Will Weiner Resign? (“package.JPG“): Politico‘s Ben Smith argues Weiner doesn’t have to resign his seat:
Politically speaking, what has already emerged may well have doomed Weiner’s hopes of being mayor of New York, and could well produce calls for him to resign. The main lesson of recent scandals, from Spitzer to Vitter, is that he doesn’t have to: No matter how gross the private conduct, these scandals tend to burn hot and fast. [E.A.]
Hmm. Maybe Spitzer’s scandal burned out because he resigned. He arguably paid his price. Vitter, unlike Weiner, quickly reacted by admitting “a very serious sin” and begging forgiveness. He survived. … Structurally, the main problems for Weiner would seem to be 1) He’s not an obscure junior senator from a smaller state. He’s all over cable news as the face of the true-blue faction of the Democratic party 2) His fellow Democrats are more likely to laugh at his plight than stick out their necks to support him. In this sense, he’s more like the widely disliked Spitzer than Vitter, who was seen as essential to defending the balance of power in one house of Congress; 3) The ongoing drip-drip of the scandal will be especially annoying to other House Dems who will say it’s preventing them from getting out their all-important message on Medicare, the budget, and the economy. That message isn’t nearly as important as they think it is, a year and a half before the election. But you try telling them that. …
I’m not denying that things move faster in politics these days. But one thing that moves fast, maybe, is the reckoning. The arc of scandal is short, but it bends toward justice. …
P.S.: You’d think a full and heartfelt Vitteresque apology would still save him at this point, though. He has a press conference scheduled in a few minutes … Update: I thought he did that. He did very well, then couldn’t get off the podium until he had said one foolish self-centered thing, which was that he had “not much desire” to meet the women he was tweeting with. …
P.P.S.–Weiner vindicated? The existence of other photos–and Breitbart claims he’s holding back the tweeted images “of an extreme, graphic nature” –seems to be the best explanation for why Weiner didn’t deny that the initial image was his. That explanation didn’t quite make 100% sense to me at the time–would it really help Weiner, if other photos came out, that he wouldn’t earlier have denied their existence? Now that this contingency has come to pass, though, it does seem to help Weiner that he hasn’t been exposed as a liar on this particular. It wasn’t “abysmal damage control.” It was reasonably savvy and far-sighted damage control. Vindicated!
The denial Weiner did make–that he hadn’t sent the original image–looks shakier than ever, though. …
P.P.P.S.: Re: “Me and the pussys”–Did Rep. Weiner steal an idea from Rep. Loretta Sanchez? Hers was on fire, though. …
Heart of Hackness: H. Kurtz has not covered himself with glory in this story.** …
_____
**–See conflict of interest disclosure here.