Biden for President?

Status
Not open for further replies.
theprestige said:
It's getting to the point where I'm starting to wonder how many people have ever actually had a passionate love affair. I'm not claiming I can unhook a bra one-handed, but I do at least know how clothes work.
Click to expand...

As far as I can tell, there's two things going on regarding the skirt/hose.

1) some people are saying it's not plausible that a staffer such as Reade would be wearing a skirt with no hose and no underwear, therefore the story is a fabrication.

2) If she weren't such a tart and was wearing hose, this couldn't have happened.

Shocking that the people trying to hand wave away the allegations don't seem to make much point of drawing a clear line between the two positions.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
Smacks of the GOP tactic of wanting to search through any old records whatsoever for out-of-context one-line gotchas the media so readily repeats ad nauseum.
Click to expand...


One columnist suggested a responsible way to deal with those records:
What Biden should do is name a small group of well-respected, impartial researchers — historians, academics, archivists. Then, he should ask the University of Delaware to give them access to his papers as soon as the precautions put in place as a result of the novel coronavirus are loosened. My own experience with the solitary endeavor of digging through boxes of documents suggests it would not be all that hard to practice rudimentary social distancing.

A team of independent researchers could probably get through the material in a matter of weeks or a couple of months at the most. They could then issue a report on whether they found anything that was relevant to what Reade claimed happened to her. It would then be incumbent upon Biden to make those records public.
Click to expand...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...id=lk_inline_manual_7&itid=lk_inline_manual_7
 
theprestige said:
When people make competing counter-claims, presumption of innocence is a zero-sum game.

If you presume Biden innocent, you must presume Reade is guilty of some pretty disgusting acts.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily. She might genuinely believe what she is claiming, and it still might not be true.
 
johnny karate said:
Haha... that’s hilarious.

Next time he says “intercourse”, you should wait until he turns his back to write something on the chalkboard and then shoot a spitball at him.

Or maybe make a loud fart noise every time he sits down.

Either way, please keep the comedy gold coming.

I need something to distract me from the tragic fallout of Trump’s epic incompetence.
Click to expand...

The whole thing makes me think of Beavis (or was it Butthead) saying "Intercourse! Heh Heh Heh!
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
As far as I can tell, there's two things going on regarding the skirt/hose.

1) some people are saying it's not plausible that a staffer such as Reade would be wearing a skirt with no hose and no underwear, therefore the story is a fabrication.

2) If she weren't such a tart and was wearing hose, this couldn't have happened.

Shocking that the people trying to hand wave away the allegations don't seem to make much point of drawing a clear line between the two positions.
Click to expand...

The point of the pantyhose discussion is that it would have been physically impossible for the assault to have taken place in the manner that she described if she had been wearing pantyhose. This apparently is something that is WAY too complicated for you to grasp.
 
Bob001 said:
One columnist suggested a responsible way to deal with those records:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...id=lk_inline_manual_7&itid=lk_inline_manual_7
Click to expand...

Why do you think that her complaint would be in a collection of Biden's papers? Is it even likely that Biden or any member of his staff even saw the complaint? Isn't it normal in harassment cases that unless there is a formal disciplinary hearing that the accused never even learns the name of the accuser? At least that's the way it works for people in non-elected positions.
 
Ms. Reade filed a very belated police report. The report did NOT name Joe Biden as the assailant. Can someone explain this?
 
theprestige said:
When people make competing counter-claims, presumption of innocence is a zero-sum game.

If you presume Biden innocent, you must presume Reade is guilty of some pretty disgusting acts.
Click to expand...

Not exactly. He is presumed innocent. She is presumed innocent.

Obviously, this is impossible. One of them must be guilty.

However, in my own interactions with them I can treat each of them as if they are innocent. In the case of Joe, that means vote for him despite the allegation. In the case of Tara, that means if I ever meet her, smile and not, or just never bring up the subject.
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
Why do you think that her complaint would be in a collection of Biden's papers? Is it even likely that Biden or any member of his staff even saw the complaint? Isn't it normal in harassment cases that unless there is a formal disciplinary hearing that the accused never even learns the name of the accuser? At least that's the way it works for people in non-elected positions.
Click to expand...


