Pretty hands-on for an unelected ephemeral seat-warmer! Re-examining the youth detention center is probably the best thing he's done for D2 in ages. I'm curious if the "filthy" order also responds to constituents' requests. I'd like to see the city put forward a package for HQ2 that includes a shit-ton of money for housing/transit/infrastructure, and not vocational training for subsistence-wage menial tech jobs.

Nobody is saying a word about Seattle's nuclear codes being handed around from one noob to another to another. Caretaker mayor isn't much of a job other than the awesome responsibility of being able to unleash the city's arsenal of land and submarine-launched intercontinental ballistic missiles.

Why am I the only one thinking about this stuff?

Can't blame him, who would want that job?

#2 Ditch that stupid handle, it's a waste of screen space.

The city needs to stop the cruel sweeps of homeless encampments which cause people to be driven to the streets without any shelter. There are not enough safe places to go. Murray wouldn’t stop ordering the sweeps and humane services are very difficult to find. This practice of continued sweeps creates more desperate circumstances for people without options and it does not serve our communities well.

@4: It's not your place to say. Your reaction is the stupid one. You should have searched Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtagn before commenting.

@3

They should appointment McGinn or Nickels.

@8: Yes, a former mayor seems very appropriate.

Given the way the succession works this is pretty obviously the way it would go for such a short stint.

Not surprised. I couldn't imagine that Harrell would want to be mayor for 2-3 months, give up his council seat, and be out on his ass looking for a new job by Thanksgiving.

Ditch the VGA monitor and you'll have one less thing to bitch about, gramps.

Yeah, was always gonna be Burgess. Well, at least we're a city where the most annoying choice is Burgess instead of Arpaio.

"stating Seattle’s intent to compete for Amazon’s second headquarters"

What, hoping they'll declare it was all a bluff? Nah. Best case for this idea is they'll declare their second city and then slow-walk it.

@2:
Noöne is talking about it because you live in a better world, at least with respect to nuclear authority, than the rest of us.

@4:
Uh-oh…now I bet he consumes you first—or maybe it's '…last', I forget how it goes. This guy has an opinion, but don't trust it out-of-tentacle.

Oh, look -- The Stranger smeared the previous mayor and demanded his resignation or removal, and now that it has happened, we get a disorganized muddle of a succession. This is why we free citizens of a democracy should choose our elected officials by election, not (character) assassination. Please make a note of this.

@15: I imagine some of Dennis Hastert's supporters had the same steadfast sentiments you have.

#17 Do you have garbage service where you live? I do. But people without homes do not.
The city has been asked to provide this service for the encampments by social workers, advocates, concerned persons and people without homes themselves. YOU put it on a ballot thank you very much. Oh and why don’t you talk to the people themselves instead of attacking them here.

I imagine some of Dennis Hastert's supporters had the same steadfast sentiments you have.

Dennis Hastert resigned from his seat in our Congress after his party lost their House majority in the 2006 elections, ending his time in the Speaker's chair. His departure was therefore a consequence of the choices American voters had made nationwide. The resulting transfer of power was orderly and well-planned.

Ed Murray was driven from our Mayor's office by the relentless harassment of a small group of lawyers from outside Seattle, with no request or approval of their actions from Seattle's citizens at large. There is now chaos in our City Hall.

You are correct. Any connection between these two cases resides entirely within your imagination.

YOU put it on a ballot thank you very much.

Yes, spitefully attacking someone who offers to help shows your sincere determination to work with your fellow citizens to solve our common problems. Please let us know what results that obtains for you.

You smeared Murray repeatedly during the recent fiasco, justifying your smears of him by claiming some connection to the homeless issue. Well, he's gone, so stop complaining and get to work solving homelessness already.

Better make sure they don't offer to pay Amazon $$$ to fuck up Seattle traffic and housing affordability even more. Not to mention abusing workers!

@15 the Stranger smeared Murray? Strange, I thought the accusations came from 5 men and Portland CPS!

I thought the accusations came from 5 men and Portland CPS!

Yes, yes you did.

The multiple connections between those men and Murray's most bitter political opponents? Not so much.

Harrell is an idiot if he thinks Amazon will build another HQ here. The entire point is to play one city against another, long term, to wrangle all the concessions possible, with really nothing in return.Don't give them a dime, they aren't going anywhere. But those 50,000 new jobs? They are not coming here either.

I think Jeff Bezos wants to move 50,000 Democrats into a red state. That's what I would do.

Quit apologizing for child molesters.

Take it to Raindrop; he's the one who brought up the subject of an admitted pedophile.

Go fuck yourself (that is, assuming you are above the age of consent).

Thanks for keeping it classy! (Care to fill in at City Hall? I understand they have some openings there right now.)

@25 - Very interesting. I am in agreement.

#20 Unintentionally I pushed your button. You do not know me and what work I do on the abolishment of homelessness or anything else. You are very touchy about the former mayor.
I reported what I know about it and the ex mayor’s part in it and that is it.

My motive is the welfare of vulnerable people - some I know and some I love and some who have died and many I have never met-.

@25 - Bezos doesn't give a shit about Democrats or Republicans, red states or blue states. Bezos only cares about Bezos' bottom line.

#25, Bezos is a known libertarian. He cares not about Republican or Democrat, only what is important to him at the time. Trumptastic in a sense.

