new Reade/Biden thread

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Fox doesn’t have Reade anywhere on its homepage this morning.

The only article about Biden is a about how he offered a union contract to his staff.

I guess that’s that.

Man, some of you folks are obsessed with Fox and their stories.
Why the obsession, pp?

Because it's the most influential news outlet for people on the right, and the stories they're highlighting and focusing on gives us insight into what the right is thinking about?

+1. And they’ve dropped Reade like a rock. That says something about where the right is.

[Anonymous]

Not only has ample info come out to discredit Reade, Fox realized this was also renewing the spotlight on Trump's many credible allegations. Heck even Trump knows that. Smart of them to drop it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, this is super weird. From the Medium articlehttps://medium.com/@macarthur.cliff/the-tara-reade-case-eight-things-the-media-wont-tell-you-27d3ca14978). Again, hyperlinks and original tweets are provided in the article.

Tara Reade’s hatred for Biden is rooted in her April 3, 2019 interview with The Union.

After the interview, journalists researched her background and discovered her article Bring on the Light, where she heaps praise upon Putin and condemns America. This is also the post where she claims to have left DC to protest American imperialism. When the article (which Tara deleted) was revealed to the public, she was mocked for it on Twitter, and some called her a “Russian asset.”

Tara became extremely upset, and blamed the Biden campaign for her troubles. Between April 2019 and March 2020 she authored more than 75 tweets accusing Joe Biden of labeling her a “Russian agent.”

Reade’s obsession went beyond mere tweets. When she went to Time’s Up with her sexual assault allegation, they put her in touch with several lawyers. Salon interviewed those lawyers, and they all told the same story: Reade didn’t care about pursuing a case against Biden, she wanted the lawyers to stop people from calling her a Russian agent on Twitter. Salon contacted Reade herself and she confirmed that was her goal.
Reade told Salon she wasn’t interested in suing Biden. Instead, she was angry “about the smears about being a Russian agent” from Biden supporters and was hoping a lawyer could find a way to stop them. One law firm Reade spoke with confirmed that they would not take a case with the ambiguous goal of trying to shut down people on social media who were speculating about an accuser being a “Russian agent.”

Reade also told Business Insider that she filed a police report with the DC Metro Police (in which she doesn’t name Joe Biden) not because she actually wanted an investigation, but because she hoped it would protect her from Twitter attacks.

None of this proves or disproves Biden raped her.
Didn't Weinstein rape several women who remained friends with him after? Rape is weird. Victims don't have to follow a playbook.

Not so much that rape is weird, but rather that trauma is. As a culture we do a really poor job actually even defining rape, as evidenced in this thread, but also in how we talk about it - rape is not a prevalent as we’re told by activists, and not as rare as we’re told
By law enforcement.

And while false rape claims are relatively rare, they’ve always been more common against celebrities. And since the 90s where celebrity status has become more coveted and more accessible than ever - the celebrity of victimhood has generated a huge appeal to far left activists. Some do it to sell books, restart careers or sell their documentary, others do it for the attention, and some are mentally ill. This was always the risk of #metoo. They made an ecosystem that merged with Bernie’s political branches. Getting a seat at the big kid table required first victimhood, second a powerful scalp, and third pious worship at the Bernieworld / Left-anti-American altar.

So you have a ton of activists, familiar with trauma, coaching people like Reade to craft their narrative - and any time the narrative hits a dead end, they scream trauma as an excuse. Basically ‘believe us, and if the story we provide is faulty, that is evidence of the trauma, which is more evidence’ - this is clearly a dangerous game - and this is why #metoo was bound to have fail and have backlash from day 1. This is the UVA case being played out as a movement with magnified casualties As a result of the Emily Renda’s trying to elevate themselves to the Big Kid table at all costs.

This is also why the DNC ( and more importantly, Dem voters) fear Bernie - it’s not Bernie or his ideas, it’s the people around him that they don’t want put into party power positions - that would be the end of the Democratic Party for generations, and the cementing of the GOPs fascist agenda possibly forever.

So when we excuse accusers actions as ‘trauma doesn’t have a playbook’ - we’re really just trying to silence our alarm bells going off. Maybe because of history, “oh she’s just being hysterical” - but that is not actually an excuse to deny observation and logic when they apply. (In fact it is the exact same as saying “oh they’re just being hysterical”)

That’s an extremely cynical take but damn if there’s not some truth to it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, this is super weird. From the Medium articlehttps://medium.com/@macarthur.cliff/the-tara-reade-case-eight-things-the-media-wont-tell-you-27d3ca14978). Again, hyperlinks and original tweets are provided in the article.

Tara Reade’s hatred for Biden is rooted in her April 3, 2019 interview with The Union.

After the interview, journalists researched her background and discovered her article Bring on the Light, where she heaps praise upon Putin and condemns America. This is also the post where she claims to have left DC to protest American imperialism. When the article (which Tara deleted) was revealed to the public, she was mocked for it on Twitter, and some called her a “Russian asset.”

