Who Did Tara Reade Hurt More?

[Frodo]

Silver lining, this will allow metoo to get rid of/replace the easily manipulated "believe all women" slogan.

The slogan 'Trust, but verify' would go over much better with the general public.

[Tartarus Sauce]

Hot take: it won’t hurt either in the long run. It might, however encourage the #MeToo movement to become more nuanced in its approach, which is for the better.

[Beet]

I'm a little confused as to why Gillibrand is being invoked here... Gillibrand nearly singlehandedly ousted Al Franken from the Senate. Why is the fact that she showed restraint after a questionable charge discrediting to her? If things continue as-is and the story turns out to be partially-fabricated at best, people like Gillibrand will be representative of the few who have their moral authority left intact.

I still don't know how this story will end, but people in the #metoo movement like this appear so far to be coming out looking most embarrassed.

Gillibrand was one of the first high-profile Democratic women to speak out in Biden's defense, and she was unequivocal. She has not intimated to knowing any more about the accusations than what has been published for all to read, so I can only take her prominence as an act of extreme political cynicism.

It should be obvious that the correct alternative to steamrolling Reade is not an immediate declaration of Biden's incontrovertible guilt. I felt unobligated to specify that given that no one of Gillibrand's stature has so much as hinted at it. AOC is probably the most visible Democrat to take anything short of the "I believe Joe Biden" line and even she only went as fair as acknowledging the accusations as a "legitimate discussion."

Yes, but since Gillibrand's comment was on a call with Nick Ballasy in response to his question rather than a press release, I wonder if her being first is just a function of being asked first. As you've said, virtually the entire Party has closed ranks around Biden.

[7,052,770]

Silver lining, this will allow metoo to get rid of/replace the easily manipulated "believe all women" slogan.

I'm still looking for an example of someone using the "Believe All Women" line unironically. "Believe Women," sure, but "Believe All Women" sounds like a Republican strawman. Searching on Twitter, that's all I see.

[7,052,770]

Yes, but since Gillibrand's comment was on a call with Nick Ballasy in response to his question rather than a press release, I wonder if her being first is just a function of being asked first. As you've said, virtually the entire Party has closed ranks around Biden.

True. I just feel particularly stupid for trusting her on this issue.

On the contrary, the fact that Gillibrand, a champion of the #MeToo movement, doesn't buy this gives Biden's claims a lot more credibility. If there was anything there, Gillibrand wouldn't be so unequivocal.

[pppolitics]

Yes, but since Gillibrand's comment was on a call with Nick Ballasy in response to his question rather than a press release, I wonder if her being first is just a function of being asked first. As you've said, virtually the entire Party has closed ranks around Biden.

True. I just feel particularly stupid for trusting her on this issue.

I would feel stupid too if I had had believed Reade despite all the evidences that she lied.

[JerryArkansas]

Yes, but since Gillibrand's comment was on a call with Nick Ballasy in response to his question rather than a press release, I wonder if her being first is just a function of being asked first. As you've said, virtually the entire Party has closed ranks around Biden.

True. I just feel particularly stupid for trusting her on this issue.

Why would you not trust her?  Nothing she has done would necessitate a loss of trust.

[Fuzzy Bear]

She hurt the #MeToo movement worse.

That's a good thing.  #MeToo is an example of Good Intentions Paving the Road to Hell.  It's a movement that seeks to substitute vengeance for justice.  It is a threat to the liberties of all citizens, and people will see this once they take a breath and consider what the ramifications of what they actually call for are.

[Figueira]

How exactly is her story imploding? I support Biden in the GE and I really don't want to believe that he did anything like this, but so far I haven't seen any conclusive evidence that Reade is lying.

[Fuzzy Bear]

How exactly is her story imploding? I support Biden in the GE and I really don't want to believe that he did anything like this, but so far I haven't seen any conclusive evidence that Reade is lying.

This thread will show which narrative people are the most vested in.

