally ran through June 30, but it has been extended through the end of the year to provide time for a nationwide search for a replacement.
* Sun-Times: Is the speaker hearing the ‘message’? Or just mouthing the words?: Is Madigan, who turned 76 last month, ready for a full investigation of his own operation? Or is he just going through the motions for political cover?
* SJ-R: Madigan denies retaliating against Democratic lawmaker, calls for investigation: Cassidy said she has had several aides, lobbyists and others come up approach her and thank her for speaking up. She has also found wide support among her colleagues.
* AP: Madigan seeks probe of sexual-harassment retaliation claim: The bill had been assigned to a House Judiciary Committee, on which Cassidy serves as vice chairwoman. Cassidy said her opposition was based on House Democrats’ well-publicized moratorium on enhanced criminal penalties when there’s no evidence they’re effective at discouraging crime.
* WCIA: Madigan denies intimidation allegations: Senator Karen McConnaughay (R-St. Charles), who sits on the Legislative Ethics Commission, says Madigan’s letter represents a conflict of interest since he appointed Porter to the position.
* NBC5: Madigan Pens Letter Responding to Lawmaker’s Claims of Retaliation: Cassidy said she did not link Dart to the retaliation and chose to resign from her position.
* Hinz: Pritzker breaks with Mike Madigan as #MeToo flap deepens
* WTTW: Speaker Madigan Denies Retaliation Claims, Calls for Investigation: But Cassidy says her opposition had no impact on [the legislation]. She also says she believes it was not a conflict of interest to hold both jobs. “That’s something that we worked through quite thoroughly when I was contemplating joining the team there,” Cassidy said. “House counsel was clear that there was no conflict of interest, especially given my history of work on criminal justice reform.”
* Meanwhile, from the ILGOP…
93 days ago, Democratic Party of Illinois Chairman Mike Madigan asked Comptroller Susana Mendoza to serve on the Anti-Harassment, Equality and Access Panel charged with, among other things, investigating the sexual harassment claims against Speaker Madigan’s political organizations.
Over the course of the last 93 days, one of Mendoza’s harassment panel co-chairs resigned, more harassment claims emerged against Madigan’s organization, and now Democratic State Rep. Kelly Cassidy –who publicly criticized Speaker Madigan’s response to claims of harassment—claims she was pushed out of her job with the Cook County Sheriff’s Office because she spoke out against Madigan.
Through these turbulent 93 days, there has been one constant—Mendoza’s silence.
“Multiple women have now come forward with stories of harassment and retaliation by the Madigan organization, yet Susana Mendoza has remained silent—failing to do her job, much less act like a leader in her party. Mendoza’s quick to launch the hyperbolic partisan attack, but when it comes to taking a critical look at her own party leaders and defending her fellow colleagues—Mendoza remains silent. Illinois women simply cannot afford more silence from Mendoza.” said Darlene Senger, Republican candidate for Comptroller.
With yet another potential investigation into harassment and retaliation in Mike Madigan’s political organization, will Mendoza break her silence now?
* And then there’s this…
State Senator Karen McConnaughay (R-St. Charles) joins several other lawmakers in calling for an investigation following the recent allegations made by Rep. Kelly Cassidy, who says she was forced to resign from her part-time job at the Cook County Sheriff’s Office after speaking out against Speaker Mike Madigan’s handling of sexual harassment claims within his political office. McConnaughay says retaliation of this kind, or any kind, needs to be taken very seriously and has no place in the Capitol.
Madigan, himself, has asked for the Legislative Inspector General (LIG) to investigate Cassidy’s allegations; however, Sen. McConnaughay believes the investigation needs to be done independently from the LIG and free from Madigan’s control.
“No inspector general should be handling an investigation regarding allegations made against the person who appoints them,” said McConnaughay. “If the Legislative Inspector General were to be in charge of this investigation, it would be a clear conflict of interest, as Madigan played a significant role in the current LIG’s appointment. The LIG cannot conduct an unbiased investigation when she is investigating the person who appointed her. This investigation must be independent.”
When sexual harassment allegations first came to light about an individual on Madigan’s political staff, Rep. Cassidy was one of few who voiced her opinion on the matter calling for an investigation and a review of sexual harassment policies. Cassidy has since publicly claimed that as a result of her speaking out against the way Madigan handled the situation, she felt forced to resign at the Cook County Sheriff’s Office.
