Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 05-08-2020, 09:52 AM
Jophiel's Avatar
Jophiel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Chicago suburbia
Posts: 20,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
I actually doubt anything happened. I think she’s so mentally messed up she doesn’t know fact from fiction. Her entire adult life has consisted of scams and bizarre stories.
I suspect, and it's just me, that she experienced some sort of harassment in the early 90s that was "no big deal" back then such as her claim that she was asked to serve drinks at a party or overheard that Biden thought she was pretty. I suspect that she was sincerely bothered by it and complained. She didn't get any traction on it and that was the basis of her leaving the job and her mother's call (no mention of assault, just "had issues") and the intake form that doesn't mention harassment or assault, just feeling "uncomfortable" and the court document saying she experienced harassment in Biden's office. I suspect that, when no one especially cared, she upped the ante with the exaggerated assault story which is why none of the documents are about assault, his vetting didn't turn up any allegations of assault, there was no Congressional follow-up while assault was a hot topic, no one else has claimed assault and the only "evidence" comes from her telling people about it months or years after it supposedly occurred.

Obviously I can't prove this is the case but it seems to fit the available facts.
  #52  
Old 05-08-2020, 09:55 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by puddleglum View Post
Biden should be judged according to the standards he has advocated for others.
So a university official should interview both Reade and Biden, someone who has been trained in dealing with trauma victims. That means understanding that inconsistent, changing stories are not evidence of falsehood and that trauma victims also can make up and exaggerate details without affecting their credibility. The investigation should not presume innocence and Biden should not have a lawyer present during his interview. If he refuses to answer any question that should be held against him. If the investigator thinks it more likely than not that an assault was committed Biden should be forced to drop out without appeal.
Biden has recently recommitted to this standard for others so he should have no problem applying it to himself.
Your interest in this might be convincing if you'd expressed the slightest bit of interest in thoroughly investigating the multiple sexual assault and rape allegations against Trump.
  #53  
Old 05-08-2020, 10:07 AM
dalej42 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 16,469
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jophiel View Post
I suspect, and it's just me, that she experienced some sort of harassment in the early 90s that was "no big deal" back then such as her claim that she was asked to serve drinks at a party or overheard that Biden thought she was pretty. I suspect that she was sincerely bothered by it and complained. She didn't get any traction on it and that was the basis of her leaving the job and her mother's call (no mention of assault, just "had issues") and the intake form that doesn't mention harassment or assault, just feeling "uncomfortable" and the court document saying she experienced harassment in Biden's office. I suspect that, when no one especially cared, she upped the ante with the exaggerated assault story which is why none of the documents are about assault, his vetting didn't turn up any allegations of assault, there was no Congressional follow-up while assault was a hot topic, no one else has claimed assault and the only "evidence" comes from her telling people about it months or years after it supposedly occurred.

Obviously I can't prove this is the case but it seems to fit the available facts.
The drinks thing makes sense. A lot of idealistic young people show up for those sort of staff jobs thinking they’ll be writing position papers and crafting legislation when they’re actually doing grunt work. No one wants to go to the Hill to spend an hour dealing with a crazy constituent who thinks there’s black helicopters watching them.
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42 He/Him/His
  #54  
Old 05-08-2020, 10:14 AM
Ludovic is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: America's Wing
Posts: 31,199
If being asked to serve drinks at a party was a pattern of only making female staff do that then it's objectionable sex discrimination. But anecdotally, my brother, as a mid-level manager in a library system, was once voluntold to be a server at a fancy dress ball for city bigwigs, so it's not always specifically women who experience this.

I, myself, was once voluntold to be a question+answer/mic usher at a corporate meeting, which was way out of my job description, but didn't seem very demeaning to me so I didn't resent it. Certainly a lot more tolerable than the embarrassing antics that cheesy DJs instigate at weddings.
  #55  
Old 05-08-2020, 10:28 AM
Jophiel's Avatar
Jophiel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Chicago suburbia
Posts: 20,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ludovic View Post
If being asked to serve drinks at a party was a pattern of only making female staff do that then it's objectionable sex discrimination. But anecdotally, my brother, as a mid-level manager in a library system, was once voluntold to be a server at a fancy dress ball for city bigwigs, so it's not always specifically women who experience this.
Her story in 2019 was that she was asked to serve drinks and Biden put his fingers on her neck or shoulders and she was uncomfortable with that. She says she complained and no one acted and she felt pushed out of the office. I find that plausible; everyone knows Biden is/was overly touchy and I doubt anyone would be shocked to learn the drinks story. That 2019 story would make a logical basis for her complaint and mother's phone call, etc.

I'm not saying the drinks thing or people shrugging it off is cool but, if the real story is "I was asked by his office to serve drinks in 1993 and didn't and got shut out" then let's be discussing if that's discrediting for being president instead of "I was physically attacked and assaulted".
  #56  
Old 05-08-2020, 10:34 AM
madmonk28 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 13,019
I think that her claims should be taken seriously and investigated. Unfortunately, I will still vote for Biden in the general, regardless of the outcome, as Trump and the GOP are the greatest threat this nation has ever faced.

