Anonymous wrote:This story won't go away for Biden. The fact that there are over 160 pages between the two threads prove that there is a double standard for the left.

Hahaha. You bump this thread several times a day to whine about supposed left-wing hypocrisy. This forces someone else to point out all the troublesome FACTS about Reade’s changing story.
There’s been no new news for several weeks. Just you bumping the thread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the Politico piece. Reade has no credibility. That along with the timing is too much for me to believe her. If she was concerned about him being a leader, when he ran for VP would have been the time to come out.

Huh. Does it bother you when other women wait decades to allege sexual assault? Or just Reade?

DP. You need to read the Politico piece, and the NPR piece. They’re about how she was fired from her Senate job for poor performance, nothing else. They're about how she ripped off people who were kind to her for decades.

I mean... the articles suggest she is a pretty unpleasant person. This doesn’t necessarily mean nothing happened. Is she a perfect credible source? Absolutely not. Does that prove Biden is innocent? Absolutely not. I feel a bit yucky about the Politico article because it very much follows the tradition of dig up whatever muck you can find on the female accuser wether it has direct relevance to the accusation or not and is precisely why women hesitate in coming forward. Do only perfect angelic women have the right to complain about harassment? How does trauma shape people’s behavior and clash with what we expect of them as a society?

Exactly this. We’ve been lectured to for years about how a woman’s background, personality, sexuality, etc. should have no bearing when it comes to a sexual assault accusation. Plenty of movies have been made about this very thing, driving home the fact that digging up sordid details of a woman’s past in order to discredit her is the lowest thing you can do. Yet here we have the very same people doing exactly that - trying to discredit this woman’s sexual assault accusation because of her sketchy past.

Amazing how the narrative changes when the accused is a Democrat.

You don't comprehend very well. Her allegation has been fully investigated for more than a year by the media. Most of the comments above are about her story, especially the fact that she keeps changing it every time the last version does not hold up to investigation. Then the people like you who want to believe it, say, "but why would she lie?" And then people respond with the comments of her former coworkers, acquaintances, etc. who say she wasn't trustworthy or honest.

This x1,000. How many times are you going to come back here, whine about double standards, and complain that Reade’s history shouldn’t disqualify her claim? Every.single.time, someone like pp has to lay out the problems with the FACTS of Reade’s claim.

PP was nice and put it on your incomprehension. But I’m going to call it what it is: you’re a weasel.

Anonymous wrote:This story won't go away for Biden. The fact that there are over 160 pages between the two threads prove that there is a double standard for the left.

DP. There is no double standard when the supposed victim is not credible.

The hypocrisy is all on the right, with your endless claims that we need to believe someone who changes her facts and had no corroboration, but ignores Trump’s many credible victims.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the Politico piece. Reade has no credibility. That along with the timing is too much for me to believe her. If she was concerned about him being a leader, when he ran for VP would have been the time to come out.

Huh. Does it bother you when other women wait decades to allege sexual assault? Or just Reade?

DP. You need to read the Politico piece, and the NPR piece. They’re about how she was fired from her Senate job for poor performance, nothing else. They're about how she ripped off people who were kind to her for decades.

And that has exactly what to do with a sexual assault? Are you the kind of person who discredits and dismisses hair stylists, strippers, waitresses, low-income women who might be down on their luck or come from less-than-ideal circumstances - if they dare to come forward after sexual assault?

Not a good look.

Do you really not see the difference between (a) direct accounts from people who knew her who say she did not tell the truth in dealings with them, and (b) jackasses who respond to sexual assault allegations with "What was she wearing?" "Was she drunk?" "Why did she meet with him alone?" or any of the other ways that rape apologists say that a woman was asking for it?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the Politico piece. Reade has no credibility. That along with the timing is too much for me to believe her. If she was concerned about him being a leader, when he ran for VP would have been the time to come out.

Huh. Does it bother you when other women wait decades to allege sexual assault? Or just Reade?

DP. You need to read the Politico piece, and the NPR piece. They’re about how she was fired from her Senate job for poor performance, nothing else. They're about how she ripped off people who were kind to her for decades.

I mean... the articles suggest she is a pretty unpleasant person. This doesn’t necessarily mean nothing happened. Is she a perfect credible source? Absolutely not. Does that prove Biden is innocent? Absolutely not. I feel a bit yucky about the Politico article because it very much follows the tradition of dig up whatever muck you can find on the female accuser wether it has direct relevance to the accusation or not and is precisely why women hesitate in coming forward. Do only perfect angelic women have the right to complain about harassment? How does trauma shape people’s behavior and clash with what we expect of them as a society?

Exactly this. We’ve been lectured to for years about how a woman’s background, personality, sexuality, etc. should have no bearing when it comes to a sexual assault accusation. Plenty of movies have been made about this very thing, driving home the fact that digging up sordid details of a woman’s past in order to discredit her is the lowest thing you can do. Yet here we have the very same people doing exactly that - trying to discredit this woman’s sexual assault accusation because of her sketchy past.

Amazing how the narrative changes when the accused is a Democrat.

You don't comprehend very well. Her allegation has been fully investigated for more than a year by the media. Most of the comments above are about her story, especially the fact that she keeps changing it every time the last version does not hold up to investigation. Then the people like you who want to believe it, say, "but why would she lie?" And then people respond with the comments of her former coworkers, acquaintances, etc. who say she wasn't trustworthy or honest.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the Politico piece. Reade has no credibility. That along with the timing is too much for me to believe her. If she was concerned about him being a leader, when he ran for VP would have been the time to come out.

Huh. Does it bother you when other women wait decades to allege sexual assault? Or just Reade?

DP. You need to read the Politico piece, and the NPR piece. They’re about how she was fired from her Senate job for poor performance, nothing else. They're about how she ripped off people who were kind to her for decades.

And that has exactly what to do with a sexual assault? Are you the kind of person who discredits and dismisses hair stylists, strippers, waitresses, low-income women who might be down on their luck or come from less-than-ideal circumstances - if they dare to come forward after sexual assault?

Not a good look.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the Politico piece. Reade has no credibility. That along with the timing is too much for me to believe her. If she was concerned about him being a leader, when he ran for VP would have been the time to come out.

Huh. Does it bother you when other women wait decades to allege sexual assault? Or just Reade?

DP. You need to read the Politico piece, and the NPR piece. They’re about how she was fired from her Senate job for poor performance, nothing else. They're about how she ripped off people who were kind to her for decades.

I mean... the articles suggest she is a pretty unpleasant person. This doesn’t necessarily mean nothing happened. Is she a perfect credible source? Absolutely not. Does that prove Biden is innocent? Absolutely not. I feel a bit yucky about the Politico article because it very much follows the tradition of dig up whatever muck you can find on the female accuser wether it has direct relevance to the accusation or not and is precisely why women hesitate in coming forward. Do only perfect angelic women have the right to complain about harassment? How does trauma shape people’s behavior and clash with what we expect of them as a society?

Exactly this. We’ve been lectured to for years about how a woman’s background, personality, sexuality, etc. should have no bearing when it comes to a sexual assault accusation. Plenty of movies have been made about this very thing, driving home the fact that digging up sordid details of a woman’s past in order to discredit her is the lowest thing you can do. Yet here we have the very same people doing exactly that - trying to discredit this woman’s sexual assault accusation because of her sketchy past.

Amazing how the narrative changes when the accused is a Democrat.

This story won't go away for Biden. The fact that there are over 160 pages between the two threads prove that there is a double standard for the left.

Here is the problem. Accusations like this are very serious and even in cases where you have a person of upstanding integrity and honor you need to have corroboration and confirmation. In this case, we have an accuser who has a history of deceit and dishonesty from a misdemeanor check fraud at the time she alleges the assault happens, a case of theft against a former employer, and multiple examples of her saying different contradictory things at different times. She has changed her political support and she updates past social media entries to match her current position trying to erase evidence of her former positions. This is a person with very little credibility making a very serious allegation.

Looking at the evidence, she has made statements about facts, such as filing complaints and making verbal complaints. There is no record of her making a written complaint and all staff members of the campaign she says she complained to cannot remember her or the complaint. When confronted, she admitted that she never filed a complaint about sexual assault but about sexual harassment and later says that she says her complaint said that he made her uncomfortable. She claims she told her mother, who has passed. A recording of a woman who could be her mother alleges some vague issue that could be anything from being treated unfairly to personality conflicts with a supervisor to something serious. There is no way to match what that caller said to what the accuser alleges. Many people that she alleges she told about the incident have no memory of her telling them about the incident. 2-3 people have come forth and confirmed what she's said, but there were some that confirmed, then recanted. There just is not enough solid evidence, confirmation and corroboration to make a case.

Unfortunately, her history of deception and theft make her an unbelievable victim without outside confirmation. She's like the little boy who cried wolf and her past is coming back to haunt her.

Anonymous wrote:The story has changed again, now in coordination with the Trump campaign, and the venue has moved to a Senate building that Biden didn't work in and would have had no reason to be there.

Really, this story is dead. Nothing happened.

Now, let's scruitinize and shed light on the 24 accusations against Trump and see which ones have validity.

Link to the bolded?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the Politico piece. Reade has no credibility. That along with the timing is too much for me to believe her. If she was concerned about him being a leader, when he ran for VP would have been the time to come out.

Huh. Does it bother you when other women wait decades to allege sexual assault? Or just Reade?

DP. You need to read the Politico piece, and the NPR piece. They’re about how she was fired from her Senate job for poor performance, nothing else. They're about how she ripped off people who were kind to her for decades.

