The Joe Biden sexual assault allegation

[Starbuck1975]

No it clearly absolutely does not in the ways that are relevant. The equivalent would have been Reade trying to discretely air the issue when Biden was being considered for the VP position, but Obama had not announced a decision yet. Given the importance of the VP position and if something had happens to Obama Biden would have been President, it is also comparatively stranger she did not try to bring the accusation to the attention of the Obama campaign at the time. Even if she was willing to personally overlook the issue at the time and still support Obama for President, logically speaking she should have been worried what supposedly happened to her suggests a serial offender, so you think she would have tried to warn the Obama campaign to avoid a scenario with the risk a bunch of other accusers come out during the general election and torpedoing Obama's campaign. Obama has made it clear they definitely did not receive any such warning or similar notification about such an issue in the past even when they engaged in a throughout background check of Biden before selecting him for VP.

By the time Reade went public in March of this year with the different and more serious allegation, the only relevant candidates still in the race for nominee were Biden and Sanders, with Biden also being generally considered the second most conservative of the plausible Democratic candidates (at least in terms of having a shot to win). To a far greater degree than with the Supreme Court candidates at the time of Kavanaugh's nomination, there were obvious political differences between the other plausible candidates for nomination which made the potential political motivation vastly more apparent.

This was also very late in the process where there would have been a real question of who else could take the nomination, with some theories of motivation assuming the action was merely designed to try to cause Biden to lose the general election. By contrast, its not clear how much political difference there would have been at all, with the allegation potentially not getting general attention at all if the public did not know the White House skipped nominating Kavanaugh over such an allegation that they heard about about fairly discretely through sources. Essentially from a judicial decision perspective, some of the other candidates would tend to be classified as more conservative if anything, so it would have to have been a fairly obscure legal issue Ford secretly cared incredibly deeply about for such an issue to be the reason for her to have theoretically been motivated to actually have tried to air a false accusation to stop his nomination when she initially did.

You’re speculating motive, but that doesn’t change the credibility of the accusation itself

 

[sandorski]

Projection at its finest. There is a reason people think Bernie bro’s are the lefts version of a trump voter.

Just passing things along. A lot of you really need a mirror. You are not as immune to these behaviours as you think.

 

[Starbuck1975]

It’s also standard playbook for a partisan hack and a both sides bitch to say anyone who is pointing out facts and inconsistencies from the accuser is doing so in bad faith.

I didn’t say @fskimospy is acting in bad faith. I don’t think you are either. You are extending to Biden a generous benefit of the doubt because the timing of these accusations are inconvenient.

Without the corroborations and ex-husband’s documented statement, her accusations don’t stand. But those things do exist, so...

 

[Starbuck1975]

His problem is he doesn`t read other peoples links and if he does he doesn`t comment on anything that is proof he is wrong...it is really obvious.....

Irony.

 

[sportage]

Ok Sean Hannity, enough already with kicking this dead horse.
Thread is unworthy of one more post.

 

[ivwshane]

Just passing things along. A lot of you really need a mirror. You are not as immune to these behaviours as you think.

Of course not. In fact I fell for a similar smear campaign with regards to Hillary and her emails.

The difference being that after the facts were pointed out to me I didn’t dig in and ignore information that was counter to what I believed.

 

[UberNeuman]

He's a man without a party. Republicans got on the crazy train so now all he has is trying to find even the smallest way to #bothsides any topic to death. Ignignokt1975

I'll disagree. His party gave him everything he wanted. He just doesn't like the optics.

 

[Aegeon]

You’re speculating motive, but that doesn’t change the credibility of the accusation itself

It does make a difference because there is far less of an apparent motive given Ford's timing with her accusation, which inherently makes it less likely she was making up her claim. (There is the separate issue I brought up that even if Reade decided she was willing to overlook it at the time, she should have been motivated by her inside information to try to warn the Obama campaign that Biden was a flawed candidate and they were taking a massive risk that other accusers would come forward if they went with him as the VP nominee.)

