The Joe Biden sexual assault allegation

[soundforbjt]

So notes 20 years after the fact(as I recall the Therapy took place) is greater corroboration than 4 Witnesses and a Phone Call to a National Call-in show from at the same time of the Alleged event to a few years later? Do you understand why many think Reade's allegations have been better corroborated?

No, I do not. She's changed her story multiple times, iirc, none of her "witnesses" came forward until this last year. There's absolutely no proof that phone call was from her mother, it was probably Reade herself on the phone.

 

[sandorski]

No, I do not. She's changed her story multiple times, iirc, none of her "witnesses" came forward until this last year. There's absolutely no proof that phone call was from her mother, it was probably Reade herself on the phone.

A Conspiracy 30 years in the making. Ya, that seems more reasonable...

 

[brycejones]

A Conspiracy 30 years in the making. Ya, that seems more reasonable...

Where did he say that?

 

[fskimospy]

So notes 20 years after the fact(as I recall the Therapy took place) is greater corroboration than 4 Witnesses and a Phone Call to a National Call-in show from at the same time of the Alleged event to a few years later? Do you understand why many think Reade's allegations have been better corroborated?

Reade also has told numerous mutually exclusive stories about her time with Biden, has claimed documentary evidence that does not appear to exist, and has deceptively altered her previous writings to better comport with her current claims. Ford on the other hand has been entirely consistent.

So no, I don’t see how any reasonable person would see that as the entirety of Reade’s corroboration is what she told others and we have good cause to think when she says something she’s lying.

 

[soundforbjt]

A Conspiracy 30 years in the making. Ya, that seems more reasonable...

Where's the proof from 30 years ago? There is none, zero.

 

[fskimospy]

A Conspiracy 30 years in the making. Ya, that seems more reasonable...

How about just a sad person who wanted attention and still does?

 

[fskimospy]

So?

Democrats have done far more damage than Reade. Did she get in Obama’s time machine to tell her neighbor about the assault and ask her mom to call Larry King?

Glad to see Democrats come around to acknowledge the importance of due process...all it took was credibly accusing one of their’s.

Kavanaugh and Biden will get the same due process, which is simply people evaluating the available information and determining if it’s more likely than not that he did it. That’s what Kavanaugh was getting, then he decided to perjure himself and the Republicans decided letting the facts come out was a bad idea.

 

[interchange]

Both accusations are equally credible when evaluated to the standard that Democrats advocated. #Ibelieveher*

* when politically convenient

Can you provide some specific evidence here where someone made statements arguing for a certain standard of evidence RE: Blasey-Ford which are not the same as they argued RE: Reade?

I'm skeptical of your premise, but believe there are likely some inconsistencies and biases to be found nonetheless. Still, you have painted a picture. Please substantiate it.

So notes 20 years after the fact(as I recall the Therapy took place) is greater corroboration than 4 Witnesses and a Phone Call to a National Call-in show from at the same time of the Alleged event to a few years later? Do you understand why many think Reade's allegations have been better corroborated?

I can understand where a cursory look at this could lead to that conclusion. However, an objective review of the individual corroborating accounts would I believe lead a rational person to feel Blasey-Ford's complaint has more evidentiary support. That is excluding the other differences (sworn testimony, polygraph, consistency in account, indicators of overall credibility in character, etc.) which greatly change things.

 

[sandorski]

Where's the proof from 30 years ago? There is none, zero.

The fucking Phone Call.

 

[soundforbjt]

The fucking Phone Call.

Who's on the call? Do you know for sure it's Reade's mother? Do you have proof it wasn't Reade herself?

 

[Brainonska511]

The fucking Phone Call.

Why would that make it a "conspiracy"? There are multiple reasons for that phone call to exist, many of them having nothing to do with a conspiracy.

 

[fskimospy]

Who's on the call? Do you know for sure it's Reade's mother? Do you have proof it wasn't Reade herself?

Not to mention it alleges no assault, just a non-specific problem with an unnamed senator and if you listen to the mom she seems remarkably not upset considering her child was supposedly raped by this guy.

 

[sandorski]

Can you provide some specific evidence here where someone made statements arguing for a certain standard of evidence RE: Blasey-Ford which are not the same as they argued RE: Reade?

I'm skeptical of your premise, but believe there are likely some inconsistencies and biases to be found nonetheless. Still, you have painted a picture. Please substantiate it.



I can understand where a cursory look at this could lead to that conclusion. However, an objective review of the individual corroborating accounts would I believe lead a rational person to feel Blasey-Ford's complaint has more evidentiary support. That is excluding the other differences (sworn testimony, polygraph, consistency in account, indicators of overall credibility in character, etc.) which greatly change things.

Some of your criteria are things that haven't been offered for Reade. However, the point was that Ford's 1 distant corroboration was superior to Reade's multiple contemporary to near after corroborations.

 

[sandorski]

Why would that make it a "conspiracy"? There are multiple reasons for that phone call to exist, many of them having nothing to do with a conspiracy.

No, his contention that Reade herself made the call is the Conspiracy. i'm not suggesting there was a Conspiracy.

 

[interchange]

Some of your criteria are things that haven't been offered for Reade. However, the point was that Ford's 1 distant corroboration was superior to Reade's multiple contemporary to near after corroborations.

I believe that's a rational conclusion. We can look at things individually for Reade:
1. Mom Larry King phone call -- mentions neither sexual assault nor harassment, and tone and content not suggestive of major violation

2. Brother's initial interview with WaPo stated that Reade told him about inappropriate touching of neck and shoulders but not sexual assault and days later by text changed to say she told him he put his hands "under her clothes". This is a changing account by someone with a close ongoing personal relationship with Reade, and it is actually a contemporary account not contemporaneous because it was shared in present day and not memorialized at the time.

3. Lorraine Sanchez attested that she reported at the time that she had been sexually harassed by a former boss in DC and subsequently fired but no recollection of any sexual assault. Again, a contemporary account of something different than what is being currently alleged.

4. Linda LaCasse shared details lining up with Reade's story. This is the only one which really supports a sexual assault claim. It is also a contemporary account, not memorialized in any way at the time it was reported to be shared, and it was told at least a couple years after the alleged incident in the first place. Troublingly, LaCasse came forward after having a conversation with Tara Reade recently, having not spontaneously remembering the story without that conversation. That puts the veracity of the memory in significant doubt, but it is still the only story that has any merit.


Contrasting to Blasey-Ford. Also not contemporaneous since it was offered years later. But being years removed from her retelling of the story is a big bonus. Firstly because it is removed from the context which provides motivation for a false account. Secondly because it is memorialized in medical records so it isn't subject to modification by today's accounts. There are some issues also with it I can discuss later. Right now late for a meeting, but I hope I've provided a good framework here.

 

[Ichinisan]

... There's absolutely no proof that phone call was from her mother, it was probably Reade herself on the phone.

Are you fucking serious?

 

[Jaskalas]

Tell you what.

We'll sacrifice Biden.
If they will sacrifice Trump.

Neither man to be nominated in 2020.
Deal?

 

[soundforbjt]

Are you fucking serious?

You have proof otherwise? Even IF it was Reade's mother, there was no allegation of ANY sexual harassment or "grabbing". Nothing more than a 30 year old call from a "claimed/stated location" (where her mother lived, but no proof the call originated there) about an unnamed Senator.

 

[eelw]

Some of your criteria are things that haven't been offered for Reade. However, the point was that Ford's 1 distant corroboration was superior to Reade's multiple contemporary to near after corroborations.

Oh then let’s take the word of that 14 year old then. She told people that same week creepy Joe complimented how well endowed she is.

 

[Jhhnn]

So?

Democrats have done far more damage than Reade. Did she get in Obama’s time machine to tell her neighbor about the assault and ask her mom to call Larry King?

Glad to see Democrats come around to acknowledge the importance of due process...all it took was credibly accusing one of their’s.

So your reference to a power dynamic has nothing to do with the current situation? Glad that's out of the way. Tara used her own time machine to edit her Medium piece, didn't she? And it happened on the very day she accused Biden, strangely enough. Changed the whole meaning. At least you haven't claimed that "not about" & "not only about" have the same meaning. That exhibition of profound dishonesty discredits Reade entirely. One of my favorites is how she didn't believe Biden knew why she quit (or was it fired?) after he grabbed her by the pussy. Oh yeh. Oh Baby! Or maybe it was because Imperialism. Or sexism. Or her allegedly abusive boyfriend. Or to pursue a career as an artist. A bullshit artist, apparently. She filed a complaint with the Senate at the time. Well, it was an intake form, whatever that's supposed to mean. She doesn't have a copy, but she's sure it's in Biden's sealed files. That's why it's a secret. Her correspondence with Hummer is typical grifter speak. "How dare you call me out for stealing your money! After all I've done for you!"

