Tara Reade Biden allegation megathread

[7,052,770]

Remember after the Kavanaugh fiasco when prominent Republican Twitter personalities were promising to pay women to falsely accuse prominent Democratic politicians at inopportune times as "revenge" ?

Makes you think.

[7,052,770]

Here is her interview with the hill.com

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i_1X2zlocoM

My own thoughts are that you are innocent until proven guilty, but the issue is that Joe Biden himself has said that all women need to be believed. Isn't that relevant?

Agreed Dems need to retire this line #believealleomen. One of the dumbest things they've done.

agreed.

A better line would be "hear all women", or "all women deserve to present their case", or something like that.

That's what they were trying to say, to draw a contrast between the current system where large swaths of the country automatically disbelieve women immediately.

But yes, the wording left them open for something like this.

[7,052,770]

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.

[7,052,770]

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.

I don't really follow what you're saying, but I hope so, because that sounds kinda badass.

[7,052,770]

If this whole story is true (including telling people about it at the time and Biden's staff knowing and retaliating), how pathetic are the vetting/oppo teams of Obama, McCain, Romney, and all the 2008/2020 Democratic candidates?

[7,052,770]

The Ford comparisons just don't work. We'll never know with 100% certainty if either of them is telling the truth or not, but we can start by assuming each is true and looking at what that would mean:

If Reade is telling the truth, there would have been dozens of people who knew about this in 1993 and every single one of them kept quiet about it for decades, when we he was running for president, running for VP, serving as VP for 8 years, and then running for president again. No opposition research or vetting ever found out about it, and all of those people kept this secret for decades, including anyone they may have told about it over the years. It's one of the greatest coverups in American history, maybe #1.

Remember, that in addition to people changing their political affiliations over time, not everybody who works in Washington works for their party. There are people working in Democratic offices who privately lean Republican and vice versa. It's not like all of those dozens of people who would have known back in 1993 are all just super Democratic hacks keeping a secret out of partisanship. Undoubtedly some of them would now support Trump, and even more likely some would have supported Bernie or another 2020 Democrat. The idea that such a huge, massive conspiracy could have gone undetected for decades just doesn't pass the smell test.

So what about Ford? According to her story, she didn't tell anyone at the time and only told a few people over the years. No one would have ever thought to talk to her while vetting Kavanaugh for his lower court offices. That doesn't prove she's telling the truth, but at least the scenario hangs together plausibly.

I think we can all see the difference. If Reade is telling the truth, Washington is way, way, way more rotten than any of us have ever dreamed, and anti-government conspiracy theories should be given more credence going forward. If Ford is telling the truth, then it's just a sad story, and unfortunately not a particularly unusual one.

[7,052,770]

Liberals don't like sexual assault victims unless they accuse conservatives and are boosted by intellectual reputable sources.

Half of establishment Democrats will believe literally any allegation of any kind against Trump/Pence (remember the months-long obsession with Pence reportedly being "uncomfortable" in a room with only one woman?), but want video footage and fifteen sources to even consider an allegation against Biden. They're just as brainwashed.

This story is flimsy and inconsistent as hell and she clearly has political motivation. No way in a million years you’d believe her if she “Bernie raped me. #Biden2020 #RidinWithBiden #WeKnowJoe”

Her story was heard, it was vetted, and debunked. The only folks clinging on are Trump supporters or Bernouts hoping this means we’ll nominate Bernie at the convention.

If a former aide of Bernie's came forward saying he sexually assaulted her, you can bet I would listen and be the first to disavow Bernie if the allegations had credibility, like the victim's mother calling into a show decades earlier and referencing a problem like this.

So don't worry, not everybody is like Biden or Trump supporters just shrugging aside sexual assault allegations.

If the evidence suggested that he did it (rather than suggesting his innocence as it does), I assure that just about everyone here would have disavowed Biden. To suggest otherwise is shockingly ignorant of the community we have here.

[7,052,770]

"Random neighbor said she knew about it," isn't going to be anywhere near enough to convince anyone who didn't already believe it.

