Tara Reade Biden allegation megathread

[Fuzzy Bear]

Folks need to stop taking the whole "Believe women" thing out of context.

The context is, prior to #MeToo, when women would go to police officers or their HR department or their friends/family and talk about being sexually harassed or assaulted or raped, they would get laughed off or blamed or ignored.

The point was, hey authority figures, stop doing that, treat these claims seriously.  It's your job.  Do a rape kit test, investigate if the claim is credible, and if it is then pursue action.

The point was not, hey voters, this rando crazy person says Joe Biden raped her, now you have to believe it.

What makes this person a "rando crazy" person?  Because she accused Biden?  

What context is "Believe the women!" stated in?  What is the criteria to NOT believe some women?  

I've never been for a "Believe the women!" standard in the context that it's presented by #MeToo and the like.  Certainly, such allegations should be heard and taken seriously.  Certainly, the initial premise should NOT be that those making such allegations are simply lying.  (Although some ARE lying; that does need to be honestly acknowledged.)  Each allegation should be taken on its own merits and given a fair hearing, and victims ought but I'm OK with skepticism toward allegations which are (A) made long after the fact, and/or (B) are made in a civil arena when the alleged act was a criminal violation.  Each allegation has its own level of credibility, and just believing accusers and assigning guilt to accusers is wrong.  But it's a product of the #MeToo movement and of "Believe the women!" sentiment.  It's not a substitute for fairness, timely reporting, and impartial investigation.  It's just not.  

[Fuzzy Bear]

What makes this person a "rando crazy" person?  

The fact that she is?

Good to know you "Believe Victims".

Or does your standard on this vary depending on who's being accused?

#MeToo has opened this can of worms, and opportunistic politicians have ran with it.  This sort of thing is what happens.

[Fuzzy Bear]

The Democrats now appear hypocritical.  And the red avatars here ARE, if not hypocritical, walking back a whole lot of what they have said over time.

Which Old Atlas Forum was I on when I would hear the entire #MeToo and #believeallwomen schtick.  The position of Brave New Atlas Democrats is, #believeallwomenexceptaccusersofjoeandbill.  Their standard became inconvenient when it threatened to be used against their lock for the Democratic nomination.

Tara Reade has made an untimely accusation and she's changed her story, so that's two (2) strikes against her credibility.  She had lots of time to say something, and I'm skeptical of people who do this once the accused person is on the biggest possible stage.  And I certainly agree Blasey Ford's accusation is more substantial.  But it would be nice if liberals and Democrats would walk back the #MeToo rhetoric that ruled out the possibility of false accusations.  Gary Dotson and the Duke U Lacrosse team say, "Hi!", by the way.

[Fuzzy Bear]

The Democrats now appear hypocritical.  And the red avatars here ARE, if not hypocritical, walking back a whole lot of what they have said over time.

Which Old Atlas Forum was I on when I would hear the entire #MeToo and #believeallwomen schtick.  The position of Brave New Atlas Democrats is, #believeallwomenexceptaccusersofjoeandbill.  Their standard became inconvenient when it threatened to be used against their lock for the Democratic nomination.

Tara Reade has made an untimely accusation and she's changed her story, so that's two (2) strikes against her credibility.  She had lots of time to say something, and I'm skeptical of people who do this once the accused person is on the biggest possible stage.  And I certainly agree Blasey Ford's accusation is more substantial.  But it would be nice if liberals and Democrats would walk back the #MeToo rhetoric that ruled out the possibility of false accusations.  Gary Dotson and the Duke U Lacrosse team say, "Hi!", by the way.

You literally have to look two posts above to see a very clear explanation I wrote of why this is not the case.

So either you didn't see it at all, you saw it and ignored it, or you read it but are playing dumb.  Which is it?

The position of the Democratic Party was never that false accusations are impossible.  Maybe people like Kirsten Gillibrand or Lena Dunham.  But they are not the mainstream of the party.  We've already had a false rape allegation against Robert Mueller of all people.