Tara became extremely upset, and blamed the Biden campaign for her troubles. Between April 2019 and March 2020 she authored more than 75 tweets accusing Joe Biden of labeling her a “Russian agent.”

Reade’s obsession went beyond mere tweets. When she went to Time’s Up with her sexual assault allegation, they put her in touch with several lawyers. Salon interviewed those lawyers, and they all told the same story: Reade didn’t care about pursuing a case against Biden, she wanted the lawyers to stop people from calling her a Russian agent on Twitter. Salon contacted Reade herself and she confirmed that was her goal.
Reade told Salon she wasn’t interested in suing Biden. Instead, she was angry “about the smears about being a Russian agent” from Biden supporters and was hoping a lawyer could find a way to stop them. One law firm Reade spoke with confirmed that they would not take a case with the ambiguous goal of trying to shut down people on social media who were speculating about an accuser being a “Russian agent.”

Reade also told Business Insider that she filed a police report with the DC Metro Police (in which she doesn’t name Joe Biden) not because she actually wanted an investigation, but because she hoped it would protect her from Twitter attacks.

None of this proves or disproves Biden raped her.
Didn't Weinstein rape several women who remained friends with him after? Rape is weird. Victims don't have to follow a playbook.

Not so much that rape is weird, but rather that trauma is. As a culture we do a really poor job actually even defining rape, as evidenced in this thread, but also in how we talk about it - rape is not a prevalent as we’re told by activists, and not as rare as we’re told
By law enforcement.

And while false rape claims are relatively rare, they’ve always been more common against celebrities. And since the 90s where celebrity status has become more coveted and more accessible than ever - the celebrity of victimhood has generated a huge appeal to far left activists. Some do it to sell books, restart careers or sell their documentary, others do it for the attention, and some are mentally ill. This was always the risk of #metoo. They made an ecosystem that merged with Bernie’s political branches. Getting a seat at the big kid table required first victimhood, second a powerful scalp, and third pious worship at the Bernieworld / Left-anti-American altar.

So you have a ton of activists, familiar with trauma, coaching people like Reade to craft their narrative - and any time the narrative hits a dead end, they scream trauma as an excuse. Basically ‘believe us, and if the story we provide is faulty, that is evidence of the trauma, which is more evidence’ - this is clearly a dangerous game - and this is why #metoo was bound to have fail and have backlash from day 1. This is the UVA case being played out as a movement with magnified casualties As a result of the Emily Renda’s trying to elevate themselves to the Big Kid table at all costs.

This is also why the DNC ( and more importantly, Dem voters) fear Bernie - it’s not Bernie or his ideas, it’s the people around him that they don’t want put into party power positions - that would be the end of the Democratic Party for generations, and the cementing of the GOPs fascist agenda possibly forever.

So when we excuse accusers actions as ‘trauma doesn’t have a playbook’ - we’re really just trying to silence our alarm bells going off. Maybe because of history, “oh she’s just being hysterical” - but that is not actually an excuse to deny observation and logic when they apply. (In fact it is the exact same as saying “oh they’re just being hysterical”)

That’s an extremely cynical take but damn if there’s not some truth to it.

Probably the closest thing I've seen to capturing some of the nuances surrounding the issue, in this context.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OK, this is super weird. From the Medium articlehttps://medium.com/@macarthur.cliff/the-tara-reade-case-eight-things-the-media-wont-tell-you-27d3ca14978). Again, hyperlinks and original tweets are provided in the article.

Tara Reade’s hatred for Biden is rooted in her April 3, 2019 interview with The Union.

After the interview, journalists researched her background and discovered her article Bring on the Light, where she heaps praise upon Putin and condemns America. This is also the post where she claims to have left DC to protest American imperialism. When the article (which Tara deleted) was revealed to the public, she was mocked for it on Twitter, and some called her a “Russian asset.”

Tara became extremely upset, and blamed the Biden campaign for her troubles. Between April 2019 and March 2020 she authored more than 75 tweets accusing Joe Biden of labeling her a “Russian agent.”

Reade’s obsession went beyond mere tweets. When she went to Time’s Up with her sexual assault allegation, they put her in touch with several lawyers. Salon interviewed those lawyers, and they all told the same story: Reade didn’t care about pursuing a case against Biden, she wanted the lawyers to stop people from calling her a Russian agent on Twitter. Salon contacted Reade herself and she confirmed that was her goal.
Reade told Salon she wasn’t interested in suing Biden. Instead, she was angry “about the smears about being a Russian agent” from Biden supporters and was hoping a lawyer could find a way to stop them. One law firm Reade spoke with confirmed that they would not take a case with the ambiguous goal of trying to shut down people on social media who were speculating about an accuser being a “Russian agent.”