I mean... the articles suggest she is a pretty unpleasant person. This doesn’t necessarily mean nothing happened. Is she a perfect credible source? Absolutely not. Does that prove Biden is innocent? Absolutely not. I feel a bit yucky about the Politico article because it very much follows the tradition of dig up whatever muck you can find on the female accuser wether it has direct relevance to the accusation or not and is precisely why women hesitate in coming forward. Do only perfect angelic women have the right to complain about harassment? How does trauma shape people’s behavior and clash with what we expect of them as a society?

Her personality isn't the real problem.

The real problem is that her story changes constantly, and her corroborators change their stories. Just a few years ago she was tweeting out her support for Biden's women policies. Her brother changed his story along with her. A former neighbor is now unsure. Reade gave MSM 3 supposed witnesses from Biden's senate office at the time, and all three issued formal denials.

Ben Savage, who worked with her at NPR, says she was fired for incompetence. She claimed she was asked to serve drinks at a fundraiser because Biden supposedly liked her legs, but others in Biden's office at the time say they don't remember anybody ever being asked to help at fundraisers, because lobbying and politics were kept strictly separate. A recent walk-through of the Senate basement/tunnels she talked about showed there were no "niches" he could have pulled her into and the tunnel in question had a ton of foot traffic. Et cetera, et cetera.

Agree there's nothing to see here. Cons and maybe Bernie Bros keep pushing this, but there's no there there. Give it up already.

Just re-reading and need to correct this.... Ben Savage worked closely with Reade at the Senate and said she was fired for incompetence, according to the NPR article.

Anonymous wrote:The story has changed again, now in coordination with the Trump campaign, and the venue has moved to a Senate building that Biden didn't work in and would have had no reason to be there.

Really, this story is dead. Nothing happened.

Now, let's scruitinize and shed light on the 24 accusations against Trump and see which ones have validity.

ITA. It's totally hypocritical to keep plugging this non-story while ignoring all the accusations against Trump.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the Politico piece. Reade has no credibility. That along with the timing is too much for me to believe her. If she was concerned about him being a leader, when he ran for VP would have been the time to come out.

Huh. Does it bother you when other women wait decades to allege sexual assault? Or just Reade?

DP. You need to read the Politico piece, and the NPR piece. They’re about how she was fired from her Senate job for poor performance, nothing else. They're about how she ripped off people who were kind to her for decades.

I mean... the articles suggest she is a pretty unpleasant person. This doesn’t necessarily mean nothing happened. Is she a perfect credible source? Absolutely not. Does that prove Biden is innocent? Absolutely not. I feel a bit yucky about the Politico article because it very much follows the tradition of dig up whatever muck you can find on the female accuser wether it has direct relevance to the accusation or not and is precisely why women hesitate in coming forward. Do only perfect angelic women have the right to complain about harassment? How does trauma shape people’s behavior and clash with what we expect of them as a society?

Her personality isn't the real problem.

The real problem is that her story changes constantly, and her corroborators change their stories. Just a few years ago she was tweeting out her support for Biden's women policies. Her brother changed his story along with her. A former neighbor is now unsure. Reade gave MSM 3 supposed witnesses from Biden's senate office at the time, and all three issued formal denials.

Ben Savage, who worked with her at NPR, says she was fired for incompetence. She claimed she was asked to serve drinks at a fundraiser because Biden supposedly liked her legs, but others in Biden's office at the time say they don't remember anybody ever being asked to help at fundraisers, because lobbying and politics were kept strictly separate. A recent walk-through of the Senate basement/tunnels she talked about showed there were no "niches" he could have pulled her into and the tunnel in question had a ton of foot traffic. Et cetera, et cetera.

Agree there's nothing to see here. Cons and maybe Bernie Bros keep pushing this, but there's no there there. Give it up already.

The story has changed again, now in coordination with the Trump campaign, and the venue has moved to a Senate building that Biden didn't work in and would have had no reason to be there.

Really, this story is dead. Nothing happened.

Now, let's scruitinize and shed light on the 24 accusations against Trump and see which ones have validity.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I read the Politico piece. Reade has no credibility. That along with the timing is too much for me to believe her. If she was concerned about him being a leader, when he ran for VP would have been the time to come out.

Huh. Does it bother you when other women wait decades to allege sexual assault? Or just Reade?

DP. You need to read the Politico piece, and the NPR piece. They’re about how she was fired from her Senate job for poor performance, nothing else. They're about how she ripped off people who were kind to her for decades.

I mean... the articles suggest she is a pretty unpleasant person. This doesn’t necessarily mean nothing happened. Is she a perfect credible source? Absolutely not. Does that prove Biden is innocent? Absolutely not. I feel a bit yucky about the Politico article because it very much follows the tradition of dig up whatever muck you can find on the female accuser wether it has direct relevance to the accusation or not and is precisely why women hesitate in coming forward. Do only perfect angelic women have the right to complain about harassment? How does trauma shape people’s behavior and clash with what we expect of them as a society?