The Smearing of Joe Biden: Why His Accuser Tara Reade is Not Credible

Don't think the Russiapublicans are done with this. This is only the beginning, the roll-out. They have women waiting in the wings.

They know that Trump's rape accusations are a drawback, so they are trying to fight fire with fire.

No one cares

[QUOTE] Don't think the Russiapublicans are done with this. This is only the beginning, the roll-out. They have women waiting in the wings.

Thankfully Joe Biden has built such a reputation as a lovable guy that he can withstand an all-out character assault like this and still win the election.

[QUOTE] No one cares

I care. I’m sick of this deranged tramp making headlines and wish Joe Biden would more forcefully defend himself against her allegation. She shouldn’t have free reign to continuously assassinate his character without pushback.

Mainstream Democrats had better close ranks. None of the Al Franken takedown bullshit.

The media are out for blood, because their primary candidates didn’t win. Left Twitter too. Soon the Pod Save America guys, who love to be woke (self-sabotaging) and worship the Squad. They’ll really get going when Biden chooses a mainstream Democrat as his VP. Their goddess, Abrams, will try to ride the wave.

This is the next “but her emails”. True Democrats need to be 100% behind Biden. Investigate each accuser and find the evidence that shows that they’re crazy, selfish liars. The media won’t be investigating: they’ll be trumpeting the accusations and expressing “concern” about Biden.

Biden won’t pick Warren. She’ll then try to lead the “concern” movement, with the Squad and the fawning, desperate media, possibly with the thought that she can help Bernie seize the nomination in exchange for the VP position.

We’re scorpions in a jar: the media and the far left, Biden and mainstream Democrats, Trump and his cult backed by Russia. One will win when the others are vanquished. There’s no room for compromise anymore.

Biden was a hot daddy in the 90s. He wouldn’t harass this beast. She looks like a witch.

interesting article OP. She's nuts, so I assume like so many nuts she'll wind up a Trumpista before too long.

Didn't she want to marry Putin? That tells you everything.

She was rather attractive in the 90s. But the fact she has witnesses from the time it happened And remembers where and when and filed a personnel complaint-contrary to Blasey Ford who has none of those things including a single person who was there-gives this woman tremendous credibility. Blasey Ford was a very poor witness with a very poor story, And let herself be used. For a big payday.

No evidence. No witnesses. No crime, just a destructive vengeful woman. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned.

She could have a fucking video and I would still vote for Biden.

So what if she complained back in ‘93 and told people then? She could have been lying back then too. I don’t subscribe to the “believe every woman” nonsense. This woman is clearly nuts and has an axe to grind. Why not come out back in ‘08? ‘12? Or before Biden even announced he was running. Timing is suspect. The person who “broke” this story is an absolutely batshit insane Bernie Bro named Katie Halper. It came out around the time that Biden started winning. Hmmm....

Blasey Ford “waited” because Kavanaugh hadn’t been a public figure until his nomination. Biden has been in the public eye for 50 years.

Witnesses apparently are a dead mother, an anonymous somebody, a brother who first said she told him Biden touched her hair, then later switched his story to she said he put his hands under her clothes.

Oh and a complaint nobody has a record of.

I think she's a nut, with the usual weird bullshit pro-Russia (for awhile) bias that everyone around Trump has or had. She'll wind up a full fledged crazy ass Trumpista by November.

And psycho Rose McGowan actually had the audacity to call out Tanya Burke for not saying anything on Reade's behalf.

Interesting that right wing sites are using older pictures of her when she was quite stunning and left wing sites are using current pictures where she looks like a hag.

Read some of the comments on the linked article. She apparently has a history of committing fraud and being sued/bringing frivolous lawsuits. Her since deleted writing about Putin are definitely by either a mentally ill person or someone desperately trying to curry for ??? money???

We need to be consistent with these kind of things.

Biden needs to unseal his records and let justice play out.

I find it completely unbelievable that the Obama administration wouldn't find out about this when Biden was vetted. I call BS on her claim. All 12,000 of them.

She's full of shit. Period. If rethuglicans want to make this into an issue, the left needs to start zeroing in on accusations against Dump that he raped a 13 y/o girl as well as his friendships with the dead pedophile Epstein.

What records R17???

She claims she made a claim at the time with the Senate. They have no record of it. She claimed she made accusations to his aides at the time. They vehemently deny she spoke to them. But you know that.

...as well as his friendship with the dead pedophile Epstein.

R20, senate claim lie is exactly why I don't believe her. And her story hasn't changed, it has MUTATED into different forms depending on the circumstances. Believe every "victim", my ass. We saw how that worked with Jussie.

Yes her story keeps progressing. First it was unwanted glances. Then it was he touched her hair. Then it turned into “sexual assault” now that that’s all the rage. The Larry king called said that her daughter had a “problem” with a senator. My guess is that this bitch is nuts and was fired and she became a disgruntled employee.

"She was rather attractive in the 90s."

Rape is not sex!!

Joe should personally address this.

i don't know if she's a con artist or a loon, but apparently she has a history of stealing and grifting and running out on debts.

Yeah done with this dingbat and her Love Biden/Hate Putin, no wait, Love Putin/Hate Biden craziness.

This doesn’t even pass the smell test, because Joe Biden was a very good looking man back then, and this woman is uglier than Paula Jones. Even deplorables don’t believe it.

It was just on Don Lemon. Stacey Abrams says she believes Biden.

Oh stop blaming women who step forward. If you want Biden, vote for him but don't dismiss her allegations. Just vote for him. Don't cover your guilt by trying to convince others that his accuser is lying.

I don’t believe it because that doesn’t sound like his MO. He’s a lot more subtle and he does it in front of people because that’s what gets him off.

And she’s just not credible, sorry.

"The media are out for blood, because their primary candidates didn’t win."

"The media" isn't a monolith and many people in the media did support Biden

"No crime, just a destructive vengeful woman. Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned."

Oh, please. I roll my eyes when people post shit like this because 90% of violent crimes are committed by men, not women. I do think she's lying/exaggerating but I doubt "vengeance" is the motive. Keep in mind she was liking/re-tweeting positive articles about him as recently as a couple years ago. I wonder if the Russians got to her....

Sorry guys, you picked the wrong woman to distract from your Rapist in Chief and daughter fucking president. Her story doesn't hold up. Maybe try the Hunter Biden thing again, given your legendary hatred of corruption.

[quote]Don't cover your guilt by trying to convince others that his accuser is lying.

She has a history of lying and bizarre behavior. So it’s very likely that she’s lying again here.

The real scandal is that Reade is a MTF and Biden didn't grab the pussy, he grabbed the peen.

[QUOTE] Oh stop blaming women who step forward.

This wildebeest has taken about seven steps forward and each time her story is different. And she shamelessly added that “Come on, man!” in her latest iteration, figuring it would make the story more plausible by conjuring Joe’s signature folksiness. Next thing you know she’ll be tossing a “Malarkey!” in there.

R8 she was a putinesca

Smearing is a weird word in this case.

This lockdown has been a win/win for Biden. No public speaking, events, debates etc. for him to fuck up AND a platform for Trump to self-destruct (those disastrous press updates he insists on doing.) Joe and his campaign staff are praying it doesn’t end anytime soon (only 6 more months till the election! Stay in your basement, Joe!)

Look at the art on her wall...obviously, she's a dumb bitch.

Trump will bring her to a debate as a guest. Biden should completely ignore her.

All her shit need to be exposed.

I love that Hunter was totally open in that New Yorker piece. There’s nothing they can mine from him. The crack use etc. are all out there. They’ll make up stuff, however.

[quote] “The media" isn't a monolith and many people in the media did support Biden

Who? Apart from surrogates, who in the mainstream media supported Biden? Name them.

You know how Democrats keep telling us Russia is fucking with us again but Republicans in the intelligence community won't talk about it? This woman is part of that. She's a loon who has changed her story a dozen times and she loves Putin. Put this bitch in the bin and forget it.

r43, here's a long list of people who have endorsed Biden. Making "the media" out to be the bad guy is pretty Trumpian

The media didn't support Biden--they proclaimed his candidacy "over" when he lost Iowa and New Hampshire with headlines like "What Went Wrong?". Then, when it all turned around in South Carolina, he was celebrated as a success. I loved the look on Bernie Bros faces when he swept.

"The media" isn't a monolith.

R45, dumbass, did you even look at the Wikipedia page?

Where are the media figures? Jennifer Rubin, Max Boot, Meghan McCain? That’s nothing: not one self-identified liberal journalist or opinion writer. A bunch of never Trumpers do not represent the mainstream media.

Look at the coverage of Biden in the Times, Daily Beast, New York, Slate, Altantic, etc.: all the fucking contemporary mainstream media hates him because he won and not one of their progressive favorites.

Retard.

r48, maybe when you graduate from tenth grade you can think of insults more clever than "retard"

R47, when someone says “the media,” they’re not talking about Mother Jones, Parade, or Fox: they mean the mainstream outlets consumed by college-educated metropolitan, typically cosmopolitan, populations.

It’s like saying “The Ivy League aren’t the only good schools “ after someone says “He has a shitty education: no Ivy League man here.” Truly an ignorant oursider doesn’t know that the latter was using “Ivy League” figuratively. Jesus.

God, these threads are infested by flyovers.

R49, ok, Boomer retard.

Clearly I’m correct, and all you can do is get meta. Did you have to google Max Boot and Jennifer Rubin? No doubt you know who Meghan McCain is: retards love daytime television.

Everyone believes that liar regarding Cavanaugh. This woman is a hell of a lot more credible that that Bitch was.

I'm not a "boomer" or a retard but you sound just as dumb as any Trumpster. I bet Trump loves calling people "retard"

I think the retard replied, but I block retards lol.

I block uneducated losers who can't think of a insult better than "retard"

So I'll be blocking you.

[quote] My prediction. Hillary will be named VP.

[quote] We need to be consistent with these kind of things. Biden needs to unseal his records and let justice play out.

[quote] Joe should personally address this.

[quote] Smearing is a weird word in this case.

Your trolling is very "consistent."

0/10

How about they’re both not credible but that didn’t stop people from defending blasé ford to the end of the earth.

OP. That piece is how the Biden campaign should be handling this attempted smear. I don’t know who the fuck Biden’s Director of Communications is, but I would have done a much better job than they’re doing. First, links dismantling this lying bitch’s credibility should be all over Twitter by now.

r55, please don’t feed that troll. Notice how it insists upon using insults to make a point. It literally cannot communicate on your level, even when it wants to. Also, please count the number of posts you two racked up. It’s derailing this thread because you are co-signing.

And r55, if you continue to respond to the troll, I can only assume that you too are a troll. We must remain vigilant and consistently exorcise this site of trolldom.

There needs to be a credible investigation by law enforcement, not by any fake gumshoe journalist.

r60, sure. Or we can just let this play out. I’m not sweating it. 42 victims to 1? Joe will be fine.

Rose McGowan got naked in a tub with a movie producer. Her pussy didn’t eat itself. She’s a borderline personality revisionist historian.

Blasey fords testimony was eviscerated but we were told it was not meant to hold up in court and kavanaugh was just having a job interview. Public opinion was all that mattered. We were told we needed more investigation. If the legal standard didn’t apply to kavanaugh then why is reade being totally dismissed outright. Do people even bother pretending to be impartial?

This woman has no credibility: her story keeps changing as do the stories of some of the people she supposedly told. So many things don’t add up. Her tweets and posts/comments about Putin make her seem crazy.

Seriously, what is up with the Putin shit? Why did she start loving him all of a sudden? Is she on Russia's payroll?

[quote] Oh stop blaming women who step forward. If you want Biden, vote for him but don't dismiss her allegations. Just vote for him. Don't cover your guilt by trying to convince others that his accuser is lying.

