Tara Reade's public incident report does not mention Joe Biden by name.

[lapucelle]

Examining Tara Reade’s Sexual Assault Allegation Against Joe Biden

On Thursday, Ms. Reade filed a report with the Washington, D.C., police, saying she was the victim of a sexual assault in 1993; the public incident report, provided to The Times by Ms. Reade and the police, does not mention Mr. Biden by name, but she said the complaint was about him. Ms. Reade said she filed the report to give herself an additional degree of safety from potential threats.

Filing a false police report may be punishable by a fine and imprisonment.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/12/us/politics/joe-biden-tara-reade-sexual-assault-complaint.html

******************************************************************************************

Looks like Business Insider (et alia) played games with the actual facts about the incident report.

https://www.businessinsider.in/politics/news/biden-accuser-tara-reade-files-criminal-complaint-over-1993-allegation/articleshow/75089995.cms

[Iliyah]

1. I wonder how much she getting paid . . . .

[brush]

6. My thoughts as well.

[HarlanPepper]

2. Putin operative.

[lapucelle]

3. ...

After her initial complaints were reported last year by a local California newspaper, Ms. Reade said she faced a wave of criticism and death threats, as well as accusations that she was a Russian agent because of Medium posts and tweets, several of which are now deleted, she had written praising President Vladimir Putin.

Ms. Reade said that she was not working for Russia and did not support Mr. Putin, and that her comments were pulled out of context from a novel she was writing at the time.

“It was trying to smear me and distract from what happened, but it won’t change the facts of what happened in 1993,” she said.

She called her praise for Mr. Putin “misguided.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/12/us/politics/joe-biden-tara-reade-sexual-assault-complaint.html

[DBoon]

32. only misguided in that it hurts her later credibility

"damn, they caught me"

[lapucelle]

7. That's why facts matter, and folks should read them.

That's why outlets like Business Insider needs to be called out when they spin a narrative rather than report the facts.

I haven't lost those two avenues of attack against Trump And I'll make sure that all the facts are part of the phone bank talking points that I write for my phone bankers.

[Roland99]

5. SO many problems with her NEW story

Link to tweet

And what’s interesting is that she went to Katie Halper to tell this new story. Katie works with Matt Taibbi who recently went Greenwald and turned to the dark side.

PapaPear (@🏠
@Scr0dman
And the new story she does tell sounds eerily similar to one of the complaints against trump

Is this acting out his projections now?

[stillcool]

8. oy..I'm getting too old for this sh*t..

and so is she.

[mcar]

9. This seems to be a mentally disturbed person

who is getting used by people.

[Ms. Toad]

10. Before you reject this out-of-hand,

Check your confirmation bias.

How would you have responded had this allegation been made against Trump (or anyone from the Republican party)?

I spent more than a decade on anti-rape work (serving as peer advocate for around 500 women). Attacks on women who make allegations of rape (wonder how much Putin is paying her, Putin operative, she seems mentally disturbed, sounds too much like one of the allegations against Trump - and the deletion of the only post suggesting there might be something here) are par for the course.

If we truly care about ending violence against women, we will explore this allegation without assuming it is false merely because it targets one of our own.

[USALiberal]

12. Good point, we would not question anything if it was a GOPer. nt

[Drunken Irishman]

14. She's a known liar. That's why people are questioning it.

[Ms. Toad]

18. Evidence? I've seen nothing that suggests that she is a "known liar."

Aside from allegations that she is lying about this particualar issue - and I've been searching for information about this since I learned about it a few days ago.

[Drunken Irishman]

23. If you've been searching then you should know.

I outlined exactly where she's been caught in a lie in my initial reply to you.

But I'll do it again here:

A few years ago, she claimed that she left Biden's staff on her own accord. She did this because she became disenchanted with the US government and fell in love with Russia. In a 2019 article she wrote for a local California paper, she claimed she was fired by Biden's staff but that Biden probably didn't even know she had been fired. Then, in 2020, she claims Biden was the one who fired her.

Three lies right there.

From 2017 through to 2019, her twitter was filled with pro-Russian and pro-Putin tweets. When accused of being pro-Russia, she claimed this wasn't true and that she wasn't. When confronted with the tweets, she claims her pro-Putin tweets were then misguided.

In her same 2019 article, she claims Biden touched her shoulders and neck, but that it was a power thing - and doesn't even hint at being sexually assaulted. All the sudden, in 2020, she drops this revelation that Biden also fingered her in the hallway. She also states she went to the capitol police - yet there's no record of any report ever being filed (and she can't provide any information on the report). Finally, she said she spoke with three people from Biden's staff at the time - all three deny ever having that conversation with her.

[Ms. Toad]

34. What you are doing feels like vidtim blaming.

I haven't see the first.

The second is completely irrelevant. I'm relatively certain searching the online history of most us would reveal discrepancies - or embarassing things we don't remember or wish we hadn't said, and that many of us denied saying. That doesn't mean she is a "known liar." And - trashing the reputation of victims of rape is the reason we have rape shield laws.

The third is entirely consistent with the response of many rape survivors (deny, sometimes even to themselves, and let little bits of the story out at a time). That the recollection of others differs from her recollection does not mean she is lying about it.

All I'm saying is that when the allegation is against one of our own, we tend to attack the victim, dig for dirt to find reasons to discredit her - in contrast to how we respond when the allegations are against a Repbulican. That is offensive from the perspective of a community that purports to be against violence against women

[Drunken Irishman]

37. Questioning the consistencies of a victim who us accusing a man of rape is not victim blaming.

I laid out why I do not believe her. I am allowed to not believe someone who gives me reason to doubt their story. She has given plenty of people reason to doubt her story. All you have to do is read the main article linked in the OP - it paints a picture of a person whose story is very inconsistent.

[Ms. Toad]

44. And everyone is consistent in everything they do or say,

and never hides a misguided position they once took out of embarassment, and rape victims always immediately report, never blame themselves, etc.

Imposing a standard on victims of sexual assault that most of us don't live up to is searching for excuses not to believe her, not searching for the truth.

[blue cat]

59. Amber Heard changed everything

It’s not believe all women, it’s all women need to be heard. She’s a liar IMO. It’s pretty obvious if you’ve looked into it with an open mind.

[Drunken Irishman]

70. I expect a level of consistency in any accusation - whether about sexual assault or whatever.

Apparently, you don't.

So, what is your end game here? Because you just basically said, in this post, that no matter what evidence is produced, beyond her retracting her statement, it must be taken as truth. How does one seek the truth without a) looking at her possible motives and b) investigating her story?

Biden already said it was false. The people she claimed to have reported this to say she did no such thing. There's no proof she ever filed a report with capitol police back in 1993.