I agree with tensor 100%. Starting in spring of 2016 with the phony story about the fictional-presented-as-fact bernie bro in a Guy Fawkes mask spewing obscene misogynistic hate speech at Hillary, the Stranger went from something I loved from the very first issue to a steaming pile of shit that I only read out of force of habit. Teaming up with Fairview Fanny and the bathroom initiative shysters to destroy Ed Murray has earned them the scorn they richly deserve.

Kiss my ass, you sorry pedophile apologist.

Our newly elevated level of political discourse is just another benefit of allowing out-of-town lawyers to drive our Mayor from office, all done without the slightest pretense of due process.

Enjoy the ongoing clown show at City Hall, and be sure to weasel out of any responsibility for it. Because that's just the kind of guy you are.

@33: How do Murrays accusers fit into your narrative? You're just going to cast these guys off (including Murray's cousin) as fame seeking gold diggers brought out of the woodwork by right-wing attorneys?

"known" libertarian

"Known" is a word you use when you've been told something and you don't question it. It's "known". I don't know why. I can't prove it. But it's "known" so that's that.

I don't know what's known about Bezos. But look at the Washington Post. Look. What do you see?

@35: Raindrop dear, it is your mention of Hastert which is not relevant to this post and thread. You might want to fix your own problems before making requests of other commenters.

You're just going to cast these guys off (including Murray's cousin) as fame seeking gold diggers brought out of the woodwork by right-wing attorneys?

Of the five accusers, we have yet to see evidence three of them have ever even met Murray. Four have documented connections to local anti-gay bigots whom Murray defeated during his political career. And Murray's cousin? His own blood relatives describe him as a chronic liar and malicious fabricator, with Murray's mother and Murray himself among the long-standing targets of his lies.

As noted @33, the legal team who filed the original lawsuit has plenty of reason to hate Murray and desire his downfall, which they have accomplished even while refusing to appear in court in support of their own case (!).

Luckily for them, Americans are well-known suckers for making cheap, lazy moral condemnations of others (see @26 and @30 for excellent examples of fact-free, personal attacks made upon flimsy moral bases) and thus, a case so flimsy the plaintiff himself won't appear in court to support it (!) magically becomes worthy of running our Mayor out of office.

I'd gladly support Seattle competing to be Amazon's second headquarters, if that meant they moved the primary headquarters, and the majority of its staff elsewhere. I remember when we were a one major employer town, when Boeing had its big bust in the 70's and the ripple effect knocked Seattle into a depression, where the rest of the country only had a recession.

@37: Assorted grievances from Murray's family members are neither here nor there. Since your arguments are mostly hyperbole, what is it about Murray that warrants your defense in the face of taking sexual abuse claims seriously (which were even substantiated by officials in Oregon)?

Assorted grievances from Murray's family members are neither here nor there.

Your hand-waving does nothing to diminish the evidence, and merely shows the desperation with which you cling to your belief in the face of the facts. You've swallowed as gospel truth an unsupported accusation from a person whose own blood relations describe him as a chronic liar and malicious fabricator.

Since your arguments are mostly hyperbole,

Since you've not cited a single example of my making the slightest exaggeration of any kind whatsoever, we can safely conclude this is more of your desperate hand-waving, as you have not even attempted to argue with my recitation of simple facts concerning Murray's accusers. (Admit it: it does bother you a little, that most of his accusers have yet to show they've even met him? Please say that it does.)

...what is it about Murray...

Nothing about Murray. Murray is gone (see the headline and main body of this post).

...that warrants your defense...

I wasn't aware that a rigorous and skeptical examination of the evidence counted as a "defense" of anything, except for a defense of the principle that we should conduct a rigorous and skeptical examination of the evidence before publicly accusing someone of child rape. (If you believe we should *not* conduct a rigorous and skeptical examination of the evidence before condemning someone as a child rapist without trial, please do tell us why.)

...which were even substantiated by officials in Oregon...

Wrong. The report from Oregon's CPS found there was cause to believe two of Simpson's former foster parents, Murray and another, had sexually abused Simpson. This was not equivalent to a guilty verdict in a court of law, but merely stated enough evidence existed to call for a police investigation. In the case of each of the former foster parents, the police were called to investigate, each person was duly investigated, and the police delivered their evidence to the District Attorney. In each case, the DA decided the evidence did not justify even asking the grand jury for an indictment, and the case was closed.

...taking sexual abuse claims seriously...

I did. Almost the entire body of evidence in the report consists of the formal statements Simpson made against each former foster parent. Murray and the other former foster parent were investigated at the same time, by the same investigators, using the same methods and witness (Simpson), and arriving at exactly the same conclusion for each former foster parent. We should always believe the accuser, right?

Right?

...Simpson said: "Nobody has ever sexually molested me besides Ed Murray. So no, absolutely no, I haven't made false allegations. There have been no investigations of sexual abuse other than him. And those are not false."

The Oregon CPS report definitively states there was an investigation into sexual abuse of Simpson by someone other than Ed Murray, and that Simpson himself provided a statement saying that someone other than Ed Murray had abused him. Either Simpson was lying about the alleged abuse he suffered, or Simpson is lying about the investigation in which he participated, or the Oregon CPS report is not credible.

Please refrain from spraining your wrists as you hand-wave away those choices.