If what you are saying represents the mainstream of the Democratic Party, then why are its leaders giving all sorts of aid and comfort to the "Guilt By Accusation" crowd?

[Fuzzy Bear]

Fake News!  Imagine that!

Joe Biden ought to be dealt with fairly on this.  So, too, should every person in this situation.  Principles of timeliness of filing a complaint, presumption of innocence for the accused, the right to confront one's accuser(s) and such ought not to be watered down for the sake of political expediency in the name of "women" and "victims". 

If Joe Biden gets more grief on this issue than he deserves, large elements in his own party are, in part, responsible.  Perhaps we can now finally get away with the Mobocracy on this issue and get back to enforce the law on this issue while providing the same fairness for the accused the Democratic Party states it wants for poor and indigent criminal defendants.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Fake News!  Imagine that!

Joe Biden ought to be dealt with fairly on this.  So, too, should every person in this situation.  Principles of timeliness of filing a complaint, presumption of innocence for the accused, the right to confront one's accuser(s) and such ought not to be watered down for the sake of political expediency in the name of "women" and "victims". 

If Joe Biden gets more grief on this issue than he deserves, large elements in his own party are, in part, responsible.  Perhaps we can now finally get away with the Mobocracy on this issue and get back to enforce the law on this issue while providing the same fairness for the accused the Democratic Party states it wants for poor and indigent criminal defendants.

That's not really what this is about.  This isn't a he-said-she-said.  This is just straight up an obviously fabricated rape allegation.  "How to deal with it" shouldn't be a question because anyone who does the minimum journalism required can easily see that it is fake.

Elements of the Democratic Party and the Feminist Left have demanded that even lame accusations such as these receive a full vetting, and that the onus be placed on the accused.  I consider the allegation lame.  But it's as lame as any number of allegations against Trump, and the response you have given here to defend Biden would be roundly condemned if it were made against Trump.  Of course, it would be fine to use regarding Bill Clinton. 

[Fuzzy Bear]

It's embarrassing that you call yourself a Democrat and write this insane psychopathic sh**t.

"Insane psychopathic sh**t" you mean the truth? I am all for supporting these accusations, and she said that there is a complaint filed and multiple witnesses. Now I just want to know, where are they?

Yeah, where are the witnesses?  What a concept; to expect witnesses to actually materialize.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Elements of the Democratic Party and the Feminist Left have demanded that even lame accusations such as these receive a full vetting, and that the onus be placed on the accused.  I consider the allegation lame.  But it's as lame as any number of allegations against Trump, and the response you have given here to defend Biden would be roundly condemned if it were made against Trump.  Of course, it would be fine to use regarding Bill Clinton. 

Flagrantly false. Trump has dozens of accusers, and only a few of them are given particular credence. Kavanaugh and Moore had additional accusers who weren't taken seriously. When the accusations are this flimsy, most of us on the Left (not including The Intercept, etc.) are pretty good at not making a big deal over them.

Is this one of your "Thus saith the Lord!" posts?

Thought so.

[Fuzzy Bear]

https://www.businessinsider.com/joshua-collins-us-congressional-candidate-lived-in-his-truck-2020-1

He's an Owner-Operator of his truck, but he's running as a Socialist?

Former truck driver Joshua Collins is running for the House of Representatives on a platform of socialism, a green new deal, and abolishing the CIA.

He's achieved viral notability and is betting TikTok and Twitter will take the place of traditional advertising to achieve his goals.

In the year leading up to his campaign, Collins and his wife moved their belongings to storage and lived in the truck to save money.

Collins was an owner-operator, someone who owns his own truck and chooses jobs to take on.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Have we started the Joshua Collins 2028 threads yet?

[Fuzzy Bear]

Left speechless?

https://mobile.twitter.com/GravelInstitute/status/1256206740061732864

You support Trump! Your pushing of the already debunked narrative is honestly breathtaking hypocrisy.

Debunked by who?  The anti-Trump media?

There is as much evidence against Biden right now as there was against Kavanaugh.  It takes a lot of intellectual honesty to deny that.