Reade also told Business Insider that she filed a police report with the DC Metro Police (in which she doesn’t name Joe Biden) not because she actually wanted an investigation, but because she hoped it would protect her from Twitter attacks.

None of this proves or disproves Biden raped her.
Didn't Weinstein rape several women who remained friends with him after? Rape is weird. Victims don't have to follow a playbook.

Not so much that rape is weird, but rather that trauma is. As a culture we do a really poor job actually even defining rape, as evidenced in this thread, but also in how we talk about it - rape is not a prevalent as we’re told by activists, and not as rare as we’re told
By law enforcement.

And while false rape claims are relatively rare, they’ve always been more common against celebrities. And since the 90s where celebrity status has become more coveted and more accessible than ever - the celebrity of victimhood has generated a huge appeal to far left activists. Some do it to sell books, restart careers or sell their documentary, others do it for the attention, and some are mentally ill. This was always the risk of #metoo. They made an ecosystem that merged with Bernie’s political branches. Getting a seat at the big kid table required first victimhood, second a powerful scalp, and third pious worship at the Bernieworld / Left-anti-American altar.

So you have a ton of activists, familiar with trauma, coaching people like Reade to craft their narrative - and any time the narrative hits a dead end, they scream trauma as an excuse. Basically ‘believe us, and if the story we provide is faulty, that is evidence of the trauma, which is more evidence’ - this is clearly a dangerous game - and this is why #metoo was bound to have fail and have backlash from day 1. This is the UVA case being played out as a movement with magnified casualties As a result of the Emily Renda’s trying to elevate themselves to the Big Kid table at all costs.

This is also why the DNC ( and more importantly, Dem voters) fear Bernie - it’s not Bernie or his ideas, it’s the people around him that they don’t want put into party power positions - that would be the end of the Democratic Party for generations, and the cementing of the GOPs fascist agenda possibly forever.

So when we excuse accusers actions as ‘trauma doesn’t have a playbook’ - we’re really just trying to silence our alarm bells going off. Maybe because of history, “oh she’s just being hysterical” - but that is not actually an excuse to deny observation and logic when they apply. (In fact it is the exact same as saying “oh they’re just being hysterical”)

That’s an extremely cynical take but damn if there’s not some truth to it.

Probably the closest thing I've seen to capturing some of the nuances surrounding the issue, in this context.

+100. Bernie supporters, you need to read this and think about it, if you don't want to keep doing lasting damage to the Me Too movement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not only has ample info come out to discredit Reade, Fox realized this was also renewing the spotlight on Trump's many credible allegations. Heck even Trump knows that. Smart of them to drop it.

Hey! Reade and Eva Murry (remember her from Saturday?) have inoculated Biden for the near future. The mainstream media can fairly say it gave Reade a platform for weeks. In fact, the "liberal" mainstream media still hasn't given us a full accounting of Reade's lies on her Biden claims or in her life in general. So... they're free to investigate Trump's 21 accusers!

[Anonymous]

Anyone know Mr. Touchin?
If so, tell him this poster gives him kudos for saying the quiet part out loud. I got a hoot from this letter to the editor.
Hard to believe he is a journalist. Well, not really.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone know Mr. Touchin?
If so, tell him this poster gives him kudos for saying the quiet part out loud. I got a hoot from this letter to the editor.
Hard to believe he is a journalist. Well, not really.

Stupid con bs. This was investigated weeks ago.

AP contacted 21 of Reade’s Senate coworkers, including 3 Reade said she told about the abuse, several weeks ago. All 21 denied knowing about it and the chief of staff issued a sharp rebuttal.

WaPo contract all 5 of the people Reade said could corroborate her story, again weeks ago. 3 denied knowing about it, one confirmed shoulder rubbing but not the fingers, and the fifth confirmed but refused to go on the record.

The real mystery is why AP and WaPo didn’t broadcast these findings weeks ago.

[Anonymous]

Well, this doesn't help.....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Well, this doesn't help.....

Because historically problematic votes, assuming that politicians never change their position or views or evolve over 30years, it’s totes evidence of a serial rapist.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Well, this doesn't help.....

Because historically problematic votes, assuming that politicians never change their position or views or evolve over 30years, it’s totes evidence of a serial rapist.

+1. I’m surprised pp had the balls to bump this thread, given how the Reade claims are doing these days.

[Anonymous]

Tara Reade also canceled a planned interview with Don Lemon.
https://cnncommentary.com/2020/05/05/don-lemon-tara-reade-canceled-on-me/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Tara Reade also canceled a planned interview with Don Lemon.
https://cnncommentary.com/2020/05/05/don-lemon-tara-reade-canceled-on-me/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

Did she ever do an interview with Fox on Sunday? I heard she cancelled on them, too.

[Anonymous]

Slate said Joe’s responses are not particularly convincing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Slate said Joe’s responses are not particularly convincing.

Slate enjoys being contrary for contrary’s sake.