“The only way for these unethical behaviors to stop is if people, like Rep. Cassidy, come forward to tell their story,” said McConnaughay. “Unfortunately, this kind of conduct has been going on for way too long in the Capitol building, and it’s long past time for it to end. Illinois cannot afford this kind of culture to continue. I commend Rep. Cassidy’s bravery to speak up and for being a trailblazer in the effort to end this kind of corruption.”
* And Rep. Kelly Cassidy gets the last word in this post…
In February, I first spoke publicly about the inadequate response to allegations of sexual harassment within Speaker Madigan’s operation. On two occasions since that time, someone loyal to Speaker Madigan has attempted to intimidate me and my part-time employer. After the second occurrence, I knew it wouldn’t stop, and I knew that the only way to ensure that these retaliation efforts cease is to place a spotlight on them.
Having spent my entire adult life advocating for those without power, I have advocated for stronger responses to discrimination at all levels as well as in the private sector. I know that my role in the House affords me a greater degree of safety than many who have long complained about the ways women are treated in Springfield. Since coming forward yesterday, I have been stopped by more women (and men) than I can count, thanking me for speaking up because they don’t feel safe speaking out about their own experiences of intimidation, retaliation, and harassment.
As this story now turns to the inevitable he said/she said and denials, I remain firmly committed to being a steadfast voice for justice and equality, just as I have worked against harassment and discrimination throughout my career. I stand by my story. I did not want to leave the work and the team I loved being a part of, and I certainly did not want to spend the waning days of this session focused on anything other than passing my bills and getting a budget completed.
I am encouraged to see the call for an investigation by the Legislative Inspector General from both the Illinois State Senate Women’s Caucus and Speaker Madigan. Based on the widely reported concerns about the ability of the LIG to operate with true independence, I stand by my original call for a truly independent and outside investigation into this culture that appears to pervade the organizations led by Speaker Madigan.
I am committed to speaking out against retaliation and intimidation, and to doing what I can to change this abusive culture. We can and must do better for all of us.
*** UPDATE *** From the three members of the Democratic Party of Illinois’ anti-harassment panel…
“This is nothing more than desperate politics being played on the part of Darlene Senger and the GOP, shamefully using the stories of brave women who have spoken up against sexual harassment, to change the subject away from her suggestion to pin the blame on Sen. Tammy Duckworth for Governor Rauner’s horrible failure to keep our veterans safe in Quincy. Senger lost all credibility and trust the instant she chose protecting Governor Rauner’s image over safeguarding the lives of veterans and their families.
The work of the Anti-Harassment, Equality and Access Panel is to focus on the future of women in this party, and engage them as it develops guidelines and a framework to eliminate obstacles to their success, such as sexual harassment, and elevate them into positions of leadership, while creating a culture of equity, safety and respect in the workplace.
While this panel does not have any oversight authority in which to investigate allegations on its own, all three members of this panel were early and vocal supporters of an independent investigation into those issues raised by Alaina Hampton regarding the Democratic Party of Illinois and the Speaker’s office. http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/politics/ct-susana-mendoza-michael-madigan-harassment-20180226-story.html
Independence around this issue is so important to the three of us that we were prepared to step down from our respective positions in the event that the party attempted to appoint a member of its leadership to our panel.
If Darlene Senger and the GOP are truly interested in rooting out sexual harassment and elevating women within their own party, we hope they will follow our lead and adopt our ultimate recommendations for their own party.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 9:47 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: *** UPDATED x1 *** A new one on me
Next Post: Massive school superintendent lawsuit lines up with massive ISBE budget request
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
1,2, you get his shoe.
3.4 he slams the door.
5,6 he swings his sticks
7,8 he lays them straight (all of these steps completed)
9,10 he’ll do it again…and again.
Kelly may just be the one to disrupt this routine. Especially if she can convince a couple more to summon the courage to disrupt that 7,8, lay them straight part of the strategy.
Comment by A guy Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 9:51 am
Porter was appointed by the Legislative Ethics Commission - McConnaughey is a member of that Commission. If she doesn’t think that a former federal prosecutor is independent or can handle such an investigation, then who can?
Comment by Befuddled Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 9:53 am
Sengers comment lacks credibility after attempted duckworth pivot.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 9:59 am
Tough to say how this ends up. Madigan has dodged a lot of bullets over a long period, and I wouldn’t bet against him. Still, the #MeToo movement is large in scope and all eyes are watching. One or two more voices and the avalanche will take out those thought to be untouchable.