[Fuzzy Bear]

https://twitter.com/isaacdovere/status/1256383907114729472?s=21

Cringeworthy.

I'm struggling immensely with the "believe all women" principle. I really don't know what it's like to have someone rape me. I really don't know what it's like to face the threat of others smearing me or gaslighting me for speaking up. I really don't know what it's like to even begin to speak this kind of truth. I want to be able to believe because it's pretty obvious society hasn't taken these kinds of issues seriously enough, but... it's tough. I see sh-t like this from the neighbour and almost roll my eyes.  

For sure, we owe it to women to hear these stories, treat all accusers with respect, and take allegations seriously. But "believe all women" just isn't compatible with reality. All claims of sexual assault need to at least go through some process of scrutiny don't they? I'm just not sure how we balance everything. And I hate it. I hate that I have to be in a position where I'm made to pass judgment on Tara Reade (which is why I usually just shut up about stuff like this). But from my perspective, it's... challenging to believe her. It could very well be because I just don't want to. There it is.

So why is it unreasonable for someone to take your position on Dr. Blasey Ford that you take on Tara Reade?  There is no more evidence to support Dr. Blasey Ford than there is to support Tara Reade.  And there's really no less, either.  They're about at the same level of evidence on behalf of their allegations.
 

[Fuzzy Bear]

https://twitter.com/isaacdovere/status/1256383907114729472?s=21

Cringeworthy.

I'm struggling immensely with the "believe all women" principle. I really don't know what it's like to have someone rape me. I really don't know what it's like to face the threat of others smearing me or gaslighting me for speaking up. I really don't know what it's like to even begin to speak this kind of truth. I want to be able to believe because it's pretty obvious society hasn't taken these kinds of issues seriously enough, but... it's tough. I see sh-t like this from the neighbour and almost roll my eyes.  

For sure, we owe it to women to hear these stories, treat all accusers with respect, and take allegations seriously. But "believe all women" just isn't compatible with reality. All claims of sexual assault need to at least go through some process of scrutiny don't they? I'm just not sure how we balance everything. And I hate it. I hate that I have to be in a position where I'm made to pass judgment on Tara Reade (which is why I usually just shut up about stuff like this). But from my perspective, it's... challenging to believe her. It could very well be because I just don't want to. There it is.

So why is it unreasonable for someone to take your position on Dr. Blasey Ford that you take on Tara Reade?  There is no more evidence to support Dr. Blasey Ford than there is to support Tara Reade.  And there's really no less, either.  They're about at the same level of evidence on behalf of their allegations.
 

Because Ford's account of the story was detailed, not flimsy, credible, and didn't change over time? Reade's story has changed multiple times. Not to mention, Reade's history with the Putin posts, the tweets - Blasey Ford never had any motive against Kav as far as we could tell - yet Reade has been posting up a storm about "tic toc" #Bernie2020 amongst other crazy things. Blasey Ford never rushed to do TV interviews, Reade is. Blasey Ford, the minute she saw Kav in the public spotlight, sent the letter to her congresswoman. Reade publicly applauded Biden numerous times while he was in the public spotlight and then changed her story, and then changed her story again. You know the details of these are completely different.

The highlighted segments are opinions, subjective, and not facts.

Sexual trauma affects different victims in different ways.  That IS a demonstrated fact.  

That's not to say that I believe one and not the other, or disbelieve one and not the other.  Neither Biden nor Kavanaugh would get hired for any number of jobs requiring in-depth backgrounds and security clearances if the background investigators looked into Blasey Ford and Reade's respective allegations.

[Fuzzy Bear]

For the millionth time: We should have nominated Bernie.

Republicans would be throwing these same stories at Bernie, or Warren, or Pete, or anyone we nominated. They literally promised to do so in 2018 as revenge for Kavanaugh.

When did they promise to engage in slander and libel?