This would be the biggest coverup in American history, so we will need lots of details about how this vast conspiracy was maintained for decades. So, so many people involved and they ALL kept quiet all this time? Gonna need some extraordinary evidence for that.

[7,052,770]

Do you guys actually read the articles or do you just skim the headlines? She really doesn't add anything to the story other than say Reade is telling the truth. Meanwhile, there's an entire section of the article where staffers of Biden at the time say they don't even remember her.

That’s evidence. She says Reade told her about the skirt fingering

Is it really though? Which of these makes more sense?

1 - some random person said something not true, either intentionally or because she believed someone else's lie decades ago
2 - a vast conspiracy to hide the truth about Biden exists in both parties throughout Washington DC and just randomly fell apart in 2020 after covering it up for 27 years

[7,052,770]

These still aren't the correct year that she said the conversation took place so...

As I said - clearly incomplete and foolish to rely on a random online search. I trust a mainstream outlet to do that verification before publishing anything - or if it to be falsified for it to come out within a week. That's not up to random people to google someone's addresses.

I'm not interested in taking sides in this he said-she said, except to point out the absolutely horrible behavior of conspiracy theorists on one side of this using continuously lying and misrepresenting to defend their guy no matter what. Posting that tweet is just the latest example of this. They are only interested in anything that calls her credibility into question to prove "Look, she's a liar!" Meanwhile, that is all MacArthur and masta are doing.

The only "conspiracy theorists" in this whole discussion are the people so blinded by their love for Trump or Bernie that they've conjured up the greatest coverup in American history, a deep deep conspiracy by both parties, without anywhere near sufficient evidence to back it up

[7,052,770]

Humans are complicated. There is no "right way" for someone to interact with their abuser. Think of domestic situations where the wife maintains a relationship with her husband despite abuse. I find it perfectly plausible Reade could've retained respect for Biden and his career (what brought her to his office in the first place) even after the alleged sexual assault happened.

We get it. You want to believe the story, so you're going to find any justification you can.

Tell me, how did Biden engineer the greatest coverup in US history? How did he make sure that none of the dozens of staffers (including some Republicans and probably some fans of the other Democratic candidates) who would have known never talked over nearly 3 decades, even through all the years of vetting and opposition research? Why is the whole Washington machine covering for Biden here?

Maybe you can twist an argument to say that Reade's actions could plausibly happen, just maybe, but there's no way that there's a vast bipartisan conspiracy, including McCain and Romney, to coverup Biden's actions. If Reade is telling the truth, the Deep State is real and QAnon might be too.

[7,052,770]

Humans are complicated. There is no "right way" for someone to interact with their abuser. Think of domestic situations where the wife maintains a relationship with her husband despite abuse. I find it perfectly plausible Reade could've retained respect for Biden and his career (what brought her to his office in the first place) even after the alleged sexual assault happened.

We get it. You want to believe the story, so you're going to find any justification you can.

Tell me, how did Biden engineer the greatest coverup in US history? How did he make sure that none of the dozens of staffers (including some Republicans and probably some fans of the other Democratic candidates) who would have known never talked over nearly 3 decades, even through all the years of vetting and opposition research? Why is the whole Washington machine covering for Biden here?

Maybe you can twist an argument to say that Reade's actions could plausibly happen, just maybe, but there's no way that there's a vast bipartisan conspiracy, including McCain and Romney, to coverup Biden's actions. If Reade is telling the truth, the Deep State is real and QAnon might be too.

Harry, you've worked in a Senate office (IIRC) as have I.  It's an environment where (especially young) people come and go with amazing frequency.  Most people who get there put their heads down and barrel through the work until moving back to the state or Downtown.  It's not an environment really conducive to developing the sort of repertoire with your superiors that is common in most workplaces.  I don't really see what you're getting at when you insist for Reade's story to be true that it must be accompanied with a "Hey guys, we had to let Tara go because she said Joe finger blasted her in the hallway" staff meeting.  What is your reason for thinking that other people in her office at the time would have cared to see her leave or heard her story?

As someone who has worked on the Hill, I just have a hard time seeing how someone (who also worked on the Hill, no less) thinks that in order for Reade's allegations to be true all her coworkers would have had to know about it.  Maybe I'm missing something?

She claims to have told multiple people in Biden's office (she has been inconsistent about the exact number) and then filed a formal complaint with the Senate detailing what happened. That's a lot of people to keep a secret for 27 years, with all the research and background checks on Biden over the years. And even if the conspiracy was real, it seems even more far-fetched that every single one of them would continue to keep the secret today, when every major media organization would love to have a scoop that gives it credence.

It would be more believable if she claimed to have never told anyone until 2020.

[7,052,770]

The way the Democrats are treating this allegation vs Ford's is disgusting.

No it's not. Things can be different.

To believe Reade, you have to believe in a vast conspiracy that held together for nearly 3 decades. To believe Ford, you don't have to do any of that.

None of that necessarily proves that Biden or Kavanaugh are guilty or innocent, but it's quite easy for someone who believes Ford to have some doubts about Reade without being a hack.

[7,052,770]

The way the Democrats are treating this allegation vs Ford's is disgusting.

No it's not. Things can be different.

To believe Reade, you have to believe in a vast conspiracy that held together for nearly 3 decades. To believe Ford, you don't have to do any of that.

None of that necessarily proves that Biden or Kavanaugh are guilty or innocent, but it's quite easy for someone who believes Ford to have some doubts about Reade without being a hack.

For the record, I'm skeptical of both accusations. But seriously, both accusations are uncorroborated and unproven, and the Democrats are actively sweeping this under the rug, no questions in the media, immediate skepticism. A little over a year ago, they were telling us to believe all women and calling Kavanaugh a rapist immediately. It's so sick. I just think if they claim to have standards, they should stick with them. You know, hear her out. To them, it's clearly an inconvenience because we're in election year. Trump is in no place to use this against Biden, so this is about having integrity and standards, of which they seem to have none.

Of course there's immediate skepticism when she says she told several Biden staffers at the time but all of them deny it, and she says she made a formal complaint to HR that lots more people would have seen, but nobody has any record of it and nobody has stepped forward to say they remember it. Believing Reade means that there has been a vast bipartisan conspiracy to protect Rapist Joe Biden for decades, and not a single one of them ever flipped or slipped or even just whispered it to the Obama campaign just so they'd know, and every single one of them continue to stay strong after Reade went public.

No one's just dismissing this off hand. We are applying critical thinking to this and concluding that such a vast conspiracy is unlikely. If Reade or anyone else can demonstrate extraordinary evidence that somehow this is all true, we'll change our minds.

Ford's case is totally separate and there's no obligation for anyone of any party to have the same opinion on the two cases in either direction. Ford did not provide any conclusive evidence for her claims, but at least the story is plausible. Reade's isn't, at least from the perspective that the "Deep State" is a silly conspiracy theory for gullible right-wingers.

[7,052,770]

I do not believe the allegation as is should cost biden the nomination, but those of you claiming blasey-ford's case is more credible are incorrect, in my opinion. Here is why:

...

Again, I don't think that's right because Reade is alleging she told so many people, all of whom covered it up for decades.

Believing that Biden staffers and people in the Senate Personnel Office (remember, it's unlikely that everyone involved was a Democrat in 1993, much less 2020, and even less likely that they're all Biden diehards) totally covered up this story back then and kept it getting out at all for 27 years is just too much for me.

Maybe I could believe it about someone who never ran for president and never was subject to primary opposition research, or someone who never was considered for VP and never subject to vetting, or who was never selected as VP and never subject to more opposition research, or who never served as VP for 8 years and had every right-wing media source digging deep with the dreams of taking down someone so high up in the Obama Administration. The idea that the conspiracy lasted for 27 years without a single leak, despite so many chances for it to happen is just not something I can believe without a mountain of evidence detailing exactly how it happened.

People are free to believe or disbelieve Ford all they want, regardless of how they feel about Reade, but believing Ford does not require believing in such a far-fetched, decade-spanning, bipartisan, leak-proof conspiracy. That makes Ford's story more credible by default because it at least passes a basic plausibility test before we start digging into details.

[7,052,770]

I do not believe the allegation as is should cost biden the nomination, but those of you claiming blasey-ford's case is more credible are incorrect, in my opinion. Here is why:

...

Again, I don't think that's right because Reade is alleging she told so many people, all of whom covered it up for decades.

Believing that Biden staffers and people in the Senate Personnel Office (remember, it's unlikely that everyone involved was a Democrat in 1993, much less 2020, and even less likely that they're all Biden diehards) totally covered up this story back then and kept it getting out at all for 27 years is just too much for me.

Maybe I could believe it about someone who never ran for president and never was subject to primary opposition research, or someone who never was considered for VP and never subject to vetting, or who was never selected as VP and never subject to more opposition research, or who never served as VP for 8 years and had every right-wing media source digging deep with the dreams of taking down someone so high up in the Obama Administration. The idea that the conspiracy lasted for 27 years without a single leak, despite so many chances for it to happen is just not something I can believe without a mountain of evidence detailing exactly how it happened.

People are free to believe or disbelieve Ford all they want, regardless of how they feel about Reade, but believing Ford does not require believing in such a far-fetched, decade-spanning, bipartisan, leak-proof conspiracy. That makes Ford's story more credible by default because it at least passes a basic plausibility test before we start digging into details.

The obvious explanation is that she was telling the less severe story and the staffers thought that Biden being handsy was so common that they didn't even register it. It doesn't require a vast conspiracy (though I wouldn't be surprised if a few Biden staffers really were keeping quiet for their career prospects), just bad memory combined with self interest.

It's pretty hilarious to see Democrats resort to the worst of "she changed her story so she's a lying whore", as if rape survivors don't test the waters with less severe accusations. The neighbour's testimony alone blows up most of the theories that this is some short term con and is more evidence than Ford ever had.

Well she said she reported the rape to staffers and HR. You're just going to change her story on her behalf to make it less unbelievable? That's not your responsibility.

[7,052,770]

While I'm not sure what to make of Reade's claims-at least not yet-it still disturbs me how so many people on here, who firmly believed in Christine Blasey Ford, denounced Brett Kavanaugh as a rapist and serial sexual harasser, and who condemned those that did not believe in Ford's claims, are now defending Biden. Wasn't the mantra of the #MeToo movement to "Believe All Women"? I am even more disgusted by how some on here want to destroy this particular accuser, whereas if anyone had dared suggest the same about Ford, they would have been shouted down and called a "horrible" human being. It's unfortunate that partisan lenses (and yes, I'm reverting back to my "fake moderate" persona, if you can call it that), seem to color sexual assault allegations in general.

I'm someone who believes the allegations against Trump, and I'm someone who would not have voted to confirm Kavanaugh had I been in the Senate. I'm also someone who doesn't think that this particular allegation should be swept under the rug.

I believe it was the generic "Believe Women," not "Believe all women" no matter what, regardless of how far fetched their claims are.

Obviously if anyone literally said Believe ALL Women but doesn't believe Reade, yeah that's hypocritical, but who actually did that?

[7,052,770]

People are free to believe or disbelieve Ford all they want, regardless of how they feel about Reade, but believing Ford does not require believing in such a far-fetched, decade-spanning, bipartisan, leak-proof conspiracy. That makes Ford's story more credible by default because it at least passes a basic plausibility test before we start digging into details.

Ford's accusations did involve a decades-spanning conspiracy of public silence. And not just regarding Kavanaugh: It quickly became clear that his behavior occurred in a setting where similar transgressions were tolerated so long as actions remained within certain bounds.

Not really. Ford never told any workplace professionals or filed any formal complaints. Nothing about Ford's story would have ever come up in the vetting process for his lower court appointments, because no one they would have asked would have known about it.

[7,052,770]

She claims to have told multiple people in Biden's office (she has been inconsistent about the exact number) and then filed a formal complaint with the Senate detailing what happened.

If such a report was filed today, there's no question that there would be a paper trail that could be uncovered in >20 years' time.  However, this was 1993.  The Act formalizing how Congress dealt with internal sexual assault allegations wasn't even passed until 1995.  I can't find anything on what the process was before 1995, but it makes me think there might not have been a formalized one.   

I mean, sure. Maybe the complaint itself got destroyed in the coverup, but there would still be people in the personnel office who would have known and kept silent for 27 years, including now when it's in the national news. I just find it hard to believe no one would speak up and say "Yes, I remember she filed that complaint."

I understand that society has evolved on things like harassment and power balance ickiness, but Reade claims she reported a full on rape. That would have raised eyebrows in Biden's office and in the personnel department. That would have ended Biden's career if it were proven, even in 1993, and it would be among the worst complaints anyone in the personnel office ever read.

[7,052,770]

Also, nobody should be analyzing anything other than Reade's own words. No one should be inserting their own made up details to make her story more or less plausible. Don't try to find an alternate location, don't try to declare what time of day it was, and don't overrule Reade on what she did or didn't write into her complaint.

Let her story stand on its own.

[7,052,770]

The problem for Joe is that he does have a creepy history of touching women so it makes this story more valuable then it should be.

Nothing like this though. Every single accuser (that word doesn't feel right) of Joe Biden, including Reade until a few weeks ago, has been adamant that there was nothing sexual about his touchiness.

[7,052,770]

Could some super sleuth get calendars of all 100 senators from 1993 and find a time when this plausibly could have happened, say a time when Biden was the only senator (including staffs) in the building, or at least on the floor?

[7,052,770]

Could some super sleuth get calendars of all 100 senators from 1993 and find a time when this plausibly could have happened, say a time when Biden was the only senator (including staffs) in the building, or at least on the floor?

You don't have to, all you have to know is that Biden left early in the evening every single day to take the Amtrak home to Delaware.  He would never have been the last guy in the building.

Did he? Literally all 365 days of 1993?

Can he produce calendars that show that, and cross-reference them against other senators' calendars to demonstrate he just wasn't ever there at a time he could have gotten away with this? That would go a long way toward demonstrating his innocence without having to go nuclear on Reade (which is a bad idea for the optics).

Reade only worked there through August - has she said how long elapsed between the alleged incident and her firing? A reporter may only have to check a few weeks.

[7,052,770]

While articles like this are mostly fine, I still find it problematic that they do not bring up Reade's changing stories or numerous credibility issues. Not even her Putin remarks, her tweets, anything. It makes her out to be way more credible than she really is.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/democrats-react-to-biden-accusations-with-pleas-for-an-explanation--or-silence/2020/04/28/b07ff9da-8967-11ea-ac8a-fe9b8088e101_story.html

I agree in principle, but the subject of the article is how prominent Democrats are reacting, and none of them are willing to make these arguments.

I think the media is afraid to make these arguments on their own, but if Abrams or whoever would do it, then all the media could just report on her saying that.

[7,052,770]

It's a delicate situation, because any argument that Biden uses to defend himself forever becomes "fair game" to any discredit any future victim.

Using his schedule to show the timing is impossible should be ok. Sworn statements from people on his staff and personnel office employees that Reade never reported this should be ok. Pointing out minor inconsistencies that victims really do have in other cases is not the right path.

It sucks, because we can't let a falsehood (or lie, but who knows if Reade honestly believes it or not) ruin a man's 50-year career, but we also can't give right wingers the cover to never believe a future victim ever again. The defense will have to be very carefully written and delivered, and he will need female supporters with strong feminist credentials threading that needle very carefully. Just an all-around sh**tty situation.