So, now what? If we're not able to question the consistency of her remarks, and you're willing to excuse blatant lies as embarrassment, then there is no other way to exonerate Biden in this, correct?

[OilemFirchen]

97. If she retracted her statement, that would be further proof of her veracity.

Such is the imagination of the true believer.

[Drunken Irishman]

103. I think you're right, unfortunately.

[Hortensis]

157. To insist on believing women only because they're women

is to insist on supporting vicious injustice against men because they're men. Substitute white against black for women against men, Christian against Jew, native against immigrant, whatever -- it's every bit as wrong, to the point of depravity, as any other bigoted victimization.

Horrible that people like that sometimes serve as jurors and witnesses without being exposed and weeded out by a watchful and competent justice system.

[BGBD]

144. Then

why did she open a new Twitter account to use before making the accusations? Why was her previous Twitter account full of her retweeting articles about how Joe Biden was a friend of women? Things took a pretty sudden turn for her when Biden because a rival to Bernie.

Why will no credible news agency or reporter take her story? Why would she need to run to Bernie propogandist?

Come out with an accusation that can't be proven or disproven and at the moment when Biden is about to clinch the nomination?



Am I supposed to believe that she just couldn't stomach him being President when she was apparently just fine with him being a heartbeat away from the Presidency for 8 years? And I supposed to believe that the vetting Obama did wouldn't have come up with something like this? Am I supposed to believe that the oppo done by McCain, Romney, and Trump/Giuliani wouldn't have come up with this?

We've already seen twice this year an RW nutjob try to frame a public figure for sexual assault. So, maybe we should be a little weary when somebody pops up to accuse a politician at just the moment they are about to win something against a candidate that the assuser is known to favor.

[The Magistrate]

149. This Is Classic Begging The Question, Ma'am

You begin by assuming that which you argue to prove. The result is circular reasoning --- because you assume she tells the truth, you present whatever she may have said or done as what people telling the truth usually do, and treat this as evidence in favor of her truthfulness. It is not a sound position. No one is under any obligation to believe her story. What people are under obligation to do is to assess her story, employing their 'intelligence guided by experience' in the endeavor. Her tales does not stand up well. It is of particular note that when naming an assailant had to be done under oath, and she was liable to penalties for perjury if she made a false statement, she did not name the man she has accused in public statements, when she was not legally liable for perjury, but only faced the very broad standard a public figure must prove to sue successfully for slander.

[videohead5]

175. She said

She filed a complaint in 1993 with the Senate but no one can find it and no one knows nothing about it.

Read this whole article. She has not just been inconsistent.

https://medium.com/@eddiekrassenstein/evidence-casts-doubt-on-tara-reades-sexual-assault-allegations-of-joe-biden-e4cb3ee38460

[videohead5]

176. You will have to

Copy and paste the link into your browser.

[still_one]

68. There are a lot of inconsistencies, and this bullshit is being pushed by Sanders surrogates such as

Briahna Gray. I suspect they think it will hurt Biden and make Sanders the nominee, but hypothetically if Biden did drop out, Sanders would NOT be the nominee

70% of the Democrats made it clear they do not want Sanders as the nominee, and a brokered convention would insure that

Most important, Biden denied the accusation, there is no evidence to corroborate Reade’s changing story, and I suggest people read the link below to get a full picture of the situation. If someone is being accused, It is not victim blaming for someone to defend themselves.

Her story has changed from a year ago. I believe this is a setup from the Sanders camp, and has his surrogates. There fingerprints are all over it.

"there are many inconsistencies in her story, the endless contradictions she has made over the years, and the evidence that paints a picture of someone who went from seemingly adoring Joe Biden and disliking Vladimir Putin in 2017, to someone who showed compassion and love for Vladimir Putin in 2018, to someone who accused Biden of doing horrific things to her in 2019 and 2020."


https://medium.com/eddiekrassenstein/evidence-casts-doubt-on-tara-reades-sexual-assault-allegations-of-joe-biden-e4cb3ee38460

[Cha]

77. Evidence Casts Doubt on Tara Reade's Sexual Assault Allegations of Joe Biden

https://medium.com/eddiekrassenstein/evidence-casts-doubt-on-tara-reades-sexual-assault-allegations-of-joe-biden-e4cb3ee38460

Aloha, still_one.. Here's the link.. yours isn't working.

[still_one]

78. Thanks Cha, I'll correct. When I do it on my phone the cut/paste misses sometimes

[Cha]

81. You're Welcome!

[uponit7771]

115. +1

[Historic NY]

83. There would be a record with the Capitol Police and I'm certain if there was one...

its would have already showed up. Her claims are not reflected in any written record.

No other allegation about sexual assault surfaced in the course of reporting, nor did any former Biden staff members corroborate any details of Ms. Reade’s allegation. The Times found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Mr. Biden.

All three parties that she names either did not know her or the incident.



[link:https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/12/us/politics/joe-biden-tara-reade-sexual-assault-complaint.html|]

[FloridaBlues]

111. One would think the complaint report is kept in archive

According to NYT she doesn't remember date, time or place of encounter.

[Historic NY]

112. Then here's the biggest problem she filed a complaint with DC Metro Police...

they don't have jurisdiction at the Capitol or Senate or Congressional offices.

[FloridaBlues]

126. Didn't know that. Why didn't her lawyer tell her that?

Makes you wonder about this whole story.
this may have happened to her but not with Biden.

[George II]

85. There's also this that she tweeted as the polls were closing on Super Tuesday....

...with the clear indication that Biden was going to have a great night (which he did, 11 of 14 victories). She subsequently deleted it when called out for it:

[R B Garr]

177. Well, there it is. Sounds like the "justice" she wants is

revenge for Sanders losing to Biden.

Flores was the same way. She prefaced her Biden accusations by stating she didn’t want him to be President since she supported Bernie. How stupid do they think we are.

[uponit7771]

114. Is there anything to counter what the person claimed? That much turn about in any story would make

... one doubt.

Thx in advance

[wildflower]

134. Thank you for your posts

[mzmolly]

40. She also made statements supportive of Biden

on the internet in recent years.

She later commented that she was going to state something about Biden to hurt his chances, and implied she was going to time her accusations accordingly.

I find it interesting she didn't name Biden in the complaint. She doesn't want to be legally accountable for her claims?

[Drunken Irishman]

41. Your last part really stands out.

She knows filing a false police report is a crime. If she is not naming the person she's accusing, it's probably a vague enough report where it can't be proved or disproved.

[Me.]

133. This Article On Medium May Help Out

Last edited Sun Apr 12, 2020, 10:11 PM - Edit history (1)

https://medium.com/eddiekrassenstein/evidence-casts-doubt-on-tara-reades-sexual-assault-allegations-of-joe-biden-e4cb3ee38460

[Cha]

137. Hi Me.. if you take the "@" out of the url the link works...

Evidence Casts Doubt on Tara Reade’s Sexual Assault Allegations of Joe Biden

https://medium.com/eddiekrassenstein/evidence-casts-doubt-on-tara-reades-sexual-assault-allegations-of-joe-biden-e4cb3ee38460

[Me.]

