Grey, gray and muddy grey’s are almost a sure thing to find in sexual assault charges. What is the requirement of proof before deciding that the person should be removed, re-allocated, or not confirmed as the judge/president/candidate/santiation worker etc?
The moral reason is enough to investigate (and obviously journalists will already be doing so), but there’s still a very strong political reason – the campaign needs to know all the potential lines of attack, coming from Trump or coming from elsewhere. If an allegation is false, they need to be able to demonstrate this as best they can, to refute it.
Then Democrats explain that
[ul][li]Accusations from decades ago, with no witnesses, no physical evidence, and no corroboration aren’t credible[/li][li]False accusations are rare, but that doesn’t mean this accusation is true[/li][li]Occasionally women lie about sexual assault because [list][]they misremembered []they exaggerated something[]they’re crazy []they were put up to it [*]they had political motivations[/ul][/li][li]That the press should go thru an accuser’s background and see what they find, and then publish it if they see fit[/li][li]That women should feel empowered to come forward[/list][/li]
I kid, I kid. Actually they will change the subject as hard as they can, and then vote for Biden anyway.
Regards,
Shodan
Facts are also possible. Without investigating, we won’t know. The possibility of not finding conclusive facts is a pathetic reason not to investigate. This is a possibility with every investigation into any accusation.
Case by case. I already voted for another candidate, and I’d prefer we had someone else as the presumptive nominee. My judgement will be reserved to see the results of investigations, or at the time I have to actually make a decision (i.e. at the ballot box).
Snark aside, have you considered the possibility that some human beings actually really, really care about this issue and take it very seriously?
I’m sure some people will follow up but I doubt it will satisfy your need for a full investigation.
One big difference between this accusation and the accusations against Trump is that one of Trump’s accusers was Trump himself. Either Trump is a sexual predator, or Trump is a false accuser, and either way, he shouldn’t be elected.
His “national relevance” is short? They put him on the scotus for life, ALSO stealing that seat from a D potus. That is more “national relevance” than should be tolerated by US voters. It’s just about eternal.
We’ll see. Obviously this isn’t about me – I’m just sharing my opinion.
The point was his short time in the public eye, not the length of his appointment.
Well, what in your opinion would be a “full investigation”?
No he’s saying that Joe Biden was “nationally prominent” back in the 70s when he became a Senator, or at least in 2008 when he was a VP candidate, and Reade could have (should have?) made her accusations at some point then. That she’s now coming out at the 11th hour before a presidential nomination is somehow a mark against her, whereas Blasey-Ford had no choice but to come out with her accusation at the 11th hour because that was the first time Kavanaugh rose to national prominence.
This of course ignores the fact that Kavanaugh was a federal judge for 15 years prior to his SCOTUS nomination, and even then I’m not sure why it’s terribly relevant that Reade waited until now. Joe Biden, as a US Senator, was already nationally prominent in 1993 when he allegedly committed the assault, so whatever fear she may have felt at the time could very well have likely carried on through his VP days.
I guess we have learned what it takes for Republican voters to start listening to women: an allegation against a Democrat.
I’m not like Trump voters who have thoroughly bought into a cult of personality. If Biden did something wrong, dump him.
How many Trump voters in this thread will say that about their cult leader?
Another trial in the court of public opinion. Awesome.
We already know how this usually goes, though; Democrats resign and Republicans get rewarded with the highest public offices. Say what you will about Bill Clinton, but the sonofabitch was as big a sociopath as any Republican.
Am I saying that what the Democratic party needs is more Bill Clintons? Hell no. What I’m saying is, we all need to strap in for another 4 years of Trump.
I’m not a professional in any related field. Something much, much more thorough than the pitiful Senate investigation into Kavanaugh. If I were a party bigwig, I’d hire the best PI agency from the city/area in question, and write a huge check telling them to find out the accuracy of the accusation as best they can.
Jimmy Dore played the whole podcast as did the Hill, on YouTube. Jimmy said when she came forward before she was dox’d and called a Russian agent.
There isn’t time for an actual investigation.
I’ll put it this way: if this opens the floodgates and other women start coming forward saying Joe grabbed their buttocks and did more than creepy hair sniffing, I’m with Ravenman: dump him.
Trump will win re-election, but I’d rather live in a plutocracy and know that the democrats purified their party. That would help me sleep (under a bridge) better at night.
This was already a possibility. IMO, this becomes more likely if we ignore accusations against the presumptive candidate – especially months before, when there’s plenty of time to pick another candidate if the accusations are accurate.
There are months until the convention. There’s time to at least find out some of the facts, if there are facts to be found.
Stop trying to make Bernie happen. 