[Figueira]

How exactly is her story imploding? I support Biden in the GE and I really don't want to believe that he did anything like this, but so far I haven't seen any conclusive evidence that Reade is lying.

This thread will show which narrative people are the most vested in.

I'm not vested in any narrative. I'm legitimately confused about this whole story.

[7,052,770]

How exactly is her story imploding? I support Biden in the GE and I really don't want to believe that he did anything like this, but so far I haven't seen any conclusive evidence that Reade is lying.

There will never be anything conclusive, but believing her story requires one to believe in a massive conspiracy in DC to protect Biden that lasted for decades.

She claims a bunch of people in Biden's office knew, people in the personnel office knew (or as of yesterday, maybe they didn't), and that it was common knowledge on Capitol Hill to the point where she couldn't get a job afterward.

So all these people knew, but no one ever told Obama during his vetting, no one ever told McCain or Romney's people, no one ever told the other candidates from the 2008 and 2020 primaries, no one ever slipped up and told anyone? Complete silence for 27 years, and even now when it's a big national news story, still no one is talking. Surely if this were real, someone would have said something like "oh yeah, I remember a complaint like that" or "oh yeah, I remember something about that story in Biden's office - that's why Senator/Representative X didn't want to hire her!" It's just not plausible that this many people could have had an airtight coverup.

The fact that she's on story #6 or whatever doesn't even have to be brought up - it would be hard to believe if she'd been 100% consistent all along.

[Fuzzy Bear]

How exactly is her story imploding? I support Biden in the GE and I really don't want to believe that he did anything like this, but so far I haven't seen any conclusive evidence that Reade is lying.

This thread will show which narrative people are the most vested in.

I'm not vested in any narrative. I'm legitimately confused about this whole story.

This makes you both a rare and honest commodity on USGD.

[💥💥 brandon bro (he/him/his)]

I'm a little confused as to why Gillibrand is being invoked here... Gillibrand nearly singlehandedly ousted Al Franken from the Senate. Why is the fact that she showed restraint after a questionable charge discrediting to her? If things continue as-is and the story turns out to be partially-fabricated at best, people like Gillibrand will be representative of the few who have their moral authority left intact.

I still don't know how this story will end, but people in the #metoo movement like this appear so far to be coming out looking most embarrassed.

Gillibrand was one of the first high-profile Democratic women to speak out in Biden's defense, and she was unequivocal. She has not intimated to knowing any more about the accusations than what has been published for all to read, so I can only take her prominence as an act of extreme political cynicism.

It should be obvious that the correct alternative to steamrolling Reade is not an immediate declaration of Biden's incontrovertible guilt. I felt unobligated to specify that given that no one of Gillibrand's stature has so much as hinted at it. AOC is probably the most visible Democrat to take anything short of the "I believe Joe Biden" line and even she only went as fair as acknowledging the accusations as a "legitimate discussion."

Sure, I agree with this (bolded) but... I don't think that's what Gillibrand was doing. Quick googling shows her major statements include this:

"So when we say believe women, it's for this explicit intention of making sure there's space for all women to come forward to speak their truth, to be heard. And in this allegation, that is what Tara Reade has done," Gillibrand said.
"She has come forward, she has spoken, and they have done an investigation in several outlets. Those investigations, Vice President Biden has called for himself. Vice President Biden has vehemently denied these allegations and I support Vice President Biden."

That's really not saying that Biden is incontrovertably innocent. She called for an investigation (as did Biden; of course it must be noted to certain people that this is a key difference from the Kavanaugh case where they crippled an investigation before it began, but the people who need to hear this refuse to listen), then she said that with the current state of knowledge she believes Biden's account. There's no bad intention, there's no suppression or discrediting, there's nothing really here saying that Reade's claim is decisively false. The Reade story has unraveled even further in the last 48 hours but when this statement was made, there were several holes which people were rightly calling to investigate.

