Sorry to put it that bluntly.  It’s just that Rep. David Wu (D, OR*) has gotten increasingly erratic… actually, let us not mince words: Wu has been acting nuttier and nuttier for the last year.  This RedState diary from February of this year tells what we thought was the tale: strange emails, bizarre statements, erratic behavior… and two pieces of interesting data:

The (heavy) implication at the time was that the second event was because of the first… which would make this story one where Wu is kind of going crazy, and his staff (not being trained mental health professionals, after all) are quietly extricating themselves from a somewhat awkward situation.  Which may not be nice of those staffers, but, really, what were they going to do?  After all, it’s not like anyone was saying that Wu did anything felonious

Sources: Young woman accuses Oregon Rep. David Wu of aggressive, unwanted sexual encounter

Well, then.

This is going to require a timeline.

And now here we are.  Michelle Malkin would like to know where prominent Democratic women are on this issue; I want to know where Wu’s former staffers are, period.  It’s one thing to quit because your boss got drunk and sent you an extra-unnerving email or three (even if they did involve a tiger’s costume); it’s another to quit because your boss got accused again of sexual assault.  At the moment, the timeline does support a scenario where Wu’s former staffers didn’t know about the original incident… but it also support a scenario where they did, but just kept quiet about it.

Which is not actually acceptable.  Even if Rep. Wu is telling the truth, and the encounter was consensual: if staffers resigned over the incident, then they themselves are admitting that this was outrageous behavior on Wu’s part, no matter what the details were.  They shouldn’t have let themselves decide that keeping silent was an acceptable moral or ethical option.

Moe Lane (crosspost)

*Needless to say, he’s been misidentified as a Republican at least once so far. Yes, yes: I’m shocked, too.

**The Oregonian goes on to note: “Two sources said the woman believed there was not enough evidence to press charges. There were no witnesses, and it would be her word against a seven-term member of the U.S. Congress.”