[quote] Pete with a beard HOT HOT HOT -- FLAMING GORGEOUS HOT

[quote] R1 They don't need to ignore the Castro comment but they need to report on it == what Bernie was actually saying -- and not framing it as "Bernie supported Castro" which wasn't the case. It's how the media chooses to frame candidate's comments that is so very misleading. And R3 I haven't seen/heard the 'ripping Pete' comments on CNN/MSNBC other than they are trying to build some kind of racial wall around the guy. The media is making much more of Pete's relationship with minorities. If it's so bad, why don't they have a dozen or more minority individuals among their talking heads? Out of the entire country, you'd think they could find hundreds to speak poorly of Pete. But they can't.

[quote] Democrats Coalescing Is A Great Thing, as Amy and Pete Endorse Biden Oh fuck. Not Biden.

why is it important for those who don't believe her to shit on her? Why is it important for those that do believe her to shit on Biden?

This happened 30 years ago. We will never know what happened. The only thing this situation would possibly do is inspire other victims to come forward (hopefully with more corroborating evidence than she has). That doesn't seem to be happening.

But seriously, i dont understand why people keep pushing this to hurt Biden or attack her credibility.

r65 is a troll, disregard it.

r63, once upon a time, I strove to be impartial. No longer. I don’t have to play pretend-games with the GOP nor give fuel to this fire they are trying to ignite. I don’t have to pretend to have the ethical high ground or a moral argument. See, that’s kind of what happens when a leader and a political party literally nuke all of our American values and standards. They want to play dirty. Ok, we play. You give me one good goddamn reason I shouldn’t just take Joe’s side simply because I want to. I want to win. I no longer give a fuck about being “right” or “consistent”. In fact, as I read those two words, they seem remarkably quaint.

If there is any truth to this story (there isn’t) let the GOP kill our guy. Why would you willingly participate in handing Trump a second term, huh? I mean, how do I put this delicately.....are you devoid of any intelligence, any historical context, or even an ounce of street smarts? Have you never had your ass kicked? Have you ever kicked someone else’s ass? I’ve done both. This is a fucking fight. The GOP intend to win by any and all means — so I fight back. I look the other way. Easy!

Under normal circumstances and conditions, my response to this would be different. This time, however, is the exception to the rule. You know, like how Rethugs made an exception for Trump’s assaults? Or ignored the evidence from the impeachment process? Or how they made an exception for Kavanaugh? Or bailing out big corporations? I could keep going. My response to this story is exactly what it should be — nothing. If you can’t respond to why you want to die on this hill, then you must be a troll too.

And of course, Hannity is pushing this story like crazy. Chris Hayes had a great story about fox news and the lies they tell about Covid. He basically called fox news watchers morally bankrupt and psychopaths. Great piece today.

[quote] There needs to be a credible investigation by law enforcement into which billionaire is paying her, not by any fake gumshoe journalist. Is she being paid in rubles or dollars? Because we know that she is a con artist and she has left a trail of lies and scams; where ever she's gone.

Fixed!

Of course every troll with an almost nonexistent post history is here to push this bullshit along.

Investigation! HA

Republicans have lied and cheated. Over and over again they have shitted on the US Constitution and ignored the rule of law and whatever democratic norms and procedures did not suit their fancy. Collins and Murcowski pushed Franken out of the senate. Then Collins turned around and voted for Kavenaugh and had the nerve to give a grand speech justifying her bullshit. Murkowski's vote wasn't needed and her seat is in jeopardy. Therefore, McConnell gave her an out. The Republican Party is over flowing with "dark" money, probably Russian. They have no respect for this country, nor our constitution, nor the American people. A con artist with a long history of cons and a history of praising Putin, decides to accuse Biden of touching her Vagina. This has the Republicans written all over it. It stinks.

If they believe that we are going to sit back and fall for their bullshit. They are in for a rude awakening. And this "Every woman should be believed" bullshit needs to end. Every woman should not be believed. Being born with a vagina doesn't mean that you are not a liar or a con artist. And if you have a documented history of lies, fraud and cons. Then your credibility is shot. I have a vagina so you have to believe me. Ridiculous nonsense.

[quote] This happened 30 years ago. We will never know what happened.

It would help if Biden would make a statement under oath of exactly what he did. We don’t know yet how much of a disagreement there is between her account and his.

[quote] The Smearing of Joe Biden: Why His Accuser Tara Reade is Not Credible

Exactly in line with the talking points sent out by the Biden campaign.

While Joe Biden has remained publicly silent about a sexual assault allegation made against him, his presidential campaign has sought to coordinate and unify Democratic messaging on the matter, advising surrogates earlier this month to say that the allegation “did not happen.”

The Biden campaign circulated talking points among top Democratic supporters shortly after the New York Times published a story earlier this month about the allegation by Tara Reade, a former staff assistant in Biden’s Senate office who says he assaulted her in 1993.

With good news and bad, talking points are standard fare on presidential campaigns. In substance, the private guidance largely hews to the sole public statement on the matter from Biden’s deputy campaign manager, Kate Bedingfield.

But the messaging shows that while Biden has stayed quiet on the allegations on the eve of his nomination, aides were taking the claims seriously enough behind the scenes to coordinate messaging among other Democrats to try to cast the matter as one that’s been thoroughly vetted and determined to be unfounded.

“Biden believes that all women have the right to be heard and to have their claims thoroughly reviewed,” the talking points read, according to a copy sent to two Democratic operatives. “In this case, a thorough review by the New York Times has led to the truth: this incident did not happen.”

“Here’s the bottom line,” they read. “Vice President Joe Biden has spent over 40 years in public life: 36 years in the Senate; 7 Senate campaigns, 2 previous presidential runs, two vice presidential campaigns, and 8 years in the White House. There has never been a complaint, allegation, hint or rumor of any impropriety or inappropriate conduct like this regarding him — ever.”

Democrats are in an increasingly precarious position as reporters assess Reade’s allegation. By any measure of the #MeToo movement that has seen the Democratic Party embrace “believe women” as a mantra, Reade, 56, has provided a serious account, disputed by Biden’s campaign and former senior staffers who worked in his office in 1993 but corroborated in part by people she told about the incident in the 1990s.

Since news outlets began to investigate her claims, Biden has participated in more than a dozen television interviews and virtual fundraisers but has not addressed Reade’s allegation himself.

The guidance to top Democrats, according to a copy of the talking points sent to two people, cast Biden as a lifelong “fierce advocate for women” and the claims as unequivocally untrue, leaning heavily on the April 12 report by the New York Times outlining the allegations by Reade.

Biden’s campaign’s talking points say the Times story served as proof that Reade’s allegation “did not happen” — but the story did not conclude this, nor did it conclude that an assault definitively did happen.

r72 Why the hell would he do that? Who exactly would that satisfy other than Fox News viewers? That is insane. Nobody has asked him to speak under oath. There is no case involved. I'm sure at some point, he will give a blanket denial.

[quote] It would help if Biden would make a statement under oath of exactly what he did. We don’t know yet how much of a disagreement there is between her account and his.

He issued a denial and we know that Reade That is enough. What you want is for Biden to help feed this, give it legitimacy.

[quote] Democrats Will Have To Answer Questions About Tara Reade.

We have answered. I answer is: Reade has a well documented history of fraud and we don't believe her. Fuck her and the so-called "journalist" working overtime to turn this into Hillary's emails. The media is largely responsible for Trump's win in 2016. They have yet to take responsibility and they continue to do all of the same things that got Trump elected. They are equally complicit in the death and destruction caused by this administration. It is obvious to anyone with a brain that this is being pushed harder because Biden is taking the lead in the polls, in crucial swing states.

The media can publish endless stories about emails. They have no problem with being baited by Republicans and allowing Republicans to control the narrative about Democrats. Yet they just cant bring themselves to call the man who has told 1000 lies a LIAR. They cant bring themselves to call Trump a racist, regardless of how many racist things he says, how many racist policies he pushes, regardless of how many racists he hires. The President of the United States suggested that ingesting household disinfectants and shining UV light on your body = a cure for Coronavirus. And the media continues to cover him, like any other president.

The Media is Going to Have to Answer for TRUMP! The owe us, not the other way around.

All media who make this a thing are the enemy to me. I’ll cancel all my fucking subscriptions if it comes to that. I’m fucking sick of this bullshit. The neurotic fucks in the media need to incur some costs for undermining our democracy.

Even WaPo, R76?

Damn. she looks like Harvey Fierstein

This got Trumpstink ALL over it.

I don’t believe her and I don’t think that I have to believe every person who comes forward with abuse allegations.

Also, if It was verified that Biden used to kick children with metastatic cancer, I'd still vote for him over Trunk.

[quote]I’m sick of this deranged tramp making headlines and wish Joe Biden would more forcefully defend himself against her allegation.

The metoo movement has made this impossible. The metoo movement is set up so that any defense is looked upon as not allowing a woman to be heard. Remember, according to the movement, every woman has the right to be heard and believed. And, now it's being weaponized.

[quote] I don’t think that I have to believe every person who comes forward with abuse allegations.

Then your're against MeToo?

I had a woman accuse me of sexual harassment about 20 years ago when I was her supervisor. She was lazy and knew I wasn't happy with her performance. When I went to HR to be interviewed I asked them if they wanted to talk to my boyfriend. It was not a fun experience because I had tried to help her rather than keep a paper trail. It's absurd to think that by not acknowledging every claim you're against #metoo.

R83, please fuck off with your reverse psychology. Not everyone who claims to be a victim of abuse is actually a victim of abuse. Sometimes people lie.

I think that everyone who states that they were abused should be listened to, but that doesn’t mean I have to believe every story especially when there are political reasons for people’s accusations a la Franken or Joe Biden.

I mostly agree with you R82, but what you failed to mention is that #MeToo only goes after low hanging fruit like Al Franken and Joe Biden. Meanwhile, the real sexual predator in the White House goes about his daily business, untouched and unscathed. Perhaps Democrats and others should do what Trump and the Republicans do and just say "go fuck yourselves"

[quote] that doesn’t mean I have to believe every story

R52: This right here is the Nazi talking point. Even though it's the total inverse, Ford had TONS more evidence that KAVANAUGH (learn to spell, moron) humped her in a drunken fashion. Until Squee got hot and wanted to hump Kavanaugh's tight white ass, allowing Ford to get the hell out of there (why does no one talk about the homoerotic implications of Squee's involvement?). This woman has NOTHING to back up anything she is claiming about Biden.

But keep reversing everything, Nazi troll. No one believes you. Oh and your inability to spell your judicial crush's last name reveals you to be the dip shit your are. Kiss, kiss.

What a slut.

Squee?

Well... It looks like people ARE coming forward to corroborate that she did disclose this back in the 90s.

Some politicos weather it, some don't. *Shrug*

One friend said in an interview she didn't even remember that she had been told about it in the 1990s until Tara Reade called her in January to talk about it, and Reade's brother was also coached by the Current Affairs guy. Neither of these "corroborative" stories are reliable. And the Larry King recording can't be officially traced back to her mother.

I don't see any reason to believe that she truly disclosed this in any meaningful way, only that she told people a story back in the 1990s, one that apparently changed per her own brother.

[quote]It looks like people ARE coming forward to corroborate that she did disclose this back in the 90s.

Translation:. People with an agenda (political, 15 minutes of Fame etc) are coming forward with a lie. Again, the timing is suspect.

[quote]And the Larry King recording can't be officially traced back to her mother.

Even if it was her mother, she said nothing damning about Biden. The call was so vague that it could've been anything from not happy that she had to work a cocktail party because Biden thought she had nice legs to she wasn't happy at being fired by the office manager for misappropriating paper clips.

R87, I must change my opinion because of a VICE article?

I will not believe anyone just because someone tells me to. I’m not a Trump voter.