As the columnist notes, the records would show her work schedules and assignments, memos written to, from and about her, and anything else that was documented about her employment. As the writer noted:
What might be in there? No one really knows until they look.
.....
Biden’s might or might not include memos or other documents discussing Reade’s stint in his office as a staff assistant in 1993. The records might also show whether she ever lodged a complaint about his behavior — she says she did; Biden’s campaign says she didn’t — either to her superiors on the senator’s staff, or under procedures then available to take her grievances outside the office.
Click to expand...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...id=lk_inline_manual_7&itid=lk_inline_manual_7

If she had ever complained to her manager about Biden or anything else, it wouldn't be in Senate files, but the manager might have written a memo for the office files. She might have asked for different work. There might be performance reviews. Anything about her work for Biden potentially would be relevant. I also note that the Congress makes its own rules about employment, and has exempted itself from many laws that would apply elsewhere. And a complaint outside an academic sphere would rarely go to a "formal disciplinary hearing." Certainly private employers don't conduct hearings.
 
Last edited:
Bob001 said:
One columnist suggested a responsible way to deal with those records:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opin...id=lk_inline_manual_7&itid=lk_inline_manual_7
Click to expand...

I thought he did say something permitting a review of these specific records. I'll go look.

TP was talking about "he rejected a call to release the records of his work as VP." Those records from that time period aren't relevant except as I noted, hunting for useable campaign gotchas. Asking for them and conflating that request with releasing the relevant campaign records is another typical tactic.


Edited to add: MSNBC, it's Youtube but you don't need to watch the news segment to see this quote:
In a new statement released Friday, Joe Biden says he is requesting the Secretary of the Senate 'ask the Archives to identify any record of the complaint [Reade] alleges she filed & make available to the press any such document.' Aired on 5/1/2020.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
TellyKNeasuss said:
Ms. Reade filed a very belated police report. The report did NOT name Joe Biden as the assailant. Can someone explain this?
Click to expand...

Maybe because filing a provably false report is a crime, and she's not sure what can be proven? But if she says "an unidentified man" did this, it's less likely to bite her. I suspect the police didn't take her complaint very seriously.
 
Bob001 said:
Maybe because filing a provably false report is a crime, and she's not sure what can be proven? But if she says "an unidentified man" did this, it's less likely to bite her. I suspect the police didn't take her complaint very seriously.
Click to expand...

Agreed. It's a cover so her fellow BernieBros can say "see, she filed a police report! It must be serious" while specifically not naming names, providing a date, or naming a place for an alleged incident that happened 27 years ago makes it impossible to follow up on.
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
In a post from January, Tara Reade claimed that the first man who abused her was her father, who was "rich and a defense contractor". Uhm, no. Tara Reade's father was a sportswriter and author. Yet more evidence that she is a compulsive liar.

https://medium.com/@AlexandraTaraRe...the-women-they-choose-to-destroy-2f471fa1b2b2
Click to expand...

Look, it's easy for people to mix up sportswriter and defense contractor! No? Well, it's not implausible! It is? Well just because she lied about this doesn't make her untrustworthy on a similar accusation! [/BernieBro]
 
Bob001 said:
Maybe because filing a provably false report is a crime, and she's not sure what can be proven? But if she says "an unidentified man" did this, it's less likely to bite her. I suspect the police didn't take her complaint very seriously.
Click to expand...

She apparently filed the report with the Metropolitan Police Department (the District's police department) rather than the United States Capitol Police Department, which has jurisdiction over the US Capitol and supporting buildings (and the Library of Congress). And of course the statute of limitations has long since expired (which she, as a law school graduate, would obviously know).
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
In a post from January, Tara Reade claimed that the first man who abused her was her father, who was "rich and a defense contractor". Uhm, no. Tara Reade's father was a sportswriter and author. Yet more evidence that she is a compulsive liar.

https://medium.com/@AlexandraTaraRe...the-women-they-choose-to-destroy-2f471fa1b2b2
Click to expand...

So this means that she has now claimed that she was sexually assaulted by a former boss (Biden), sexually abused by her father. physically abused by her ex-husband, and bullied by her co-workers in Biden's office.
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
In a post from January, Tara Reade claimed that the first man who abused her was her father, who was "rich and a defense contractor". Uhm, no. Tara Reade's father was a sportswriter and author. Yet more evidence that she is a compulsive liar.

https://medium.com/@AlexandraTaraRe...the-women-they-choose-to-destroy-2f471fa1b2b2
Click to expand...


The same publication has an assessment of her claims:
While the allegations made by Reade are impossible to prove or disprove, examining Reade’s actions over the years and other evidence that has been archived on the internet, brings her honesty and integrity into question.
Click to expand...
https://medium.com/@eddiekrassenste...assault-allegations-of-joe-biden-e4cb3ee38460
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom