Biden for President?

[wareyin]

You think it is meaningful that she may have lied or simply confused the details about how she traveled to DC two decades ago?

One time I lied in an English paper in 9th grade. Therefore, I cannot be trusted about matters of extreme importance.

You did see that there were far more discrepancies than just whether by car or by plane, right? And that they are not one time in the 9th grade, but many times, over many years, and central to the story she is asking us to believe.

Claims that she stole money from an anonymous twitter account. Are you kidding with this?

Let anyone that wants to call her liar from personal experience go on the record. Anonymous twitter jabs can be discarded without consideration.

Edit: Didn't notice the link before. This lady accusing Tara Reade of ripping off her charity has gone on the record. She should probably talk to someone who isn't a Krassenstein, because they are both shameless hacks that shouldn't be trusted. A real journalist ought to interview her as a character reference to Reade.

A real journalist probably would not characterize a dispute about a vet bill as stealing from a charity.

I don't really see why her hiding her car from the repo man as some grave sin. Sounds like she was broke and didn't want her car to get yanked. Sucks to be poor, but not exactly a character flaw. Ginning this up as some great evil reminds you that this article is written by a Krassenstein.

Ok, so you don't trust the Krassensteins because they change their story, but you do trust Reade despite her story also changing? That seems convenient.

 

[Puppycow]

I long for the days when the media was pretty tightly controlled, and if someone came in with a salacious but unprovable story, the editors would look at it and say, "We don't have enough to run with this." and it would never be heard of in the general public again. Whether it's Tara Reade or Christine Blasey Ford, we simply would never have heard of them, because the editors would kill the story if they didn't have the backup.

Nowadays, the existence of the allegation is the story itself, so there's no need for backup. There is an allegation. That's the story.

This.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

You did see that there were far more discrepancies than just whether by car or by plane, right? And that they are not one time in the 9th grade, but many times, over many years, and central to the story she is asking us to believe.

How she got to DC is irrelevant. She could have taken a hot air balloon. Who cares?

Ok, so you don't trust the Krassensteins because they change their story, but you do trust Reade despite her story also changing? That seems convenient.

This article is clearly written with an objective to discredit Reade. They are cherry picking tweets to paint her as same weirdo, dogwhistling some improper relationship to Russia (resistance lib catnip), and seeking out anyone that is willing to say nasty things about her with no means of verification.

The krassensteins are shameless self-promoters constantly trying to insert themselves into the story of the day.

They never did anything dastardly like hide their car from the repo man, they just had half a million dollars seized by the feds for conducting illegal wire fraud by running a financial scam website.

 

[Delvo]

I was under the impression the USA had decided that even being caught on tape admitting to being a sexual predator didn't disqualify someone from being President, unless of course certain people are operating a massive double standard here.

The usual answer is that there's a double standard, which was already demonstrated almost 30 years ago with Bill Clinton, but there are also a couple of other things about about it. One could be that people who are likely to support candidates/politicians in the two parties have different thresholds for what makes an action sexual assault/harassment, or for how many occurrences it takes to make somebody a sexual assaulter, harasser, or "predator". That threshold would appear to be higher to Republican voters than it is to Democrat voters. So a Republican would not need to be found acceptable by Democrats in order to be found acceptable by Republicans. (It could also have shifted with time.) (I've literally been told that, in order to get a girlfriend, I should do things that were pretty obviously above the threshold to be sexual assault to me. But they were clearly below that threshold for the people who were telling me to do them.)

Second, the usual advice that's given to men about how to get women, by female advice-givers as well as by male ones, is "confidence, confidence, confidence" with addenda about how "aggressiveness" and "boldness" and "persistence" can be equated with confidence. The usual explanation that's given for why some women act as if they prefer bad men who mistreat them is that either the men they're getting themselves stuck with have lots of confidence or those women mistake some other aspect of their personalities for confidence. Either way, the bottom line is that confidence, or at least something that can pass for it or be taken as an indicator of it, is typically treated as the single most important, overriding factor, the one that makes other factors not be factors anymore. The very same action is OK or even positive if you do it with a display of confidence (or even something else that enough people can mistake for it), and negative if you don't. Biden has never seemed like the kind of guy who would have walked into a club thinking all the women in there want him so it's just up to him to pick one or a few and filter out the rejects. Trump has. And that "every woman in here wants me" presentation is exactly what turns the very same behavior from bad ("creepy") to OK or good.

You think it is meaningful that she may have lied or simply confused the details about how she traveled to DC two decades ago?

Since that "trip" was actually a relocation, she probably did both. I relocated for a job recently. It took more than one trip: one in my own car so my car would get there, and one earlier which was by other means paid for by my employer so I could start working at the new site before finding a new home in that area & going back to get the rest of my stuff including my car.

 

[wareyin]

How she got to DC is irrelevant. She could have taken a hot air balloon. Who cares?