If I'm reading this right, McHugh's interview with LaCasse says Reade didn't tell her about it in 1993, but rather mentioned it in 1996.

Also weird is that LaCasse said in her interview that she and Reade bonded because they were single mothers but Reade was married at the time.

Aaannd a very weird thing about Reade's husband Tate is that she claims the FBI told her they took his DNA because he was a person of interest in missing women's cases? Does the FBI really reveal info like that?

This person thinks Tara's tweets sound "Russian" but I think she sounds troubled, not like a Russian asset.

Tara on March 3rd saying "wait for it" re: a closer look at Biden. Clearly she was planning this revelation already by then, weeks before she came forward at the end of March.

[quote]Democrats are in an increasingly precarious position as reporters assess Reade’s allegation.

Not really, particularly given what we have seen since the accusation first surfaced. The preponderance of evidence suggests that there is nothing there and that this will disappear soon, no matter how much our resident trolls want it to stick.

[quote] Yes her story keeps progressing. First it was unwanted glances. Then it was he touched her hair. Then it turned into “sexual assault”

Yes, it does seem like a progression of what she was willing to divulge.

I'm someone that is open minded when it comes to victims, unless there's something suspicious going on. I don't automatically believe all victims, but I don't automatically discredit them just because it's a guy I like, admire, or is famous, because a lot of abusers are good at what they do.

That said, this woman has been very suspicious. I don't think we need to discredit other victims to see the conflict in stories with her in particular. Until I hear something substantial, there's no reason for media to go nuts with this, other than to attack Biden.

No matter how much One dislikes kavanaugh , it’s hard to believe no one called out the absurdity it was precisely because something like this would be coming. The Woman angrily shouting at Jeff Flake in the elevator was obviously a plant. And then Alyssa Milanos looking steely in the background during kavanaughs testimony. The pivot to kavanaughs moderate drinking when the facts didn’t bear out. .The whole thing was so embarrassing and obviously orchestrated I can’t believe that people didn’t think it would backfire and be weoponized in the future.

Like all the shit they threw at Hillary. Which the media took the bait on and became so fixated on. This too will be revealed to be Republican bullshit.

Why would we believe that Putin or Trump or any other Republican is not financing this? Who are these idiots who continue to pretend that there is anything that Republicans or Putin won’t do to maintain power. They are overtly corrupt. They say fuck you to the constitution and any other laws right in front of our faces. Yet we’re still pretend that they are going to play by the rules and they just aren’t capable of paying this woman off. Oh that’s right she has a vagina so we have to believe whatever she says, despite her history of fraud.

The problem with any movement, including MeToo, is that you have to have an easy message to convey. You can't say "believe the 95% of women who are telling the truth" because that's not clear and concise. But none of the women I know truly believe all women all the time no matter what. Everyone knows that there are a few examples of people who lie about sexual attacks, and those examples get amplified because they're part of a bigger news story, or because someone with an agenda can manipulate the accusation to their benefit, or sometimes because some MRA hears the story and goes nuts spamming the internet with it as proof that "all women are liars."

The fact that the Sanders stans are tweeting "if you believed Blasey-Ford then you HAVE to believe Reade, and if you don't believe Reade that means you hate all women" shows just how easy it is to weaponize the idea that women should be believed. They should, but like everyone else regardless of gender and regardless of the crime, they should be believed WITHIN REASON. Most women aren't lying. Occasionally, someone is.

Where's my justice?

[quote] No matter how much One dislikes kavanaugh , it’s hard to believe no one called out the absurdity it was precisely because something like this would be coming. The Woman angrily shouting at Jeff Flake in the elevator was obviously a plant. And then Alyssa Milanos looking steely in the background during kavanaughs testimony. The pivot to kavanaughs moderate drinking when the facts didn’t bear out. .The whole thing was so embarrassing and obviously orchestrated I can’t believe that people didn’t think it would backfire and be weoponized in the future.

“Weaponized in the future“, Really? As if we didn’t know that there is anything that is beneath Republicans. As if Collins and Murkowski hadn’t already “weaponized” metoo against Al Franken. It doesn’t matter what Democrats do or don’t do. Republicans are going to lie, cheat and steal. They are always going to take the low rode, because that is who they are. So do we expect for them to not be the corrupt liars and thieves that they are? No. Do we expect trolls like you to not show up and defend them? No.

[quote] Ford had TONS more evidence that KAVANAUGH (learn to spell, moron) humped her in a drunken fashion

Exactly! And there were also others who had allegations against him. Julie Swetnick said he was present while she was GANG RAPED in college. He is fucking scum. To see all these fucking trolls online say "If Ford was believed with less evidence, why not Reade?" is a detestable strawman argument.

When Kavanaugh’s lifetime term is up; then come back to us with your Susan Collins concerns.

The Bernie Bros (but not Bernie himself) were relishing Tara Reade's allegations days ago. They were even posting on here with comments like "this will never be in mainstream news". Fucking morons--it has been reported in politico AND Fox News extensively so far. And that's just the tip of the iceberg. Reality isn't their strong suit so I'm not too surprised. But it does piss me off when people on here give these people the time and day.

[quote]As if Collins and Murkowski hadn’t already “weaponized” metoo against Al Franken.

They didn't. Kirstin Gillbrand was the ring leader of this movement. She's the one who organised all the Senate women and it's the reason she will never hold office outside of New York.

[quote] They didn't. Kirstin Gillbrand was the ring leader of this movement. She's the one who organised all the Senate women and it's the reason she will never hold office outside of New York.

They did! They along with Gillibrand.

They were part of the gaggle of women, r111, but all blame rests with Gillibrand. Gillibrand was the ring leader, and at the time was very happy about her efforts.

R102: Are you seriously going to re-litigate the Drunk Humper affair again? And newsflash, Nazi, you won anyway on that front. You got a Falangist Drunk Humping Boy on the Supreme Court for the next 30 years. What exactly are you cunting off about again? That's right, nothing. SIT DOWN AND SHUT UP.

Reade is nothing like the Ford case and the reality of what ole Bart did to her. There is nothing to back Reade up. (I still want to know why Squee jumped on Bret. That alone merits investigation. They had to be doing each other but wanted a girl in the room so it wasn't "gay").

At the same time, since none of this mattered before, it doesn't now. So thank you for supporting Joe Biden for President. Welcome to the movement sweetie!

If you are a defense attorney and you have no verifiable alibi, you have to try convince people that the sexual assault victim is a slut or is crazy. Obviously, that’s underway, but Democrats have to decide how far they are willing to use that.

[quote] What exactly are you cunting off about again?

I thought women didn’t use that word.

^ Bullshit.

He's an old man and she hasn't any diva attitude. So, nobody here cares.

WHET those "elevator girls"? They were fearless.

I think one person is dominating this thread, the tone is so similar in each post.

Look at Chris Cillizza's dumb article on CNN, trying to drag Biden down. Again. They love their drama: it got Cheeto elected. They want more Cheeto, for ratings, clicks, and ad rates.

If real Democrats don't fight back, this is going to be Franken on an apocalyptic scale. All because they didn't get their beloved Bernie or Warren as the Democratic candidate, and/or fear being called biased.

Don't drag Warren into this. This is pure "Bernie or bust" shit. Sanders once again having his surrogates do his dirty work for him while he sits back pretending to be oblivious as to what's going on.

R119: Yeah, a Nazi pig who is OBSESSED with false equivalency and keeps linking to Murdoch's New York Compost of hate and lies. Just a pathetic loser.

More mainstream media: Sara Jones in New York today. I'm unsubscribing.

R121, I'm just saying that some journalists who were all about Warren (probably a plurality of political journalists at the top outlets, more than Bernie's level of support this time around cf. 2016) are pissed off about Biden winning the nomination, and they're on the attack. I didn't say Warren is in on it: she's almost certainly not.

R120, all Dems have to do is point to the many more accusations against Trump

R124 I don't think it's a lot of Warren supporters either. It's that small "Bernie or Bust" contingent that's been spreading this story and got the BidenDropOut hashtag going on Twitter over the weekend.. Because who did they want to replace him? Sanders.

[quote]all Dems have to do is point to the many more accusations against Trump

Their fault was in throwing Franken to the wolves. They wanted so bad to be the "morally right" party at that moment that they forced him to step down without due process and without even letting his voters have any input. And they most certainly should have stated that if Franken had resigned than 45 had to as well, given that he had ten times the accusations.

It shouldn't be a surprise to anyone that they were going to try pulling this with Biden eventually, with the help of the usual "leftists" of course.

r126, no one "forced" him to step down and "due process" only applies to court cases. That said, I think at least some of the accusations against him were dubious, one of the women who came forward was a Trumpster

The OP picture looks like a crazed Kathy Najimi.

Maybe Joe wants to defend himself and speak up about this but Jill won't let him because of his notorious stumbles and gaffes.

Cover story in the Times just put. Metoo legends Lerer and Ember. They’re out for blood. The Times is going to earn the praise from Cheeto that they’re so desperate for. Democracy will die and the Times won’t care: just another story to cover.

Just *out

Or maybe, R129, given your posting history, you're just an ignorant troll desperate for attention.

Guess which one of us has evidence for their suppositions?

Kirstin Gillibrand supports Joe Biden. I think Reade's story and metoo as we know it have just come to an end.

[quote]Interesting that right wing sites are using older pictures of her when she was quite stunning and left wing sites are using current pictures where she looks like a hag.

Are independent sites using pictures of her when she is middle-aged, attractive but just a bit frumpy?

Of course they are smearing Biden. They tried it first with the Hunter Biden shit, which led to impeachment. Did we think they were going to stop there?

She's gross and is a nutcase

It looks like the Bernie Bros are planning on doing what they did in 2016.

I know the vast majority are going to vote for the nominee but WTF is wrong with that 32 that is either unsure or voting for Trump?

The people using the Biden campaign talking points seem to be getting more and more shrill. The boat must be taking water.

It's too early for that kind of poll, R137, as emotions are still too high from Sanders' failed campaign. Check back in October to see if they still feel that way.

It's the other way around, R139, but you already knew that. The people desperate to smear Biden are desperately trying to come up with something, anything, that will stick. And, so far, they are utterly failing.

Here is Tara Reade when she was younger. Reminds me of Hillary Shephard.

Some examples of this link in this thread

Losing focus. Looks don't matter. Elderly and disabled women get raped and assaulted all the time. Attacking her looks doesn't do Biden favors either. The facts should be good enough without making Democrats sound hypocritical. She's not credible as of yet and that's what really counts with this.

She looks like a young Leif Garrett, r142.

R145 Both were very good looking. Something must have happened to her to let herself go like that. Sexual abuse victims and drug addicts lose their looks pretty fast.

[quote] [R145] Both were very good looking. Something must have happened to her to let herself go like that. Sexual abuse victims and drug addicts lose their looks pretty fast.

Fast? You call 30 yrs fast. Do you look exactly like you did 30 yrs ago. She looks her age and like most fat Americans her age.

R147 She's only 49. Still relatively young.

[quote] [R147] She's only 49. Still relatively young

She looks like a 50 yr old obese woman.

Has Blasey Ford spoken up about this? I know Juanita Broderick has.

r9, did you read the article? Why would you think this?

Because he made up his mind without bothering to learn the facts of either case, R151, since he got the details on both completely wrong.

r29, she isn't credible.

Joe has spoken. He denied this happened.

Trolls are working overtime.

Tara Reade looks like the Kathy Bates character in Misery.

No one believed this cunt but those rethugs masquerading as liberal bernie bitches../

r52, you just blew your hand.

R155 = Boris pretending not to be and trying to drive wedge bt Biden / Bernie supporters. Nice try asshole

[quote]Joe has spoken. He denied this happened.

His campaign released a statement.

Biden hasn't said a word.

