new Reade/Biden thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it time to close this thread and create a 3rd 80 plus page one?

Maybe. Or, just close it and stop with it.

The Con attempts to frame Biden have failed thoroughly.

Eva Murry was lying.

Reade was lying, plus she has a terrible history of lying for most of her life.

But now that Reade's been exposed for what she is, do we need to keep going? She'll likely be punished IRL by the people she's defrauded. She's probably going to lose her law degree (for entering law school under the false pretenses of having an undergraduate degree). I don't even know what the penalty is for perjuring yourself in court as a supposed expert witness.

You are desperate to close this thread, aren't you? Can you prove that Biden is innocent? Nope. And so we'll continue to discuss this. If it upsets you, don't click on it.

Can't prove a negative. But the evidence amounts to he said/she said where the "she" has more than one hole in her story plus may have committed fraud and perjury.

Again... so familiar... just can’t quite place it.

Maybe. But this was battled out in the court of public opinion then and now. And right now, Reade is losing the battle. Her supposed supporters on this thread aren't even supporting her. They are just hypocritically screaming "hypocrite." That seems to make you feel good, but it doesn't change anyone's mind about anything.

[Anonymous]

Well, her lawyer just dropped her and now cases in which she testified as an "expert witness" might be re-opened. She has zero credibility, as the shadowy person or persons fronting her legal bills must have realized.

[Anonymous]

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/22/lawyer-drops-tara-reade-as-client-274635

[Anonymous]

I wonder if lying about her BA invalidates her law degree:

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/21/tara-reade-biden-expert-testimony-274460

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/22/lawyer-drops-tara-reade-as-client-274635

“Much of what has been written about Ms. Reade is not probative of whether then-Senator Biden sexually assaulted her, but rather is intended to victim-shame and attack her credibility on unrelated and irrelevant matters,” he wrote. “We genuinely wish Ms. Reade well and hope that she, as a survivor, is treated fairly. We have and will continue to represent survivors regardless of their alleged predator’s status or politics.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/22/lawyer-drops-tara-reade-as-client-274635

“Much of what has been written about Ms. Reade is not probative of whether then-Senator Biden sexually assaulted her, but rather is intended to victim-shame and attack her credibility on unrelated and irrelevant matters,” he wrote. “We genuinely wish Ms. Reade well and hope that she, as a survivor, is treated fairly. We have and will continue to represent survivors regardless of their alleged predator’s status or politics.”

Not sure what your point is. Even in quitting, her lawyer can't say anything bad about her. This is just fluff to cover the obvious negative implication of quitting after one week.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if lying about her BA invalidates her law degree:

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/21/tara-reade-biden-expert-testimony-274460

Why would it. She gained admission to the Law School through their Alternative Admission Program, now renamed the Access Admission Program. From their own description:

https://law.seattleu.edu/admission/access-admission

Each year, the law school admits a number of students through its acclaimed Access Admission Program. This program recognizes candidates from historically disadvantaged and under-represented communities. Though their potential for success may not be accurately reflected by traditional indicators such as standardized scores or undergraduate GPAs, Access Admission students have demonstrated grit, intellectual curiosity, and the ability to overcome substantial obstacles.

This program takes disadvantaged applicants without traditional credentials into the program. There is not a requirement to have a BA or BS for admittance.

And from the exhaustive CNN article published on Tuesday, 5/19:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/19/politics/tara-reade-biden-allegation/index.html

Reade graduated from Seattle University School of Law in 2004, gaining admission to the school through its Alternative Admission Program.

A law school official familiar with the program said it was established to help "diverse and non-traditional students" enter the legal field.

"The Alternative Admission Program, now known as the Access Admission Program, is a pathway for individuals from historically disadvantaged and under-represented communities who have demonstrated grit, intellectual curiosity and the ability to overcome substantial obstacles," the official said.

She was rightfully admitted into the law school program, so her law degree is fine. However, she does not have an undergraduate degree and seems to have lied about that. But the Law School she went to will allow up to 10% of each class be admitted through the Access Admission Program which does not necessarily require a bachelor's degree.

It definitely raises questions about her integrity and veracity, but I doubt that it invalidates her law degree.

[Anonymous]

I wonder what "historically disadvantaged" or "under-represented" community she belongs to. Did she claim that she is "historically disadvantaged" by way of being a "victim" of domestic abuse?

The more we find out, the more she seems like a person who has been lying ALL of her life to take advantage of other people's sympathies. And because it is considered inappropriate to question someone who says they are a victim of domestic violence, she's has been able to get away with it.

Sickening.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/22/lawyer-drops-tara-reade-as-client-274635

“Much of what has been written about Ms. Reade is not probative of whether then-Senator Biden sexually assaulted her, but rather is intended to victim-shame and attack her credibility on unrelated and irrelevant matters,” he wrote. “We genuinely wish Ms. Reade well and hope that she, as a survivor, is treated fairly. We have and will continue to represent survivors regardless of their alleged predator’s status or politics.”

Not sure what your point is. Even in quitting, her lawyer can't say anything bad about her. This is just fluff to cover the obvious negative implication of quitting after one week.

He speaks the truth. That’s what my point is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/22/lawyer-drops-tara-reade-as-client-274635

“Much of what has been written about Ms. Reade is not probative of whether then-Senator Biden sexually assaulted her, but rather is intended to victim-shame and attack her credibility on unrelated and irrelevant matters,” he wrote. “We genuinely wish Ms. Reade well and hope that she, as a survivor, is treated fairly. We have and will continue to represent survivors regardless of their alleged predator’s status or politics.”

Not sure what your point is. Even in quitting, her lawyer can't say anything bad about her. This is just fluff to cover the obvious negative implication of quitting after one week.

He speaks the truth. That’s what my point is.

Yet he dropped her like a hot potato. Why is that, do you think?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/22/lawyer-drops-tara-reade-as-client-274635

“Much of what has been written about Ms. Reade is not probative of whether then-Senator Biden sexually assaulted her, but rather is intended to victim-shame and attack her credibility on unrelated and irrelevant matters,” he wrote. “We genuinely wish Ms. Reade well and hope that she, as a survivor, is treated fairly. We have and will continue to represent survivors regardless of their alleged predator’s status or politics.”

Not sure what your point is. Even in quitting, her lawyer can't say anything bad about her. This is just fluff to cover the obvious negative implication of quitting after one week.

He speaks the truth. That’s what my point is.

It's her lawyer's opinion. By definition it is whatever advantages his client and always will be. Might as well quote yourself and say "see, I'm right!"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/22/lawyer-drops-tara-reade-as-client-274635

“Much of what has been written about Ms. Reade is not probative of whether then-Senator Biden sexually assaulted her, but rather is intended to victim-shame and attack her credibility on unrelated and irrelevant matters,” he wrote. “We genuinely wish Ms. Reade well and hope that she, as a survivor, is treated fairly. We have and will continue to represent survivors regardless of their alleged predator’s status or politics.”

Not sure what your point is. Even in quitting, her lawyer can't say anything bad about her. This is just fluff to cover the obvious negative implication of quitting after one week.

He speaks the truth. That’s what my point is.

It's her lawyer's opinion. By definition it is whatever advantages his client and always will be. Might as well quote yourself and say "see, I'm right!"

Yes, and actions speak louder than words.

He dropped her because he couldn't press her case effectively, because she's lying all the damn time.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wonder if lying about her BA invalidates her law degree:

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/21/tara-reade-biden-expert-testimony-274460

Why would it. She gained admission to the Law School through their Alternative Admission Program, now renamed the Access Admission Program. From their own description:

https://law.seattleu.edu/admission/access-admission

Each year, the law school admits a number of students through its acclaimed Access Admission Program. This program recognizes candidates from historically disadvantaged and under-represented communities. Though their potential for success may not be accurately reflected by traditional indicators such as standardized scores or undergraduate GPAs, Access Admission students have demonstrated grit, intellectual curiosity, and the ability to overcome substantial obstacles.

This program takes disadvantaged applicants without traditional credentials into the program. There is not a requirement to have a BA or BS for admittance.

And from the exhaustive CNN article published on Tuesday, 5/19:
https://www.cnn.com/2020/05/19/politics/tara-reade-biden-allegation/index.html

Reade graduated from Seattle University School of Law in 2004, gaining admission to the school through its Alternative Admission Program.

A law school official familiar with the program said it was established to help "diverse and non-traditional students" enter the legal field.

"The Alternative Admission Program, now known as the Access Admission Program, is a pathway for individuals from historically disadvantaged and under-represented communities who have demonstrated grit, intellectual curiosity and the ability to overcome substantial obstacles," the official said.

She was rightfully admitted into the law school program, so her law degree is fine. However, she does not have an undergraduate degree and seems to have lied about that. But the Law School she went to will allow up to 10% of each class be admitted through the Access Admission Program which does not necessarily require a bachelor's degree.

It definitely raises questions about her integrity and veracity, but I doubt that it invalidates her law degree.

That program still requires an undergraduate degree and her law school record says she graduated from Antioch. If she lied to the law school, they will revoke her degree.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/22/lawyer-drops-tara-reade-as-client-274635

“Much of what has been written about Ms. Reade is not probative of whether then-Senator Biden sexually assaulted her, but rather is intended to victim-shame and attack her credibility on unrelated and irrelevant matters,” he wrote. “We genuinely wish Ms. Reade well and hope that she, as a survivor, is treated fairly. We have and will continue to represent survivors regardless of their alleged predator’s status or politics.”

Not sure what your point is. Even in quitting, her lawyer can't say anything bad about her. This is just fluff to cover the obvious negative implication of quitting after one week.

He speaks the truth. That’s what my point is.

It's her lawyer's opinion. By definition it is whatever advantages his client and always will be. Might as well quote yourself and say "see, I'm right!"

Yes, and actions speak louder than words.

He dropped her because he couldn't press her case effectively, because she's lying all the damn time.

And that may be so, but the bolded is still true. Sad that this even has to be explained.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/22/lawyer-drops-tara-reade-as-client-274635

“Much of what has been written about Ms. Reade is not probative of whether then-Senator Biden sexually assaulted her, but rather is intended to victim-shame and attack her credibility on unrelated and irrelevant matters,” he wrote. “We genuinely wish Ms. Reade well and hope that she, as a survivor, is treated fairly. We have and will continue to represent survivors regardless of their alleged predator’s status or politics.”

Not sure what your point is. Even in quitting, her lawyer can't say anything bad about her. This is just fluff to cover the obvious negative implication of quitting after one week.

He speaks the truth. That’s what my point is.

It's her lawyer's opinion. By definition it is whatever advantages his client and always will be. Might as well quote yourself and say "see, I'm right!"

Yes, and actions speak louder than words.

He dropped her because he couldn't press her case effectively, because she's lying all the damn time.

And that may be so, but the bolded is still true. Sad that this even has to be explained.

What's sad is that you think quoting her withdrawing attorney strengthens rather than weakens your case. He's literally the least credible person in the world on anything related to her case.