Last edited by madmonk28; 05-08-2020 at 10:36 AM.
  #57  
Old 05-08-2020, 11:00 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 13,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by puddleglum View Post
Biden should be judged according to the standards he has advocated for others.
So a university official should interview both Reade and Biden, someone who has been trained in dealing with trauma victims. That means understanding that inconsistent, changing stories are not evidence of falsehood and that trauma victims also can make up and exaggerate details without affecting their credibility. The investigation should not presume innocence and Biden should not have a lawyer present during his interview. If he refuses to answer any question that should be held against him. If the investigator thinks it more likely than not that an assault was committed Biden should be forced to drop out without appeal.
Biden has recently recommitted to this standard for others so he should have no problem applying it to himself.
Let's flip this around and say that Biden should be judged and held to account the same way Republicans judge and hold their own candidates hold their candidates to account.
  #58  
Old 05-08-2020, 11:03 AM
dalej42 is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Chicago
Posts: 16,469
Interesting. Tara Reade charged with check fraud (yes, those were still a thing in the 90s) just days before she was fired.

https://twitter.com/zacakamadu/statu...981537281?s=21
__________________
Twitter:@Stardales IG:@Dalej42 He/Him/His
  #59  
Old 05-08-2020, 11:12 AM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 13,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
Interesting. Tara Reade charged with check fraud (yes, those were still a thing in the 90s) just days before she was fired.

https://twitter.com/zacakamadu/statu...981537281?s=21
I'm glad that there's more investigative reporting focusing on the accuser and not just the accused. I don't believe in smearing people who come forward with legit complaints, but if this is true, then it sheds light on her accusations.
  #60  
Old 05-08-2020, 11:25 AM
Skywatcher's Avatar
Skywatcher is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere in the Potomac
Posts: 36,363
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalej42 View Post
Interesting. Tara Reade charged with check fraud (yes, those were still a thing in the 90s) just days before she was fired.

https://twitter.com/zacakamadu/statu...981537281?s=21
Since you brought it up, there are also allegations of her being $400K in debt and filing for bankruptcy in 2012, referring to case no. 12–57565 Northern District of California.

At some point between 2012 & 2014, she started a non-profit pet food pantry. The IRS pulled her organization's 501(c)(3) status at some point after 2015; there are allegations that she wasn't filing the necessary financial disclosures to maintain the non-profit status.

https://twitter.com/gritsncollards/s...28185308549120

Last edited by Skywatcher; 05-08-2020 at 11:26 AM.
  #61  
Old 05-08-2020, 11:56 AM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 7,081
She apparently also referenced timing her announcement for maximal political damage against Biden.

Comparing this allegation to Ford's allegation against Kavanaugh is just silly unless and until there is more information to come out.
  #62  
Old 05-08-2020, 12:11 PM
Xema is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 12,571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
She apparently also referenced timing her announcement for maximal political damage against Biden.
Whereas Ford's allegation came at a more or less random time during Kavanaugh's career?
  #63  
Old 05-08-2020, 12:17 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 13,259
AP is reporting that Reade's lawyer is a #MAGA man.

https://apnews.com/10d2842623b2c299e...&ICID=ref_fark

Quote:
WASHINGTON (AP) — Tara Reade, a former Senate staffer who alleged Joe Biden sexually assaulted her 27 years ago, is being represented by a prominent lawyer and political donor to President Donald Trump’s 2016 Republican campaign.
Starting to add up now.

I'm beginning to doubt she was ever even a harassment victim.
  #64  
Old 05-08-2020, 12:24 PM
Skywatcher's Avatar
Skywatcher is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere in the Potomac
Posts: 36,363
Further down that article:
Quote:
Over the weekend, another attorney, William Moran, told the AP he was working with Reade.

Moran, who works at a law firm in Columbia, Maryland, previously wrote and edited for Sputnik, a news agency founded and supported by the Russian state-owned media company Rossiya Segodnya. A January 2017 report released by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence on Russia’s interference in the 2016 campaign said Sputnik was part of “Russia’s state-run propaganda machine,” which “contributed to the influence campaign by serving as a platform for Kremlin messaging to Russian and international audiences.”
  #65  
Old 05-08-2020, 12:25 PM
UltraVires is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Bridgeport, WV, US
Posts: 17,428
Quote:
Originally Posted by asahi View Post
Let's flip this around and say that Biden should be judged and held to account the same way Republicans judge and hold their own candidates hold their candidates to account.
Republicans have never by and large embraced the #metoo and believe all women nonsense that the Dems have. The Republicans are not subject to accusations of hypocrisy which the Dems clearly are.

This entire thread and the nitpicking of Tara Raede would be forcefully denounced if she made an allegation against a Republican. So she was forced to serve drinks in 1993, that pissed her off, so she made this allegation up?

If a Republican said that, he would be scoffed as saying he just didn't understand the dynamics of sexual assault and that women do not act like petulant or evil children by making up serious allegations for such a sleight. We would probably be told that was the most sexist thing ever said by anyone ever.