Comment by SSL Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 10:00 am
This sure is some 3-D chess move Madigan pulled here. We normals just can’t see the genius.
Probably has something to do with getting Lisa elected governor in 2026.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 10:01 am
Does McConnaughay think the LIG office should be disbanded? Because this is literally the LIG’s job, so if McConnaughay thinks she’s is innately incapable of doing it the position should be terminated. I mean, unless you ask someone to do the investigation pro bono they are going to get paid, and that money - or the authority to spend that money - will come from the legislature. How far removed does it need to be?
Comment by Perrid Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 10:04 am
So the ILGOP is using this as an opportunity to poke Mendoza. That usually works out well.
Comment by Pundent Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 10:07 am
McConnaughay’s argument seems to be that the Inspector General concept is useless at any level, legislative and executive. I don’t think the evidence supports that.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 10:08 am
Julie Porter will have a difficult time as LIG investigating a “culture” around the Speaker, I think Rep Cassidy realizes that. Rep Cassidy is an attorney and must be aware of that problem. Hopefully in any formal,written complaint she and others will better define the scope of what is to be investigated.
Comment by Rod Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 10:09 am
–So the ILGOP is using this as an opportunity to poke Mendoza.–
Maybe they can tie it back to Duckworth.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 10:10 am
As I said yesterday Mendoza boxed herself in this corner. Senger is the wrong messenger though. Be interesting what Ammons has to say about this.
Comment by Almost the Weekend Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 10:11 am
Darlene Senger adopts the Cara Smith approach to #metoo politics, cut down another woman. Charming.
Comment by Sonny Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 10:18 am
Is Porter going to reenlist when her term expires, or is someone going to put forth a new name?
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 10:18 am
Maybe if Madigan had a bit less scorn for cellphones and social media he’d have recognized that the #metoo phenomenon isn’t something that powerful men can simply choose to ignore.
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 10:21 am
If Mendoza had a better candidate running against her this issue and her silence could be very problematic for her. She dosen’t however have a strong opponent so she will be just fine..
Comment by Board Watcher Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 10:21 am
What I don’t get is why Rep Cassidy reaigned? You claimed you had the gall to speak out yet you cower to what you claim was retaliation? Did you resign in order to make this retaliation claim seem bigger than what it was? Why not just stay in your position you were in when you released this story?
Comment by Real Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 10:23 am
That what you call full press coverage ! Glass half full from MJM perspective…”There is no such thing as bad publicity”
Comment by Texas Red Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 10:36 am
“What I don’t get is why Rep Cassidy reaigned? You claimed you had the gall to speak out yet you cower to what you claim was retaliation? Did you resign in order to make this retaliation claim seem bigger than what it was? Why not just stay in your position you were in when you released this story?”
https://capitolfax.com/2018/05/21/rep-cassidy-claims-retaliation-for-speaking-out-on-metoo/
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 10:42 am
What ever happened to old fashioned hypocrasy?
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 10:44 am
What has been lost in all this is the sexual harassment of female prison guards by inmates at any state facility, not just Dart’s.
If Cassidy didn’t like the sex offender registration requirement of said bill, she could have proposed a different way of handling that problem. Instead we have no one speaking out for those female prison guards.
Comment by A Jack Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 10:51 am
Rod —
Rep. Kelly Cassidy is not an attorney. In fact, I’m not sure if she even has a college degree. Just so we are clear.
Comment by Helm Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 10:54 am
Sexual/Workplace/Professional Discrimination and Intimidation is demoralizing. Moreso to people who’ve beat it at several levels to get where they are.
She’s fed up. Nothing to trifle with. Kelly and I would be lucky to find agreement on the time of day, but on this, I’m 100% with her. This has to end. And if she’s the heroic person who slays this dragon, I’m all for her.
Comment by A guy Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 11:07 am
Helm looking at her biography on line I have to say you could well be correct about her background in the law. Hopefully she has competent legal representation about the formality of filing an LIG complaint. I have to admit I assumed incorrectly she had a law degree based in particular on the past agencies she worked for. I stand corrected.
Comment by Rod Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 11:13 am
–.. but on this, I’m 100% with her. This has to end. And if she’s the heroic person who slays this dragon, I’m all for her.–
Yeah, well, you were 100% with this dragon. So it comes and goes.
https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/hardball-tactics-alleged-in-lawsuit-against-bruce-rauner/
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 11:21 am
Some focus would be helpful. Formally investigating a whole “culture of intimidation” is an exercise in futility — or a PhD thesis. It also seems rife across any political boundaries.