NY Times and Washington Post who defended him are now saying tonight that he needs to make a personal statement.

The story would not be where it is had he just come out a few days back and denied it himself.

Obama addressed the stupid certificate garbage. Warren addressed the Native American shit. This is what politicians do. They have to deal with garbage sometimes. So you suck it up and deal with it.

He could legitimately say he doesn't remember that ever happening at this point.

r158, If someone said stuff about you that you know is false, why would you bother. As it continues to grow steam then you might want to speak up and shut it down. I imagine he will do that if it continues to be an issue.

Suck what up and deal with what? I looked into it. I read the information and I don't find it credible. I have nothing to deal with.

[QUOTE] He could legitimately say he doesn't remember that ever happening at this point.

Saying he “doesn’t remember” will just add more fuel to the fire. He needs to say it never happened.

[quote] Warren addressed the Native American shit.

That's not a good example.

Biden should not address this, he will just make it worse. Better to ignore it and stay in the basement while Trump goes on TV sounding like an idiot.

"they" had 12 years to bring this shit up. He was in office for 8 years, there is nothing to discuss or deny.

Either Trump will win in November or Biden will. After 3 yrs of Trump and Republicans throwing the US constitution, every rule, every tradition and norm out of the window. After a corrupt election and the most corrupt administration in modern history. After everything that the media helped create. The media is back to tell us what Democrats “owe us.” Back to tell us what is the correct and decent thing that Democrats must do or about what we must care?

I’m not sure which one is more destructive, the media or Trump and the Republicans. They are both cancerous forces.

[quote]He needs to say it never happened.

He did.

Republicans will looked at with about as much disdain as Nazi Germany when the Trump era ends. Congrats to them for hooking their wagons to this fucking tool

I’m sorry but if some employee of mine came out saying I jammed my fingers in his ass at work while I was running for President 30 years later and I know I didn’t do it, you couldn’t stop me from running to the nearest camera and unequivocally denying it ever happened. I’d want my supporters to hear it directly from me. It’s quite confounding why Joe Biden won’t do the same. I don’t care what his advisers are telling him; they work for him, not the other way around.

I can’t fucking stand it when campaigns allow open wounds to fester.

R168, he's denied it, through his campaign. Even if he did what you ask, how would that possibly make a difference? You really think that's going to accomplish anything?

Nope. He was VPOTUS for 8 years, you people shoulda dredged this up back then when you were accusing Obama of being "foreign born".

[QUOTE] Even if he did what you ask, how would that possibly make a difference? You really think that's going to accomplish anything?

Are you kidding me? It makes a big goddamn difference. We’re talking about sexual assault here, not budgetary numbers for the next fiscal year. If some woman accuses you of jamming your fingers in her fuckbox and you didn’t do it, you come out and say that bitch is lying!

OP, it's not going away. Whether or not it's true, the videos of Biden touching women and children in a creepy manner are everywhere. That, on top of everyone believing he has dementia is going to sink him. Yes, I know, Trump had a background that was way worse, but Americans have become numb. Americans are authoritarian by nature and always gravitate towards them. They will either vote for Trump or that Libertarian shithead running. And no, I don't believe Bernie had a shot. Biden wasn't chosen by the DNC either. America is not a left wing country. They vote based on personality and looks more than anything. Trump has allowed them to be the bigoted shitheads they are, Trump still wins on immigration and taxes. Democrats have taken a hard left turn on those issues. Americans are angry right now, and that is the perfect environment for a Republican to come in and blame someone else, usually a minority. This even applies when the Republican is the reason why Americans are pissed up and up shit creek. Don't forget that Republicans shut down the government not even a decade ago and that same year were rewarded by voters with the keys to Congress. Americans like authoritarianism, and not the Democratic brand of it. They go for shitting on "the other", people they can look down on and make themselves look better in comparison. Right now its Mexicans and now the Chinese.

r171, most people don't believe it.

Warren addressed the Native American shit two years after it started and she didn't do a really good job of it, either.

So imagine you are a U.S. Senator who's been in office for 20 years. Are you going to risk your career to molest a (dog faced) employee in a public hallway in a crowded building with security cameras all around?

Several people have attested she never filed a complaint. She can't recall exactly when and where this happened. She can't recall any details. She's a leftist ideologue was got pissed her candidates lost. Like most Bros, she can't accept that, so she thinks she can knock Biden off so Bernie can ascend the throne. Ain't. Gonna. Happen.

[quote]Are you kidding me? It makes a big goddamn difference. We’re talking about sexual assault here, not budgetary numbers for the next fiscal year. If some woman accuses you of jamming your fingers in her fuckbox and you didn’t do it, you come out and say that bitch is lying!

To be fair, that could go either way. It's like a defendant not taking the witness stand. You open yourself up to even more crap and give the story legs.

[quote]Are you going to risk your career to molest a (dog faced) employee in a public hallway in a crowded building with security cameras all around?

You're adorable. Men have done much worse than that, dear. Biden has been in office since the 70s.

r174, is she a Bernie supporter? We know she loves Putin.

[quote] most people don't believe it.

Or put another way

[quote]if some employee of mine came out saying I jammed my fingers in his ass at work while I was running for President 30 years later and I know I didn’t do it, you couldn’t stop me from running to the nearest camera and unequivocally denying it ever happened. I’d want my supporters to hear it directly from me. It’s quite confounding why Joe Biden won’t do the same

His handlers won’t let him do that because the man can’t fucking speak. Every time he tries he ends up blurting out a garbled mess of gibberish.

Trump is repugnant. Biden is pathetic. I want someone ELSE. I don’t know who that might be (and no, I’m not a ‘Bernie bro.’) But damn, we should be able to do better than this.

My mother has dementia. I see the signs. It is will just get worse for him. He is hanging on by a thread. It is a sad situation all any way you slice it.

If Biden won’t deny he because he actually did it, that shows integrity.

[quote] Biden was dozing off during Hilary’s “endorsement”

In fairness, he had already read the script that had been handed to her.

[quote] We need to be consistent with these kind of things.

Biden needs to unseal his records and let justice play out.

[quote] Joe should personally address this.

[quote] Smearing is a weird word in this case.

[quote] I think one person is dominating this thread, the tone is so similar in each post.

[quote] Maybe Joe wants to defend himself and speak up about this but Jill won't let him because of his notorious stumbles and gaffes.

[quote] Has Blasey Ford spoken up about this? I know Juanita Broderick has.

[quote] He could legitimately say he doesn't remember that ever happening at this point.

[quote] My mother has dementia. I see the signs. It is will just get worse for him. He is hanging on by a thread. It is a sad situation all any way you slice it.

0/10

Trump being what he is, we may have reached the point where BIDEN could shoot someone on 5th Avenue and still get elected.

Why is R186 obsessed with my posts? It feels a little stalkerish. I have my opinions, you have yours. It is a message board. Kindly get over yourself.

r186 is obsessed with his own posts.

Our nation is in crisis, we have a mishandled pandemic and our economy is collapsing. We're once again facing double digit unemployment and a protracted recession. Yet the trolls are still screaming that the man, who won the electoral college by 70,000 votes from 3 states, (which faced great voter suppression), the man who 1/2 the country despises, and who went on national television and told the public that injecting Lysol will kill the corona virus, is unbeatable.

There were enough votes suppressed in Michigan and Milwaukee to swing both of those states. That's the real story that the media with which the media should be focused. They cover what they want to cover, not what is important or in the nation's best interests.

Here’s the thing. Use your energy to go write the NYT, WaPo, LA Times, etc. that if they continue to promote what is clearly a sham story, that you will make it your mission in life to convince as many people as possible to never give these publications they’d money. Talk money. Maybe unsubscribe — but let them know WHY.

[quote] you will make it your mission in life to convince as many people as possible to never give these publications they’d money.

Nice little newspaper you got here Sulzberger. Be a shame if something was to happen to it.

Ronald Reagan on his last day in office was more coherent and responsive than Joe Biden is today.

Nobody takes those newspapers seriously anymore, R189. Where have you been the last few years?

It's the debates that will do Biden in.

Just like Bernie was supposed to savage Biden in that last debate, r193?

When I see Jill appearing in television interviews with Joe, I'm reminded of Shari Lewis and Lambchop.

R194, Debating Bernie is not the same as debating Trump.

So what? Even if Joe comes out and says he grabbed someone by the pussy I’ll still vote for him.

Remember to Vote Blue. Any Dem will do.

[QUOTE] Debating Bernie is not the same as debating Trump.

You’re right, because Bernie is a far better debater than Trump.

The response to this is always this:

We will resume having fair investigations when your side is able to hold a fair investigation into Donald Trump and his sexual assaults on women. We will no longer pretend we are on a level playing field.

USAToday published an opinion columnist who was a federal prosecutor. He listed what he thought were things that made him skeptical about her claims.

Here's one example.

[quote]Missing formal complaint.

[quote] Reade told The Times she filed a written complaint against Biden with the Senate personnel office. But The Times could not find any complaint. When The Times asked Reade for a copy of the complaint, she said she did not have it. Yet she maintained and provided a copy of her 1993 Senate employment records.

[quote] It is odd that Reade kept a copy of her employment records but did not keep a copy of a complaint documenting criminal conduct by a man whose improprieties changed “the trajectory” of her life. It’s equally odd The Times was unable to find a copy of the alleged Senate complaint.

more at link.

R200, Wait . . . We're trusting the New York Times now?

[quote] We know she loves Putin.

Link.

Even so, it is reasonable to consider a 27-year reporting delay when assessing the believability of any criminal allegation. More significant perhaps, is Reade’s decision to sit down with a newspaper last year and accuse Biden of touching her in a sexual way that made her uncomfortable — but neglect to mention her claim that he forcibly penetrated her with his fingers.

As a lawyer and victims’ rights advocate, Reade was better equipped than most to appreciate that dramatic changes in sexual assault allegations severely undercut an accuser’s credibility — especially when the change is from an uncomfortable shoulder touch to vaginal penetration.

►Implausible explanation for changing story. When Reade went public with her sexual assault allegation in March, she said she wanted to do it in an interview with The Union newspaper in California last April. She said the reporter’s tone made her feel uncomfortable and "I just really got shut down” and didn't tell the whole story.

It is hard to believe a reporter would discourage this kind of scoop. Regardless, it's also hard to accept that it took Reade 12 months to find another reporter eager to break that bombshell story. This unlikely explanation damages her credibility.

Putin Love, From the USA Today opinion - r200

[quote] During 2017 when Reade was praising Biden, she was condemning Russian leader Vladimir Putin’s efforts to hijack American democracy in the 2016 election. This changed in November 2018, when Reade trashed the United States as a country of “hypocrisy and imperialism” and “not a democracy at all but a corporate autocracy.”

[quote] Reade’s distaste for America closely tracked her new infatuation with Russia and Putin. She referred to Putin as a “genius” with an athletic prowess that “is intoxicating to American women.” Then there’s this gem: “President Putin has an alluring combination of strength with gentleness. His sensuous image projects his love for life, the embodiment of grace while facing adversity.”

[quote] In March 2019, Reade essentially dismissed the idea of Russian interference in the 2016 American presidential election as hype. She said she loved Russia and her Russian relatives — and "like most women across the world, I like President Putin … a lot, his shirt on or shirt off.”

Then later, she denies she ever said this stuff. It was for a novel she was writing, or something. Just read the whole USAToday story above if you want some clarity on this.

►People who contradict Reade’s claim. After the alleged assault, Reade said she complained about Biden's harassment to Marianne Baker, Biden’s executive assistant, as well as to top aides Dennis Toner and Ted Kaufman. All three Biden staffers recently told The New York Times that she made no complaint to them.

