• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Biden for President?

Status
Not open for further replies.
xjx388 said:
Somebody better tell Kanye West Diamond and Silk they ain't black.

New Biden campaign slogan:

Don't be an Uncle Tom; vote for Uncle Joe!

Anyway, it's a weird world we are living in these days, where we attack the credibility of sexual assault accusers and tell black people they aren't black enough.
Click to expand...

When has anyone claimed that accusers are immune to being accused? The Duke lacrosse case is a rather famous example of an accuser who was accused, and investigation showed that the accuser had lied, and the 'perpetrators' were actually the accuser's victims. What nonsense is this, that by making an accusation, she can protect herself from her victims?
 
SuburbanTurkey said:
I have to admit, this accusation about Reade's undergraduate degree is pretty severe. Hopefully we get some sort of firm resolution soon. If the worst accusation is true, Reade misrepresented herself in order to get a law degree and intentionally perjured herself on numerous occasions, really casting a lot of doubt on her credibility.

I suppose it's nice that the smear campaign against Reade has a real meaty accusation to dig into rather than tedious speculations about bounced checks or miffed landlords. Regardless on how things turn out for Reade regarding her degree, I still stand by my characterizations of the smear campaign for these imagined bombshells.

Given the gravity of the accusation about Reade committing perjury, I imagine we'll actually get a firm resolution with some concrete proof, rather than Twitter speculation about check fraud. Diplomas will or won't be produced, court records will be examined, etc.

Whatever the conclusion, I stand by my claim that the desperate fascination about bad checks was a shameful attempt to make an otherwise unverifiable, politically inconvenient sexual assault claim disappear.
Click to expand...

Your continued attempts to minimize the evidence that Reade is habitually dishonest doesn't fly.
"Miffed landlords"? More liked "stiffed landlords". Reade has a long pattern of failure to pay her rent and to meet other financial responsibilities. She manipulated people she owed money to by lying to them with a sad story of an abusive ex-husband she was trying to escape. She is a manipulative, deceitful liar.
 
theprestige said:
And not even them, really.

The past two weeks in this thread, the only people still making hay over it have been Biden's supporters, with some bipartisan pushback that maybe they don't need to go so far, nor keep going.
Click to expand...

I take it then that someone has hacked your account and that you have not made all these posts over the last two weeks 'making hay' over the allegation?

At this point I kinda think they're keeping the Reade thing alive to distract from Biden's senility and corrupt offspring. #winkyface
Click to expand...

Then you need to think again. And a #winkyface does not hide your attempt to resurrect the 'senility and corrupt offspring' nonsense.
 
Stacyhs said:
Thanks for posting this. If, in fact, Reade did not receive a degree from Antioch, then how does that affect her law degree? Could Seattle U rescind her degree? I would think it could and would since she has not met the requirements for the law degree.
Click to expand...

The Seattle U. has a special admissions program ("Access Admission Program") for people from "under-represented" groups, and I did not see an explicit requirement for a Bachelor's degree mentioned. Given that she enrolled at Antioch in the fall of 2000 and enrolled in law school in the fall of 2001, I don't see how she could have completed a degree before entering law school unless she had almost completed a degree somewhere else
 
theprestige said:
the only people still making hay over it have been Biden's supporters, with some bipartisan pushback that maybe they don't need to go so far, nor keep going.

At this point I kinda think they're keeping the Reade thing alive to distract from Biden's senility and corrupt offspring. #winkyface
Click to expand...
More from how republican & against the peasants he is and how voting for him is voting for the continued ongoing republicanization of the D Party.

It has been interesting watching a bunch of Biden supporters flipping out over this while occasionally working in an accusation that it's all somehow being kept alive by the people who've been completely silent about it... between rounds of admitting that we're not the ones flipping out about it but pretending that that simply must be because it wasn't going the way we'd hoped & planned. :rolleyes:

thaiboxerken said:
What's their choice in November for POTUS? A rich old white man vs..?
Click to expand...
A sort-of-rich-but-obsessed-with-pretending-to-be-much-richer orange one
 
TellyKNeasuss said:
The Seattle U. has a special admissions program ("Access Admission Program") for people from "under-represented" groups, and I did not see an explicit requirement for a Bachelor's degree mentioned. Given that she enrolled at Antioch in the fall of 2000 and enrolled in law school in the fall of 2001, I don't see how she could have completed a degree before entering law school unless she had almost completed a degree somewhere else
Click to expand...


On their admissions page, a bachelor's degree is listed as a requirement. I suspect that the Access program is for people who don't have great grades and test scores, not for people who don't have a degree. I don't know, but it seems likely that the ABA would require an undergrad degree for applicants as a condition of accreditation.
As a candidate for admission, you must have earned a bachelor's degree from an accredited college or university prior to your enrollment. In addition, you must have received a competitive score on the LSAT or the GRE General Test and have registered with the LSAC's Credential Assembly Service (CAS).
Click to expand...
https://law.seattleu.edu/admission/prospective-students/applicants/admission-requirements

There's also this from the Times story:
Seattle University School of Law confirmed that Ms. Reade graduated with a J.D. degree in 2004. The school only considers accepting students with bachelor’s degrees, according to its website. But it would not share what degree Ms. Reade presented with her initial application, citing federal privacy standards.
Click to expand...
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/21/us/politics/tara-reade-credentials.html

Also from the story:
To protect her identity as a survivor of domestic abuse, Ms. Reade says she received her degree through the private assistance of the school’s then-president, Tullisse Murdock. She says she never received a diploma or requested one since she was “fast-tracked” to law school.

“The president took it from the registrar and did it herself for complete confidentiality,” she said in an interview.

