Rep. John Conyers announces he will 'retire today' from congressional seat
DETROIT — Facing a rising chorus of voices demanding he step down because of sexual harassment claims, U.S. Rep. John Conyers Jr., on Tuesday retired from the seat he has held for more than five decades, a swift and crushing fall from grace for a civil rights icon and the longest-serving active member of Congress.
Saying he was finalizing his plans for retirement, Conyers, D-Mich., added he would endorse his son, John Conyers III, to replace him in Congress, potentially setting up a fight between him and his cousin, state Sen. Ian Conyers, in a special election to be called by the governor.
In his statement on the Mildred Gaddis Show on WPZR-FM in Detroit on Tuesday morning, Conyers did not describe it as a resignation but said his decision was immediate, suggesting the difference may be little. His lawyer, Arnold Reed, also confirmed that Conyers was leaving the seat as of Tuesday.
Conyers, 88, made his decision to quit Congress two weeks after an article on BuzzFeed.com detailed a secret settlement of more than $27,000 with a former staffer who accused him of making sexual advances toward her and paying her out of funds from his taxpayer-supported office.
Within days, several other women had come forward with accusations against Conyers, who, despite his denials that he harassed anyone, saw House leaders and members of his own party abandon him, with three of the four Democrats in the Michigan delegation calling for him to resign last Thursday.
Tags
Who is online
414 visitors
Nancy Pelosi's "icon" has quit.
Umm.....you do realize one of the people finally asking him to step down was Nancy Pelosi right?
Of course I do. That's what is so hypocritically pathetic about her. A week ago, Pelosi called Conyers an icon, advocated due process. Now, she turned against him. She didn't do any of this because of her belief in women's rights.
Perhaps it has escaped your notice that Pelosi has been completely silent about the Kate Steinle travesty of justice that occurred in her district this week. Throwing her "icon", Conyers, under the bus was a small price to pay and was the only way for her to save her hypocritical old ass. Those are the facts, so find another tree to scratch.
He can still be a political icon and still be asked to step down! So what's really your problem?
OK, Pot meet Kettle,
And that's hypocritical? Yes, she called Conyers an icon, because in the political world he is, that's a fact. As for advocating due process, she cant ask for that and also ask for the sake of the party and government for him to resign?!
You mean when the illegal immigrant was captured, charged with murder, went to trial and was found not guilty by a jury? Exactly what should she have said on that one?! Oh! Should she have been like Trump hypocrisizing about wanting to be the law and order President while refusing to acknowledge that justice was served in this case?
Aren't you one of the ones that said things should be decided in a court of law? If you are you should accept that A COURT OF LAW decided the case in favor of the accused.
I doubt it, because everyone now knows that the jury wasn't told that Zarate had been deported several times, deliberately returned to San Francisco because he'd be protected by its sanctuary city status, and had several felony convictions under his illegal alien belt.
Is he an icon NOW?
Umm....yeah! Politically he is! Maybe you should look up the definition of an icon
So you feel as though the justice system didn't work in this case? Was there not an indictment, and investigation, a trial, a verdict and a ruling? How was justice NOT served in this case?
So what does his immigration status have to do with any of this.......are you trying to say that the jury should have been biased toward the defendant just because he was an illegal alien?! Why do you feel that would have made any bit of difference?
You know what's so funny about this.....in the Zimmerman trial the jury didn't get to hear about the assault on the police officer charge or domestic violence and restraining order Zimmerman had on him, and you all claimed none of that should matter in that case......so if that's the case Zarate's illegal status shouldn't be an issue in this one!
I never said that Zarate's immigration status had anything to do with anything. What I DID state was that the jury wasn't allowed to know that he had been deported multiple times and that he had multiple felony convictions.
George Zimmerman is irrelevant to the seeded topic.