Your claim is that the massive number of discrepancies in the story Reade tells are irrelevant as to whether we should believe the latest version of that story?

This article is clearly written with an objective to discredit Reade. They are cherry picking tweets to paint her as same weirdo, dogwhistling some improper relationship to Russia (resistance lib catnip), and seeking out anyone that is willing to say nasty things about her with no means of verification.

It's a real shame that the people looking into Reade's allegations are discrediting her, I guess. Such a shame that there is no other way to find Reade's deleted articles and tweets, so we should blame the people who found them rather than the woman who wrote them.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Your claim is that the massive number of discrepancies in the story Reade tells are irrelevant as to whether we should believe the latest version of that story?



It's a real shame that the people looking into Reade's allegations are discrediting her, I guess. Such a shame that there is no other way to find Reade's deleted articles and tweets, so we should blame the people who found them rather than the woman who wrote them.

Bury your head into the sand while #resistance libs call her a Russian bot. Nothing untoward happening here, certainly not a self-serving ad-hom.

The story should be investigated. Leads that discredit Tara Reade should be pursued and the facts unearthed. I have 0 confidence that someone like the Krassensteins will do anything but muddy the waters. I'll look to real journalists, not opportunistic hacks.

Chris Hayes had a very even handed, nuanced coverage of the allegation as it stands. Hopefully this is the start of the mainstream press actually treating the story seriously and putting journalistic resources into determining the truth.

 

[Sideroxylon]

The Biden allegations are really exposing a lot of these Democrats as fair-weather metoo friends. Happy to jump on the bandwagon when it's some conservative freak getting the treatment, but totally unwilling to clean their own house.

The sincere MeToo people must be really feeling some intense whiplash. The knives are coming out.

Who had Dems cancelling the MeToo movement on their bingo cards?

 

[Delphic Oracle]

The point about dressing professionally is that what she described could not have happened if she was dressed according to the professional standards of the time.

This is somewhere near the top of the list of ways not to respond to this.

It wouldn't have happened if she'd been dressed appropriately?

Who are we any more?

 

[TurkeysGhost]

This is somewhere near the top of the list of ways not to respond to this.

It wouldn't have happened if she'd been dressed appropriately?

Who are we any more?

The party of Bill Clinton apologists

 

[wareyin]

Bury your head into the sand while #resistance libs call her a Russian bot. Nothing untoward happening here, certainly not a self-serving ad-hom.

That's odd, I'd think ignoring anything that contradicts your preferred narrative would be better described as burying one's head in the sand, not being aware of and questioning the many contradictions in the narrative.

The story should be investigated. Leads that discredit Tara Reade should be pursued and the facts unearthed. I have 0 confidence that someone like the Krassensteins will do anything but muddy the waters. I'll look to real journalists, not opportunistic hacks.

The story should be investigated, but if anything is found that discredits Reade then we should ignore it and attack the investigators? This doesn't sound like an impartial investigation.

Chris Hayes had a very even handed, nuanced coverage of the allegation as it stands. Hopefully this is the start of the mainstream press actually treating the story seriously and putting journalistic resources into determining the truth.

The mainstream articles I have read have mentioned many of the very same contradictions in Reade's story as the article you are attempting to ad hom away. Should those journalists also be hunted down and made to stop reporting against your latest thing that will bring Biden down?

 

[varwoche]

Who had Dems cancelling the MeToo movement on their bingo cards?

When there's a dated incident, and it's isolated, and it's an unprovable he/she said, and we assign weight to it ... there lies a path to madness.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

The mainstream articles I have read have mentioned many of the very same contradictions in Reade's story as the article you are attempting to ad hom away. Should those journalists also be hunted down and made to stop reporting against your latest thing that will bring Biden down?

Good. If there is anything there, real journalists will find it. Krassensteins will move on to their next grift soon.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

When there's a dated incident, and it's isolated, and it's an unprovable he/she said, and we assign weight to it ... there lies a path to madness.

Yeah, I always had this lurking dread when the low hanging #MeToo fruit were getting plucked.

It was an uphill struggle for people like Weinstein and Cosby, and it was basically an open secret in their industry that they were serial offenders. Multiple accusations from multiple women spanning many years, it just became pretty much impossible to be untrue.

It's clear we can slay the most egregious monsters, but the less prolific predators will be much trickier to suss out.

If no other women come out against Biden, I don't see how this has any kind of firm conclusion one way or the other.

 

[Bob001]

How she got to DC is irrelevant. She could have taken a hot air balloon. Who cares?
.....

I think the point is that if she has given conflicting accounts about something as trivial as how she traveled, it raises doubts about the reliability of her memory in other areas. The more such conflicting accounts can be discovered, the more those doubts multiply.