 

[Starbuck1975]

No it does not and I have already posted links that prove you wrong.

No

 

[Starbuck1975]

It does make a difference because there is far less of an apparent motive given Ford's timing with her accusation, which inherently makes it less likely she was making up her claim. (There is the separate issue I brought up that even if Reade decided she was willing to overlook it at the time, she should have been motivated by her inside information to try to warn the Obama campaign that Biden was a flawed candidate and they were taking a massive risk that other accusers would come forward if they went with him as the VP nominee.)

Biden was nominated for VP prior to the #metoo movement. Dr. Ford came forward after the #metoo movement. It is entirely feasible that back then, Reade thought such action would be futile, where now she feels empowered to come forward.

 

[ivwshane]

I didn’t say @fskimospy is acting in bad faith. I don’t think you are either. You are extending to Biden a generous benefit of the doubt because the timing of these accusations are inconvenient.

Without the corroborations and ex-husband’s documented statement, her accusations don’t stand. But those things do exist, so...

I’m sure you believe that too. The problem for you is that you won’t find a post by Eskimospy or me hyping up support for Biden or defending him on anything specific. We’ve both been pretty indifferent to whoever the democratic nominee is. So no motivation there.

As far as you’re corroborating evidence...if you think vague recalls and changing stories is valid corroboration of reades claims then I don’t know what to tell you.

 

[Aegeon]

Without the corroborations and ex-husband’s documented statement, her accusations don’t stand. But those things do exist, so...

The thing is as noted some of those collaborations have been explicitly inconsistent and contradicted Reade's latest claims in one case with the individuals testimony before that person suddenly changed what he/she remembered to match what Reade is now claiming instead of contradictory testimony that person previously told a reporter a year ago.

The husband's documented statement actually contradicts Reade's latest claim. Besides the fact it talks about sexual harassment (incidentally not saying it was Biden who was responsible for this) there is also the problem that the husband claimed Reade "struck a deal with the chief of staff of the Senator's office and left her position." The problem is this clearly does not resemble Reade's latest claim regarding how she was fired. Realistically "striking a deal" in relation to a sexual harassment claim or something more serious involves would involve getting paid, and also presumably signing something like an NDA at the time. (With her also officially voluntarily leaving instead of them firing her in terms of how it would apply to her future job searches.)

Glaringly Reade has made no mention of any such agreement with any recent claim, even though this would seem to be close to the smoking gun in terms of evidence. That would also be very different than merely filing a complaint in terms of the kind of document in question. If Reade had an NDA or some sort of other settlement agreement from the office, it also is vastly less plausible she would not have a copy and that would have been basically exhibit 1 in her case against Biden.

In other words, this is yet another apparent example of Reade dramatically changing her story about how and the way she left Biden's office over time which is obviously a problem in terms of her credibility.

 

[Jhhnn]

What part of the Edits was an attempt to deceive?

You're being deliberately obtuse. We've already been through this some while back when you were forced to admit that "But this is not a story about sexual misconduct" and "But this is not only a story about sexual misconduct" have entirely opposite meanings. You went on to misrepresent the gramatical use of a semi-colon, admitted you were mistaken about that, but I see you're doing again. It went from an account of harassment by fellow staffers to Joe grabbing her by the pussy in the hallway, but she had to change her original story to get there. She just couldn't change the copy in TheUnion, which is how she got busted.

 

[Jhhnn]

You’re speculating motive, but that doesn’t change the credibility of the accusation itself

Tara threw hers away when she stealth edited her Medium post.

 

[JEDIYoda]

It really is politically motivated.....Reade cannot have it both ways and Reade herself said and I quote ---
"I wish he would (withdraw from the race)," Reade said. "But he won't. But I wish he would. That's how I feel emotionally."

As for a polygraph test, Reade questioned the standard it would set for sexual assault survivors if they were all asked to take polygraphs. -- meaning I have lied to much to take a polygraph test!!

 

[eelw]

Biden was nominated for VP prior to the #metoo movement. Dr. Ford came forward after the #metoo movement. It is entirely feasible that back then, Reade thought such action would be futile, where now she feels empowered to come forward.