But, you know, it's all about Democrats' hypocrisy so we should believe Tara because reasons. Because Kavanaugh!

 

[pauldun170]

Secretary if Senate says - "lol lets keep this going..."

Secretary of Senate declines to disclose information on Tara Reade complaint against Biden

The Secretary of the Senate has informed former Vice President Joe Biden that it has “no discretion to disclose” the existence of former aide Tara Reade’s complaint of sexual assault against t…

thehill.com

 

[soundforbjt]

People also don't seem to understand the difference between a lifelong appointment (Kavanaugh) which will shape this country for decades through his decisions vs a President (4 years - 8 years) who can also be more easily impeached.

 

[soundforbjt]

Secretary if Senate says - "lol lets keep this going..."

Secretary of Senate declines to disclose information on Tara Reade complaint against Biden

The Secretary of the Senate has informed former Vice President Joe Biden that it has “no discretion to disclose” the existence of former aide Tara Reade’s complaint of sexual assault against t…

thehill.com

Translation, they've got nothing, but will let this play out in the hopes of hurting Biden.

 

[fskimospy]

Oh then let’s take the word of that 14 year old then. She told people that same week creepy Joe complimented how well endowed she is.

She also had multiple corroborating witnesses who claim she told them that at the time it happened and her own mother (and likely witch) claimed she saw it herself!

There is one minor problem with this accusation though and it's that Joe Biden wasn't even at the event in question. Then of course they said it happened the year prior, at which time Joe Biden wasn't even in the state.

 

[eelw]

I don’t know. The head of state represents the entire country. How evangelicals can look past all his issues is absurd. Sure SCOTUS should also be a moral leader but they are 1 of many.

 

[sandorski]

I believe that's a rational conclusion. We can look at things individually for Reade:
1. Mom Larry King phone call -- mentions neither sexual assault nor harassment, and tone and content not suggestive of major violation

2. Brother's initial interview with WaPo stated that Reade told him about inappropriate touching of neck and shoulders but not sexual assault and days later by text changed to say she told him he put his hands "under her clothes". This is a changing account by someone with a close ongoing personal relationship with Reade, and it is actually a contemporary account not contemporaneous because it was shared in present day and not memorialized at the time.

3. Lorraine Sanchez attested that she reported at the time that she had been sexually harassed by a former boss in DC and subsequently fired but no recollection of any sexual assault. Again, a contemporary account of something different than what is being currently alleged.

4. Linda LaCasse shared details lining up with Reade's story. This is the only one which really supports a sexual assault claim. It is also a contemporary account, not memorialized in any way at the time it was reported to be shared, and it was told at least a couple years after the alleged incident in the first place. Troublingly, LaCasse came forward after having a conversation with Tara Reade recently, having not spontaneously remembering the story without that conversation. That puts the veracity of the memory in significant doubt, but it is still the only story that has any merit.


Contrasting to Blasey-Ford. Also not contemporaneous since it was offered years later. But being years removed from her retelling of the story is a big bonus. Firstly because it is removed from the context which provides motivation for a false account. Secondly because it is memorialized in medical records so it isn't subject to modification by today's accounts. There are some issues also with it I can discuss later. Right now late for a meeting, but I hope I've provided a good framework here.

1 I don't find this to be very compelling. Mainly because certain things people don't just blurt out, especially if there are concerns around power dynamics and also the person speaking is not directly involved. The mother was likely respecting her daughters wishes or concerns.

As for her Tone, like I have said earlier in the thread, what Tone should she have? Especially when you are involving a Third Party on a National Live broadcast and trying to protect someone close to you at the same time. She wasn't trying to expose anyone, she was asking for help in what avenue should be taken to get a proper addressing of concerns. It was especially timely due to the guests on his show at the time would seem likely to have ideas on the subject.

2 I believe the brother was 15 or so at the time. How many 15 year olds would be told full details of such a thing? Not too many I suspect.

3 Victims of Sexual Assault don't always fully divulge what happened to them to everyone. They are generally quite guarded on the subject.

4 As far as I understand it, Tara informed her that she was going to come forth with the full details and wanted some backup with it if she was willing. Granted, it could be nefarious in the sense of being a lie/deception. However, it is not unreasonable to ask someone to help if you wanted to finally put yourself out there on something as risky as this.