new Reade/Biden thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bottom line here..... with the Mother's call to the talk show and the court records from her ex, it is clear SOMETHING happened when she worked for Joe Biden.

What exactly? We may never know. But to say it is "out of character" for Biden is a stretch since we have tons of pictures and video of him being "handsey."

Oh, and liberals continue to be hypocrites about this whole thing.

It’s clear she told her mother and her ex that something happened when worked for Joe Biden, but she’s such an incredibly unreliable narrator that I’m starting to think it was all an elaborate cover for when she was fired for check kiting and didn’t want to tell anyone.

That’s the speculation on some parts of the internet—that she lost her job for check fraud (and this may not have been the first time she did it), but she didn’t want to tell the truth to her mom or boyfriend.

Who knows. I want to see more on the check fraud.

I am betting the check fraud thing is a red herring.
Otherwise, Biden's office would have stated this from the get-go.

Biden’s office had a ton of contraindicating stuff from the get-go, including how her story changed constantly. They limited themselves to personal statements from three of his former staffers saying they didn’t remember anything she said. Reade had personally identified these former staffers, so it’s almost like she forced them to speak out.

Also, new stuff comes up all the time. I doubt they knew about this recent discovery.

Also, I’m not sure because I’m not a supervisor in the federal government, but I expect they are limited in what they can say about personnel files, even though it was a long time ago.

[Anonymous]

^^ DP. We don’t know. But as pp said, there must be an address associated with this record. Since none of us are going out to the California courthouse in question, some enterprising reporter will have to investigate this. Maybe on Monday when the courthouse re-opens.

Another question in my mind: did Reade bank with the Congressional Federal Credit Union, as I did in 1993? I have no clue about banking confidentiality re fraud, although this is a possible explanation for how Biden’s staff would have learned about a charge in far-away California

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^ DP. We don’t know. But as pp said, there must be an address associated with this record. Since none of us are going out to the California courthouse in question, some enterprising reporter will have to investigate this. Maybe on Monday when the courthouse re-opens.

Another question in my mind: did Reade bank with the Congressional Federal Credit Union, as I did in 1993? I have no clue about banking confidentiality re fraud, although this is a possible explanation for how Biden’s staff would have learned about a charge in far-away California

Correct, we don’t know based on the current evidence (the screen shot), so why do you assume it must be her?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ DP. We don’t know. But as pp said, there must be an address associated with this record. Since none of us are going out to the California courthouse in question, some enterprising reporter will have to investigate this. Maybe on Monday when the courthouse re-opens.

Another question in my mind: did Reade bank with the Congressional Federal Credit Union, as I did in 1993? I have no clue about banking confidentiality re fraud, although this is a possible explanation for how Biden’s staff would have learned about a charge in far-away California

Correct, we don’t know based on the current evidence (the screen shot), so why do you assume it must be her?

Because of the timing. There may be two Tara Reades in that CA county. But what are the odds the other Tara Reade engaged in check fraud over the Senate’s summer recess and got fired several days after she was charged?

But yeah, let’s wait for someone to verify.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ DP. We don’t know. But as pp said, there must be an address associated with this record. Since none of us are going out to the California courthouse in question, some enterprising reporter will have to investigate this. Maybe on Monday when the courthouse re-opens.

Another question in my mind: did Reade bank with the Congressional Federal Credit Union, as I did in 1993? I have no clue about banking confidentiality re fraud, although this is a possible explanation for how Biden’s staff would have learned about a charge in far-away California

Correct, we don’t know based on the current evidence (the screen shot), so why do you assume it must be her?

Because of the timing. There may be two Tara Reades in that CA county. But what are the odds the other Tara Reade engaged in check fraud over the Senate’s summer recess and got fired several days after she was charged?

But yeah, let’s wait for someone to verify.


The other Tara got fired?

That’s the issue, you are adding stuff. You want it to be her. At the moment all we know is someone with the same name was charged in 1993.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:^^ DP. We don’t know. But as pp said, there must be an address associated with this record. Since none of us are going out to the California courthouse in question, some enterprising reporter will have to investigate this. Maybe on Monday when the courthouse re-opens.

Another question in my mind: did Reade bank with the Congressional Federal Credit Union, as I did in 1993? I have no clue about banking confidentiality re fraud, although this is a possible explanation for how Biden’s staff would have learned about a charge in far-away California

Correct, we don’t know based on the current evidence (the screen shot), so why do you assume it must be her?

Because of the timing. There may be two Tara Reades in that CA county. But what are the odds the other Tara Reade engaged in check fraud over the Senate’s summer recess and got fired several days after she was charged?

But yeah, let’s wait for someone to verify.


The other Tara got fired?

That’s the issue, you are adding stuff. You want it to be her. At the moment all we know is someone with the same name was charged in 1993.

Whatever. Maybe you put different odds on it than most do. Let’s wait and see.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

On Twitter there’s a screen shot of the charge against her, the dates match up and the crime code is for fraud. Now a screen shot isn’t evidence, I agree. But apparently several reporters are investigating. So stay tuned, I guess.

Are the charges against her, or just a Tara Reade?

Just against Tara Reade for check fraud committed by Reade only.

But how do you know it’s THE Tara Reade? Is there only one in the USA?

There are 600 people named Ronald Reagan in the USA, should I assume the ex president got a speeding ticket in Ohio because I saw that name on a court case?

You think there was more than one Tara Reade in San Luis Obispo County, CA in 1993? Her address is I’m sure part of the court record.

I have no idea if there were 1 or 10 people with that name in CA in 1993. That screen shot does not show an address.

There are 2 Ronald Reagan’s currently in Damascus. Can you tell me which one ran the stop sign based on the court record?

You missed me saying that I’m sure there’s an address somewhere in the court record.

Everything quoted above is about "a screen shot of the charges against her" all I asked was based on that screenshot how do we know it is in fact her and not someone with the same name? We don’t have the court records, we have a screenshot with no address or even a middle initial.

Ok, I spent about 40 minutes last night hunting for information to corroborate this tweet. I could not find any, and I'm pretty good at Google Fu. The only thing is a reddit thread that has been redacted and edited to ask for corroboration or confirmation of the person who posted the original snapshot and there is no answer. @FliedGaff is the Twitter handle of the person who initially posted the photo.

So, at this point, it seems that neither the Twitter person who initially posted the clip nor any of the people on Twitter who reposted the clip can confirm the source of this clip or the authenticity. The SLO court records are not searchable on-line so this is not confirmed, nor should it be used as evidence against her until it is corroborated by someone and the source confirmed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

On Twitter there’s a screen shot of the charge against her, the dates match up and the crime code is for fraud. Now a screen shot isn’t evidence, I agree. But apparently several reporters are investigating. So stay tuned, I guess.

Are the charges against her, or just a Tara Reade?

Just against Tara Reade for check fraud committed by Reade only.

But how do you know it’s THE Tara Reade? Is there only one in the USA?

There are 600 people named Ronald Reagan in the USA, should I assume the ex president got a speeding ticket in Ohio because I saw that name on a court case?

You think there was more than one Tara Reade in San Luis Obispo County, CA in 1993? Her address is I’m sure part of the court record.

I have no idea if there were 1 or 10 people with that name in CA in 1993. That screen shot does not show an address.

There are 2 Ronald Reagan’s currently in Damascus. Can you tell me which one ran the stop sign based on the court record?

You missed me saying that I’m sure there’s an address somewhere in the court record.

Everything quoted above is about "a screen shot of the charges against her" all I asked was based on that screenshot how do we know it is in fact her and not someone with the same name? We don’t have the court records, we have a screenshot with no address or even a middle initial.

Ok, I spent about 40 minutes last night hunting for information to corroborate this tweet. I could not find any, and I'm pretty good at Google Fu. The only thing is a reddit thread that has been redacted and edited to ask for corroboration or confirmation of the person who posted the original snapshot and there is no answer. @FliedGaff is the Twitter handle of the person who initially posted the photo.

So, at this point, it seems that neither the Twitter person who initially posted the clip nor any of the people on Twitter who reposted the clip can confirm the source of this clip or the authenticity. The SLO court records are not searchable on-line so this is not confirmed, nor should it be used as evidence against her until it is corroborated by someone and the source confirmed.

That Reddit also says the WaPo is on it. So we shall see.

[Anonymous]

Has Biden denied her claims regarding his alleged touching of her shoulder and/or neck?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Has Biden denied her claims regarding his alleged touching of her shoulder and/or neck?

How could he possibly deny those when there are countless pictures of him doing the same to other women and girls?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has Biden denied her claims regarding his alleged touching of her shoulder and/or neck?

How could he possibly deny those when there are countless pictures of him doing the same to other women and girls?

Typical standards don't apply to our friends.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has Biden denied her claims regarding his alleged touching of her shoulder and/or neck?

How could he possibly deny those when there are countless pictures of him doing the same to other women and girls?

Last year when her allegations were of inappropriate touching of her shoulder/neck, he responded to the group of allegations saying that he has always been one to use touch to make a human connection. He said he was aware that times had changed and that he would be more mindful in the future about any touch that might make others uncomfortable.

This year when she changed her allegations from inappropriate touching to sexual assault, he came out and vociferously denied the allegations.

"No, it is not true," he said. "I'm saying unequivocally, it never, never happened."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Has Biden denied her claims regarding his alleged touching of her shoulder and/or neck?

How could he possibly deny those when there are countless pictures of him doing the same to other women and girls?

Last year when her allegations were of inappropriate touching of her shoulder/neck, he responded to the group of allegations saying that he has always been one to use touch to make a human connection. He said he was aware that times had changed and that he would be more mindful in the future about any touch that might make others uncomfortable.

This year when she changed her allegations from inappropriate touching to sexual assault, he came out and vociferously denied the allegations.

"No, it is not true," he said. "I'm saying unequivocally, it never, never happened."

I thought the “it” there referred to the alleged assault. Just wondering whether he remembers this woman, remembers allegedly commenting about her legs , and has specifically refuted claims regarding alleged touching of shoulders and/or neck.

[Anonymous]

Or, maybe he knows he has never sexually assaulted anyone, ergo he can honestly deny any allegation of it. Unlike Trump or Clinton and their "bimbo eruptions."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Or, maybe he knows he has never sexually assaulted anyone, ergo he can honestly deny any allegation of it. Unlike Trump or Clinton and their "bimbo eruptions."

That would mean that his accuser is not telling the truth?