Agreed. She wasn’t likely to come out in 2008. But once #MeToo did happen, she actively supported Biden. If she really was telling the truth now, explain this.

 

[JEDIYoda]

You’re speculating motive, but that doesn’t change the credibility of the accusation itself

Had she not changed her original story.......OK!!
But we all know she did! As such she has no credibility!! It really is that simple!
Yet YOU insist that nothing after her first story matters.....

 

[HomerJS]

You’re speculating motive, but that doesn’t change the credibility of the accusation itself

Which accusation?

The anonymous harassment complaint?
The Joe touoched my neck and hair?
The Joe fingered me in the halls of the Senate?

 

[eelw]

Actually let’s go back to 2008. The VP vetting. Don’t you think they went with a fine tooth comb any formal complaints filed against Biden? So that 1993 complaint if real would have been uncovered.

 

[sandorski]

You're being deliberately obtuse. We've already been through this some while back when you were forced to admit that "But this is not a story about sexual misconduct" and "But this is not only a story about sexual misconduct" have entirely opposite meanings. You went on to misrepresent the gramatical use of a semi-colon, admitted you were mistaken about that, but I see you're doing again. It went from an account of harassment by fellow staffers to Joe grabbing her by the pussy in the hallway, but she had to change her original story to get there. She just couldn't change the copy in TheUnion, which is how she got busted.

Your assessment is wrong.

 

[UberNeuman]

Your assessment is wrong.

As is yours. Care to refute this?

sure, bro.
okay.
yep.
uh huh.
nope.

/lol.

 

[theeedude]

These sex scandals catch on in boring years, I think now we have more important issues to address.

 

[sandorski]

You're being deliberately obtuse. We've already been through this some while back when you were forced to admit that "But this is not a story about sexual misconduct" and "But this is not only a story about sexual misconduct" have entirely opposite meanings. You went on to misrepresent the gramatical use of a semi-colon, admitted you were mistaken about that, but I see you're doing again. It went from an account of harassment by fellow staffers to Joe grabbing her by the pussy in the hallway, but she had to change her original story to get there. She just couldn't change the copy in TheUnion, which is how she got busted.

Using a semicolon, the very first example in this video.

Splitting that statement at the semicolon changes what she was conveying. The 2 parts make a whole.

 

[Aegeon]

Biden was nominated for VP prior to the #metoo movement. Dr. Ford came forward after the #metoo movement. It is entirely feasible that back then, Reade thought such action would be futile, where now she feels empowered to come forward.

You previously had Robert Packwood forced to resign from the US Senate due to the extent of sexual misconduct allegations against him, including specifically his staff.

Bob Packwood - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

That was in allot of ways a very glaring example of how #metoo could apply to to politicians prior to when it hit Hollywood and the more recent phenomenon.

In other words it was quite clear that something like a sexual assault or especially rape allegation by a staff member against a politician could potentially matter politically by the time Biden was being considered for VP. The idea she assumed a bunch of people coming out with allegations like hers would not potentially be a problem for Obama's campaign seems hard to believe. (The Obama campaign could hypothetically have further investigated once they were clued in that this specific issue would be a concern, and could have chosen to drop Biden as a possible VP pick if they found enough supporting indications that this was going to be an issue without having to publicly say why.) In other words, she has inside information demonstrating the Biden was a weak candidate, and she would have actually been doing the Obama campaign a favor if anything by letting them know about this risk prior to them picking Biden and potentially getting ambushed by a bunch of allegations during the general election.

 

[ch33zw1z]

It really is politically motivated.....Reade cannot have it both ways and Reade herself said and I quote ---
"I wish he would (withdraw from the race)," Reade said. "But he won't. But I wish he would. That's how I feel emotionally."

As for a polygraph test, Reade questioned the standard it would set for sexual assault survivors if they were all asked to take polygraphs. -- meaning I have lied to much to take a polygraph test!!

Polygraphs are bullshit.