Or is it slander and libel when a Republican is accused, but "Standing Up For Women!" when is accused?  Do we Believe All Women?  Or do we disbelieve women who accuse Democrats because it's inconvenient and work to actively trash their reputations HONESTLY vet all accusations, and not put the confirming/debunking process solely in the hands of an incredibly biased media?

Keep in mind that I've not DIS-believed Blasey Ford, nor did I support Kavanaugh's confirmation.  Nor have I said that I believe Reade's accusations.  In a Court of Law, neither accusation would stand up.  But in a background interview for any number of sensitive positions, both accusations, and the evidence behind them, would be sufficient grounds to not hire the prospective applicant for law enforcement or any number of positions that would require a Security Clearance.

On this issue, the issue of who do we believe, the Democrats are exposed as having to backtrack on something they presented as axiomatic in 2018.  "Believe All Women"; that was the mantra.  That some Leftist Politician would step up to a mic and say "I believe Dr. Blasey Ford!" with the proper seriousness and go into a melodramatic spiel about victims being silenced and needing vocal advocacy is presented as EVIDENCE, when it is somwhere between ADVOCACY and PROPAGANDA.  Advocacy and Propoganda are not evidence, period.  There WAS evidence that Dr. Blasey Ford was telling the truth.  There was some evidence to place her truthfulness in doubt.  In the end, there really is not enough evidence to meet the Probable Cause standard against Kavanaugh.  But I wouldn't hire Kavanaugh to be a cop or a Federal Prosecutor.

I fail to see, however, how Tara Reade's accusation is any less credible than Dr. Blasey Ford's.  It's certainly in the same general "she said/he said" range, with reasons to believe and reasons to doubt for both.  Neither allegation meets a Probable Cause standard.  The ALLEGED CIRCUMSTANCES of Kavanaugh's alleged acts are more serious, but the alleged circumstances of Biden's alleged acts against Reade do rise to the level of a criminal offense, and were allegedly committed when Biden was a sitting Senator, whereas Kavanaugh's alleged actions were committed when he was 17 years old, not even a legal adult.

Perhaps what I would like to see is not Democrats throwing Biden to the wolves.  Biden deserves to be treated fairly, but so does Kavanaugh.  Kavanaugh is treated like a Sex Offender, whereas Biden is treated as a Victim of a Wrongful Accuser.  That's not right.  If we're going to consider the allegations against Kavanaugh as legitimate and the proper course of action to be to keep digging until there is enough evidence to impeach him, why should we do less in regard to allegations with the same level of overall credibility leveled against a man who, at this writing, is the person most likely to be President on January 21, 2021?

I posted this here, as it's more relevant to this thread.

[Fuzzy Bear]

This scenario looking more and more likely. I hope she can get the help she needs.

I don't have clear evidence about that, let alone proof, but is there a chance she's paid by the Russians for these allegations which appear not have much substance? Otherwise, why would someone wait that long, even during the vice presidency, and stay quiet? There must be something more behind it if you ask me.

Possibly. Also in the immediate Kavanaugh aftermath, Republican social media stars promised to start paying women to accuse Democrats, so maybe we're seeing that in action.

However, I think the most likely scenario is that she's just an unstable, crazy person who thought she was going to become rich and famous last year when she joined others in accusing Biden of unwanted but non-sexual overtouching, but after that went nowhere she decided to rev it up and try again. It has probably worked.

I have little doubt that Tara Reade is a victim.  I have little doube that Christine Blasey Ford is a victim.  WHO victimized them is a fair question.  But the reality is that people here "believe" Blasey Ford because they want it to be true and discredit Tara Reade with the kind of "Nuts" innuendo that Hillary Clinton used against Bill's 1990s accusers because they want Reade's accusations to be false.

The truth is that there is not enough evidence to confirm, even to a standard of mere Probable Cause that Biden or Kavanaugh did any of what they're accused of.  For that to happen, there would have to be more actual evidence to come to light that has not been brought to light as of now.  