But at least an accused man now has some way of getting the "woke" movement on his side, whereas he was always guilty before. Just espouse liberal policies early and often in life and you are golden!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jophiel
Well, Biden is innocent until proven guilty.
Were we not told ad nauseum during the Kavanaugh hearings that this is not a court of law, but a job interview? Is it a job interview for Kavanaugh but a court for Biden?
  #66  
Old 05-08-2020, 12:29 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
The Republicans are not subject to accusations of hypocrisy which the Dems clearly are.
Ha! You must have missed the last 3-4 decades in which the GOP campaigned on "family values" and character.
  #67  
Old 05-08-2020, 12:29 PM
ricksummon is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Columbus, OH, USA
Posts: 1,028
This article questions how useful the corroborations of Tara Reade's story actually are:

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/202...paign=trending
  #68  
Old 05-08-2020, 12:41 PM
Fiveyearlurker is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 7,081
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xema View Post
Whereas Ford's allegation came at a more or less random time during Kavanaugh's career?
Tara Reade specifically says she was timing her announcement for maximal political damage. Did Ford do anything like that?
  #69  
Old 05-08-2020, 12:49 PM
Jophiel's Avatar
Jophiel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Chicago suburbia
Posts: 20,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
Were we not told ad nauseum during the Kavanaugh hearings that this is not a court of law, but a job interview? Is it a job interview for Kavanaugh but a court for Biden?
Reade's statement was literally that SHE isn't the criminal so Biden should have to take the test (i.e., he IS a criminal)

When your accuser is saying you're a criminal so you should have to take the test, I think "innocent until proven guilty" applies. "Criminal" isn't a job interview term.

If we're agreeing that it's a job interview, there's no reason for her to refuse to take a polygraph on her own without the "But I'm not a criminal!" defense.

Last edited by Jophiel; 05-08-2020 at 12:49 PM.
  #70  
Old 05-08-2020, 01:18 PM
ITR champion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jophiel View Post
Her story in 2019 was that she was asked to serve drinks and Biden put his fingers on her neck or shoulders and she was uncomfortable with that. She says she complained and no one acted and she felt pushed out of the office. I find that plausible; everyone knows Biden is/was overly touchy and I doubt anyone would be shocked to learn the drinks story. That 2019 story would make a logical basis for her complaint and mother's phone call, etc.

I'm not saying the drinks thing or people shrugging it off is cool but, if the real story is "I was asked by his office to serve drinks in 1993 and didn't and got shut out" then let's be discussing if that's discrediting for being president instead of "I was physically attacked and assaulted".
Ok, it's true that at different times Tara Reade has publicly told different versions of her story of what Joe Biden did to her. So let's discuss why that might be. Hypothetically, if Biden did force his fingers into her vagina against her will, why might that be true?

Well, here's the answer written out at great length: https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/...vable-bullshit

But for those who don't want to read the long answer, here's a shorter version.

In 1993, Tara Reade knew what happened to women who told the full truth about being raped or sexually exploited by powerful men, and she didn't want that to happen to her. Therefore, she held back parts of the story for different lengths of time and didn't tell the entire story in public until 2020.

Maybe it's hard to understand for people who weren't around in 90's, but the whole societal attitude towards rape and sexual assault was totally different then. Back then, respectable people believed that rape was something street thugs and other poor men did to poor women. By and large, they believed that wealthy and powerful men didn't commit sex crimes. They defined things in such a way that it was impossible. "Sex crime by a Senator, a CEO, a Catholic bishop? We just know that sort of thing doesn't happen, thank you very much."

Furthermore, at that time decent people were hesitant to even use the word "rape" in polite society. Decent preferred tiptoeing around questions of rape and sexual assault and child molesting with euphemisms.

So today people are asking, for instance, when Reade's mother called Larry King, why didn't she specifically say outright, "A prominent Senator raped my daughter"? Well, the answer is that at that time, no one said such things, certainly not on venues like CNN, which was respectable at the time. If you knew that your daughter's boss had shoved his fingers into your daughter's vagina, you didn't say "My daughter's boss shoved his fingers into my daughter's vagina." Instead you said, "My daughter is having problems with her boss." That's the way it was.

So that's part of the reason, but there's more to understand. Do you recall during the Monica Lewinsky mess, Bill Clinton defended himself by insisting that oral sex wasn't sex? That's exactly the sort of thinking that powerful men used to justify their behavior towards women at that time.

So suppose Tara Reade had stood up public and accused Joe Biden of rape in 1993. Does anyone doubt for a minute that the response from Biden and his defenders would have been basically the same: "Fingers in the vagina isn't sex, so it isn't rape, so what are you so upset about, you dumb slut?" That's the way it worked in the 90's.

Does anyone think that in 1993, Tara Reade wasn't aware of what happened in Washington to women who accused powerful men of sex crimes? Does anyone think she didn't remember the Clarence Thomas hearings, where a certain Senator by the name of Joe Biden was instrumental in silencing women making accusations against a powerful man? Does anyone think she didn't know that Ted Kennedy, leading Democrat in the Senate, was a serial sex criminal who had actually killed a woman and gotten away with it? Does anyone think she didn't know that Bill Clinton, U.S. President and leader of the Democratic party, had been accused of various sexual misbehavior, some criminal, some not?