And they did not offer the standard, noncommittal “I don’t remember any such complaint.” The denials were firm. “She did not come to me. If she had, I would have remembered her,” Kaufman said. Toner made a similar statement. And from Baker: “I never once witnessed, or heard of, or received, any reports of inappropriate conduct (by Biden), period." Baker said such a complaint, had Reade made it, "would have left a searing impression on me as a woman professional, and as a manager.”

►Memory lapse. Reade has said that she cannot remember the date, time or exact location of the alleged assault, except that it occurred in a “semiprivate” area in corridors connecting Senate buildings. After I left the Justice Department, I was appointed by the federal court in Los Angeles to represent indigent defendants. The first thing that comes to mind from my defense attorney perspective is that Reade’s amnesia about specifics makes it impossible for Biden to go through records and prove he could not have committed the assault, because he was somewhere else at the time.

For instance, if Reade alleged Biden assaulted her on the afternoon of June 3, 1993, Biden might be able to prove he was on the Senate floor or at the dentist. Her memory lapses could easily be perceived as bulletproofing a false allegation.

►The lie about losing her job. Reade told The Union that Biden wanted her to serve drinks at an event. After she refused, "she felt pushed out and left Biden's employ," the newspaper said last April. But Reade claimed this month in her Times interview that after she filed a sexual harassment complaint with the Senate personnel office, she faced retaliation and was fired by Biden’s chief of staff.

Leaving a job after refusing to serve drinks at a Biden fundraiser is vastly different than being fired as retaliation for filing a sexual harassment complaint with the Senate. The disparity raises questions about Reade’s credibility and account of events.

►Compliments for Biden. In the 1990s, Biden worked to pass the Violence Against Women Act. In 2017, on multiple occasions, Reade retweeted or “liked” praise for Biden and his work combating sexual assault. In the same year, Reade tweeted other compliments of Biden, including: “My old boss speaks truth. Listen.” It is bizarre that Reade would publicly laud Biden for combating the very thing she would later accuse him of doing to her.

►Rejecting Biden, embracing Sanders. By this January, Reade was all in for presidential candidate Bernie Sanders. Her unwavering support was accompanied by an unbridled attack on Biden. In an article on Medium, Reade referred to Biden as “the blue version of Trump.” Reade also pushed a Sanders/Elizabeth Warren ticket, while complaining that the Democratic National Committee was trying to “shove” Biden “down Democrat voters throats.”

Despite her effusive 2017 praise for Biden’s efforts on behalf of women, after pledging her support to Sanders, Reade turned on Biden and contradicted all she said before. She claimed that her decision to publicly accuse Biden of inappropriately touching her was due to “the hypocrisy that Biden is supposed to be the champion of women’s rights.”

You must ALWAYS believe the woman. But which woman (in r206)? The one making the complaint, or the women saying that they never got such a complaint?

Pivoting again this month, Reade said that she “did not support Putin, and that her comments were pulled out of context from a novel she was writing,” according to The Times. The quotations above, however, are from political opinion pieces she published, and she did not offer any other "context" to The Times.

Reade's writings shed light on her political alliance with Sanders, who has a long history of ties to Russia and whose stump speech is focused largely on his position that American inequality is due to a corporate autocracy. But at a very minimum, Reade's wild shifts in political ideology and her sexual infatuation with a brutal dictator of a foreign adversary raise questions about her emotional stability.

►Suspect timing. For 27 years, Reade did not publicly accuse Biden of sexually assaulting her. But then Biden's string of March primary victories threw Sanders off his seemingly unstoppable path to the Democratic nomination. On March 25, as Sanders was pondering his political future, Reade finally went public with her claim. The confluence of Reade’s support of Sanders, distaste for the traditional American democracy epitomized by Biden, and the timing of her allegation should give pause to even the most strident Biden critics.

►The Larry King call. Last week, new "evidence" surfaced: a recorded call by an anonymous woman to CNN's "Larry King Live" show in 1993. Reade says the caller was her mother, who's now deceased. Assuming Reade is correct, her mother said: "I’m wondering what a staffer would do besides go to the press in Washington? My daughter has just left there after working for a prominent senator, and could not get through with her problems at all, and the only thing she could have done was go to the press, and she chose not to do it out of respect for him."

As a prosecutor, this would not make me happy. Given that the call was anonymous, Reade’s mother should have felt comfortable relaying the worst version of events. When trying to obtain someone’s assistance, people typically do not downplay the seriousness of an incident. They exaggerate it. That Reade’s mother said nothing about her daughter being sexually assaulted would lead many reasonable people to conclude that sexual assault was not the problem that prompted the call to King.

Reade’s mother also said her daughter did not go to the press with her problem “out of respect” for the senator. I’ve never met a woman who stayed silent out of “respect” for the man who sexually assaulted her. And it is inconceivable that a mother would learn of her daughter’s sexual assault and suggest that respect for the assailant is what stands between a life of painful silence and justice.

The "out of respect" explanation sounds more like an office squabble with staff that resulted in leaving the job. Indeed, in last year's interview with The Washington Post, Reade laid the blame on Biden’s staff for “bullying” her. She also said, “I want to emphasize: It’s not him. It’s the people around him.”

►Statements to others. Reade’s brother, Collin Moulton, told The Post recently that he remembers Reade telling him Biden inappropriately touched her neck and shoulders. He said nothing about a sexual assault until a few days later, when he texted The Post that he remembered Reade saying Biden put his hand "under her clothes.”

That Reade’s brother neglected to remember the most important part of her allegation initially could lead people to believe he recounted his Post interview to Reade, was told he left out the most important part, and texted it to The Post to avoid a discussion about why he failed to mention it in the first place.

In interviews with The Times, one friend of Reade’s said Reade told her she was sexually assaulted by Biden. Another friend said Reade told her that Biden touched her inappropriately. Both friends insisted that The Times maintain their anonymity.

On Monday, Business Insider published an interview with a friend of Reade’s who said that in 1995 or 1996, Reade told her she was assaulted by Biden. Insider called this friend, Lynda LaCasse, the “first person to independently corroborate, in detail and on the record, that Reade had told others about her assault allegations contemporaneously.”

But Reade alleged she was assaulted in 1993. Telling a friend two or three years later is not contemporaneous. Legal references to a contemporaneous recounting typically refer to hours or days — the point being that facts are still fresh in a person's mind and the statement is more likely to be accurate.

The Insider also quoted a colleague of Reade’s in the mid-1990s, Lorraine Sanchez, who said Reade told her she had been sexually harassed by a former boss. Reade did not mention Biden by name and did not provide details of the alleged harassment.

In prior interviews, Reade gave what appeared be an exhaustive list of people she told of the alleged assault. Neither of the women who talked to Business Insider were on that list.

The problem with statements from friends is that the information they recount is only as good as the information given to them. Let’s say Reade left her job because she was angry about being asked to serve drinks or because she was fired for a legitimate reason. If she tried to save face by telling friends that she left because she was sexually assaulted, that’s all her friends would know and all they could repeat.

Prior statements made by a sexual assault victim can carry some weight, but only if the accuser is credible. In Reade’s case, the statements coming from her friends are only of value if people believe Reade can be relied on to tell the truth, regardless of the light in which it paints her.

►Lack of other sexual assault allegations. Last year, several women claimed that Biden made them uncomfortable with things like a shoulder touch or a hug. (I wrote a column critical of one such allegation by Lucy Flores.) The Times and Post found no allegation of sexual assault against Biden except Reade's.

It is possible that in his 77 years, Biden committed one sexual assault and it was against Reade. But in my experience, men who commit a sexual assault are accused more than once ... like Donald Trump, who has had more than a dozen allegations of sexual assault leveled against him and who was recorded bragging about grabbing women’s genitalia.

►What remains. There are no third-party eyewitnesses or videos to support Tara Reade’s allegation that she was assaulted by Joe Biden. No one but Reade and Biden know whether an assault occurred. This is typical of sexual assault allegations. Jurors, in this case the voting public, have to consider the facts and circumstances to assess whether Reade’s allegation is credible. To do that, they have to determine whether Reade herself is believable.

I’m still waiting for a link showing her love for Putin.

The media is currently publishing stories that include only the allegations, no critique, no mention of the contradictions nor the other issues with Reade and her story. For example if you read the current People Magazine article; you get her allegations this weeks update, nothing more.

[quote] I’m still waiting for a link showing her love for Putin.

►Love of Russia and Putin. During 2017 when Reade was praising Biden, she was condemning Russian leader Vladimir Putin’s efforts to hijack American democracy in the 2016 election. This changed in November 2018, when Reade trashed the United States as a country of “hypocrisy and imperialism” and “not a democracy at all but a corporate autocracy.”

Reade’s distaste for America closely tracked her new infatuation with Russia and Putin. She referred to Putin as a “genius” with an athletic prowess that “is intoxicating to American women.” Then there’s this gem: “President Putin has an alluring combination of strength with gentleness. His sensuous image projects his love for life, the embodiment of grace while facing adversity.”

In March 2019, Reade essentially dismissed the idea of Russian interference in the 2016 American presidential election as hype. She said she loved Russia and her Russian relatives — and "like most women across the world, I like President Putin … a lot, his shirt on or shirt off.”

And let's not forget . . .

"Agents say that, whether at the vice president’s residence or at his home in Delaware, Biden has a habit of swimming in his pool nude."

“Female Secret Service agents find that offensive."

“Biden likes to be revered as everyday Joe. But the reality is no agents want to go on his detail because Biden makes agents’ lives so tough.”

Anita Hill is still pissed at Joe's treatment of her during the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings.

[quote]Gillibrand was the ring leader, and at the time was very happy about her efforts.

The Dems were under the mistaken impression that they could win points by proving that their party would kick out members who behaved inappropriately, and that it would lead to citizens and the media calling for the GOP to do the same.

I don't know why so many in the DNC haven't accepted the fact that the media holds them to a different standard, but they do, thus the entire Franken episode was botched. They also failed to account for the fact that Franken wouldn't be able to get a fair hearing about the accusations because the Hill was swamped with the then-current Trump investigation, and wouldn't have time nor the interest to spend on Franken.

It's not just that Gillibrand pushed for it, it's that so many in the Senate went along with it. I get that it was still during the days they were disorganized after the 2016 election was stolen, but it was still a massive blunder.

For the last day or two, Reade has been going back and editing her blog posts to get rid of all the contradictions people have been pointing out for weeks.

[quote]Nope. He was VPOTUS for 8 years, you people shoulda dredged this up back then when you were accusing Obama of being "foreign born".

That's the thing, isn't it?

We have to believe that either the Obama vetting team missed this completely, or that they found it and didn't think it would hurt Biden.

We also have to believe that the Republicans, who pull out every dirty trick in the book, didn't find it themselves and try to use it in 2008 or 2012 or or 2019.

Reade and her neighbor try to explain this away by saying they forgot about it, but if they forgot about it, how serious was it?

I find it completely unbelievable that the Obama administration wouldn't find out about this when Biden was vetted. I call BS on her claim. All 12,000 of them.

I agree with this; I honestly don't know what to make of this whole thing: she seems like a loon, on the other hand, Christine Blasey Ford didn't seem all together either. But considering how risk averse Obama was, I can't imagine that he'd bring him on the ticket & keep him on the ticket if there was anything to this story that's been out there for years. Obama could have picked any number of candidates besides Joe & still been elected.

[quote] or that they found it and didn't think it would hurt Biden.

Boys will be boys

Fire Chris Hayes is trending on Twitter. He apparently said that we cannot believe Biden just because we like him. As if we are incapable at reading and evaluating the story. Chris and his fucking diarrhea of the mouth. He talks too fucking much. That is why I stopped watching his show.

What I found interesting was the non-profit Pregnant Mare Rescue who once employed Reade saying she'd stiffed them with tons of false bills and pocketed the money about 12 years ago, then ran off when exposed, saying she had to leave because of an abusive husband.