This statement

"[...] I stand by Vice President Biden. He has devoted his life to supporting women and he has vehemently denied this allegation," the New York Democrat said.

is saying that she's supporting Biden because it's consistent with her priors on him, his conduct and his beliefs. There is something fishy about this considering Gillibrand tried to smear Biden for wanting women to work from home during the 2019 campaign; that's cynical and hypocritical. But it's more reflective of the dishonest desparation of the last gasp of a dying, poorly-run campaign than it is her current statement.

(source on above quotes, from CNN)

I'm sensing that your disappointment is that she didn't give any credence to the idea that Reade maybe was telling the truth. And I understand and sympathize with that complaint and think it's largely true. But it's looking so far like this was a warranted skepticism, and either way there's room between doing that and totally tarring and blackballing Reade the way other alleged victims have experienced. The people who come out of this looking much, much worse are the Mann-type people who were (and still are) quick to uncritically accept and defend a very flawed case.

[America Needs R'hllor]

#MeToo movement, and that might be what annoys me even more.

Also, Gillibrand is almost consistently right, and she is here too.

[pppolitics]

How exactly is her story imploding? I support Biden in the GE and I really don't want to believe that he did anything like this, but so far I haven't seen any conclusive evidence that Reade is lying.

I'm not vested in any narrative. I'm legitimately confused about this whole story.

Reade built her entire story on complaint that she supposedly submitted.

According to her story (or at least one version of it), she submitted a sexual harassment complaint which led to a cascade of events that ended up with her getting fired.

Now that Reade admitted that sexual harassment is not in the complaint that she may or may not have submitted (depending on which version you are reading), her whole story comes crumbling down.

______________________________________________________________________________

In other words, her story has no legs (if you know what I mean)

[wbrocks67]

How exactly is her story imploding? I support Biden in the GE and I really don't want to believe that he did anything like this, but so far I haven't seen any conclusive evidence that Reade is lying.

Check the other thread. She's changed the story about her "complaint" 5 times already. She also happened to cancel her Fox News interview shortly after the Biden Morning Joe segment aired where he asked for the complaint to be made public.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

https://twitter.com/HKrassenstein/status/1256771085762285568?s=19

[Donerail]

https://twitter.com/HKrassenstein/status/1256771085762285568?s=19

The Krassensteins would certainly know fraud when they see it!

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

https://twitter.com/HKrassenstein/status/1256771085762285568?s=19

The Krassensteins would certainly know fraud when they see it!

Exactly! They've been calling out the massive fraud occupying the White House pretty much 24/7!

[Sestak]

How exactly is her story imploding? I support Biden in the GE and I really don't want to believe that he did anything like this, but so far I haven't seen any conclusive evidence that Reade is lying.

There will never be anything conclusive, but believing her story requires one to believe in a massive conspiracy in DC to protect Biden that lasted for decades.

This is a consistency with nearly every #MeToo case, though? That's the whole reason it happened - people finally started to publicly call out systems and norms that protected abusers and silenced victims.

I really don't understand how the Biden people on here and elsewhere somehow jump straight past all the legitimate arguments to make here and go straight to the same sort of scorched-earth arguments that have been used against every other #MeToo accuser (their politics oppose the person they're accusing! Why hasn't this ever been brought up before! There's no way so many people would have said nothing!) etc etc etc etc etc

[CookieDamage]

3rd and more accurate option: Herself

[Suburbia]

The #MeToo movement.

Whenever a woman or a man says that they were sexually harassed, people will not believe it anymore because of inconsistent stories.

[Calthrina950]

#MeToo. As I've said repeatedly, her allegation will have very little, if any, impact on the actual election. However, it gives fuel to the arguments of those who have cautioned against "running people over" with false accusations, and makes it more difficult for legitimate sexual assault/harassment survivors to be believed in the future. Her allegation has also revealed the hypocrisy that has attended many of this movement's prominent figures in recent years.

[lfromnj]

#MeToo movement, and that might be what annoys me even more.

Also, Gillibrand is almost consistently right, and she is here too.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Columbia_University_rape_controversy
lol