No, it wasn't. The judge didn't allow prosecution to tell the jury that Zarate had been deported 5 times, that he always wanted to return to San Fran because it's a sanctuary city, and that he had 7 previous felony convictions (some of them violent crimes).
If he were a Republican he'd still be denying any wrongdoing and calling all the accusers liars.
No like Roy Moore and Donald Trump!
Wake us up when you find evidence that they've been indicted and convicted.
Soo......Roy Moore? anyone? anyone?
Apparently his fate is up to the voters of AL while Dems get no such option. How nice it must be to live in the morality and decency free bubble of the rightwing pig sty that passes for a conscience.
Well you know they need their tax cuts and "religious freedom" to discriminate, so I guess that's an easy path to walk for them in that case
That is BS. Just look up the history of Bill Clinton to see what options Democrats have had up until Harvey Weinstein. Usually, it is just a wink and a nod to Democrats while Republicans are forced out of office. It is quite refreshing to see Democrats starting to have some set of morals put upon them. As with Roy Moore, all of these things except his admittance of dating are unsubstantiated rumors. Conyers, et al, have admitted to actual wrongdoing after the allegations came forth. Roy Moore has denied the allegations and until they are proven, you have to consider him innocent.
Key word there is history. Moore, and the rest of the republican scumocracy is happening right now.
ROY MOORE IS ACCUSED OF MOLESTING A 14 YEAR OLD, BILL CLINTON IS NOT. Of course none of that matters to you, you want a pedophile in Congress picking SCOTUS Justices and, Federal Judges so, your Pussy grabber can do whatever he wants. Got it.
Why, they're dead.
Congressmen don't pick SCOTUS Judges.......
Again, an accusation vs. admitted guilt, or as in this case, using taxpayer money to settle claims of being a serial sexual offender while being in public office. There's a huge difference, and if you can't see that, well, they will never allow you to move to Colorado.
And.....Deflectomatic ENGAGED! You do realize Harvey Weinstein is not an elected official right? That he was just some rich shumck that use his power and influence to assault women right? Dems didn't endorse Weinstein, the world did, because last time I checked if you Republicans knew about it and never said anything then you're just as complicit!
Ted Kennedy is D E D, dead, he went to court over this and, the court decided his case, all you are doing here is deflecting......very badly I might add.
So, your just whining then, you want some cheese to go with the whine?
They are part of the approval process, not the 'picking' process.
Wasn't this story about Conyers that someone on the left derailed into a Roy Moore Monologue? Yeah, so deflecto-what were you saying?
Actually it wasn't. He plod quilty to leaving the scene of an accident. There never was anything in court about the death of his victim. That was just swept under the rug and he was given a pass
I really hate this.
The COURT decided the sentence and, I'm not talking about the court of public opinion.
So show me in your little copy and past job where it says he was charged, tried and either acquitted or convicted of Ms. Kepeknes death.
This is the charge that the court was going to prosecute him on and, this is the charge that he pled guilty to. You want something different, go into the past in your time machine and, change it. Until then stop deflecting.
So he wasn't charged for the crime he actuall committed. Telll me, what do you think you would be charged with if you were involved in a single car accident that resulted in a dearh, left the scene and din not report it for ten hours?
Also tell me what your thought are on Officer Wlilson in the michael brown incident? Is he innocent in your mind because he was never charged? How about the policem3n from Baltimore that were acquited or had the charges dropped? What about george zimmerman? He was acquitted also? O. J. ?
Have you heard about the 8 or so corrupt cops in Baltimore that were on some kind of gun running unit - under investigation now? They planted evidence, robbed citizens, the charges go on and on. 1,000s of cases are called into question now because of these corrupt murderous cops.
Now please go ahead and blame the democrats for these corrupt cops.
Yep. I've enjoyed watching the Left deflect/derail/spin by inserting Roy Moore into my seed about Conyers.
And that has what to do with what we are talking about? Oh! It doesn't! Just another attempt at deflection.
Oh my. I haven't read about all of these Baltimore cases. Please give me some links so I can read about all of these cases. Thanks!
Figure it out yourself.
This was the deflection here dear. I thought I'd respond to it since you were deflecting anyway.
good job
Et, voilà: presto changeo INSTANT FALSE EQUIVALENCY CREATED!!!
Right. Anything to deflect away from your current sexual child predator.
Well, wait a sec, Tessy.
That's rich!
Oh, why would they do such a thing? Could it have anything to do how Dems are showing Conyers (and just breaking: Franken) the door while you're opening one up for a child sex predator?
Franken is resigning? Good!
Now let's really drain the swamp!
Really? Galen said that Ted Kennedy was not guilty because he was nit charged with the actual crime. I just wanted to know how consistent he was witj those thoughts or if it only applies to those the left approves of.
It seems you missed the last paragraph of your article:
Please remember that you stated 1000s of cases in your own comment.
On my local news last night and this morning - they were saying there were 1,000s of cases in question. I live in Baltimore.
Well it is now Wednesday and more cops have been found to be corrupt and more cases called into question.
I do remember. That's what was said on the news this morning. The article I gave you was just to reference what you doubted.
I meant to say in my original comment - that it was a gun task force - my mistake.
We'll have to wait to see how many convictions there might be.
Well duh.
I was not deflecting. I was referring to the timeline of how Democrats have had little if any consequences to their sexual misbehavior until recently, which started with the Harvey Weinstein accusations came out this past year.
I appreciate your eloquent comment.
Because someone on the right decided to auto engage their deflecto-matic 3000 to Bill Clinton....so your point?
And, he didn't do time because it was a suspended sentence, which means as long as he meets the conditions laid out in the sentence, he doesn't go to jail.
If you are talking about Leigh Corfman, there are substantial questions about her honesty including where she was living at the time of the supposed interactions:
Hey, I'm going by what people like you have said about Roy Moore, that "because none of his accusers came forward 40 years ago and, that none of this ended up in court, he should be able to run for the Senate, get elected and, serve." Isn't that what you and, your little cheering section have been saying on NT since all of this came up? This isn't about politics, it's about what is moral, Moore has been accused of having sex with a minor female, by the woman who was that minor female at the time. If you're going to use Kennedy's miss deeds against him after he's dead and, a court of law convicted him for something different than what you THINK he should have been charged with while supporting someone like Roy Moore, then I can do the opposite, I'm just using your moral standing to defend Kennedy.
Read my comment to Arkpdx.
I have never said anything about Moore. Not now not ever.
What about him? Last week, Nancy Pelosi said that everyone deserves due process.
And last week you all were complaining how bad Dems are because with the accusations coming out they have no honor because they are not resigning or stepping down.....well Conyers just did honorable thing in Republican eyes....Roy Moore anyone?!
All you'll get on that front is crickets or, deflection.
And right now that due process is getting rid of Conyers and, this just in, Franken. Six Dem women senators have called on him to resign. You must really be enjoying watching Dems do to their own something your side refuses to consider for your sexual predator of children.
No crickets, people are tired of directing you to the truth and you continue to twist and turn it into something it isn't....
Listen up....
The democrats that are resigning are doing so AFTER ADMITTING THEY DID IT! (or in the case of Franken, actual proof is shown)
The truth of the allegation is established by the accused himself..... (probably cause there is sufficient actual proof that would be very difficult to cover up)
An admission is prima fascia evidence of guilt.
So far no one has brought forth any real proof on the Moore side, the T-Rump side or anyone on the republican side. Mere Allegation does not make fact......
Sans admission of guilt, there is nothing to be done.
Rest assured that there is no republican that would remain in office if there was one shred of proof that they did such things......
All this whining and waddaboutism going on here to deflect away from the political leanings of those admitting to said behavior, well we understand that it is difficult to see how many on your side speak out both sides of their mouth.....
