"Congressman Weiner departed this morning to seek professional treatment to focus on becoming a better husband and healthier person," Heller said in the statement.
"In light of that, he will request a short leave of absence from the House of Representatives so that he can get evaluated and map out a course of treatment to make himself well."
Weiner’ Seeks Treatment After Underage Charges
Previous post: Little Green WTF? Part 2
Next post: #Weinergate Music: Rehab
Deviant Art
Facebook
Flickr
Google Reader
LinkedIn
StumbleUpon
Twitter
Vimeo
YouTube
{ 20 comments… read them below or add one }
US Constitution, Article 1, Section 5: “Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two thirds, expel a Member.”
Get on it, Mister Speaker.
Lee…can you explain to me why this is not treated as a crime. What he did was sexual harassment. People go to jail for this stuff…why is everybody dismissing it so easily and not recognizing the criminality. There are people who are now registered sexual offenders who have done things such as this….just because the parties involved are adults does not mean that there is no crime
why did weiner feel it necessary to go out and take his 4 or 5 shirts to the laundry? on a $174K salary you’d think he’d have several more. did he just need the attention from the cameras?
Well, Weiner probably has a lot of time on his hands. His wife is out of town, his important “friends” are shunning him, his handlers won’t let him get near twitter or his blackberry. He might as well do stuff like take his shirts to the laundry, clean out the fridge and maybe change the cat litter.
Remember, ALWAYS watch what the other hand is doing. With the Chinese dumping our bonds by the Trillions to them being allowed to purchase U.S. land in places like Idaho. These are amusing but just distractions.
Underage charges? Did I miss something? Are these charges brought by authorities or are these claims?
The police are investigating. Which means there’s at least an allegation.
So it’s a claim. Charges are brought after an investigation is complete. Lee, you might want to change that headline. He’s not charged with anything - yet.
What he did was sexual harassment.
No it’s not. For starters, his behavior (sending dirty pics) wasn’t unwelcome. Secondly, he didn’t have any real-world relationship with these women. Thirdly, he had no power over them.
People go to jail for this stuff
Really? Please provide any evidence of this. Or are you comfortable just making shit up because it sounds good at the time?
The police are investigating. Which means there’s at least an allegation.
Okay, I hereby allege that the owner of this blog is a serial murderer. Now there are charges of serial murder. If there are any significant events in his life, we can write a headline: “X does Y after charges of serial murder.”
Legally he may not be in trouble - yet. Professionally he sure as hell proved he doesn’t have good enough judgment for his present job.
No it’s not. For starters, his behavior (sending dirty pics) wasn’t unwelcome.
“Ms. Cordova, who had traded messages with Mr. Weiner, a New York Democrat, about their shared concern over his conservative critics, said she had never sent him anything provocative. Asked if she was taken aback by his decision to send the photo, she responded, “Oh gosh, yes.”
Secondly, he didn’t have any real-world relationship with these women. Thirdly, he had no power over them.
So what you are saying is that it is legal for me to drop my pants, with a bulge in my underwear, when speaking to a women. Do you think I would be arrested if I did that on a busy street?
Professionally he sure as hell proved he doesn’t have good enough judgment for his present job.
I agree with that, although I’d point out that every now ‘n then a politician has survived this stuff. David Vitter and Barney Frank come to mind.
So what you are saying is that it is legal for me to drop my pants, with a bulge in my underwear, when speaking to a women. Do you think I would be arrested if I did that on a busy street?
The Internet isn’t a busy street.
Ms. Cordova, who had traded messages with Mr. Weiner, a New York Democrat, about their shared concern over his conservative critics, said she had never sent him anything provocative. Asked if she was taken aback by his decision to send the photo, she responded, “Oh gosh, yes.”
Maybe next time she won’t be calling some stranger her boyfriend, etc. And we really don’t know what messages they’d been trading, do we?
“there are many historical similarities between discussions of cyber harassment today and the initial debates about sexual harassment in the workplace that occurred during the 1980s. Harassment is being trivialized now in quite similar ways to how it was then, and the arguments for seeing such behavior as non-actionable private crudeness rather than civil rights violations are familiar as well. Courts and commentators in those early days routinely dismissed harassment at work as harmless flirting, and would-be plaintiffs were often exhorted to seek work elsewhere if they didn’t like the sexually charged atmosphere that some workplaces “happened” to have. So, the recycling of such attitudes into arguments such as “if you don’t like the atmosphere, stay off the website” is certainly not surprising.”
Guest,
1) she says she didn’t want it, he said it was a joke. I do believe Anita Hill would beg to differ on the definition of sexual harassment.
2) he posted the picture on twitter. If twitter isn’t comparable with a busy street, then you must have never heard the term “information super highway.” there’s a reason its always compared to a busy road. You should know better.
3) you and mani are right about the charges thing, and I wasn’t arguing otherwise. Mani asked for clarity. Try not to invent things that aren’t said or implied.
she says she didn’t want it, he said it was a joke. I do believe Anita Hill would beg to differ on the definition of sexual harassment.
Anita Hill shared an office with Clarence Thomas, her supervisor. The 21-year-old woman here has never met Anthony Weiner. Anita Hill never indicated any desire to have a relationship with Thomas. The 21-year-old woman here indicated that she was Weiner’s “boyfriend.” Anita Hill never had any non-business communication with Thomas. The 21-year-old woman here exchanged messages with Weiner.
If twitter isn’t comparable with a busy street, then you must have never heard the term “information super highway.” there’s a reason its always compared to a busy road. You should know better.
To paraphrase Sigmund Freud, sometimes a metaphor is just a metaphor. Twitter is a library whose owners allow the public to view. It is not a public street.
you and mani are right about the charges thing, and I wasn’t arguing otherwise. Mani asked for clarity. Try not to invent things that aren’t said or implied.
A headline, “Weiner Seeks Treatment After Underage Charges,” implies a link between the treatment and the “charges.” Use of the word, “charges” implies a criminal complaint. Neither the link nor the complaint is true. You are just one more circus freak trying to play tricks. By the way, how the fundraising going for your “documentary?”
I see I’ve made a mistake. mark, I presume you are not the blog owner. I implied that you are, and apologize for that. I also retract the “circus freak” comment with respect to you.
Apology accepted. I am not Lee.
However, there is one thing I would prefer clarity on: are you suggesting that its impossible to sexually harass a woman over the internet if one has not actually met said woman? Or are you just not buying her story that it was unwelcome? If its the latter, than we are actually in agreement. I believe she’s covering for him. Unfortunately, since we don’t have proof that she said “i wanna see your junk,” we are forced to take the word of both parties, which would indicate sexual harassment.
For the record, I don’t believe weiner or cordova.
Use of the word, “charges” implies a criminal complaint.
I criminally complained the battery in my phone yesterday, kind of thing?
Use of the word “charges” does not necessarily imply a criminal complaint. The word “charge” is far older than the US Department of Justice, or the Delaware or your home state’s equivalent, ergo we get to use the word “charge” as we see fit and if they want to borrow it into their legal jargon they are perfectly free to do so; but there is no onus on anyone to prefer the legal jargon definition over the plain English definition: including in their inferences. Unless, of course, you really don’t understand the difference between “possible” and “necessary”, in which case, rave on.