Running off and having to leave because of an abusive husband is what happened when she worked with Jack O'Connell in the 1990s, too.

And in that case she said the FBI told her all about their investigation into her ex who was a "person of interest" in "multiple missing persons cases" and none of that sounded plausible in the least.

Woody Allen fans will love this: Tara's dad wrote a skeevy erotic romance with a scene in a Russian strip joint (!) where a guy put his hands up a lady's skirt and fingered her without permission (!!) until she loved it.

If Biden were running against anyone BUT Trump, I’d be more willing to believe her. BUT Putin and Trump have really upped the game here. I’m not naively saying shit was rainbows and unicorns before obviously, but I think the past four years have really, really turned up the dirt in politics. They’ve made it much more tangible (I think that’s the word I’m looking for) to people who only had a passing glance at the logistics behind it. I avoided cable news for the longest until the 2016 campaign. I would keep myself updated via various websites, but I never consumed THIS much political news.

NOW I’m having slugfests under the IG comments of photos of cats and shit.

[quote]you just blew your hand

Pics please.

Trump is tweeting about Sweden LOL.

Is that woman is OP's linked picture Tara Reade?

R224 Thanks for sharing. This stuff is very damning.

If even WaPo and NYT are calling him out, he HAS to respond. Just get it over with. Like pulling a band-aid.

If even WaPo and NYT are calling him out, he HAS to respond.

Agreed; he needs to do a long form interview with 60 Minutes (like Bill Clinton) where he directly addresses the accusations; it won't die - after figuring out that the public gives 0 fucks about Beau Biden, they've now moved on with other pigshit to throw at Biden, but it clearly isn't going away either.

R231, you're way off here.

Biden already responded, first of all, and secondly, nothing about Beau Biden has been brought up. You mean Hunter. How could you get them confused?

There is no need for a "longform interview" at this point, not with the pandemic and everything else going on. The public reaction to Chris Hayes bringing it up has been largely negative, so the best thing to do is wait it out for a few days.

This is the predictable result of that incredibly absurd and exceptionally misguided notion that “we believe all survivors.” Really? Every single allegation, even those that have been completely fabricated for ulterior motives? Admittedly, those are likely very few, but those are also the most problematic when trying to establish a standard that applies in all cases.

[quote] Biden already responded

Link?

[quote] We will resume having fair investigations when your side is able to hold a fair investigation into Donald Trump and his sexual assaults on women.

[quote]Are you kidding me? It makes a big goddamn difference. We’re talking about sexual assault here, not budgetary numbers for the next fiscal year. If some woman accuses you of jamming your fingers in her fuckbox and you didn’t do it, you come out and say that bitch is lying!

No, I'm not kidding, and no, it won't make "a big goddamn difference." His campaign has denied it completely. Were Biden to say those exact words, it would not make one iota of difference. Our trolls here would continue to push the story until its stereotypical "15 minutes" is over.

[quote]If even WaPo and NYT are calling him out, he HAS to respond.

Nah, he really doesn't.

[quote]Agreed; he needs to do a long form interview with 60 Minutes

A "long form interview" to say that it never happened? Why on earth would he do that?

[quote]but it clearly isn't going away either.

This is minute 10 of 15 minutes. You have no idea whether it's going away or not. Absent anything new, yes, it will go away.

[quote]If even WaPo and NYT are calling him out, he HAS to respond.

Nah, he really doesn't.

[quote]Agreed; he needs to do a long form interview with 60 Minutes

A "long form interview" to say that it never happened? Why on earth would he do that?

[quote]but it clearly isn't going away either.

This is minute 10 of 15 minutes. You have no idea whether it's going away or not. Absent anything new, yes, it will go away.

Who’d finger that!

[quote]"we believe all survivors."

It's not so much "We believe all survivors" as it is "We believe all survivors should be taken seriously." You take it seriously, you do the due diligence, and you let the facts speak for themselves. The USA Today article linked above and here pretty firmly puts the stake in this story. It's been taken seriously, it's been investigated, and there is nothing there.

Like father, like son.

You mean, innocent of trumped-up charges, R241? I agree.

R241 does seem to have a problem with reality:

[quote]Ronald Reagan on his last day in office was more coherent and responsive than Joe Biden is today.

[quote]It's the debates that will do Biden in.

[quote]When I see Jill appearing in television interviews with Joe, I'm reminded of Shari Lewis and Lambchop.

[quote]Debating Bernie is not the same as debating Trump.

[quote]Wait . . . We're trusting the New York Times now?

[quote]And let's not forget . . . "Agents say that, whether at the vice president’s residence or at his home in Delaware, Biden has a habit of swimming in his pool nude." “Female Secret Service agents find that offensive." “Biden likes to be revered as everyday Joe. But the reality is no agents want to go on his detail because Biden makes agents’ lives so tough.”

[quote]Anita Hill is still pissed at Joe's treatment of her during the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings.

[quote]Like father, like son.

[quote] It's not so much "We believe all survivors" as it is "We believe all survivors should be taken seriously."

Is that MeToo's position?

They're covering this because there's so much clearly negative news on Cheeto, and they desperately feel a need to look "balanced": so take the accusations of a loon and try to legitimize them, never mind the consequences for democracy.

Cancelling the Times today.

There is no single "MeToo position," R244. It is, however, the only position that makes sense.

R244 I don’t think ford or reade are credible. The problem is when you apply different standards to similar accusations. Neither woman has to prove anything because people keep moving the goal posts. After kavanaughs overly passionate defense, critics pivoted by saying that he would not have remembered because he blacked out due to alcohol. In the case of Biden they’ll blame his dementia. Like a poster up thread said, the metoo movement is now dead and women will have a harder time getting people to listen to them. Unfortunately

[quote]It's not so much "We believe all survivors" as it is "We believe all survivors should be taken seriously."

The Achilles Heal of metoo is in identifying true survivors.

I'm not giving clicks to any news outlet that keeps pumping this bullshit. Unsubscribing to the Times, among others.

The Bernie bros were hoping this story would break and that everyone would suddenly then run to Bernie. That didn’t happen so now they’re furious. Anyone with a brain and two eyes can see this for what it is. It will be a non factor in the general because most people simply do not care.

I can't wait for a President Biden to instruct the FBI to go ahead and look for evidence regarding Reade's allegations, as in "You want this addressed, right? Here goes: FBI, go forth and do an objective investigation." I want them to dig up all they can about Reade.

The media need to be fucking humiliated for pushing this bullshit to feed their own neuroses. The truth will humiliate them. Biden should sue Reade for slander, and media outlets for libel, here because they're republishing defamation.

The media are necessary, but they need to have a greater self-awareness of how going out on a limb can damage democracy: they're not being responsible, and are actually making their own destruction by a reelected Trump more likely.

This woman is selling her shit all over town like she’s Meghan Markle or something. I’ve never seen someone talk about how their life was destroyed with a big smile on their face. This woman is clearly mentally sick and is loving all this attention.

[quote]I can't wait for a President Biden to instruct the FBI to go ahead and look for evidence regarding Reade's allegations, as in "You want this addressed, right? Here goes: FBI, go forth and do an objective investigation." I want them to dig up all they can about Reade.

Biden won't do this. Biden has a lot of empathy and I have a feeling he knows this women isn't well.

After extensive interviews with Tara Reade, The New Yorker’s Ronan Farrow and the New York Times’s Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey — all of whom won Pulitzer Prizes for their meticulous coverage of the 2017 Harvey Weinstein investigation — refused to report on her story, because there were too many inconsistencies and claims which could not be substantiated.

Let’s start off with the article Tara Reade herself wrote in 2009 praising her boss Joe Biden for sponsoring the Violence Against Women Act. It’s just one of dozens of postings she made praising Joe Biden prior to 2019:

Next, there is her former employer, who says she has papers and emails to prove Tara Reade stole from her charity:

Next, we have Reade claiming initially that Biden simply made her uncomfortable by touching her shoulders. She later changed her claim, stating he had complimented her legs. Finally, she upped the ante IMMEDIATELY AFTER BIDEN WAS NAMED THE DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE, claiming he JAMMED HIS FINGERS INTO HER IN THE SENATE HALLWAY.

Lastly, in 2018, Reade had been writing multiple gushing posts praising Vladimir Putin, some of which were actually written in Russian.

She based her bullshit on her father's novel.

Anyone giving this air, is a Russian Troll. Focus on Trump‘s decades long history of serial rape, including the rape of a minor. Stop feeding this bullshit. Block the trolls, ignore it and focus on the real crimes: Trump’s.

Text from the novel.

MSNBC needs to fire Chris Hayes just like they did Chris Matthews. He has to go.

R253, maybe. On the other hand, maybe others she mentioned in her story can sue for defamation: if she comes out and says something about the Biden staffers etc. who categorically deny this bullshit, they might be able to sue her for slander, and the media for libel by republication.

We need to get as vicious as Cheeto if we're going to survive.

[quote] Anyone giving this air, is a Russian Troll.

Does that include you, R256, who just bumped this thread with your post?

When Tara first came out she said she had issues with the office and not “the Senator”. The mother that called Larry King said that her daughter respected the senator. Tara said she didn’t come forward in 2008 because she liked Obama and wanted him to win. Now we’re supposed to believe that she’s a traumatized rape victim living in hell for 30 years? Give me a fucking break.

[4/15/20 analysis by Katty Kay (BBC):]

Will this hurt Biden's presidential bid? Probably not

It's possible that Tara Reade's accusation of sexual assault against Joe Biden could derail his campaign, but it seems unlikely. Here's why.

Americans already know about the "touchy feely-ness" of the former Vice President and they factored that in as they chose him to be their nominee. He put out a video saying he'd learned from #metoo that times have changed and that his history of rubbing women's shoulders, kissing their heads etc was not appropriate. Evidently, that was seen as apology enough by most primary voters.

An accusation of sexual assault is of course more serious but the criteria for judging whether someone is a sexual abuser is looking at a consistent story from the accuser and a pattern of behaviour in the accused. Ms Reade told different versions of her story to the New York Times and so far she is the only woman to accuse Biden of sexual assault. If no others emerge, Democrats may be inclined to believe their candidate over her.

Joe Biden is running against Donald Trump, who has been accused of sexual misconduct by some 25 women. That may not stop the President using it as an attack line (he's hinted at it before,) but it does diminish the credibility of the attack.

In the midst of this pandemic, almost no other news is breaking through. In a normal cycle this story would be getting a lot more attention in newspaper headlines and on cable TV. Today it barely registers. That's helpful for Biden.

The Democratic Party does hold itself to a higher standard on inclusivity of race and gender than the Republican Party does, so this accusation is uncomfortable. But this year, the standard that matters most to Democrats is getting Trump out of the White House. They believe Biden has the best shot at doing that.

R258, And replace him with a shirtless Ari Melber.

What happened that made her started loving Putin in 2018?

He does not have to respond. You voted for and doggedly support a person with dozens of rape allegations.

I can't stand Biden but was still planning to vote for him regardless. I mean - what choice is there? I was leaning towards believing her, too. I really have no problem believing almost any straight man would assault a woman if he thought he could get away with it. I believe I've seen polls to that effect.

Anyway, as I said, I was almost believing her, but then some weird information about her began to pile up. It seems she has accused multiple men of sexual assault including her father (who wrote a book with a sexual assault scene in it similar to the one she claims happened with Biden) so she's sounding less and less credible all the time.

These trolls are really getting desperate. No, Biden was not falling asleep during Hilary's endorsement, I just watched the whole thing. These trolls are taking screenshots of when Biden was looking down. Fuck these people.

[quote]It's the debates that will do Biden in.

And the town halls. Especially the town halls because they’ll be only Biden speaking, no Trump to distract from his incoherence. The last Biden town hall on CNN was some time last month and it was painful to listen to him flounder and blurt out mangled sentence fragments. I had to turn it off after a few minutes.