Of course she knew all of these things.

Do we really need more explanation of why Tara Reade might have chosen to not publicly accuse Joe Biden of rape immediately after it happened?

Well, there's more. Let's talk about the role of the media. Those who lived through the 90's will surely recall the names of the women involved in Bill Clinton's sex scandals: Jennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, Monica Lewinsky, Linda Tripp. And will also recall how the media treated them. Will recall Jay Leno and other alleged comedians, telling us night after night that these women were fat, ugly, slutty, stupid, desperate, crazy, nasty, and aggressive. Will recall The Daily Show showing a picture of two hippos in a mud puddle and saying "Monica and Linda are taking a break". Will recall that sort of thing continuing day in and day out for years. That's how it worked. If a woman told the truth--and we know for sure that at least several of the women involved were telling the truth--then the media poured vast effort into utterly destroying her.

So why didn't Tara Reade stand up earlier and publicly say that Joe Biden had raped her?

Maybe she didn't want every comedian on television calling her an ugly slut every night for the next five years.

Maybe she didn't want The Daily Show to tell viewers that she was a hippo.

Maybe she didn't want to put up with the ocean of vile abuse that comes immediately for any woman who tells a story about being raped or abused by a powerful male politician.

Maybe. I don't have the ability to read her mind. I can only speculate. But certainly there are probable answers to the question.
  #71  
Old 05-08-2020, 01:22 PM
Jophiel's Avatar
Jophiel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Chicago suburbia
Posts: 20,033
Forget "publicly". By her own admission, she didn't call it harassment or assault on her official complaint to her office. Probably not because the Daily Show might say things about her.

Neither Reade, nor her friend, nor her brother, called it assault or harassment originally when asked about it in 2019, long after the puritan 90s and people being too afraid to say "rape".

Last edited by Jophiel; 05-08-2020 at 01:23 PM.
  #72  
Old 05-08-2020, 01:41 PM
Czarcasm's Avatar
Czarcasm is offline
Charter Member
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 64,044
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
I'm not here to rehash the old arguments, but it seems like his talking points are incredibly weak. And once again, I don't believe these allegations against him.
But as long as they cast a shadow over his campaign it is alright with you, correct? Otherwise you wouldn't post that bit about "lackeys" and "talking points" then try to wash your hands of guilt with that last sentence.
  #73  
Old 05-08-2020, 02:02 PM
Skywatcher's Avatar
Skywatcher is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Somewhere in the Potomac
Posts: 36,363
Why is Reade's account of the alleged encounter so similar to a paragraph in a novel by her father (Loss: A Love Story, self-published in 2010)?

Last edited by Skywatcher; 05-08-2020 at 02:02 PM.
  #74  
Old 05-08-2020, 02:20 PM
asahi's Avatar
asahi is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: On your computer screen
Posts: 13,259
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
Republicans have never by and large embraced the #metoo and believe all women nonsense that the Dems have. The Republicans are not subject to accusations of hypocrisy which the Dems clearly are.
I couldn't disagree more. They forever tried to impale Bill Clinton on his apparent lack of sexual restraint only to be exposed for "youthful indiscretions" of their own.

Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
This entire thread and the nitpicking of Tara Raede would be forcefully denounced if she made an allegation against a Republican. So she was forced to serve drinks in 1993, that pissed her off, so she made this allegation up?
Time and better reporting will hopefully tell us the truth, one way or the other.

Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
Were we not told ad nauseum during the Kavanaugh hearings that this is not a court of law, but a job interview? Is it a job interview for Kavanaugh but a court for Biden?
I agree that there's probably some hypocrisy to go around, but there's a difference between Kavanaugh and Biden in that nobody voted for Kavanaugh. That's not required by the Constitution, of course, but there's a difference between a question over whether someone's behavior disqualifies him from a lifetime appointment and whether someone's earlier behavior should effectively throw out the will of millions of voters. With the former, it's more important to investigate the nominee, which we did not unfortunately. In the second question, it's important to investigate the presumptive nominee, but it's also important -perhaps more important - to really show some healthy skepticism.

In any case, I don't care. I voted for Biden because I know he's generally fit for the office and he will represent not only my interests but the interests of almost everyone in this country better than the bozo we have now. Good enough for me.

What I hope comes from this is a more intelligent discussion about what voting means, what democracy means, and when we really need to consider disqualifying someone from public office. Biden has probably, ahem, accidentally copped a feel. So fucking what? I vote for interests, not individuals.
  #75  
Old 05-08-2020, 02:20 PM
ITR champion is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Indiana
Posts: 10,477
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jophiel View Post
Forget "publicly". By her own admission, she didn't call it harassment or assault on her official complaint to her office.
Quote:
Neither Reade, nor her friend, nor her brother, called it assault or harassment originally when asked about it in 2019, long after the puritan 90s and people being too afraid to say "rape".
Yes. And I have already linked to one article that discusses at great length why that might be. Here's another article on the subject, written by a social worker and professor specializing in sexual violence.
As someone who has spent most of his career working with victims of sexual violence and currently teaches about this type of trauma at the university level, I can say that Tara Reade’s story rings true, like so many other stories of sexual assault I have heard throughout my professional career. That she waited so long to tell her full story, only disclosing part of the story last year, has been a criticism of detractors, but this is exactly how so many victims of sexual trauma handle their disclosures.