Sticking to a focus on specific instances of diminished women’s rights, sexual harassment, lack of appropriate response, and retribution for complaining about them, could certainly be worthwhile.
Comment by walker Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 11:39 am
Other than her conversations with Smith and Rita, what evidence does Rep. Cassidy have to support claims of retaliation?
Comment by Jocko Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 11:43 am
==Yeah, well, you were 100% with this dragon. So it comes and goes.==
Uh, no it doesn’t come and go. Don’t assign this to me Sling. While different contexts, this isn’t good behavior, and I’m not defending it. Ever.
Comment by A guy Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 11:46 am
And Sling…see the posts. All your admirers are still finding fault with Kelly. Maybe your time would be better spent straightening out their thinking, eh? I can assure you that you have a lot more influence on them than me. I’m already on the right side of this equation.
Comment by A guy Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 11:48 am
–While different contexts, this isn’t good behavior, and I’m not defending it. Ever.–
I recalled you were quite a robust supporter and defender of Rauner back in 2014. My mistake.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 11:49 am
So Representative Cassidy and other progressives are not actually with the MeToo# movement as far as it pertains to the some of the most egregious workplace sexual harassment endured by prison guards and attorneys.
Quite a contradiction
Comment by Lucky Pierre Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 11:50 am
–All your admirers are still finding fault with Kelly.–
Who knew I was blessed with so many admirers, and all of them “are still finding fault with Kelly.”
Give me some names, and I’ll see what I can do. But I think my posts yesterday and today have been pretty clear.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 11:53 am
===Uh, no it doesn’t come and go. Don’t assign this to me Sling. While different contexts, this isn’t good behavior, and I’m not defending it. Ever.===
- A Guy -
Let’s revist…
===- A guy… - Friday, Oct 17, 14 @ 11:37 am
Willie, looks like you’ve got a new toy to play with today. You’ve already broken the toy. Relax. Nobody is going to unseal depositions in this court case. Has it every occurred to the Wizard of Oswego that this deposition could be very unflattering to the lady who accepted the settlement? You’ve heard an accusation of what his ‘pretty language’ was and he’s denied it. You think this lady exec wants her laundry hung out on the line? You just want this too much. It’s just not what you “need” it to be.
Now, go ahead and parse away Wizard.===
…
“…that this deposition could be very unflattering to the lady who accepted the settlement? You’ve heard an accusation of what his ‘pretty language’ was and he’s denied it. You think this lady exec wants her laundry hung out on the line?”
…
Here’s the link.
https://bit.ly/2J3MpGz
===While different contexts, this isn’t good behavior, and I’m not defending it. Ever.===
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 11:58 am
**Other than her conversations with Smith and Rita, what evidence does Rep. Cassidy have to support claims of retaliation?**
So, other than the evidence of retaliation, what evidence does she have?
Comment by SaulGoodman Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 12:08 pm
“”–All your admirers are still finding fault with Kelly.–”"
Count me in; no count me out.
The dangers of generalization my friend, LOL.
Comment by walker Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 12:13 pm
==So, other than the evidence of retaliation==
By Rep. Cassidy’s own admission she resigned, but went on to say she held a belief that what happened was a clear form of retaliation. Conversations with two separate people three months apart is far from “clear”.
Comment by Jocko Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 12:30 pm
==I recalled you were quite a robust supporter and defender of Rauner back in 2014. ==
You may also recall I’ve said nice things about the Speaker…so shoot me.
Comment by A guy Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 12:34 pm
Willy, are you alluding to a court case where this ugly, but naturally adversarial business situation took place..
And…
A clear case of threatening a sitting member of the GA through intimidation by another member(s) trying to leverage a vote. And doing so, in part to retaliate against her speaking up on an issue deeply disturbing to her? Just for clarity, I don’t think that Kelly has a Judge there to mediate either.
Yet. My opinion is eventually she will.
And Sling, you have been clear the past couple days. And I agree with those posts. I’ll resist any temptation to find old posts that have you defending or cheering for the guy you’re now holding to account. Because I’m glad you’re doing so.