He did just fine in the town halls. The Trumpsters and Bernie Bros are out in full force

He'll do okay.

[quote] This lockdown has been a win/win for Biden. No public speaking, events, debates etc. for him to fuck up AND a platform for Trump to self-destruct (those disastrous press updates he insists on doing.) Joe and his campaign staff are praying it doesn’t end anytime soon (only 6 more months till the election! Stay in your basement, Joe!)

[quote] His handlers won’t let him do that because the man can’t fucking speak. Every time he tries he ends up blurting out a garbled mess of gibberish. Trump is repugnant. Biden is pathetic. I want someone ELSE. I don’t know who that might be (and no, I’m not a ‘Bernie bro.’) But damn, we should be able to do better than this.

[quote] And the town halls. Especially the town halls because they’ll be only Biden speaking, no Trump to distract from his incoherence. The last Biden town hall on CNN was some time last month and it was painful to listen to him flounder and blurt out mangled sentence fragments. I had to turn it off after a few minutes.

[quote] Now the WaPo is reporting the latest “developments:”

[quote]Apparent corroboration surfaced this week for elements of two accusations made by Biden’s former Senate aide Tara Reade, one involving harassment and the second a sexual assault. Biden has not commented on the allegations, but his campaign has denied them and pointed to his record on women’s rights and promotion of women in his offices.

[quote] Lynda LaCasse, who was one of Reade’s neighbors in California, where Reade moved after working for Biden, said in an interview with Business Insider published Monday that Reade told her in the mid-1990s that Biden had “put his hand up her skirt and he put his fingers inside her.”

[quote]Lorraine Sanchez, a former colleague of Reade’s in the office of a California state senator, also told the news outlet that Reade told her in the mid-1990s that she “had been sexually harassed by her former boss while she was in DC and as a result of her voicing her concerns to her supervisors, she was let go, fired.”

[quote] What’s their deal (WaPo)? Are they trying to help Trump win?

[quote] R4 The WaPo is “GOP thugs”?

[quote] R15 Biden is a fucking pathetic candidate, that’s for sure.

[quote] R18 So now the WaPo is a Bernie bro or a Russian troll? That’s why the thread was started, to speculate why they would pick it up and run with it if there was ‘nothing to it.’

[quote] No, R38, the stories keep coming back because the Washington Post prints them.

[quote] Again: the WASHINGTON POST published the latest Biden story. They’re the ones who are “pushing it.” Not “Bernie Bros” or “YMF-types.” The. Washington. Post. Go cry to them if you don’t like it.

0/20

Any attack on the victim or attempt to undermine her credibility is a non-starter. The analysis at r262 is interesting though. The alternative approach is to state Biden doesn’t have a history over time of sexual assault, and of course whataboutism.

I'd like to see Biden answer with a Trumpian answer - "She's not my type" - and then smile while mouthing 'grab em' by the pussy'

If they come out with proof it won't matter. The Rapist in Chief is the one who needs to go.

Defeat Hatred. Vote Democrat in 2020.

[quote] Any attack on the victim or attempt to undermine her credibility is a non-starter. The analysis at [R262] is interesting though. The alternative approach is to state Biden doesn’t have a history over time of sexual assault, and of course whataboutism.

No one is attacking her credibility. Her credibility is nonexistent, because of her own statements and her history of fraud. The public can't destroy what doesn't exist. Reade herself destroyed her own credibility. Pointing that out is not an attack. It is acknowledging what is obvious. This is more of the all women must be believed bullshit. A sexual assault allegation is not an excuse to removed your brain from your head and suspend all logical reasoning.

R271, what the hell was that supposed to be?

Goodness there is some cutting and pasting

[quote] [R271], what the hell was that supposed to be?

Very poor trolling from 1 troll. Is it not obvious?

How long does it take to put together a post like that? Do you just leave the post you were working on open in one tab and toggle back and forth between the cut tab and the paste tab?

[quote] How long does it take to put together a post like that? Do you just leave the post you were working on open in one tab and toggle back and forth between the cut tab and the paste tab?

About as long as it takes you to post whatever ridiculous nonsense you are posting.

Deadline.com:

Former Vice President Joe Biden will appear on MSNBC’s Morning Joe on Friday to address Tara Reade’s sexual assault allegation. He will be speaking to Joe Scarborough, Mika Brzezinski and Willie Geist.

r264 She got a big chunk of money from right-wing operatives? Just a guess.

Dear r271, I hope you resume gainful employment soon.

Is r271 also r279?

[quote] Dear [R271], I hope you resume gainful employment soon. —This whole COVID-19 thing is getting to you, isn't it?

Dear it has obviously gotten to you or perhaps you were always this stupid.

[quote]How long does it take to put together a post like that?

About 3 minutes in trolldar. You block the individual, then use trolldar to see their posts. Select, copy, paste, a trivial bit of editing to add quotes and remove thread titles, and you're done.

It's not a big deal and it's precisely what trolldar was intended to be used for.

Sometimes I forget that DL is a hobby.

ABC and NBC nightly news did a good job presenting the story. They laid out the facts against her in addition to her accusation. I don't was CBS so I can't comment min them.

[QUOTE] Former Vice President Joe Biden will appear on MSNBC’s Morning Joe on Friday to address Tara Reade’s sexual assault allegation. He will be speaking to Joe Scarborough, Mika Brzezinski and Willie Geist.

It’s about damn time.

At this point, I would believe the "actress" Tara Reid more than this person.

I never believed this deranged harlot for a second. Her whole story is bullshit. But it’s important that Joe Biden himself say that she’s lying.

HS he ever met her?

"What happened that made her started loving Putin in 2018?"

I felt RAPED by the U.S.!

I just fucking hate the complete and utter bullshit that we're now supposed to believe every gawdamned fucking nutcase that steps forward to accuse someone of sexual misconduct....because NO ONE WOULD EVER LIE ABOUT SUCH A THING!!!!

There’s still time for Biden to bow out and for one of the female candidates to get the nomination. That would neutralize the damage that the assault revelation has caused.

[quote] I just fucking hate the complete and utter bullshit that we're now supposed to believe every gawdamned fucking nutcase that steps forward to accuse someone of sexual misconduct

Blame her.

r295, why? She didn't do a damn thing. I guess you hate her because you're a freeper. Try blaming Bernie Bros and Republicans.

The consensus on the internet seems to be that most people don't believe this story. I was surprised. Based on how deplorables and Bernie Bros basically dominate all social media, I expected there to be more anger.

r297, this is that rare example of the Trumpian/Corona UTTER exhaustion of the public is working in our favor. Just this once.

R298, I agree with you there. That's why I'm so surprised. Usually, Democrats are held to a higher standard by the public than Republicans are. I feel like Trump has lowered the bar for a long, long time.

[quote] The consensus on the internet seems to be that most people don't believe this story.

The consensus of the die-hard Biden supporters on the internet seems to be that most die-hard Biden supporters don’t believe this story.

You don’t have to be a die hard Biden supporter to see through the holes in this story. She’s a fraud.

Biden is a rapist. Fuck that demented asshole.

And, for the record, I can't stand Joe Biden.

But, Tara Reade doesn't seem very credible. And, if old Joe was such a rapist, where was she in 2008 when he was running for Vice President?

And, even if old Uncle Joe did feel her up, I'd still take him over the Orange Idiot being in the White House.

[quote] But, Tara Reade doesn't seem very credible.

If you’re a victim with credibility problems, you’re screwed?

The whole story is a 10 on the Jacob Wohl scale of fabricated mess: have the witnesses come out yet to tell us how much they were paid by Vlad to tell their part of their story? Because, you know that's the next episode...

R304 And, everyone who claims they're a victim is ALWAYS telling the whole truth?

I mean...I guess he has to address it, but the lines have obviously been drawn for quite a while now. Nothing's gonna change anybody's mind. You'd be a fool to think otherwise. Either you support Trunk OR you want his ass out.

R278, I'm not the person you're talking to, but I've done that before with a racist troll that people for some fucking reason wouldn't believe was racist. All you have to do is put the person in question on ignore, go to the ignored tab, and copy all their replies to the thread. There's some editing and you have to add the quote tag but it takes a couple of minutes, max.

The people who try to say that someone must be obsessed to quote "so much" etc. are really stretching things. Normal, everyday cut & paste isn't remotely "weird" or "obsessive."

R299, Democrats did it to themselves. They pushed believe the women.

[quote]because NO ONE WOULD EVER LIE ABOUT SUCH A THING!!!!

That is what I don't understand. People do lie about it. Maybe not a lot, but it does happen. When was it decided that anyone accused of sexual assault was not allowed due process? This trial by twitter is utter bullshit.

[quote] All you have to do is put the person in question on ignore, go to the ignored tab, and copy all their replies to the thread.

That's called being a stalker.

"When was it decided that anyone accused of sexual assault was not allowed due process? This trial by twitter is utter bullshit."

Do people not know what due process means? It doesn't apply to cases like this where no criminal charges were brought.

R313, you are a fucking troll of the highest order. There are 1,000 things wrong with what you said but you already knew that, Boris. Go fuck yourself.

If they want to go after Biden and his single accuser, I say all is fair but only if they dig into ALL of Trump's accusers in the same way. It's really too late though. The Cult Of Trump is a sniveling low life death cult. They should all burn in the flames of their idiotic narratives.

When you consider some of Reade's corroborating witnesses were her family you have to discount a lot of that very corroboration.

They need to talk about the other FIVE people Reade has accused as well. Her father, who’s dead, is out, but the other 4 are still living. I’d like to hear what they have to say about her and her accusations.

Yes, R313 has been red tagged as a troll.

Tara wants to talk to one of the network anchors about her story.

From the NY Times:

[quote] Ms. Reade told me Wednesday that the only offers she’s had to appear on television have come from Fox News, including a call from the prime time host Sean Hannity. She has so far turned them down.

[quote] “I’ve been trying to just kind of wait to get someone in the middle,” she said in a phone interview. “I don’t want to be pigeonholed as a progressive, I don’t want to be pigeonholed as a Trump supporter.”

[quote] “They’re not offering to put me on TV — they’re just doing stories,” Ms. Reade told me. “No anchors, no nothing like that.” She’d most like to tell her story to a network television anchor she admires — CBS’s Gayle King is one, she said — but they haven’t called.

[quote] So she’s planning to accept Fox News’s offer for an interview to air this weekend, she said, with “someone a little more up the middle.” She declined to say who, but a person who has spoken to her said Ms. Reade is in talks with Chris Wallace.

That wasn't my finger..

I will not be surprised, as she yammers on about this, if she invents additional lurid details that further damage her credibility.

[QUOTE] They need to talk about the other FIVE people Reade has accused as well. Her father, who’s dead, is out, but the other 4 are still living. I’d like to hear what they have to say about her and her accusations.

That’s my first time hearing about this. Why doesn’t the media bring it up? How many times has this woman been raped, exactly?

I mentioned this on another thread - she said the digitally felt her up in a hallway? I am a female and in 1993 any woman in a place of business still had to wear panty hose. He would have had to pull her skirt all the way up to her waist, grab her tight panty hose and yank them down over her bottom and reach down there - it would have been a struggle - I think it is odd that she didn’t mention that he “ripped her panty hose” or “pulled down her panty hose!”

You can get pantyhose that only goes up to the upper thigh.

This grifter also stole money from an animal rescue organization where she volunteered.

R324 nobody wore tight highs outside the bedroom in the 80s. They're not the best with staying up without a garter belt.

I find it hard to believe 5 people wanted to rape this m2f looking shebeast.