The trauma of sexual violence can affect mind, body and soul. A victim’s sense of time and place can be turned upside down. Memories often enter consciousness in pieces, unlike memories of non-traumatic events which are easier to recall fully and in a linear fashion. In the account, Ms. Reade remembered seemingly innocuous details: her legs hurting from walking on the marble floor on her way to meet Biden the day of the assault; wearing a skirt and no stockings because it was hot; the coldness of the wall she was pinned against.

Reade’s recollection of what was said during the encounter is spotty, with two chilling exceptions. The first: “C’mon, man, I heard you liked me,” Biden’s preemptive suggestion that she was to blame for what was happening to her. The second, simply: “You mean nothing to me.”

Many people who believed Dr. Blasey Ford when she came forward with her allegations against Brett Kavanaugh are the same people now attempting to dismantle Tara Reade’s story. They only need to turn to Blasey Ford’s testimony before the Senate to understand why Reade’s story should be taken seriously.

When Senators asked why she couldn’t remember linear details of her account with Kavanaugh, Blasey Ford, a professor of psychology at Palo Alto University and a research psychologist at the Stanford University School of Medicine, explained how the brain responds to trauma, sometimes creating disjointed memories, and how seemingly unimportant details can stand out while other key details may be lost. When Republicans criticized Blasey Ford for taking so long to come forward with her story, Democrats rightly came to her defense, pointing out that victims often take decades to come forward with their stories. Why the same deference is not given to Tara Reade is as perplexing as it is troubling.

In the sexual violence advocacy community it is well understood that survivors take time to tell their full stories. While I was a director at an advocacy agency, a young girl who was sexually abused by a male relative told police he fondled her above her clothing. Months later she spoke about the penetration. This is typical for victims of trauma. Rarely does the story come out all at once.
  #76  
Old 05-08-2020, 02:25 PM
Jophiel's Avatar
Jophiel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Chicago suburbia
Posts: 20,033
I read the article you originally linked. It was a bunch of "Here's A Question" followed by "Answer: This is why women don't come out, aren't you the REAL monster for not just accepting it??"

Sorry, I didn't find it convincing and believe there are a LOT of questions to be answered before her claims hold merit. I also don't think the psychology part explains why Reade supposedly told her neighbor about this in the 90s but then neither her, her friend nor her brother related it in 2019. You are free to believe Reade, of course, but I find plenty of reasons to question her.
  #77  
Old 05-08-2020, 02:37 PM
Xema is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 12,571
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiveyearlurker View Post
Tara Reade specifically says she was timing her announcement for maximal political damage. Did Ford do anything like that?
Yes, according to her lawyer:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Debra Katz
He will always have an asterisk next to his name. When he takes a scalpel to Roe v. Wade, we will know who he is, we know his character, and we know what motivates him, and that is important; it is important that we know, and that is part of what motivated Christine.
  #78  
Old 05-08-2020, 05:29 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bijou Drains View Post
Accuser Tara Reade says she will go under oath and also allow people to ask her questions while under oath. She will take a polygraph if Biden takes one.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/07/u...interview.html
Polygraphs are worthless. And it would have been easy as pie for her russian handlers to impart a false memory. And so under oath she says he remember such & such- how do we disprove that? Her accusations are essentialy unprovable and impossible to disprove.

Do we really need another thread on this?
  #79  
Old 05-08-2020, 05:31 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
If it's true it's also disappointing that the potentially First Black President was so indifferent to his electoral success, that he failed to do basic vetting of his prospective Vice President.

(Or perhaps "difficult to believe" is more appropriate, here.)
Reade didnt mention any of this until Biden was running for President in 2019, and she changed her story when Biden was the presumptive nominee.
  #80  
Old 05-08-2020, 05:42 PM
Left Hand of Dorkness's Avatar
Left Hand of Dorkness is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: at the right hand of cool
Posts: 42,807
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Polygraphs are worthless. And it would have been easy as pie for her russian handlers to impart a false memory.
I love Phillip K. Dick, too!
  #81  
Old 05-08-2020, 05:42 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xema View Post
Whereas Ford's allegation came at a more or less random time during Kavanaugh's career?
It came as soon as he was mentioned commonly on national news. Before that he was just a Circuit court judge. Not that that is a unimportant position by any means, but it doesnt get the national media attention that a SCOTUS seat does.

OTOH, Biden was national news since 2008.
  #82  
Old 05-08-2020, 06:43 PM
RioRico is offline
Suspended
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: beyond cell service
Posts: 3,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Left Hand of Dorkness View Post
I love Phillip K. Dick, too!
What parts of "Polygraphs are worthless" and "implant[ed] false memory" are unbelievable?