My issue is with the whole #MeToo thing.  The whole issue that people can come forth, out of the blue, 20-30 years later and accuse people of criminal sexual acts that happened when they were adults, able to report the matter to Law Enforcement.  I'm well aware of the difficulty victims experience in reporting these crimes.  Just imagine the difficulty Gary Dotson experienced in his years in prison after being falsely accused.  It SHOULDN'T be easy to ruin the life of another, even if your own life has been ruined, because that will result in an increase of ruined lives solely for a political agenda.

The same folks who "believe" Joe Biden and are suggesting "vetting" of Reade's accusation are the same folks who condemned vetting of Blasey Ford's accusation; they wanted Blasey Ford's to be taken at face value, without critique.  This crowd has a record of public statements they can't walk back, now that it's Biden in the hot seat.  I'm willing to allow them to gracefully do so if they are willing to admit that the #MeToo posture is a fundamentally wrong posture.  It's a posture that allows men to be treated as guilty, without a burden of proof being met.  It's a posture that makes questioning of female accusers to be something short of a meaningful confrontation of the accuser by the accused.  I challenge the Red Avatars here to walk THAT posture back.  I don't condone sexual crimes, and I don't condone sexual harassment, but I don't view the kind of "justice" that #MeToo has wrought to be anything than a remedy that is, at its most extreme, far worse than the disease.

[Fuzzy Bear]

https://medium.com/@macarthur.cliff/the-tara-reade-case-eight-things-the-media-wont-tell-you-27d3ca14978

https://thefederalist.com/2019/12/02/21-reasons-not-to-believe-christine-blasey-fords-claims-about-justice-kavanaugh/

One article gives reasons to not believe Tara Reade.  The other gives reasons not to believe Blasey Ford.  I'd really like to know why the reasons not to believe Reade are so much more compelling than the reasons not to believe Blasey Ford.

If we're going to pick and choose who we believe and who we don't, it ought to be on something more than the color their avatar would be if they posted here, or of whose favorite candidate would be hurt if the allegations were true.

[Fuzzy Bear]

I literally can't keep up with all of her stories. She says there is a complaint, but then she said there isn't a complaint and she chickened out - she tweeted that it involved assault and harrassment and then she said she doesn't now what it contains. She said she knows where it would be and then says it would be somewhere else. I feel like it's been nonstop back and forth of changing stories just over the past 48 hours.

Is this a multiple choice exam?

What did Tara Reade filed a complaint about?

(A) She filed a complaint about sexual assault/harassment

(B) She didn't file a complaint

(C) She filed a complaint, but didn't mention sexual assault/harassment

(D) She doesn't remember

E) She filled an "intake form," not an official complaint of any sort.

But what will she say tomorrow?

That's a fair question. 

I hope the #MeToo crowd gets the message that their agenda takes a back seat to Partisan Politics.

[Fuzzy Bear]

Can we please chill with the Russian stuff? The only reason that is even slightly relevant to this case is that it establishes Reade's... Complicated relationship with the truth, as she said she was only interested in it to write a novel when in fact her interest stretched far beyond that. These are the main reasons she isn't credible--

Two consistent corroborators of her stories are

1. One of her closest friends who had to be "walked through" the story, just recently said she had doubts and was considering recanting her corroboration

2. An anonymous person (can't be investigated and brought to scrutiny), said to be a friend of hers as well

Larry King call--

Mother explicitly states that she could ONLY go to the press, which is simply not true of sexual assault and directly contradicts Reade's description of the interview.

Complaint--

Corroborates her previous story clearly but not this one, may not even exist

History of Lying/Grifting

There is clear evidence that she defrauded a horse charity, created multiple misleading GoFundMe's, committed welfare fraud, and falsified a bankruptcy filing. Not directly relevant to this case obviously, but behavior like this is a tell-tale sign of those who make assault claims.

But if Joe Ordinary was accused by Tara Reade of sexually assaulting her, you would be lambasting her attorney for bringing up her history of "grifting" as being "sexist" and "irrelevant".  Why, pray tell, is that OK for Joe Ordinary, but sexist against Joe Biden?