Comment by A guy Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 12:41 pm
===So, other than the evidence of retaliation===
==By Rep. Cassidy’s own admission she resigned, but went on to say she held a belief that what happened was a clear form of retaliation. Conversations with two separate people three months apart is far from “clear”.==
Ok, Jocko.
Are you under the impression that resignations are an indication that a person left completely on their own accord and on their own terms? Are you arguing that her resignation absolves MJM’s operatives of their intimidation?
Does that mean if we troublesome women would just voluntarily leave all the jobs we hold where we make things too difficult with our stubborn insistence that we be treated without contempt or disdain in the workplace that the issue of intimidation and retaliation would be moot be solved by virtue of the fact that we decided to leave on our own?
Do you actually think she just randomly woke up that day and said, “Hey- this is the day I’m going to resign my job! And then I’m gonna make up that I was retaliated against cause I really want that kind of attention. I can’t wait for everyone to come after me and try to discredit me publicly!”
If not, please clearly articulate what it is that you think is happening here.
Comment by Who else Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 12:51 pm
===are you alluding to a court case where this ugly, but naturally adversarial business situation took place..===
From the Post I cited.
===The ad cites a court deposition claiming Rauner, through an intermediary, communicated a threat to “bankrupt” and “bury her,” if the CEO filed a lawsuit against him and his Chicago-based investment firm, GTCR…===
Threaten…
I get you don’t like that you victim shamed, and I also understand that you wanted to say the victim should be careful what comes out about her…
I get that, I totally understand why that might bother you, especially after…
===While different contexts, this isn’t good behavior, and I’m not defending it. Ever.===
… as here you are now trying to “parse”… intimidation and threats of women are ok for Rauner… but…
I get it. I really do.
Just as I get you not supporting Rauner for signing HB40, until, you now are supporting Rauner… I get it… your flag waves in the breeze…
Hmm… and this?
===A clear case of threatening a sitting member of the GA through intimidation by another member(s) trying to leverage a vote.===
Rauner told both caucuses, purposely, he didn’t want any $&@#% problems… is that a business disagreement?
This is as phony as your try to explaining this away…
===While different contexts, this isn’t good behavior, and I’m not defending it. Ever.===
… except when you did…
===“…that this deposition could be very unflattering to the lady who accepted the settlement? You’ve heard an accusation of what his ‘pretty language’ was and he’s denied it. You think this lady exec wants her laundry hung out on the line?”===
“…that this deposition could be very unflattering to the lady who accepted the settlement?”
I’m sure she doesn’t want her laundry out… is that how it goes?
“You’ve heard an accusation of what his ‘pretty language’ was and he’s denied it.”
You accepted the denial? You didn’t accept the denial?
“You think this lady exec wants her laundry hung out on the line?”
Is that victim shaming?
To this and the Post,
I nominated Rep. Cassidy on 2 seperate occasions, stand by every word, I won’t re-comment them here, use the google.
What happens, and why I don’t prolifically comment on these subjects is as I stated before I see commenters blindly ignoring what they say about “their” side, and what they say about the “other” side.
Like with - A Guy - here…
That’s the real sad thing that’s happening after the fact.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 1:01 pm
–I’ll resist any temptation to find old posts that have you defending or cheering for the guy you’re now holding to account. –
Wouldn’t be hard to do. I call them as I see them on their merits, regardless of personalities.
Good way to prevent getting tied up in hilarious knots of hypocritical babbling, as can happen to some.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 1:08 pm
Aren’t retaliation, intimidation, and harassment inherent in the political game? Even if you believe that Rep. Cassidy’s version of events is 100% accurate, how was she discriminated against because she’s a woman? She spoke out on a public policy issue - and against the head of the Democratic POLITICAL party. If this would have taken place 18 months ago, would it even be an issue? And, if this happened to a male legislator today, would it even be an issue?
I believe everyone is equal - and should be treated equally.
Comment by Anon Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 1:50 pm
^^^ Madigan’s not the type to ‘retaliate’ for no good reason. ^^^
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:17 pm
The Republicans definitely occupy the high ground here. Look how Governor Rauner treated Rep. Ives with such kid gloves when she criticized him.
Comment by Michael Westen Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:17 pm
Having worked with JP- any suggestion she won’t be totally above board and independent is rediculous. The only question is how quickly her investigation will conclude in terms of November. Never once ever thought of asking whether Porter was an R or a D. She always seemed kind of apolitical
Comment by Sue Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:22 pm
Willy, by explanation, albeit wordy, you made my case. You’re comparing apples and oranges, but I will absolutely concede there is an intersection to some underlying principles. One of these people has a vote in the General Assembly and plenty of influence there. The other does not.