I'll give you a pass on "false memory" - that's trickier, and unnecessary because lying willing misdirection is straightforward, with or without Russian handlers but definitely with Trampist minions involved. Tramp and his owner are scared shitless of Biden and thus attack. Forget that Tramp is a vile rapist* scumbag - look at Biden!

* Molesting underage beauty contestants qualifies as rape.
  #83  
Old 05-08-2020, 06:53 PM
Miller's Avatar
Miller is offline
Sith Mod
Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Bear Flag Republic
Posts: 45,021
Quote:
Originally Posted by RioRico View Post
What parts of "Polygraphs are worthless" and "implant[ed] false memory" are unbelievable?
That would be the "implanted false memory" part.
  #84  
Old 05-08-2020, 07:01 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 7,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
Reade didnt mention any of this until Biden was running for President in 2019, and she changed her story when Biden was the presumptive nominee.
Agreed. I was attempting to point out how extremely unlikely it is that Obama's people would have overlooked an accuser who had a credible story of assault against Biden.


Quote:
Originally Posted by DrDeth View Post
It came as soon as he was mentioned commonly on national news. Before that he was just a Circuit court judge. Not that that is a unimportant position by any means, but it doesnt get the national media attention that a SCOTUS seat does.

OTOH, Biden was national news since 2008.
Yes, in this as in many other points, the Ford/Kavanaugh issue fails as a reasonable comparison for the Reade/Biden issue.
  #85  
Old 05-08-2020, 07:26 PM
PhillyGuy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Pennsylvania U.S.A.
Posts: 1,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by ITR champion View Post
While I was a director at an advocacy agency, a young girl who was sexually abused by a male relative told police he fondled her above her clothing. Months later she spoke about the penetration. This is typical for victims of trauma.
Is it typical that the months or decades later accuser only gets the courage to speak fully when seeing that the alleged perpetrator is getting more powerful?

Even if you do have some subtle evidence there, I don't think it would apply to a public figure, like Biden, who has known, and even supervised, directly or indirectly, hundreds of women. The ratio of true to untrue accusations could, in general, be extremely high, and yet the chances of one or two people coming forward with a mistaken story, when someone they knows is at the cusp of supreme achievement, could also be quite high.

I think there is no chance that Pete Buttigieg, or husband, is a child abuser. But I predict that if Pete every gets close to the presidency, an adult man is going to say falsely that he seduced them as a minor. It's not because stories like that are always lies. It's because the story fits the narrative of the worse thing you could say about a gay person. And that will feed someone's grandiosity impulse.

As for the Biden case, after reading the tic toc thing, I think the fair thing is to disregard unproven character assassination.

Last edited by PhillyGuy; 05-08-2020 at 07:28 PM.
  #86  
Old 05-08-2020, 08:49 PM
Deeg is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 3,707
In an effort to disqualify Kavanaugh the Democrats hitched their cart to the sex accusation donkey and now it's running them off the path.

From my view the Kavanaugh and Biden accusations are similar with equal probability. Ford seemed more reliable than Reade but then Biden does have the shaky history of over-touching. It is highly unlikely that a 25+ year-old accusation is going to be proven one way or the other so it just comes down to he/she said.

Both sides are showering themselves in hypocrisy. Democrats--hoping that the accusation is untrue--are putting Reade's testimony through the ringer and using the same rationalizations they criticized Republicans for. I'll give some credit (for now) to Republicans: I haven't heard many, if any, GOP politicians call out Biden. I suppose the Dope will set me straight if they have.

To me the underlying problem is that the Democrats tried too hard to get rid of a SCOTUS candidate that they disliked using a weakly supported accusation. If they had hard evidence then absolutely go after him but now they look stupid and hypocritical.

But sadly being a hypocrite is par for politics.
  #87  
Old 05-08-2020, 08:51 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Miller View Post
That would be the "implanted false memory" part.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Memory_implantation

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/...1.2016.1260747

Implanting false memories is known, especially if what you are doing is just trying to change a real memory. Does that mean I think Reades memories have been tampered with? No, i think she is lying. But certainly such a thing is possible.

And even if the false memory isnt deliberately implanted, look at out very own "alternate ending to Big" thread where dozens of posters remember something that never happened.

Last edited by DrDeth; 05-08-2020 at 08:55 PM.
  #88  
Old 05-08-2020, 08:57 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by Deeg View Post
In an effort to disqualify Kavanaugh the Democrats hitched their cart to the sex accusation donkey and now it's running them off the path.

From my view the Kavanaugh and Biden accusations are similar with equal probability. Ford seemed more reliable than Reade but then Biden does have the shaky history of over-touching. It is highly unlikely that a 25+ year-old accusation is going to be proven one way or the other so it just comes down to he/she said.

Both sides are showering themselves in hypocrisy. Democrats--hoping that the accusation is untrue--are putting Reade's testimony through the ringer and using the same rationalizations they criticized Republicans for. I'll give some credit (for now) to Republicans: I haven't heard many, if any, GOP politicians call out Biden. I suppose the Dope will set me straight if they have.

To me the underlying problem is that the Democrats tried too hard to get rid of a SCOTUS candidate that they disliked using a weakly supported accusation. If they had hard evidence then absolutely go after him but now they look stupid and hypocritical.

