Katie 'throuple' Hill announces resignation from Congress

The #MeToo movement appears to have taken its first female politician as a trophy, as Democrats sigh in relief that an embarrassing story will no longer drag out over election season.  By the reckoning of the New York Times, 201 powerful men have lost their jobs, and of 124 replacements so far, 54 have been women.  Now a woman is losing he job over accusations of sexual exploitation and lurid misbehavior: Rep. Katie Hill.  Hill announced that she is resigning from Congress in a letter tweeted out yesterday afternoon.

It is with a broken heart that today I announce my resignation from Congress. This is the hardest thing I have ever had to do, but I believe it is the best thing for my constituents, my community and our country.

She portrayed herself as a victim of an abusive husband and claimed that her motive was to protect her supporters from pain and "cyber exploitation."

This is what needs to happen so that the good people who supported me will no longer be subjected to the pain inflicted by my abusive husband and the brutality of hateful political operatives who seem to happily provide a platform to a monster who is driving a smear campaign built around cyber exploitation.

Hill has not specified a date her resignation will take effect, but Politico says "multiple people with knowledge of her plans said she could step aside as soon as Nov. 1."  Replacing her will require a special election to be called by California's Governor Newsom and could take three to six months, allowing a new "incumbent" just a few months in office before voters decide on a representative for the 2021–22 term.  Hill's district north of Los Angeles is considered competitive.

Hill is facing a formal inquiry, which may have more to do with her resignation than her supporters' feelings, as Guardian reports:

Last week the House ethics committee opened an investigation into allegations that Hill had engaged in a sexual relationship with her legislative director, Graham Kelly, in possible violation of a House rule forged in response to the #MeToo era. Hill denied the claim in a letter to constituents but admitted to a relationship with a different, unnamed staffer on her congressional campaign that she called "inappropriate".

House rules enacted at the height of the #MeToo movement in 2018 prohibit relationships between members of Congress and their employees. But the rules do not cover campaign aides.

Hill is thus short-circuiting a formal inquiry into a relationship with an employee, as has been accused and denied by her.  Without her resignation, hearings would have dragged out and embarrassed her party, which has built its appeal by posing as the champion of female victims of male predators.

I can't claim to know the truth or falsity of the accusations against her and those made by her.  But a number of important questions beyond her personal conduct remain unanswered.

Was she advised or ordered to resign by Nancy Pelosi?  Hill had been regarded as a rising star and was given choice committee assignments by Pelosi, who was also grateful that she had flipped a seat held by a Republican.  Did Pelosi want to close the book on a story that would have dragged out in public and generated talking points for Republicans eager to cast Democrats as libertines and hypocrites when it comes to charges of sexual predation?

My strong suspicion is yes.

Another interesting question is whether or not constituents in Southern California would be willing to support a "polyamorous" solon, one whose sexual tastes are not merely homosexual or bisexual (as Hill was open about), but who recognized no special tie binding her to any one partner.  By comparison, for example, presidential contender Pete Buttigieg is very clear that he regards his homosexual relationship with his male partner as a sacred tie of marriage, and this was accepted by an Indiana constituency and is finding significant levels of support nationally.  It is quite clear that the national public now supports monogamous homosexual relationships.  But is the public now conditioned to regard sexual relationships as purely driven by pleasure and not as a marker of a special tie between two humans, drawing them together and marking that tie between them as apart from all other human relationships?

Hill's resignation removes these questions from consideration in the year preceding the 2020 election, something for which Democrats are no doubt grateful.  But these questions will not go away.  Now that taboos against homosexuality have been discarded by a national electoral majority, those who wish to destroy all religion-based taboos on sexual activity have bisexuality and polyamory on their agenda.

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore.

The #MeToo movement appears to have taken its first female politician as a trophy, as Democrats sigh in relief that an embarrassing story will no longer drag out over election season.  By the reckoning of the New York Times, 201 powerful men have lost their jobs, and of 124 replacements so far, 54 have been women.  Now a woman is losing he job over accusations of sexual exploitation and lurid misbehavior: Rep. Katie Hill.  Hill announced that she is resigning from Congress in a letter tweeted out yesterday afternoon.

It is with a broken heart that today I announce my resignation from Congress. This is the hardest thing I have ever had to do, but I believe it is the best thing for my constituents, my community and our country.

She portrayed herself as a victim of an abusive husband and claimed that her motive was to protect her supporters from pain and "cyber exploitation."

This is what needs to happen so that the good people who supported me will no longer be subjected to the pain inflicted by my abusive husband and the brutality of hateful political operatives who seem to happily provide a platform to a monster who is driving a smear campaign built around cyber exploitation.

Hill has not specified a date her resignation will take effect, but Politico says "multiple people with knowledge of her plans said she could step aside as soon as Nov. 1."  Replacing her will require a special election to be called by California's Governor Newsom and could take three to six months, allowing a new "incumbent" just a few months in office before voters decide on a representative for the 2021–22 term.  Hill's district north of Los Angeles is considered competitive.

Hill is facing a formal inquiry, which may have more to do with her resignation than her supporters' feelings, as Guardian reports:

Last week the House ethics committee opened an investigation into allegations that Hill had engaged in a sexual relationship with her legislative director, Graham Kelly, in possible violation of a House rule forged in response to the #MeToo era. Hill denied the claim in a letter to constituents but admitted to a relationship with a different, unnamed staffer on her congressional campaign that she called "inappropriate".

House rules enacted at the height of the #MeToo movement in 2018 prohibit relationships between members of Congress and their employees. But the rules do not cover campaign aides.

Hill is thus short-circuiting a formal inquiry into a relationship with an employee, as has been accused and denied by her.  Without her resignation, hearings would have dragged out and embarrassed her party, which has built its appeal by posing as the champion of female victims of male predators.

I can't claim to know the truth or falsity of the accusations against her and those made by her.  But a number of important questions beyond her personal conduct remain unanswered.

Was she advised or ordered to resign by Nancy Pelosi?  Hill had been regarded as a rising star and was given choice committee assignments by Pelosi, who was also grateful that she had flipped a seat held by a Republican.  Did Pelosi want to close the book on a story that would have dragged out in public and generated talking points for Republicans eager to cast Democrats as libertines and hypocrites when it comes to charges of sexual predation?

My strong suspicion is yes.

Another interesting question is whether or not constituents in Southern California would be willing to support a "polyamorous" solon, one whose sexual tastes are not merely homosexual or bisexual (as Hill was open about), but who recognized no special tie binding her to any one partner.  By comparison, for example, presidential contender Pete Buttigieg is very clear that he regards his homosexual relationship with his male partner as a sacred tie of marriage, and this was accepted by an Indiana constituency and is finding significant levels of support nationally.  It is quite clear that the national public now supports monogamous homosexual relationships.  But is the public now conditioned to regard sexual relationships as purely driven by pleasure and not as a marker of a special tie between two humans, drawing them together and marking that tie between them as apart from all other human relationships?

Hill's resignation removes these questions from consideration in the year preceding the 2020 election, something for which Democrats are no doubt grateful.  But these questions will not go away.  Now that taboos against homosexuality have been discarded by a national electoral majority, those who wish to destroy all religion-based taboos on sexual activity have bisexuality and polyamory on their agenda.

Photo credit: Gage Skidmore.