When it concerns the GA, it’s surely a matter of public interest. We’re arguing for the same thing here.
Comment by A guy Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:38 pm
===by explanation, albeit wordy, you made my case.===
Nope. Sorry.
Keep trying.
You’re wishy-washy when it comes to harassment and intimidation and you’re not above victim shaming.
Your words tell me so.
Just like your righteous indignation on HB40… but you’ll be voting for Rauner anyway.
===We’re arguing for the same thing here.===
We’re not. Don’t drag me into your flim-flams.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:41 pm
==clearly articulate what it is that you think is happening here==
I don’t know…and that’s the point. Denise Rotheimer had Facebook posts. Alaina Hampton had text messages. What does Kelly Cassidy have other than her recollection of two conversations?
Comment by Jocko Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:43 pm
==Anon @ 1:50 pm: Aren’t retaliation, intimidation, and harassment inherent in the political game? Even if you believe that Rep. Cassidy’s version of events is 100% accurate, how was she discriminated against because she’s a woman? She spoke out on a public policy issue - and against the head of the Democratic POLITICAL party. If this would have taken place 18 months ago, would it even be an issue? And, if this happened to a male legislator today, would it even be an issue?
I believe everyone is equal - and should be treated equally. ==
You’re missing it, or you’re not missing it and you’re playing dumb.
She was not retaliated/discriminated against because of a public policy matter, nor was she retaliated/discriminated against because she was a woman.
She was retaliated against because she publicly spoke out and demanded that everyone be treated equally. Specifically, she demanded that women should not be harassed for being women, and that those responsible should be investigated independently and held accountable. That was a threat to power, given that those in power continue to deny the validity of the underlying claims of harassment. People in power have all kinds of reasons for retaliating. They want to keep the other ducks in their row, they want to force the offending person out of the spotlight, they actually want to harm the other person, and so on.
Kelly is being retaliated against because she spoke out publicly and threatened the existing power structure–the one that allows women to be harassed and assaulted, and protects the harassers and assaulters.
No, if she had randomly resigned 18 months ago without retaliation, this would not be a big deal.
And as soon as a man steps up and demands accountability from the existing power structure we’ll get a chance to see how swiftly they are dealt with. I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for that, but yes– if he is retaliated against, it will also be an issue.
Please cut the crap on the “equality” line.
Comment by Who else Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 2:55 pm
==You’re wishy-washy when it comes to harassment and intimidation and you’re not above victim shaming.==
Entirely untrue, goof. Not the least bit wishy-washy; maybe ask someone who might know…(maybe the only person for sure we know we have in common?)
As for who I’m voting for? I’ve got until November to decide. I’m already decided that there is a 0% chance that I would vote for JB. I’m neither happy nor satisfied with the choice I have. I exercised my civic duty to provide me with another choice.
I’m just not as good a soul as you when it comes to principle I guess. I have no idea how you maintain such high standards in the environment we’re in; but you manage.
Comment by A guy Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 3:54 pm
Move along, boys.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 3:56 pm
Could someone kindly explain what makes this a “sexual” harassment case? The purported victim did not allege any sexual impropriety, did she?
Comment by anon2 Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 4:03 pm
===explain what makes this a “sexual” harassment case===
It isn’t.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 4:09 pm
Rich- given the breadth of the me too movement - and assuming the allegations are true- the fact that the actions were taken against a female legislator- albeit Madigan has taken retaliation against men- it falls with Porters jurisdiction and it approaches discrimination. If not 99 percent of Title 7 cases are frivolous on their face given the salient facts typically are something bad was done against me and I am (filling the blank)
Comment by Sue Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 4:15 pm
==Move along, boys.==
Apologies.
Comment by A guy Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 4:27 pm
My apologies.
Comment by Oswego Willy Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 5:25 pm
The honorable thing here is for Mendoza to say something…she is the highest ranking female elected official in Illinois and her silence is speaking volumes.
Comment by Mod Dem Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 8:46 pm
I don’t have any particular article citations to offer, although Rich likely does, but Cassidy did make some very strong statements just months ago. Anyone remember that? women were calling for independent investigations but she took it a bit further. Just sayin.
Comment by plainfield liberal Wednesday, May 23, 18 @ 9:39 pm