Sorry guys, maybe you should elect people with more class, or at the very least more intelligence. (aren't most of them trained as lawyers?)
So apparently to Republicans the real crime is "admitting to anything". Their holy mantra is "deny, deny, deny..."
They just don't get it.... You don't fall on your sword unless there is fact to back up the claim.... (falling on your sword is the only honorable thing left to do)
That's beyond their comprehension......
Love it when they prove the assertion immediately, makes it easier to expose them doesn't it....
Thank you for the admission......
But that's what you get when your dealing with people that live in a world of hate. (and they love their hate don't they)
please....
your welcome.
I don't really care so much for hate, but I'd rather live there than in a world of lying pedophiles. Roy Moore has 9 accusers, several of whom were very young teens, one only 14 at the time of the assault, but because he maintains all of them are liars his Republican base stand by him. Trump has over a dozen accusers, but as long as they don't have video evidence he maintains all of them are liars. John Conyers has 6 accusers and because he's apologized for any inappropriate behavior he must be guilty as sin and cast out. Franken has 6 accusers and because he's apologized for his inappropriate behavior he must be guilty as sin and should be cast out.
Personally, I believe all the women, they have no personal reasons to lie. Most of the accusers of Roy Moore have been Republicans nearly all their adult lives and have no reason to try and sabotage his Senate seat. They were pursued after rumors leaked that Roy had done these things years ago and the WAPO followed up and got them to come forward with their accounts of what happened. You can dismiss it all you want if it makes you feel better about sending a pedophile to the Senate, but you'll still be sending a pedophile to the Senate. Republicans have no shame and no conscience, it's frankly disgusting.
Wasn't there a verified account of them, (the WAPO investigator) offering money for them to come forward? Yes there was, $1,000 I believe. Very quickly after the first few "revelations".
Which now gives a motive for coming up with a story doesn't it?
Yes it does.
Which unfortunately colors all such reports now, well at least in the real world it does..... Colors the reason for the "Investigation" colors the "Revelations" and makes all aspects of all allegations suspect.
I really wish you guys and gals understood the true meaning of all this....
The allegations need to be what is known in the investigative world as rehabilitated. Which is very difficult, in the real world.
Probably the evidence in the cases of those resigning is the fact that they paid money out to shush the complainants. You see the effect of money on such allegations? the acts of offering money clouds the veracity of those offering it.....
And in many cases goes to prove the allegations. In the case of Moore, lends credence to the allegation that it is a political hit piece. Which is a fact that should carry equal weight when considering the truth of the allegation. Any good investigator knows this and avoids it like the plague.....
To me, that is a fatal flaw in the allegations against Moore, money was offered to come forward......
You can never escape that flaw......
The veracity of the allegations will always be compromised because of the offer of payment made to come forward.
No, that was a fake robo-call created by weaselly Roy Moore supporters attempting to discredit the accusers.
So your supposed "motive" is total BS, though I don't expect you to change your tune here, you'll just try to find some other excuse to continue supporting a pedophile because that's what you want to do.
Wait, what? I must have missed when Conyers and Franken were arrested, indicted by a grand jury, and then tried, convicted, and sentenced in a court of law. Do tell!
Since Conyers apologized for his misdeeds by admitting guilt and has abruptly quit his position, due process doesn't apply to him. Smart, slick move.
It's silly and immature to assume what you think people think, feel, and believe unless they've already told you. I feel very sorry for Conyers and Franken. Conyers ended a long career in shame, and Franken is just an unfunny guy who was stupid enough to pose for photos of himself groping women.
My side? You have no idea what my side might be, so stick to legal facts. Hearsay is not provable evidence in a court of law. To date, no one from any "side" has been indicted or convicted of being a "sexual predator of children".
PS -- You might want to look up the legal/constitutional definition of "due process". Even Nancy Pelosi knows what it means, and she's not the brightest crayon in the House box.
You miss the point again.