Her pic at the time of the incident showed she was a pretty woman. Why is it that a woman brings something forward against a Dem and everyone ignores it when the allegations against Kavanaugh and everyone went ape shit. Talk about a double standard.

r328, no one is ignoring this. It's all over the news, including major newspapers like the New York Times

BTW, Kavanaugh's accuser didn't have a history of praising him on Twitter.

R328 because her “story” is wildly inconsistent and she’s an unreliable narrator, to say the least. Her story has changed many times, becoming worse each time. She has a criminal past and a history of praising Putin in her blog posts. She’s clearly an unwell woman. Dr. Ford’s story was the same since day one and she clearly had no motive coming forward. Can’t say the same for Ms. Reade. Everyone says “listen to women”. We listened. We determined she’s a liar being coached by Bernie bros.

R330, we must believe all women, not just listen to them. If a woman comes forward, we must not just let her speak her truth, but we must also believe each and every word. She is courageous. She is being a hero.

And any candidate accused by a woman of assault must immediately resign. He must be immediately cancelled for all eternity.

Ha Ha. r331 is Lindsay Graham's scrotum talking.

r331, here's you:

We should automatically disbelieve all women. And also men who say they were molested by a famous pop star. That is, until someone accuses a famous Democrat. Then I'll automatically believe her, no questions asked

The %me2 movement will seriously damage Biden. While this unbalanced Russiapublican operative should be treated like a loon, the news will keep asking, "But shouldn't she be HEARD?!".

[quote] Why is it that a woman brings something forward against a Dem and everyone ignores it when the allegations against Kavanaugh and everyone went ape shit. Talk about a double standard.

Except your claim has no basis in reality. This is literally all over the news. Yes, MAINSTREAM news. But acknowledging this would require you to be a competent individual which you clearly are not. And seriously, what is with you people comparing Kavanaugh to Biden? Read this, it's a comment from another forum that explains why the Kavanaugh situation is completely different:

[quote] Blasey-Ford came forward as someone who was highly credible in her personal life. She first came forward, confidentially, to her representative, congresswoman Anna Eshoo in July of 2018. Her representative was convinced of her credibility and they decided to go to their senator, Diane Feinstein (who was also the ranking democrat on the senate judiciary committee). Feinstein took a letter of the account written by Ford, redacted her name (as she wished to remain anonymous) and forwarded it to the FBI who then included it in kavanaugh’s White House background check. Separately, in August of 2018, she also took a polygraph test with a former FBI agent which concluded she was being truthful. It wasn’t until mid September that the media (ironically the intercept) started to catch wind of some anonymous allegations against kavanaugh and began to attempt to track down her identity. Ultimately, she came forward, was able to obtain counsel, produce therapists notes corroborating the event, and testify for several hours on live television at what can only be described as an enormous cost.

Blasey-Ford also had therapist notes about her allegations and didn't seem to have a political agenda unlike Tara.

Looks like her neighbor is backtracking on those claims she made. How completely unpredictable.

Now that MAGA-loving sow Juanita Broaddrick has come out saying she has been talking and texting with Reade. The only person who has changed their sexual assault story more times than Reade is Broaddrick.

How did “the office made me uncomfortable but I respect senator Biden” turn into “Biden violently raped me”?

The answer is bernie bros. Katie halper and Nathan Robinson. Look it up.

'I Have Never Treated A Woman Inappropriately,' Joe Biden Whispers Into Journalist's Ear

Biden is very handsy with people, women AND men. It's something I wish he would stop fucking doing but that doesn't make him a rapist.

Not everyone at Fox believes Tara.

Can you imagine MSNBC.com so prominently placing an editorial " I DON'T believe Joe Biden" on their website

[QUOTE] Now that MAGA-loving sow Juanita Broaddrick has come out saying she has been talking and texting with Reade. The only person who has changed their sexual assault story more times than Reade is Broaddrick.

It’s only a matter of time before Tara is on Sean Hannity pledging her allegiance to Donald Trump.

Nothing turned up in the records search. She never filed an official complaint as she claimed.

Someone mentioned on another thread about this that she said she made "informal" complaints first, which was news to me, but sure enough, about two days ago Fox News was reporting her "informal" complaints. I figure she said that to cover her ass when no documents were found.

The document she said she filed didn't contain a rape allegation according to her anyway, just comments that he made her feel uncomfortable. But no one has seen it, she doesn't have a copy, the Obama lawyers never saw it when vetting Biden... I mean, it's obvious it doesn't exist, and even if it did, it wasn't a rape allegation.

[quote]Can you imagine MSNBC.com so prominently placing an editorial " I DON'T believe Joe Biden" on their website

Why bother? They have Mika.

[quote]No one cares

I care, you troll

From Reddit poster. I didn't turn up anything on google, so I don't know if this is true.

[quote] Liz Mair (former GOP strategist) also said the RNC ran a thorough oppo research on Biden, she saw pretty much everything and nothing like the allegations.

[QUOTE] Nothing turned up in the records search. She never filed an official complaint as she claimed.

The search has already been completed?

R350, apparently so.

As Biden fends off sexual assault charge, National Archives says it has no relevant records

The National Archives said Friday it has no record of any files from a congressional office that might contain evidence of a sexual misconduct complaint against Vice President Joe Biden from 27 years ago, when he was a senator.

Liz Mair, the lawyer who oversaw vetting of Biden for Obama, said yesterday that they never saw any complaint from Reade or any similar complaint about Biden at all. David Axelrod has confirmed this in a CNN article.

Also McConnell was the head of the Ethics Committee at the time Reade would have filed the complaint and it appears he never saw any such complaint, either, but that's not officially confirmed as of yet.

I'm not sure if the records search is over or not (it was a Friday and the archives are probably closed due to the virus) but all signs point to it never existing.

R351, they said they don't have any records, the Senate does. Not that they searched and found nothing, but that the Senate would have it.

In response, Biden officially asked the Senate to look through their records. I don't think that's been done yet.

And once it has been done and nothing is found, there will be some other search or investigation that Tara Reade McCabe calls for. Or maybe she’ll change her story again.

It'll probably be some other story altogether. The media is going to keep pushing until they find a single story they can focus on like they did in 2016.

r340, that's a right wing site

I'd like to think everyone here knows the Babylon Bee is a fake website, R356. Surely they do?

Something troubling happened back then or why would her mother call Larry King about her daughter's "problems"? Why was she fired? There must be a record out there somewhere about some of this.

What’s your theory about this, R358? What do you think really happened?

Here’s the transcript of the call into Larry King:

[quote] KING: San Luis Obispo, California, hello.

[quote] CALLER: Yes, hello. I’m wondering what a staffer would do besides go to the press in Washington? My daughter has just left there, after working for a prominent senator, and could not get through with her problems at all, and the only thing she could have done was go to the press, and she chose not to do it out of respect for him.

[quote] KING: In other words, she had a story to tell but, out of respect for the person she worked for, she didn’t tell it?

[quote] CALLER: That’s true.

There is nothing in the call that either directly mentions or even suggests that the problem involved sexual harassment. The mother’s call does not bolster Reade’s case. It is like all her other “evidence” — largely illusory.

In the words of Regina George: "Stop trying to make Tara Reade happen, she's not gonna happen!".

R360, that call sounds like it might refer to problems in a senator’s office, but can’t get through to whom? The senator? He would be the most senior person there to get through to. So why would she have trouble contacting the senator that was the one that did it?

It makes me wonder if she was having a problem with an office worker there, but now wants to remember it as Biden was the problem. Maybe blaming him because her problem with another management person there wasn’t addressed properly? I doubt he ran the office. Somebody else must have.

What does “didn’t want to go to the press out of respect for the senator“ mean? Why would you respect someone if they raped you?

I could see Biden smelling her hair or something and she didn’t like it, but who was it she was trying to get to and couldn’t? If it was the office manager or HR or somebody like that she should have been able to get to them. She could have leaked it to some Republican who would have happily done something about it. Something is missing here.

I'm calling it now: The DNC are quietly helping this story to stay in the papers and on Chris Hayes etc, despite the massive lack of evidence, in the hope that it will buy them time to find a candidate other than Dementia Joe.

You heard it here first.

Who will it be? Michelle? Hillary?

R363, maybe it will be heart-attack Sanders? He can hit his head on the oval office door and collapse and STILL refuse to release his medical records. Quit trying to push Biden out.

[quote] The DNC are quietly helping this story to stay in the papers

No, they’re not. The NY Times — which called for a FULL investigation of Reade’s baseless charge — is simply doing to Biden what it did to Hillary. With the heavy weight that comes with bring the “paper of record,” 🙄 they are going to repeatedly examine every aspect of this pack of lies and falsehoods in the same way that they endlessly rehashed the details of Hillary’s emails.

Bullshit. Where is the call for a full investigation of the 25+ tRump accusers? Nonexistent, you say? Then sit the fuck down.

Such incredible hypocrisy.

The title of this thread is stupid. You can't smear someone like Creepy Quid Pro Quo Joe because the proof is in the pudding, so to speak. Drumpf has his own skeletons in the closet, so I'm not worried. We're going to have a surprise presidential candidate that will wipe out the bad memory of Biden's campaign.

What proof is that exactly R366? And if you think we're going to change candidates at this point you're insane.

[quote] if you think we're going to change candidates at this point

Technically, it wouldn’t be a change since Biden hasn’t been nominated yet.

I read this article a few days ago and one statement by Republican strategist Tyler Brown really struck me.

'That doesn’t worry Republicans much. “Whether it’s a false equivalence is by nature kind of moot,” says Brown. “The way people consume information, it kind of nullifies whether it’s false or not. It becomes less a values question and more of a volume question.” '

Technically shmecnically. Changing candidates at this point would be handing the election over to Trump and the GOP on a sliver platter with a bow on it.

[quote]Looks like her neighbor is backtracking on those claims she made. How completely unpredictable.

Uh, where? She's not backtracking at all.

[quote]Creepy Quid Pro Quo Joe

Quid pro quo? What now???

[quote]The DNC are quietly helping this story to stay in the papers

Stop listening to the voices inside your head, dear.

[quote] Uh, where? She's not backtracking at all.

In case you don't know how to read tweets, I will break it down for you. Here is what she said:

[quote] "I saw [Biden] on Morning Joe this morning, and he looks very believable, too. But I’m hearing this today, and I heard Tara a long time ago telling me that. So, I’m struggling with it."

Do you not understand how that's backtracking? If someone told you they were raped, you wouldn't say "well, I believe her, but that rapist was SO convincing on tv and looks really nice, so now I don't know". That's BS. If you believed someone who told you they were raped, you would not give a rats ass regarding how the abuser presents themselves on tv. She is being incredibly wishy-washy with that statement which means she is not reliable. It's really simple.

Oh, look, another accusation against Trump

A friend posted some article on FB that was supportive of Biden and skeptical of the veracity of Reade’s claims. He ran into a buzz-saw of criticism from the wokest of the woke. The SJW crowd claimed that the sexual assault survivor is to be believed at all costs, even if their credibility doesn’t hold up under traditional means of scrutiny. You say that she has changed her story? No problem. That happens to women who are traumatized. Oh, her claims have escalated from harassment to assault? That’s fine too, because “that’s what survivors do.” But, she . . . No. There’s the problem — you’re looking at this from a “man’s perspective.” 🙄 No matter how strenuously he denies it, Biden can’t be believed, and no matter how inconsistent Reade is and how much she makes shifting and inconsistent allegations, she must be believed.

It cannot be that every survivor is given complete and absolute immunity in all instances despite what seems to be serious questions about their credibility.

r376, only a few people think she "must be believed" at this point. And I bet a lot of them are bots or trolls

R377, this was on FB, and the “woke folks” who responded to my friend were friends of his, so not bots — but I guess they could be considered “trolly.” There are some people who love to revel in their virtue-signaling just to make sure that everyone knows how much better they are at social justice than the rest of us. 🙄