140. OMG How Is That Getting In There

[Cha]

141. For some reason that's the way Medium does it..

I learned awhile ago that just taking out the "@" makes it work.

[Me.]

143. I JUst Went Back & Looked

and there it was. You're a genius

[Cha]

145. I wish!

No, just a person who read that on DU many Moons ago and keeps passing it on.

It's kinda weird why they do that?

[lapucelle]

19. I would still question why Business Insider reported the way they did.

Business Insider called it a formal criminal complaint and then told readers that it was about Joe Biden.

It was actually an incident report that did not name Joe Biden.

I'm not sure who "we" is, but please don't include me.

[Ms. Toad]

22. How business insider reports is not (necessarily) anyway

attributable to Reade. Unfortunately a lot of what I read about a lot of things is mis-reported.

[lapucelle]

28. The purpose of the OP was to share the facts about the incident report.

I too, see a lot of things misreported. That's why I look for facts and sometimes share them.

I don't know how Business Insider got the inside track on the "story" or why Reade spoke to them.

I do know that they reported dishonestly. They need to be called out.

[MH1]

63. Your statement is not true, at least I am not part of that "we".

I *always* question allegations, coming from either gender, regardless the target.

I question, and then based on my best rational judgment, I either accept or reject the allegation, or consider it "on hold" if there doesn't seem to be enough info.

Funny thing about GOPers? There is almost always something horrible that can be proven about them, even if a particular sexual allegation cannot. If there isn't a strong case for the sexual allegation, let's stick to the facts. (Example case - although I eventually leaned toward believing the accuser - Brett Kavanaugh. There was plenty of awful stuff in his record. He should never have been confirmed even if there were no sexual allegations against him.)

In this case, there are too many gaping holes in the accuser's allegation for me to accept it.

Also in my history I have met both male and female liars who will lie as easily about sexual stuff as anything else. "Believe women" means hear them and check out the story. It doesn't mean fall for utter bullshit.

And - not relevant to Biden here, but a general statement - everyone needs to accept that sometimes, bad things are done to people and the perpetrator can never be punished, because it just cannot be proven. This is part of life. IMO it is worse to punish an innocent person for a terrible wrong that they did not do, than to let a guilty person go free because the evidence wasn't strong enough.

[Drunken Irishman]

13. Bull...

People are not assuming it's false because it's against Biden. That's a bad accusation on your part. People are dismissing it because she has not proven herself credible in the least - based on her past statements.

1) in 2009, she wrote an article about being abused by a partner she was seeing. In the article she mentions Joe Biden by name, touting working for him when he passed the Violence Against Women's Act (the assumption was that her link to Biden's advocacy for women should have made her more aware of the abuse she was going through with her boyfriend at the time - it didn't).

2) in 2017, on her personal Twitter, she consistently praised Joe Biden as a champion of women, RT'd a good amount of pro-Biden articles, some that suggested he should have run in 2016.

3) in 2019, literally a year ago, she finally accused Biden of making her uncomfortable. In an article she wrote for her local paper, she said Biden would touch her shoulder and neck. But also claimed what he did was not sexual. She never accused him of sexual assault. She certainly didn't accuse him of rape. It's a valid question to ask why she had an entire platform to write about Biden and his touching but she omitted a huge chunk of the story about being raped.

4) months later, she claims she was raped by Biden and that she has tried telling her story for a while now. Except she had a chance to back last April and came nowhere near accusing him of rape.

5) she is on the record lying about her support of Russia and Putin. Around 2017, she started posting pro-Russian and pro-Putin articles and tweets. When confronted with this, she said she never supported Putin, except her past, now deleted tweets, say otherwise. So, if she can lie about that, who's to say she isn't lying now?

6) years ago, she stated she left Washington on her own accord because she became disenchanted with American government (and fell in love with Russia). In that 2019 article, she states she was fired by Biden's staff for mentioning how uncomfortable she felt. She admits Biden probably didn't even know she had been fired. Now she claims Biden knew she was fired and was the one who advocated it after she went to someone about being raped.

7) the person she claims she went to with the accusation flatly denies this.

9) she was, as recent as January, a Bernie supporter and sent out vague tweets teasing a story that would bring Biden down.

All this together paints a picture of someone who is not credible and likely why none of the major media outlets are taking it too seriously.

[tazkcmo]

16. Well done.

She has impeached her own credibility. She has also damaged future women's claims of sexual assault/harassment due to her inconsistencies and lies.

[Kingofalldems]

20. Boom!

The gatekeepers not liking that post at all!

Nice job and extremely thorough.

[Ms. Toad]

21. Virtually all of that is also consistent with a victim of sexual abuse.

Many women who are victims of sexual abuse hide it for years - and blame themselves for it, to the point of trying to pretend it did not happen.

This all feels like dirt-digging on someone who is making an allegation we don't want to believe is true, especially when that allegation is about rape. Ever hear of the rape shield laws? They were created for a reason.

I don't know what happened in this case, but all of the response I'm seeing from Biden supporters feels like classic victim blaming.

[Drunken Irishman]

26. This just isn't true.

Many people sexually abused prove themselves credible in their story. Tara Reade has proven herself the exact opposite with the major inconsistencies she's laid out over the years.

I don't believe Tara not because she's accusing Biden (and I take offense to your snark suggesting that's the reason without any base for this), I don't believe her because she's given me multiple reasons to question her story. The most blatant being that, last April, she was asked specifically about Biden and the potential sexual assault and, instead of discussing it (after now saying she's been trying to tell her story for a while), told an entirely different story than she's telling now.

[Cha]

27. Too bad what it "feels like" to you. Tara Reade's story

is Not credible.

Read DI's post on it.

https://www.democraticunderground.com/100213272381#post13

[Ms. Toad]

38. I've read it.

From the perspective of someone who has repeatedly watched women who make allegations of sexual assault have their reputataions trashed for the purpose of making inconvenient allegations go away - I see the same thing going on here.

I don't know whether the allegation is true - but it needs to be examined without the goal being to find the truth, not discredit it.

[Cha]

49. Then Stop Accusing Biden Supporters of "dismissing it out of hand".

[Ms. Toad]

52. "Putin operative"

"I wonder how much she's getting paid?"

Those are examples, in this thread, of dismissing it out of hand.

[Cha]

56. No.. we've read the the facts & are NOT "Dismising it out of hand" like

you accuse.

[Ms. Toad]

58. So what evidence do you have that Putin is behind this?

Or that she is being paid?

What I am seeing is a knee-jerk "Biden couldn't have done this so we need to dig up dirt to discredit her," reaction.

[Cha]

61. You're not helping your case by acting like there's no "evidence"..

Read DI's post Again.

[Ms. Toad]

69. I've read it.

People do stupid things. Stupidity is not a barrier to being raped or sexually assaulted.

[Cha]

71. Still not helping your case.

[HarlanPepper]

122. ...

[ehrnst]

172. Like you are dismissing the NYT article out of hand?

Please just own that you will reject out of hand any evidence that doesn't support her allegations.

I believe that you are trying to accuse others of confirmation bias that you are denying you have.

[ehrnst]

174. Your posts indicate otherwise.

I think that you should own that.

[ehrnst]

160. It is being examined. And some are upset that the goal isn't to simply

ignore some facts, including some very disturbing inconsistencies, that aren't convenient to their particular bias.

You clearly think that the allegation is true, and are pushing back on any evidence that doesn't support your opinion.

Please don't claim that you are undecided, when your posts clearly indicate that you are not.

[lapucelle]

36. Reade accused Biden of rape? Do you have a link? N/T

[thucythucy]

75. Rape Shield laws--

--the ones that I'm familiar with anyway--protect rape survivors from having their past sexual experiences brought out in court as a way to intimidate or discredit their testimony during trial.

They don't prevent defense from presenting any and all evidence that might otherwise undermine an alleged victim's testimony.

The defense is allowed, for instance, to cross examine an alleged victim about his belief that he is from another planet, or to point out that he was previously convicted of perjury.

Neither do they prevent defense from questioning inconsistencies in the account of the assault, including contradictions of previous statements. The prosecution might then present testimony on how this might be consistent with rape trauma syndrome, or on re-examination ask the victim to explain such inconsistencies or contradictions.

But the laws aren't a carte blanche preventing any and all hostile questioning. At least, that was my understanding back in the day when I volunteered at my local rape crisis center.

I admit that it's sometimes difficult to draw the line between judicious examination of an alleged assault and victim blaming, in balancing the rights of a defendant and those of an alleged survivor.

[OnDoutside]

84. That's a pretty laughable post there. Someone has glaring, at best,

inconsistencies, and you're saying that is consistent with victims. How is the accused supposed to defend themselves against that logic ?? That's nonsense, but it suggests you're trying to wedge a narrative into this. You accused another poster of being biased, you should check out your closest mirror.

[stillcool]

105. enough!! Anyone can make an allegation...

and anyone can make a false allegation. I am so sick of 'consistent with a victim'...are you effing kidding me? That is absolute horseshit. How many women do you know who have never come forward, never said a word...because they know where it would lead. This is such horseshit Ms Toad, and it has nothing to do with being a "Biden Supporter". She wants to accuse, she needs to follow the law. Or does that not matter anymore?

[pnwmom]

125. Was her March 3 "tic toc" tweet consistent?

Link to tweet

/photo/1

[Happy Hoosier]

169. Who here is blaming the "victim?"

NO ONE.

Question the veracity of an accusation is not eh same as victim blaming. No one is saying "she asked for it" or some such nonsense.

We are questioning a confluence of circumstances and events that lead us to question the honesty of her claim.

If she has more corroborating evidence, I'm all ears. But as with the Franken claims, I am very suspicious here.

[Baltimike]

24. Thank you for this. Sometimes people claim the moral high ground while they're standing

on a heap of bullshit.

Cogent, methodical and true.

Thank you for this

[Cha]

25. Thank you, DI.. you've summed that up well from all

that I've read about it.

StaySafe

[Kingofalldems]

30. Remember Al Franken!

There was an attack squad after him on a daily basis.

[OnDoutside]

86. That's a good point.

[mzmolly]

42. Good information!

Thanks for the concise recap.

[lapucelle]

15. Wait...what? I linked to a reliable news source concerning the facts of a story

that was spun into a narrative by Business Insider yesterday.

Any other assumptions made about the post or its putative motives belong to those who making them, not to me.

But the concern is duly noted.

[Ms. Toad]

17. I was not speaking specifically to you.

You'll note that i referenced several other comments in the thread. There's no real way to speak to the entire thread of people (other than responsing to each and every post) - or to the initial thread. My experience when I say something uncomfortable to to each and every poster is that it starts dozens of (largely unproductive) conversations.

Sorry for making it appear I was specifically addressing you.

[Cha]

29. Follow your own advice.

[Ms. Toad]

35. Um, I am?

I am suggestion we not dismiss this out of hand. I am not.

[Drunken Irishman]

39. No one is dismissing it out of hand.

I am confused as to why you keep peddling this.

No one is dismissing this out of hand. It isn't like we're saying, "Joe Biden could never do this and therefore she's lying."

People are questioning her claims after doing their own research into her and realizing her story has some strong inconsistencies that she refuses to answer for.

[Ms. Toad]

50. How about you read the first half-dozen responses in this thread. n/t

[Drunken Irishman]

64. What makes you think they haven't reached that conclusion by doing their own research?

[Demsrule86]

119. I am dismissing it out of hand Joe Biden could never do this and she is lying....

Personally, I think Joe should sue the crap out of her...I know it is hard to win but the shitty story will be shown to be bullshit...I say here and now that no Democrat should even consider this story period as anything but bullshit.

[lapucelle]

43. What allegation about rape?

[Ms. Toad]

48. Digital penetration is rape, in most jurisdictions. n/t

[lapucelle]

53. Has Ms. Reade used the word rape? N/T

[Ms. Toad]

57. The first reports I saw used the word rape.

I don't recall whether the report was that she used the word or whether that was the word used by the reporter

She has described digital penetration which, as I indicated, is rape in many - if not most - jurisdictions.

Aside from which, there is no inherent difference in the emotional response of someone who has been digitally penetrated from someone who has been penetrated with a penis.

[lapucelle]

73. I'll take that to mean that Ms. Reade has not used the word "rape".

A search came up dry except for one article by a Jill Stein acolyte.

[Cha]

45. "Check your confirmation bias." Ms Toad

[Ms. Toad]

47. I have not reached a conclusion one way or the other about the veracity of this allegation

It is not a confirmation bias to assert that we need to take allegations of sexual assault seriously, and not impose standards on the life history of people who allege sexual assault that a vast majority of the world doesnt' live up to.

[lapucelle]

54. Has Ms. Reade used the word "rape"? N/T

[alp227]

90. This year, she described Biden as touching her under her clothing

A detail not made in her 2019 story to her local newspaper, where in fact she even wrote "this is not a story about sexual misconduct; it is a story about abuse of power."

[lapucelle]

95. So she hasn't used the word "rape". N/T

[HarlanPepper]

123. Are you voting for Biden in November?

[GeorgiaPeanut]

146. Why are you peddling anti-Democratic viewpoint so viscerally?

We get your point. No need to damage Biden any more.