Doesn't matter whether it is true or false....
The point is the allegation. Your claiming that the allegations against Moore are in your opinion valid. You haven't an actual clue one way or the other.
An allegation was made that it is a hit piece, true or not, it is out there. the accused denying it is a hit piece should be given all weight correct? All the benefit of the doubt? correct?
What's the difference between WAPO denying the allegations (which would have been much more credible without the attack on Veritas) and Moore denying the allegations?
None....
No spin, just revealing your preferential biases...
.
NwM, unless you've got a link showing otherwise, that is not a true statement. Which would mean that the rest of your logic construct, built solely to try and impugn these women's stories, quickly falls apart.
I have seen no legitimate source saying WAPO offered money for the women's stories but I have seen many bogus stories trying to cloud the truth of their well documented, well corroborated stories about Judge Moore.
The evidence backing these women is strong enough for a jury to convict, if this was something that would ever be taken to court.
.
.
.
Rest assured, IF Moore is elected to the Senate, McConnell & Senate Republicans will not seat him AND Alabama can hold another election.
In the meantime Franken is trying to ride it out despite all the women & some democrats calling for his resignation.
Don't you get tired of looking silly? (psst, I hope not). There have been no criminal charges filed against anyone. So "due process" in this context means applying pressure to force people to resign. I'll bet your still mad that I tore your school lunch BS to pieces.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!!!! Funny one, Vicky. Not a fucking chance.
Really?! Conyer admitted to nothing but still made the decision to leave, Franken admitted to a tasteless picture that was done in poor humor but not to the sexual assault and may be resigning tomorrow. Roy Moore has NINE women who claimed he sexually assaulted or raped him ALL have similar stories and details and you all STILL defend him!......I guess the truth to Republicans is optional when it comes to getting your tax cuts and legislations passed!
And why not? Show me why you think it wont happen
Don't flatter yourself. I never get mad at anything someone says on the Internet.
? Now you're talking in circles. You said "Wasn't there a verified account of them, (the WAPO investigator) offering money for them to come forward? Yes there was, $1,000 I believe." But there wasn't, so yes it matters whether it was true or not. If it were true then you'd have a point discrediting the accusers, but you don't so your entire argument crumbles into the dry crusty dog turd it was.
AH,
You my friend I will respond intelligently to....
Unfortunately my friend, your statement is true only if the court and jury does NOT do it's job......
ie. If they think that an accusation alone is enough to get a conviction and they refuse to follow the law.....
I know, your side will come back with there are so many corroborating witnesses.....
If the court does it's job the charges would never make it to the jury.....
Mere repetition does not make veracity and such statements would not even make it into the courtroom, if the judge was actually fair. But contradictory statement CAN be used in Court, not so much for their probative value but for their alternate version of events. They would carry the same weight as the allegation.
Any case brought on the current "evidence", (if the statute of limitations did not apply) would eventually be dismissed for legal insufficiency. All the corroborating statements would not be allowed at trial. Not making a statement about their veracity here, a legal statement about their admissibility at trial. They are pure hearsay as well as mere repitition, and would serve to poison the jury.
That's the problem with such a thing as this. Very few know the legal standards that are required to be fulfilled and what has been brought forth doesn't even come close to meeting any standard of legal sufficiency to gain a conviction. Sure the mere allegation if not time barred is sufficient to charge, but you need a LOT more to convict, and simply there is nothing to base a conviction on here.....
It makes for titillating reading, and very angry divisive politics. but that is all it is good for.... (aside of revealing how much people can be hoodwinked by their own uneducated biases)
If they elect him he should serve, if they don't there is no way to know if the allegations had an effect. Both sides will claim they had in either circumstance.
But the fact is both sides are hoping and praying for an outcome that suits their side. And will rant if it doesn't.....
Be well my friend...
And, that is the whole point. No criminal charges filed against anyone.
Hearsay.......
Vic.