But sadly being a hypocrite is par for politics.
Democrats wanted to sink Kavanaugh. But what they asked for was a real and thorough investigation. That didn't happen, and it was entirely appropriate to ask for it.

And a real and thorough investigation is appropriate here also.
__________________
My new novel Spindown
  #89  
Old 05-08-2020, 09:00 PM
Sherrerd's Avatar
Sherrerd is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 7,885
Quote:
Originally Posted by UltraVires View Post
... This strategy seems odd to me. First, the repetition of the "she has a right to say it." As mentioned in the other thread, if it is false, she has absolutely no such right. Women who are sexually assaulted clearly have a right to name their accuser, but if Joe knows it is false, that line is odd in the extreme. ...
You've used this argument often, and it remains a poor one. Biden's "line" is not even remotely odd.

Biden, like any American with basic knowledge of our Constitution and legal system, acknowledges that Reade, like any other person, has a right to say whatever she wishes (outside the normal exceptions such as yelling 'Fire' in a crowded theater). In our system, a person may say whatever they wish about another person.

The person or persons about whom something is said, then have their own right to bring suit for slander or libel (as the case may be).

Acknowledging a legal-and-moral right to speak is not the same thing as placing a seal of approval on what is said.

"She has a right to say it" is not within miles of what you imply it is. It is not 'I'm not opposing her claim.' It is not 'I agree with what she's said.' It is not 'She's telling the truth.'

What it is, is "she has a right to say" whatever she wants to say. Then Biden, in turn, has and can exercise his right to hold her accountable for her false claim. So far he's been doing that by asserting that her claim is false. No doubt legal action against Reade has been discussed within the campaign; possibly it's been rejected so far because the spectacle of taking a mentally-ill woman to court would be unpleasant and off-putting. The campaign may feel that denials, and the resulting impact on Reade's reputation, are sufficient to get the point across.

But I don't think anyone lacking a crystal ball can be sure that Reade is free and clear of potential legal consequences for her choice to say these things. (That doesn't change the fact that she, as Biden notes, has the right to say what she wants to say.)
  #90  
Old 05-08-2020, 09:24 PM
Blank Slate's Avatar
Blank Slate is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 5,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Democrats wanted to sink Kavanaugh. But what they asked for was a real and thorough investigation. That didn't happen, and it was entirely appropriate to ask for it.

And a real and thorough investigation is appropriate here also.
How can you have a 'thorough investigation' of an alleged assault that occurred on a non-specific date in a non-specific location, with no physical evidence or witnesses. True or false, this is a pointless exercise.
  #91  
Old 05-08-2020, 10:30 PM
PhillyGuy is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Pennsylvania U.S.A.
Posts: 1,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
And a real and thorough investigation is appropriate here also.
They did it:

Reade filed a police report about Biden’s alleged criminal conduct earlier this month, in Washington, D.C. The police declared it “inactive” because of the statute of limitations.

Passage of time makes a fair investigation increasing impossible. So I support statutes of limitations. Once you've carefully checked them, if they apply, the thorough investigation is complete.

There was good reason to oppose Kavanaugh's nomination. I didn't think impossible to file criminal charges (of teenage conduct!) were among them.

Why don't you hear so much about hypocrisy of caring less about the charge of Trump committing a rape in Burgdorf's dressing room? Are they soundproof? (Maybe, it's a very expensive place that surely has rearranged spaces over the decades.) But that's also a 20+ year after accusation. Bergdorf Goodman kept no security footage that would prove or disprove Carroll’s story.

The public record tells us what we need to know about these men, good and, often, bad. Hopeless unprovable stale charges do not.

In the Biden case, if only due to the bad economy, he'll probably be the next President, while more and more embarrassments from Reade's past trickle out. These stale charges don't empower women or stop powerful political men.
  #92  
Old 05-08-2020, 10:40 PM
Siam Sam is offline
Elephant Whisperer
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Honolulu, Hawaii
Posts: 42,019
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sherrerd View Post
Agreed. I was attempting to point out how extremely unlikely it is that Obama's people would have overlooked an accuser who had a credible story of assault against Biden.
We've all heard that Trump is going to come out swinging dirty, and this is just the first salvo. One of his cronies is even representing her. Coaching her too? Expect worse to come from Desperate Donald.
__________________
"Hell is other people." -- Jean-Paul Sartre
  #93  
Old 05-08-2020, 11:42 PM
DrDeth is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Jose
Posts: 44,750
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blank Slate View Post
How can you have a 'thorough investigation' of an alleged assault that occurred on a non-specific date in a non-specific location, with no physical evidence or witnesses. True or false, this is a pointless exercise.
Yep. There can be no real investigation, there is no evidence. And altho I disliked Kavanagh the evidence against him was weak and the memories too old.
  #94  
Old 05-09-2020, 01:06 AM
SlackerInc's Avatar
SlackerInc is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Northern Minnesota
Posts: 13,483
Bill Maher nails it in his latest "New Rules" rant:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ju1ZFuvjzYc

"Don't know. Never will. Don't care." Word.