There's no objective way to prove or disprove her allegations about Biden. All we can do is assess them in the context of everything we know or can learn about both parties. Biden's been a public figure for 50 years; we generally know him pretty well, for better or worse. Ms. Reade? Not so much.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

I think the point is that if she has given conflicting accounts about something as trivial as how she traveled, it raises doubts about the reliability of her memory in other areas. The more such conflicting accounts can be discovered, the more those doubts multiply.

There's no objective way to prove or disprove her allegations about Biden. All we can do is assess them in the context of everything we know or can learn about both parties. Biden's been a public figure for 50 years; we generally know him pretty well, for better or worse. Ms. Reade? Not so much.

I don't see whether or not she accurately recalls trivial details of her life is relevant to whether or not she would fabricate a sexual assault allegation.

The two events, moving to DC and being sexually violated, are not exactly of the same significance or memorability.

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

I don't see whether or not she accurately recalls trivial details of her life is relevant to whether or not she would fabricate a sexual assault allegation.

Is it a matter of not remembering or is it that she sometimes makes up stories?

And is relocating for a new job a "trivial detail"? I found all of my relocations to be major life events, almost equal to getting married.

 

[wareyin]

I don't see whether or not she accurately recalls trivial details of her life is relevant to whether or not she would fabricate a sexual assault allegation.

The two events, moving to DC and being sexually violated, are not exactly of the same significance or memorability.

Does whether she quit the job (to move across country with her boyfriend or over how badly DC treats Russia), was forced out of the job over these very allegations, or was fired over these allegations have any significance? Does whether she was walking around her workplace nude under a short skirt or not during the alleged incident have any significance to the story? Does whether Biden sneered that she was nothing to him at the end of the alleged incident or whether Biden comforted her at the end of the alleged incident have any significance?

Do you begin to see a pattern here?

 

[theprestige]

This is somewhere near the top of the list of ways not to respond to this.

It wouldn't have happened if she'd been dressed appropriately?

Who are we any more?

I don't think that's quite the argument. I think what they're actually trying to say is,

She claims she wasn't wearing hose, and was assaulted. But the truth is, it was a professional setting in the early 90s, so she must have been wearing hose. Therefore, she could not have been assaulted in the way she describes.

---

I dunno. Maybe in the 90s, not wearing hose to the office was the Beltway Handkerchief Code for "DTF"? She was going for Casual Friday, and Biden got his signals crossed?

 

[theprestige]

Is it a matter of not remembering or is it that she sometimes makes up stories?

And is relocating for a new job a "trivial detail"? I found all of my relocations to be major life events, almost equal to getting married.

About 20 years ago I followed a job from San Francisco to San Diego*. It was a momentous time for me, but I'd be hard pressed to give you an accurate account of the details of that move.

In 1992, I enlisted in the US Army. Going on thirty years later, I couldn't tell you sod all about how I actually got from California to North Carolina.

---
*Already my credibility is shot. I said "San Francisco", but the truth is I was actually living in Campbell, California at the time. But nobody's heard of Campbell, so for a more global audience I just used the nearest well-known metropolis. The Krassensteins would have a field day with all my lies and changing stories.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Someone else accurately dissected the fact that moving from one city to another is often a multi-trip endeavor. A flight to the new city, living out of a hotel for a week or two until you can get a place, going home to pick up your stuff and your car and move in to the new place. That may span over a month or two and all that would be considered "moving to New Place" in my book.

Does whether she quit the job (to move across country with her boyfriend or over how badly DC treats Russia), was forced out of the job over these very allegations, or was fired over these allegations have any significance?

I have never left a job for a single reason. It was often multiple reasons and the reason I give someone will likely depend a lot on the point I'm trying to make. If I'm talking about how poor leader run off good employees, I'll lean heavy on the flaws of my boss that made me want to leave. If I'm talking about the importance of work/life balance, I'll lean heavy on how that was improved by the departure. If I'm talking about how following the type of work you want to do is important, I'll talk about how I took a risk to do more interesting work. The thing is, all of those are true and none are the full story.

Does whether she was walking around her workplace nude under a short skirt or not during the alleged incident have any significance to the story?

My recollection is that she has not clearly said she was entirely nude under her skirt and her comments could be interpreted to simply mean she wasn't wearing hose. Which would have been "out of dress code" for many offices at that time, but not uncommon. A bit like wearing nice jeans on business casual days at the office.

Does whether Biden sneered that she was nothing to him at the end of the alleged incident or whether Biden comforted her at the end of the alleged incident have any significance?

Do you not think both could have happened within a short span of of time after the event ending? Do you deal with humans who are embarrassed by their own flaws very often? Being both apologetic and aggressively defensive does not seem out of place.

Do you begin to see a pattern here?

Yes, humans are complex and relying on tweets to understand them is likely not very revealing.

And my, aren't we all just shocked, shocked I tell you, to find out that creepy uncle Joe has been accused of going too far. So, while this may be the only accusation of sexual assault, let's not pretend like he doesn't have a history of violating the personal space of women. This was all known, this was all predictable. I'm sorry, I meant electable.