Demand Dan Abrams apologize to Joe Biden

[Trumpocalypse]

He owes and runs the right wing Law & Crime website that first published the lying smear of Biden.
https://mobile.twitter.com/RodsandReeds/status/1256979709197344768

[Bev54]

1. I expect better of law and crime

I have seen more BS on their sister website, mediaite, and even that pisses me off, but I expect as much.

[comradebillyboy]

2. Here's the Law and Crime update

https://lawandcrime.com/2020-election/biden-campaign-provides-documents-to-dispute-eva-murry-sexual-harassment-allegation/

Biden Campaign Provides Documents to Dispute Eva Murry Sexual Harassment Allegation

On May 1, Eva Murry came forward to allege that former vice president and presumptive 2020 Democratic nominee Joe Biden sexually harassed her at a dinner in 2008. Law&Crime published her account (which has now been updated) along with corroborating witnesses who asserted that she had shared the details with them. Thirty-six hours later, the Biden campaign responded and denied that allegation by providing a series of documents that cast doubt on one of the key specifics of Murry’s allegation.

Murry had alleged the incident occurred at the First State Gridiron Dinner & Show in 2008 when Biden was still a senator from Delaware. He had recently stopped running for president but had not yet been chosen by then Sen. Barack Obama to be his running mate. A PDF version of Biden’s senatorial schedule for Saturday, May 3, 2008, the date of the dinner in question, has now been shared with Law&Crime and is sub-headlined with the phrase “REGRETS IN DELAWARE.”

[Cha]

3. "REGRETS IN DELEWARE"? wth does that mean?.. you're

only as good as your reputation, Dan Abrams.

Link to tweet

Mahalo, comradebillyboy

[Celerity]

4. it isn't RW, it is centre-left

Law & Crime

https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/law-newz/

[UCmeNdc]

6. They got it wrong. They seem to not have checked out the facts at all before publishing it.

It has nothing to do with being liberal or conservative.

[Celerity]

7. I never said they did not bollocks up the story. I was simply correcting the OP who incorrectly said

it was a RW site. I was not the person who initially interjected ideology at all.

Obviously it was very shoddy reporting.

[rockfordfile]

8. For now that's all bs. What they just did says otherwise

[Trumpocalypse]

9. One RW site calls another RW site left

[Celerity]

10. Ridiculous nt

[Cha]

5. Whatever "wing" it is.. it was shoddy reporting.. no vetting.

[uponit7771]

11. The headline chasing is disgusting