And "why now", indeed. Why not before Super Tuesday, or after the November election? Could it have something to do with Putin? After all, in a now-deleted post, Bill notes that Reade said "I love Russia with all my heart...[Vladimir Putin] is intoxicating to American women." And I'm sure Putin would much rather this allegation be made after Biden has the nomination sewn up, but before he beats Trump in the general.
__________________
SlackerInc on Twitter: http://twitter.com/slackerinc
  #95  
Old 05-09-2020, 11:00 AM
Sdowiat is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 61

Say it ain't so Joe.... But...


Tara with Megyn Kelly: She looks and sounds a lot more believable than him... No dodging... no him hawing... no deer in the headlights look.

How can we best explain to daughters that we "Believe Every Woman" .... except THIS ONE?



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5HeZiKvOA0o
  #96  
Old 05-09-2020, 11:25 AM
Ann Hedonia's Avatar
Ann Hedonia is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 4,137
Here’s the thing
We are going into the dirtiest political campaign ever. As the presumptive nominee, Biden is going to be hit with one scandal or accusation after another pretty much constantly for the next 6 months. They’re going to paint a picture of him that makes Caligula look like Rebecca of Sunnybrook Farm. This is only the beginning.

The opposition is going to spare no expense in order to ratfuck him to death. I fully expect the Ukraine stuff to come rushing back and I suspect Trump really will succeed in getting Hunter investigated and probably arrested. And a couple of more “abusers” will show up. And they’ll find “corruption” inside every official action he took as President.

From now until November, I’m ignoring all of it and defending the Democratic candidate like Trump supporters defend Trump.

If there’s anything to any of it, he’ll probably have a strong VP and we can look into it next year.

For me, it’s all about policy and not people and personality, anyway . I’m selecting the person whose policy positions are best for the nation. I’m not electing a husband, best friend, mentor or role-model.

I think the Democrats need to take a lesson from the Republicans, who learned that being an amoral whoremonger doesn’t prevent someone from effectively selling policy positions.

I do think Biden is innocent of this accusation, but I don’t know that my position would change if I didn’t, especially in the absence of any alternative path to take back our nation.

I’m really tired of watching the Democrats trying desperately to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. If I was a Trump supporter I’d be pretty much laughing my ass off 24/7. Polling aside, I think the Dems are going to manage to lose this one. I honestly think the only choice is between losing with honesty and integrity or gaslighting our detractors and fighting really dirty and winning. For example, we need to be promoting the narrative that insists we wouldn’t have had a lockdown at all if Trump hadn’t dropped the ball, and pushing it hard. It scares me that no one has the balls to do this. We need a Roger Stone and a Karl Rove.

And, for what it’s worth - I believe Trump is innocent of one and a half of the many allegations that were made about him. I think the Katie Johnson allegation - the 13 year old that alleged a brutal rape and beating by Trump at Epstein’s house - is completely non-credible. There is another allegation where I believe the physical act probably happened but I think it was consensual.
  #97  
Old 05-09-2020, 11:42 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 37,855
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sdowiat View Post
How can we best explain to daughters that we "Believe Every Woman" .... except THIS ONE?
This is a straw-man argument. And coming from an apparent supporter of Trump, it's not credible that you actually care about accusations of sexual assault.
  #98  
Old 05-09-2020, 12:04 PM
Jonathan Chance is offline
Domo Arigato Mister Moderato
Moderator
 
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: On the run with Kilroy
Posts: 23,668

The Moderator Speaks


Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
This is a straw-man argument. And coming from an apparent supporter of Trump, it's not credible that you actually care about accusations of sexual assault.
That'll earn you a warning, andy. Phrase it however you like that's still an accusation of lying. Don't do it again.
  #99  
Old 05-09-2020, 12:05 PM
Jophiel's Avatar
Jophiel is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Chicago suburbia
Posts: 20,033
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sdowiat View Post
She looks and sounds a lot more believable than him... No dodging... no him hawing... no deer in the headlights look.
Her story has been "This happened... I mean that happened.. by which I mean this other things happened. But you know it's true because I reported it... well, not really reported it... and when I say 'it' I don't mean that I reported 'it'... but my family and friends will back me up... by the second or third time you ask them..."

But I don't doubt that this interview looks better if this is the first you've actually learned about the story so far.
  #100  
Old 05-09-2020, 12:09 PM
Shodan is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 40,870
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
This is a straw-man argument. And coming from an apparent supporter of Trump, it's not credible that you actually care about accusations of sexual assault.
It's funny how little we hear about slut-shaming from the woke folk now, and how little we hear from them about treating accusers badly when Reade gets called a nut and a floozy and politically motivated and a liar.

Also funny how the response to this -
Quote:
From now until November, I’m ignoring all of it and defending the Democratic candidate like Trump supporters defend Trump.
snip

I do think Biden is innocent of this accusation, but I don’t know that my position would change if I didn’t, especially in the absence of any alternative path to take back our nation.
is to accuse somebody else of not caring about sexual assault.

Funny. Not ha-ha funny, but funny.

Regards,
Shodan
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:08 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017