If you believe Tara Reade, you do have options.

[ehrnst]

163. Your posts indicate otherwise.

Please just own that.

You have a definite agenda here, and it's not to weigh all the evidence before coming to a conclusion.

[Loki Liesmith]

31. I would have doubted it then too.

[mzmolly]

51. Has Democracy Now interviewed any of Trump's

accusers?

Credible allegations do need to be explored. Her allegations have been. Not only in the Times article noted above but in other reports:

https://medium.com/@eddiekrassenstein/evidence-casts-doubt-on-tara-reades-sexual-assault-allegations-of-joe-biden-e4cb3ee38460

[W_HAMILTON]

55. I don't have to pose a hypothetical, given that a similar situation actually happened.

Back during the Kavanaugh hearings, there were some allegations that appeared to be not credible. These were actually some of the ones that were released by Senate Republicans, which made me even more suspicious.

It turned out they were basically ratfucking attempts, with them using anonymous allegations that were clearly made-up to "muddy the waters" with the very real, very credible, and very evidence-based accusations made by Dr. Blasey Ford.

There are enough questions and contradictions about this woman's particular allegations for any critical thinking person to be suspicious of them.

[Ms. Toad]

60. It may or may not turn out to be true -

But what I'm seeing has all of the hallmarks of an attempt to discredit, rather than an attempt to get at the truth.

[W_HAMILTON]

66. That is just your opinion. The NY Times article attempted to get at the truth...

...and uncovered a lot of inconsistencies and outright contradictions that others have already noted.

[Skya Rhen]

91. By discrediting vs truth, do you mean how she neglected to name her alleged assailant in the police

report. One would think that if really she wanted to get at the truth, as do you, she would provide a name. Or is it her intention to throw out innuendos, in the report, for the sole purpose of discrediting a candidate that she doesn't prefer to be the Democratic nominee?

[HarlanPepper]

147. What truth?

What is the threshold of truth? Where and when does this truth inquiry end and everyone is satisfied?

Oh, that’s right. They never do. And that IS the point.

So yeah, a hard pass on this Russian crank’s story.

Who are you voting for in November? (Now asked for the second time).

[ehrnst]

161. Your posts indicate that you have clearly decided that her allegations are true.

Please just own that, and don't try to claim otherwise.

You are rejecting any objective evidence that doesn't point to the credibility of the story.

This doesn't help any of us who have survived sexual assault, no matter how much one thinks that blindly defending the credibility of every single person who accuses a public figure of something is the only way to be an ally.

[Happy Hoosier]

67. Like always, I start by assessing the credibility of the accuser.

1) She did not make the claim at the time. And in fact praised Biden since the supposed time of the incidence.

2) She has no corroborating witnesses

3) She did not make any such accusations until she declared her support for Sen. Sanders

4) She tweeted ridiculously over the top praise of Putin and Russia

None of these by themselves mean Biden didn't do it. But wrapped up together, they suggest she is a less than credible accuser to me.

I'd need a LOT more before taking her seriously. The Bros are trying to Al Franken Joe. Don't let them do it.

[Ms. Toad]

80. 1 & 2 are more characteristic of rape and sexual assault survivors than not.

As for #3, her experience may be what what caused her to support Sanders (which, in turn, may have given her the courage to speak out about it).

I have two extremely progressive friends who (now) say they will not vote for a rapist - and they include Biden in that group. They are the ones who brought this allegation to my attention. At least one of them is in a state where every vote matters (Florida). That friend is really struggling, and trying to find a way to live with his conscience and still vote for Biden - but he is not there yet. While his support for Sanders was not caused by his belief that this is true, it is the only thing that might prevent him from voting for Biden. The other lives in New York, so can probably vote her conscience without risking putting Trump back in office. There are good people, who care about the truth, who believe Reade.

As to #4, most of us have probably done stupid things we regret. I don't hold stupid against people when considering whether to believe them when thye say they were sexually assaulted or raped.

I have not seen anything yet that suggests to me her accusations should not be treated seriously - and they merit a direct response from Biden.

[Skya Rhen]

96. If she wants her accusation to be treated seriously, let her include his name in the police report.

She knows that her accusation is false so she is refusing to make a false statement with the police, which could land her in prison.

[Happy Hoosier]

108. As a survivor of sexual assault myself....

I get one and two.... to an extent.


If people choose to believe this woman, that's up to them, of course, but I do think we've come to point that Me Too has been weaponized by our enemies. Simply put, this woman's accusations morphed and changed very conveniently with her political loyalties.

Perhaps YOU don't think her ridiculous love tweet to Putin kills her credibility, but it sure does to me. I mean, that is wacky crap. I can't see how she can be seen as credible. She last was praising Putin in JANUARY.But even if you don't think that nutbaggery is suspicious, in the absence of credible witnesses or some other evidence, how this ever be more than a "he said, she said."

In short, at this moment, I see no reason to pursue this beyond where it is. I simply do not believe her. Biden has denied any sexual misconduct with women, and said this directly, " Women have a right to tell their story, and reporters have an obligation to rigorously vet those claims. We encourage them to do so, because these accusations are false." So there's your response.

[ehrnst]

164. I think that like Norma McCorvey, there are those who have

Last edited Mon Apr 13, 2020, 12:49 PM - Edit history (3)

need for validation, and will gravitate to those who give them that validation, and will do what they can to support the efforts to work against those that they believe took away validation they were promised. I think that they convince themselves that a perceived betrayal took other forms.

As was discussed in the case of Christine Blasey-Ford, there are indeed metrics that support the credibility of witness testimony of victims of trauma. Blasey-Ford met those criteria as a credible witness for that incident. Reade, under increasing scrutiny, doesn't.

Her complete reversals on political views in the past year indicate something to me, and her lack of naming the subject of her complaint, when she knows him, indicates to me that she is trying to protect herself from being charged for making a false accusations, which doesn't add to her credibility. The NYT investigation brought up some things that support that opinion.

Her accusations are being taken seriously, but it appears your vision of "being taken seriously" is to not question her in any way, not to lay out the facts, or not try to corroborate her story. Yes, I know that there are women who are pressed into recanting their testimony about a rape, and it later turns out to be true. And yes, this is a case of a woman accusing a powerful man.

I also believe that the vast majority of women who have regrets about stupid or ill-advised decisions they made do not simply decide later that it was assault.

I saw right here on DU many who cheered on Assange called the rape allegations against false because he embarassed powerful people.

I will not refuse to vote for Biden due to Reade's accusations, because I don't think that she is credible. If I thought they were credibile, I would not vote for Biden. This does not mean that I don't believe women, or understand that there is an inherent bias against believing women who accuse powerful men. It is possible to do both.

In the same way - I can believe that OJ Simpson killed his wife, and Bill Cosby raped multiple women and at the same time know that the justice system is inherently racist and biased against black men.

I also don't think that you are approaching this objectively, reading the posts that you have made. Please just own that.

[Gothmog]

102. The NYT looked at the story and the facts did not hold up

Link to tweet

[HarlanPepper]

120. ...

[pnwmom]

129. Why do you think she filed a report, supposedly for her "protection,"

27 years after the alleged attack, but then didn't name the person she was claiming assaulted her?

How would such a report give her protection? Why would a person not name an assaulter when they know who the assaulter issei's?

[mzmolly]

131. Good question.

[pnwmom]

136. Maybe because it's a felony to file a false police report

but you can say whatever you want in a tweet or an interview.

[Cha]

142. Excellent point.. TY.

[mzmolly]

148. Yep.

[kcr]

150. Before posting, check your facts

No matter how much you think you're an expert on everything.

[pnwmom]

153. What fact are you suggesting is wrong? n/t

[kcr]

154. Just about everything she's posting n/t

[qazplm135]

178. And I spent more than a decade prosecuting and defendings sexual assault cases

100s I was directly on, at least 1000 I either supervised, advised on, or reviewed in some manner.

So if your experience is relevant, I would submit mine is as well.

These aren't "attacks." They aren't saying she's a slut. They aren't saying she dressed provocatively. They aren't saying she wanted it. These are indicia of bias, a motive to fabricate. But you know what, the Putin stuff is at the bottom of the list. Ignore it. Throw it out.

1. She says she reported it at the time. No one there says she did. That's a pretty big discrepancy. You'd have to believe they are all lying, and she's telling the truth.

2. Up until 2017, she was praising Biden for his views/efforts/response on/to sexual assault. There was no reason for this. She was not working for him. She was not reliant on his good graces for her livelihood. It's one thing to say nothing out of fear, but she wasn't being threatened by him. She wasn't trying to butter him up. A sex assault victim does not do this. I have never seen anything like this in any of those 100s of cases.

3. When she did report this, it was unwanted attention/touching. That's it. She was CLEAR that it wasn't sexual. This is also about the same time as she started getting involved in supporting his political opponents. That's called bias. That's called motive to fabricate. Does it, alone, mean she's lying? No. Is it a data point? Yes.

4. She then changes her story SIGNIFICANTLY a year later when it's down to Biden/Bernie. She supported Bernie. Sex assault victims get details wrong, but they get the general story the same. This isn't a "it was 230 instead of 200" nitpicking. I don't even have a problem that it happened decades ago. Means nothing as to whether it happened or not. But to give one version of events, and then a year later give a completely different version of events is not faulty memory. One of those two versions is a lie. And in reality, there are three versions if you include the version up until 2017 that says he was great on sex assault and everything else. So two out of those three versions is a lie.

5. She lied about why she left the campaign. Either she lied about her original reason which was not negative at all, or her second reason which was anti-Russian sentiment, or her third reason which was Biden being inappropriate, or her fourth reason which was Biden sexually assaulted her. Again, when most versions are a lie, that's yet another reason to reject what she is saying.

So, to sum up, no one is rejecting "out of hand." There are real, definite, multiple reasons to not believe her story. Her credibility is in tatters, and her motives are in question. And that's even if you ignore the Putin stuff, or yes the fact that the allegations are almost exactly like the ones against Trump.

I'm willing to believe that Joe Biden could have done this. Any man is capable of momentary evil. What I find unlikely given what we know about the man is that he did it in such a cold way. The guy is personable. IF I were to believe the stuck his fingers up someone's crotch, I don't believe he would have just walked right up to someone, no hello, no speech, no "hey girl" just fingers in crotch. Nor do I believe he would have told "she's nothing."

So, even as I can agree that Biden is not magically immune to ever doing something sexually inappropriate, I also can see that the story she tells does not in any way line up with how I would expect him to do it, if he did do it.

Nothing about her story tracks. Nothing about her story aligns with what we know about him. Nothing about her story remains consistent, either internally or over time. She's got clear motive to fabricate and clear bias.

So, it's been "explored." There's nothing else to explore. There's already too many problems. If this were a plane...it wouldn't have wings, an engine, a fuselage or a cockpit, but you'd have us explore the single seat on the ground to see if maybe it can fly? Nah.

[FM123]

181. You make some very good points quazpim135.

I was thinking about Joe Biden and how different his reaction seemed from Trump, or Weinstein, Epstein or even Cosby - he did not accuse them of being liars, he did not try to pay them hush money, or threaten them or even lawyer up - what does this say to an attorney like yourself? While reactions may vary from victim to victim depending on how traumatized they were- how consistent is Biden's reaction to someone who is innocent, or guilty?

[qazplm135]

182. I mean a guilty person can be smart

and an innocent person dumb. I tend to look more at the evidence, consistency, motive/bias, the standard stuff.

Short of a confession or consciousness of guilt evidence, I don't think you necessarily learn from the reaction of the accused whether they are innocent or guilty. A smart person says nothing or gives a general denial and leaves it at that.

[FM123]

185. Thanks for your answer!

[Politicub]

11. She reminds me of the person who said someone carved Obama on her face

Remember that? It turned out to be a lie, too.

[Drunken Irishman]

33. It's curious she wouldn't name Biden in her police report...

Almost sounds like she's setting up plausible deniability when it comes to filing a false police report.

[Indykatie]

46. Isn't It Odd To File a Complaint and Not Mention The Attacker's Name

I'm so over this story and don't care if folks accuse me of not believing this woman just because she's accusing a Democrat. But seriously, we're being asked to believe that Biden fingered her in a public corridor in a Senate building where anyone could have come upon them. In those days it was common for women to be wearing panty hose. It's can't be that easy to finger someone in a hallway even if they're just wearing panties. There's a reason this story isn't sticking to Biden. It's too f**king ridiculous even without Ms. Read's Putin crush.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

62. This story is unsettling and I don't know what to think

I've read a few articles about it that have raised some of the questions mentioned here and I have lots of left-leaning friends on my FB posting this story and/or others calling him a "rapist" at least a thousand times a day and vowing never to vote for him, not in the primary, nor the general (which is their right, of course) but I don't really have any good responses about this and have mostly stayed silent about it and not even talked about who I'm voting for in November. I do wonder why Trump/GOP haven't started jumping on this story yet (and it's not like Trump is too distracted by the Pandemic to tweet about everything else)? Does anybody know what the Biden camp is saying? I find it strange that nothing came up when he ran for VP with Obama back in 2009. Also, the story seems rather extreme for Biden. I don't know the guy personally and I know that he has had some issues about being "touchy" and making some women feel uncomfortable but it's hard to see him being really awful like this, especially in such a public area. How do we discuss and litigate this?

[still_one]

72. Biden has categorically denied it.

Her story has changed from a year ago. I believe this is a setup from the Sanders camp, and his surrogates. Their fingerprints are all over it.

"there are many inconsistencies in her story, the endless contradictions she has made over the years, and the evidence that paints a picture of someone who went from seemingly adoring Joe Biden and disliking Vladimir Putin in 2017, to someone who showed compassion and love for Vladimir Putin in 2018, to someone who accused Biden of doing horrific things to her in 2019 and 2020."

https://medium.com/eddiekrassenstein/evidence-casts-doubt-on-tara-reades-sexual-assault-allegations-of-joe-biden-e4cb3ee38460

[Demsrule86]

117. He was VP and and underwent extensive clearance by the FBI ...this person Tara whoever has no

credibility and I say to you Sanders will never by the nominee period...even if his campaign continues this nonsense. You only don't know what to think because you don't like Biden...as for your FB friends unfriend them those who won't vote for Biden are Trumpers...we will not have this shit every time someone on the left doesn't like a person who won the primary. NO. And I don't even see the point of these sort of threads and will trash them from now on.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

135. Biden was not my first choice (Warren was)

BUT I desperately want him to beat Trump. I also don't want to brush off allegations against anybody either, although these seem sketchy at best and hope beyond hope these don't sink him in November. The attitude by several progs/Bernie stans worry me but I am beyond exhausted dealing with them.

[RandySF]

151. Didn't she also claim that Putin was interested in her?

[Proud Liberal Dem]

158. I believe that I have heard that

[ehrnst]

167. We investigate the allegations. We look at the facts.

We take into account the credibility of those making the accusations. The Biden campaign is denying the allegations.

Read the NYT article in the OP for full information.

Yes, it's strange that Reade suddenly made a huge reversal in her politics and opinion on Biden in the last year. She was praising him on Twitter in 2017 for being a champion of victims of sexual assault:

Link to tweet

We can believe women about sexual assault, and acknowledge that one could be making less than credible accusations, just like one can acknowledge that the criminal justice system is biased against black men, and also believe that Bill Cosby did rape women.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

168. +1

[Historic NY]

65. The safety is called offering a false report for filing.

Knowing that to be true, she can't name him

[Drunken Irishman]

74. Exactly.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

76. So

are you saying that she didn't name him specifically to protect herself against claims of filing a false report?

[Drunken Irishman]

82. Yes.

In her police report she filed, she did not name Biden. The implication here is that she didn't name a name because if it's ambiguous, there really isn't a way to prove or disprove her claim and therefore no way to determine if it's a false police report or not.

Why didn't she name Biden?

[Proud Liberal Dem]

88. Good question.

She's made the accusation and everybody who's aware of the story know that the incident report she just filed is about him, so why be coy with it now? I don't have an answer for it.

[GeorgiaPeanut]

79. That is proof enough that she is filing a false report

and said incident never happened

[Celerity]

87. Why did the New York Times do an unacknowledged edit?

I have zero problem with ex post facto editing, as long as it is acknowledged, which the NYT's is usually quite fastidious at.

Here is the original paragraph in question, the now deleted part is in bold:

https://web.archive.org/web/20200412101553/https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/12/us/politics/joe-biden-tara-reade-sexual-assault-complaint.html

Mr. Biden last year, to discuss their experiences with him.

No other allegation about sexual assault surfaced in the course of reporting, nor did any former Biden staff members corroborate any details of Ms. Reade’s allegation. The Times found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Mr. Biden, beyond the hugs, kisses and touching that women previously said made them uncomfortable.

On Thursday, Ms. Reade filed a report with the Washington, D.C.,

snapshot





and the post edit version

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/12/us/politics/joe-biden-tara-reade-sexual-assault-complaint.html

Mr. Biden last year, to discuss their experiences with him.

No other allegation about sexual assault surfaced in the course of reporting, nor did any former Biden staff members corroborate any details of Ms. Reade’s allegation. The Times found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Mr. Biden.

On Thursday, Ms. Reade filed a report with the Washington, D.C.,

snap shot




no acknowledgement

[lapucelle]

94. It says "updated" in the 12:23 PM byline.

If you want to know why the story was updated, you should contact the New York Times.

[Celerity]

98. Probably their legal department would be my guess, it just caught my eye as I had the original

version up and then accidently closed the window and when I saw you OP I went back and finished the article, and noticed the missing part.

[lapucelle]

100. I think it was the legal department too. N/T

[Celerity]

101. +1

thanks for the OP, btw

[alp227]

109. NYT acknowledged this edit on Twitter

Tweeted that there was "some imprecise language that has been changed in the story."

Link to tweet

[Celerity]

110. cool, thanks for the info!

[dustyscamp]

89. I think authorities should get her & Biden to take a polygraph test

Toss in an expert to interview them both afterwards to see if there is anything funny going on. If they find her to be telling the truth they should continue the investigation. If nothing comes of it they should fine her for making false claims

[Drunken Irishman]

92. Hard to do when she refuses to name Biden in her police report.

She claims she was sexually assaulted but refused to say it was Biden when she filed a police report Friday.

[oasis]

106. And expand publicity? Not the best way to make this go away. nt

[Tarc]

139. What the fuck, do you watch too much Dragnet?

Discredited, century-old technology.

[dustyscamp]

183. Most of us know here that here story is all over the place and she is probably lying

The general public though doesn't really look into this so when they are fed lies they will probably believe it. I think it would help public perception on Biden if authorities did all this. They don't have to do any tests on Biden just on Tara Reade. I just feel like Biden won't be able to brush this off like how Trump or Kavanaugh did because he is a very different man than them. A better man. Anyway I'm going to come back to this after November's election to see if it hurt Bidens chances at all.

[obamanut2012]

156. lolololol a polygraph

Okay, Dr. Phil.

[Happy Hoosier]

170. To what end?

There is no possibility of a prosecution here. If a crime did occur (it didn't), the statute of limitations has expired.

[Wellstone ruled]

93. Forgot to add this,

this is a majority China owned company.

[lapucelle]

130. What is a majority China owned company? N/T

[Gothmog]

99. New York Times 'Deep Dive' Clears Joe Biden Of Sexual Misconduct: 'No Pattern' Of Bad Behavior

Link to tweet

Unsurprisingly, the NYT found no evidence that Biden sexually assaulted Reade and, what’s more, they “found no pattern of sexual misconduct” by Biden, despite years of claims of unwanted harassment and touching by multiple women.

“The Times interviewed Ms. Reade on multiple days over hours, those she told about Mr. Biden’s behavior and friends,” the lead reporter on the story tweeted Sunday. “The Times also interviewed lawyers who spoke to Ms. Reade; nearly 24 people who worked with Mr. Biden in the 1990s and 7 women who criticized Mr. Biden last year.”

“No other allegation about sexual assault surfaced in the course of reporting, nor did any former Biden staff members corroborate any details of Ms. Reade’s allegation,” she added. “The Times found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Mr. Biden.”

The Times does admit that Reade made contemporaneous complaints about the assault to friends, and that she didn’t simply “discover” that she’d been assaulted by Biden in the last several months or years, as Biden’s name surfaced as a potential presidential contender. In fact, the Times does go out of its way to catalog Reade’s claims, made several times over the course of several years — not dissimilar claims made against now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh by a former high school classmate.
“A friend said that Ms. Reade told her about the alleged assault at the time, in 1993,” the Times reports. “A second friend recalled Ms. Reade telling her in 2008. Ms. Reade said she also told her brother, who has confirmed parts of her account publicly and her mother, who has since died.”

That should give the Times pause — after all, it all but declared Brett Kavanaugh guilty of sexual assault over a similar, largely unsubstantiated claim last year. Dr. Christine Blasey Ford, in contrast, did not make any contemporanous reports of her assault, and the only friend who had any recollection of high school summer parties with Kavanaugh and his friends, a woman by the name of Leyland Keyser, said she remembered nothing.

Instead, the Times goes out of its way not just to clear Joe Biden of responsibility in Reade’s incident — but in all incidents, in a shocking statement.

[Cha]

104. Thank you for this, Goth! Unsurprisingly, the NYT found no evidence that Biden sexually assaulted..

Link to tweet

[Rstrstx]

128. Umm, I think that was sarcastic (at best) since it's coming from the daily wire

They are trying to discredit the NY Times story.

According to Snopes, "DailyWire.com has a tendency to share stories that are taken out of context or not verified", including reports on protesters digging up Confederate graves, Democratic congresspeople refusing to stand for a fallen Navy SEAL's widow, and Harvard University holding segregated commencement ceremonies

[healthnut7]

113. Money

First thing I thought of!! It's always about the money. I wonder which Republican is paying her!! This sure sounds like their MO!!
Shame on her for doing this!!

[OKNancy]

116. She launched a lawsuit several years ago saying she was discriminated against for being white

So "Tara" apparently launched a nonsensical lawsuit several years ago saying she was discriminated against for being white.

Link to tweet

She was also sued by her law school

Link to tweet

[Cha]

138. Wow.. Thanks for that, OKNancy..

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

[MustLoveBeagles]

152. It sounds like she's a fry short of a happy meal

[Happy Hoosier]

171. This woman is shady as fuck. NT

[thucythucy]

179. Thank you for this.

I know this information will be useful.

[spanone]

118. THIS is probably only the beginning of the shit they will throw at Joe.

IGNORE IT ALL.

[lapucelle]

124. I think it's important to correct the record. I've also done enough campaign

volunteering to know that you need to have real, fact based-answers for on-the-fence voters.

The NYT piece is a good news story, especially for anyone who wants to get an early jump on oppo.

I am not going to ignore it. I am going to arm myself with facts.

[DenverJared]

121. Tara Reade is a fraud

I bet she was a part of David Sirota's dirty tricks campaign.

[la-trucker]

127. I never believed Tara Reade

The timing is not consistent with a true victim.

She is fake, a liar and a dirty trick by Putin or the Sanders campaign.

[Skittles]

132. I'm no big Biden fan

but her story sounds utterly ridiculous

[kcr]

155. Vox did the same thing

A Jezebel reject wrote a similar article. She even linked to the one at BI as a source.

[ehrnst]

159. Avoiding a false report charge?

That's the only justification that I can see for doing that.

[lapucelle]

165. Who is the blond women in the gif in your sig line?

What was the context? That's priceless.

[ehrnst]

166. That was an Italian interpreter listening to what she had to translate...

https://theconversation.com/confusion-of-donald-trumps-italian-interpreter-goes-viral-why-some-jobs-are-meant-to-be-invisible-125593

[Tommy_Carcetti]

162. This woman does not need to be believed.

Nor does someone like Juanita Broaddrick need to be believed.

And no, that's not cognitive dissonance simply because of who the person is accused is. At one point, I loved Bill Cosby. But the claims against him had substance, and after considering the evidence, he sexually assaulted women and I believe he was rightfully convicted for it.

But bullshit is bullshit. And this is bullshit.

[Clash City Rocker]

180. Meanwhile, a couple dozen women have accused Trump of sexual misconduct

We’re supposed to disbelieve all of them, but take this woman’s word as gospel truth?

[Ilsa]

184. This woman is mentally ill, I think.

She's an attention seeker, probably a sociopath, delusional.

[ConnorMarc]

186. Yeah, and...?

So what?

I thought Democrats said that we must "believe every woman?"

What happened to that creed?

[lapucelle]

188. ...

[Gothmog]

187. Joan Walsh at the Nation-The Troublesome Tara Reade Story

Link to tweet

There is no evidence former Vice President Joe Biden, now the assumptive Democratic presidential nominee, sexually assaulted aide Tara Reade in 1993. There is no evidence he did not. Reade claims he did — specifically, that he pushed her against a wall and digitally penetrated her against her will, when she worked in his US Senate office. Biden’s campaign firmly denies it.

The story originated on the left, just about three weeks ago, when diehard Bernie Sanders supporter Katie Halper hosted Reade on her podcast, and encouraged her to tell her story publicly for the first time in 27 years. The story took off from there, on the left and the right, with certain Sanders supporters and Donald Trump backers (whose own man is credibly accused of sexual assault or extreme harassment by more than a dozen women) accusing the mainstream media of pro-Biden bias for not investigating the charges against him.....

Where does this leave us? Reade’s shifting stories are a huge problem, as they would be for anyone claiming to be the victim of a crime. And as someone who has personally criticized Biden for his persistent invasion of women’s personal space — up to and including multiple accounts of touching and kissing — I find her allegation hard to believe. Is it possible? Sure. Is it probable? No.

And here’s why, in addition to Reade’s credibility issues: in his closely documented, almost 50-year career, there have been no other similar claims against Biden. The Times interviewed the other seven women who came out last year to accuse Biden of touching them against their will; none said his behavior crossed the line to sexual assault. After many dozen interviews, with Reade and her friends, along with lawyers and two dozen Biden staffers, the writers concluded: “The Times found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Mr. Biden.” Men who do what Reade says Biden did tend to do it more than once (see Harvey Weinstein, Jeffrey Epstein and Donald Trump). Also, once an allegation like Reade’s surfaces, others usually follow. They have not, at least so far.....

Reporters have done just that with Tara Reade. Her allegation against Biden doesn’t stand up to close scrutiny. And bullying by the left or right won’t change that.