My friend, Give it up.
They haven't a clue about what real actual due process is, in any circumstance, on any level.
But it is fun to poke them with a stick and watch them foam at the mouth from time to time.....
I thought I outlined it clearly my friend, I guess not enough for them.....
Does this mean we will see another march of people dressed as vaginas?
You enjoyed that, did you, Jer?
Time to break out my pink pussy hat
As another rw here said: You don't have to listen or look
Oh, I think Jer wants to look.
U. S. Constitution, Article 1, Sections 2 & 3 state that if there is a vacancy in the Senate or House for any reason, "the Executive" shall fill that slot until an election can be held to refill the vacancy.
Don't think Conyers qualifies as "the Executive" - ya think?
In New York, the Governor acts as the 'Executive'. I wonder if its the same for Michigan?
Per the Constitution, the "Executive" being mentioned is the Pres/VP from recommendations of the House/Senate.
That's the "executive authority" of the state for which the vacancy occurs. Not the federal executive.
Sad - makes sense, but sad just the same.
This is just. Anyone behaving in a manner that is not ethical and moral should be shown the door when it comes to public office. They're supposed to be the best we can elect to the job and if they're using the position to enrich themselves or to abuse that power, they need to be immediately removed from office. Oh wait...
But not to be applied to Roy Moore, right?
Perhaps you misunderstood. Moore and Trump are both ill-suited to office as they're both the very sort that I was referring to.
I guess once a black women claims he assaulted her, Democrats care. After all white women can't be trusted says the third highest ranking Democrat in the House.
Well they can always do like Bill O'Reilly did and just blame God instead of just taking responsibility for himself!
Deflecto-what? The whole glass houses/stones thing.
You mean, like the one your throwing stones from?
And the White House is the biggest glass house
The Democrats, the party that celebrates racists because O'Reilly or something.
something tells me we will see more "retiring before the next election.
Not any republicans, though. No pressure's being put on them by their party leaders. Meanwhile, Conyers is out and just today six women Dem senators have called on Franken to go. No one's calling on Joe Barton or Scott Desjarlais and the big boy of them all Trump to resign. Trump's got a ten fold lead on Franken and Conyers for accusers. And, Roy Moore -- the scummiest of them all: He's got the full throated support now of the republican party apparatus not to mention the president of scum, Trump. Ah, but it's OKIYAR, right?
According to USA Today there are 4 people in Congress that have been accused of sexual misconduct. Three of them are democrats with multiple charges each and one republican with only one accusation.
I do not condone any of these individuals behavior if they are found to be guilty ... yet Shirley you see the difference between one being accused and denying the allegations are true, and those that have paid settlements in the past, not denying the accusations, just paying to get those accusations to go away? (Bill O'Reilly ring a bell?)
Ugghhh Trump - well he is in the category of being accused and denying it ... do I think he is guilty ? my opinion on the subject does not matter. What does matter is the legal system in place in the United States of America .... all these men are innocent until proven guilty - accusations do not make a guilty individual. Words like on that Access Hollywood tape, are just that words, albeit offensive, but nonetheless still words. I hate to say that, yet it is true...
I have stated many times before that I cannot speak to harassment, as I gave as good as I got ......................... yet women are coming out of the wood work with stories. I hope that none are found to be fraudulent ... that would be so harmful to those that are legit!
Something tells me that you are correct ... between those choosing to leave because they know in this climate they prob would be unable to win ... and those that may get caught up in the avalanche of the sexual harassment movement ........................ a much needed cleansing is coming to DC. To use a tired/over used phrase ... draining the swamp!
Sadly the extremes in both parties are the ones getting the attention in this current political climate - "We the People" need to pay attention before casting a ballot in 2018 ... forget about (D) and (R) .. one needs to vote their conscience! (my thoughts)
I don't care if he resigns or not. I just don't think the taxpayers should be paying for his lawsuits and settlements.