But Ms. Hamilton, the Antioch spokeswoman, told The Times that it had spoken with Ms. Murdock, and that there was no such special arrangement with Ms. Reade. It takes 180 credits to graduate, and students earn up to a maximum of 45 for life experience or prior studies, according to the school’s website.
Click to expand...

Does that even make any sense? "I have a super secret degree in a different name that nobody can know about." What?
 
Last edited:
TellyKNeasuss said:
Speaking of courts of law, it appears that Tara Reade lied under oath while acting as an expert witness during a criminal trial.

http://www.montereycountyweekly.com...cle_89c8bfcc-9bb2-11ea-826b-7776b2cd779e.html
Click to expand...


This is really blowing up into a scandal. At least six cases that resulted in convictions may now be appealed or the convictions thrown out. The law school she went to is refusing to answer questions on how she got in without the required Bachelors degree which may result in them suffering penalties as well.



Some Bernie supporting "reporters" unleashed all this when they refused to investigate a woman they hoped to use to usurp the will of the voters. Absolutely incredible.
 
Travis said:
This is really blowing up into a scandal. At least six cases that resulted in convictions may now be appealed or the convictions thrown out. The law school she went to is refusing to answer questions on how she got in without the required Bachelors degree which may result in them suffering penalties as well.
.....
Click to expand...

In the law school's defense, there are privacy restrictions on what information they can release about their students. But Antioch is pretty clearly saying she didn't get a degree from them.
 
Stacyhs said:
I take it then that someone has hacked your account and that you have not made all these posts over the last two weeks 'making hay' over the allegation?
Click to expand...
I've been on the bipartisan pushback side.

What "hay" have I made of this accusation? I don't recall ever suggesting the accusation was true and that Biden is therefore disqualified, or anything like that. The last couple weeks in this thread has been mostly you and others doing a deep dive into Reade's reputation, and me and others mostly saying that's probably not necessary since the claim can just be dismissed on its (lack of) merits anyway.

You've been defending against an attack nobody has actually been making in several weeks.

Then you need to think again. And a #winkyface does not hide your attempt to resurrect the 'senility and corrupt offspring' nonsense.
Click to expand...
It was wareyin that resurrected it, remember? At least, I think it was him that sounded the alarm that once the Reade thing went under, we'd return to the senility and Huntergate things.

Personally I thought both those topics were pretty much played out. I'm not a big fan of parsing Joe Biden's behavior for senility (for a mix of principled and pragmatic reasons). If he's a gaffe machine, he's a gaffe machine. That's not going to go away just because we haven't talked about it for a month.

But I have no problem riffing on wareyin's warning.

WAREYIN: If we stop talking about Reade, they'll just bring up Biden's senility again.

STACYHS: Let's keep talking about Reade!

ME: When you put it that way, I can see how it kinda makes sense to keep talking about Reade, far past the point where anyone is trying to defend her accusations.

Tell you what: If you stop talking about Reade's reputation, I promise not to bring up Biden's senility.
 
Last edited:
Stacyhs said:
Thanks for posting this. If, in fact, Reade did not receive a degree from Antioch, then how does that affect her law degree? Could Seattle U rescind her degree? I would think it could and would since she has not met the requirements for the law degree.

I suspect that Reade could also now be charged with perjury on several counts considering she lied under oath about her professional qualifications.
Click to expand...

We've now made the transition from "how can we prove she's lying about Joe Biden?" to "how can we make sure she's punished for her lies?"
 
Suddenly said:
They are getting warmer, but running with the lie angle without some idea of why Seattle University was satisfied she had a degree seems a bit like the same kind of death by paper cut angle.

If a law school accepted her that means they were satisfied she has documented proof of a college degree. Which means she had a degree, she had a reasonable belief she had a degree, or this was some hard-core fraud and that law school was being run by muppets. Only the third has any bearing on her credibility. The second was the B-plot of a Night Court episode.
Click to expand...

There is a possibility that she could have gotten into the law school without a college degree (it isn't explicitly stated as a requirement for their "Access Admission Program").

Something more definite should come out of that in these criminal cases. As far as I can tell they would have to show this was a knowing lie in order to have a compelling case for reversal. The degree itself wasn't related to the substance of her testimony. That was all from her work history. If she lied on the stand and the defense could have impeached her at trial for lying on the stand then that is a different story.
Click to expand...

The issue is that she was testifying as an "expert witness", so if she exaggerated her background then the other side (in this case, the defense) might have grounds to argue that she didn't establish herself as an "expert" and therefore should not have been allowed to testify.
 
xjx388 said:
Let this be a lesson to any woman who dares accuse powerful men.
Click to expand...

That's rich, coming from the person who said this:-

xjx388 said:
From where I sit, I don’t think either of those gentlemen should have been subjected to what they went through based on vague and uncorroborated accusations. I am not one of those who thinks the mere existence of allegations -especially allegations arising from distant events that are uncorroborated and have scant evidence- should warrant much investigation at all. Serious allegations require real evidence to take seriously and publicly drag people’s reputations through the mud.
Click to expand...
 
I think Kamala Harris would make the best veep as she would grab more of the progressive vote without alerting anyone. Amy Klobuchar is a funky smart babe that would be an asset to but not my Besty because her office did not reply to a letter I wrote her
 
Last edited:
Roger Ramjets said:
That's rich, coming from the person who said this:-
Click to expand...

What exactly is wrong with what I said? If there's no evidence, there's nothing to investigate. That's uncontroversial. OTOH, digging up sordid details about an accuser's life in order to discredit the allegation causes harm to the accuser and does not actually disprove the accusations they make. It just makes it easier for some to dismiss the allegations because they have pushed this "Believe Women," narrative and they need to find reasons to not believe particular women. Which just makes it harder for women to come forward.

If I had to reframe that rather useless, feel-good mantra, I'd change it to, "Listen to Women."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom