new Reade/Biden thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:According to the statements from some experts, the narrative that only the archives would have these records is false.
Having said that, if there were any damning documents at the U of Del - they are long gone now.

They wouldn't be in Biden's personal files at U-Del, they would be in the Senate archives at the NARA in Adelphi, MD.

Mika thought this was a gotcha moment when she questioned him about doing a search through these records for Tara's name so that other confidential information wouldn't be seen. But are we sure that these records are in a digital and searchable format? Honest question here because I really don't know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe Reade. But I will vote for Biden because Trump is worse.

This. We need a grown-up back and apparently this is the one we are stuck with. Hopefully 4 years and paving the way for our 1st female president. Which it is beyond annoying that the country seems only willing to elect after a stint as VP, but whatever. I'll take it.

If you think that female will be Hilary Clinton, don't bank on it. Someone younger, there's a chance

It will be Harris, Whitmer or Grisham.

[Anonymous]

Let’s stand with Biden! For our next rally:


https://www.amazon.com/Stand-Joe-Biden-President-Hands/dp/B07RGMJ28Y

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every woman should be believed unless they are accusing a Democrat. Got it.

They should be believed if their account is believable. If a woman says your house is on fire and you can see it's not, it doesn't mean you have to call 911.

You are full of it. Own it.

Say the one who voted for the pu$$y-grabber.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Every woman should be believed unless they are accusing a Democrat. Got it.

I don't know whether anyone actually said the words "believe ALL women." If they did, they certainly don't speak for the entire party. I certainly never said or felt that women are incapable of lying. I am sick of the entire party being help accountable for the comments of a few. I believe women should be heard, but not all should be believed.

[Anonymous]

Joe Biden doesn't have any NDAs forbidding anyone from speaking.

Trump, meanwhile, has NDAs all over the place. Let's not with another "but her emails"

Hold trump to the same scrutiny, or get off Biden's case.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every woman should be believed unless they are accusing a Democrat. Got it.

They should be believed if their account is believable. If a woman says your house is on fire and you can see it's not, it doesn't mean you have to call 911.

You are full of it. Own it.

Say the one who voted for the pu$$y-grabber.

Hypocrite you are.

As Democrats, we either support women or not. Obviously not.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone on twitter brought up a valid point. She claims to have also been a senate staffer at the time and recalled that the dress code required women to wear pantyhose with skirts. Those of us who are old enough to remember pantyhose can verify that they were constricting enough to practically cut off circulation. It is hard to imagine that he was able to reach up her skirt and inside pantyhose far enough to penetrate. Especially while standing up in a hallway where someone could have walked by at anytime.

And apparently her allegations mention her *bare* legs...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I do not believe Biden.

At. All.

He is lying and now trying to cover it up.

I do not believe Tara Reade.

There is one person who has been in the public eye for 40 years, been vetted by many groups and agencies and has never had this come up.
There is another person who whimsically changes her positions, her enthusiasm and is almost bipolar politically that seems to have no issue changing her story as often as she changes clothes.

This was her political temper tantrum when her candidate of choice lost the lead in the primary race. It was her last ditch effort to swing support back to Sanders and was completely fabricated. I do not believe an accuser who has been known to spin her stories based on her current whims. She was a pro-Biden supporter from the early 90's when this alleged assault occurred, for 24 years while he ran for reelection to the Senate (1996, 2000, 2004) and ran as VPOTUS (2008, 2012). When he ran for President in 2008, she never mentioned this and was still supportive. In 2017, she said that he touched her and made her uncomfortable. It was only when her candidate of choice, Sanders, lost momentum that she upped the ante by claiming that it was assault. When Sanders was leading the primary race, she only mentioned that he touched her and made her uncomfortable. When the tides turned and the Democratic party decided to throw their full weight behind the moderate candidate and not her progressive choice candidate, that she decided that she needed to do something extreme to get Sanders back in the limelight. So she fabricated this to spike Biden's surging campaign and help Sander's flagging campaign.

Washington Post and New York Times have already researched her claims and there is just not enough substance to make the case. The strongest "evidence" is a vague anonymous call-in to a talk show in 1993 that can be spun several different ways. She claims it is her mother (no way to verify, as her mother is dead). The caller says:

"Hello. I'm wondering what a staffer would do besides go to the press in Washington. My daughter has just left there after working for a prominent senator and could not get through with her problems at all, and the only thing she could have done was go to the press, and she chose not to do it out of respect for him."

Nothing about assault, not even about harassment. Just that she had problems and was not sure what to do other than go to to press. Anything could have happened that made her disenchanted with the Senator. That is so vague and all it says is she had problems with either Biden or the staff and was considering going to the press. That's worse than an accusation; it's vague enough that she could spin that to be anything she wanted to be once her mother was dead. Talk about ultimate spin doctoring. No one else on the campaign who worked there at the time had any idea that any such thing had happened at the time.

This is just not credible. And for those who made the argument that got the other thread closed, I am not partisan, I am a moderate independent and did not think the other accuser was credible either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every woman should be believed unless they are accusing a Democrat. Got it.

They should be believed if their account is believable. If a woman says your house is on fire and you can see it's not, it doesn't mean you have to call 911.

You are full of it. Own it.

Say the one who voted for the pu$$y-grabber.

Hypocrite you are.

As Democrats, we either support women or not. Obviously not.

Supporting mean believe them but verify the report. In this case, the story has shifted, witnesses have not backed the story and the Putin love/BernieBros support undermine the whole thing. Biden has not maligned Ms. Reade in any way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every woman should be believed unless they are accusing a Democrat. Got it.

They should be believed if their account is believable. If a woman says your house is on fire and you can see it's not, it doesn't mean you have to call 911.

You are full of it. Own it.

Say the one who voted for the pu$$y-grabber.

Hypocrite you are.

As Democrats, we either support women or not. Obviously not.

This. It’s not too late to let Bernie be nominee, is it? If media and Dems don’t sweep this under the rug and really go after Biden. Force Vuden to withdraw? Bernie has never had any sexual misconduct accusation thrown at him. What, exactly, do we stand for if we sweep this under the rug?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone on twitter brought up a valid point. She claims to have also been a senate staffer at the time and recalled that the dress code required women to wear pantyhose with skirts. Those of us who are old enough to remember pantyhose can verify that they were constricting enough to practically cut off circulation. It is hard to imagine that he was able to reach up her skirt and inside pantyhose far enough to penetrate. Especially while standing up in a hallway where someone could have walked by at anytime.

And apparently her allegations mention her *bare* legs...

She actually addressed this in the original complaint saying it was a hot day and she was not wearing any. She specifically mentions it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Every woman should be believed unless they are accusing a Democrat. Got it.

They should be believed if their account is believable. If a woman says your house is on fire and you can see it's not, it doesn't mean you have to call 911.

You are full of it. Own it.

Say the one who voted for the pu$$y-grabber.

Hypocrite you are.

As Democrats, we either support women or not. Obviously not.

Who says Democrats are supposed to support all women? What a ridiculous statement. I don’t support women who lie, women trump supporters, etc.

[Anonymous]

Sorry cons, but it doesn't matter. Trump is a piggish boor and no self-respecting woman will cast a vote for him.

Meanwhile, Joe will be running with a woman as his VP. And Joe has stuck his neck out for women time and again. He's pushing pro-woman policies, like paid maternity leave and the ERA.

Joe has a flimsy allegation hanging over his head. Any man who has been in politics for 40+ years will probably have a similar person with a flimsy allegation. C'est la vie.

It's really not a hard choice for Democrats and self-respecting women in 2020. Everyone expects this rat-f#ckery from Republicans.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t believe Biden piped or fingered.

I think he def patted and squeezed her butt a few times.

+1, I think he was handsy and overly familiar like he has been for years and years, and it would definitely be recognized as sexual harassment today.

It would be recognized as inappropriate. I don't think it's "sexual" harassment, though. I don't know - I just don't see any record of women (or men) finding that Biden was sexually inappropriate.

I don't buy Reade's story. I am open to being wrong. I am voting for Biden either way.

It's weird - Trump got a little bump after the Kavanaugh hearing because it made people retreat to their camp. I wonder if that will happen here, too. If people become more committed to Biden because of the feeling that our guy is being unfairly attacked. I don't know if it works that way with Dems.

It's also so weird that we now have to go through all this with Biden - and Trump has never once been held to account for the dozens of well documented, actually credible allegations against him. That guy's skin must be layered in teflon.

Works that way with me. I knew from the beginning that no matter who the Democrats picked, the Republicans would find some flaw to focus on. If they found none, they would make something up. So I took a page from Trump's playbook. Biden can shoot someone on Fifth Avenue and he won't lose me. It's sad that our politics have sunk so low. But here we are, and I am not unilaterally disarming.