Will Joe Biden Drop Out of the Presidential Race

lil devils x

🐐More Lego Goats Please!🐐
Legacy
May 1, 2020
3,330
1,045
118
Country
🐐USA🐐
Gender
♀
Trump showed that a Republican could do that. The Democrats absolutely do not have to follow suit; electing Joe Biden normalizes Trump.
Except that didn't happen, the only thing that normalizes trump is re-electing him. Numerous sources deemed Tara Reade's altered claim not to be credible due to contradictions in her story, and no where near as credible as the long line of veritably documented cases against trump. She just changed her story in March and they have just now found her old interviews and have been reviewing why they found her original clam to not be credible, and it makes this new claim even worse than the previous ones.

The reason why many actual rape victims are not believing her claim is because none of her actions here make any damn sense. You do not praise your rapist online as a Champion hero of victims of sexual assault after they raped you. You do not tell people that your rapist "speaks the truth" and vote for them and encourage others to vote for them. You do not tell reporters that you never worried about being sexually assaulted by your rapist because you didn't get that sort of " vibe" from them. You do not tell people that your rapist didn't even know why you left... The only claim against Biden is about as credible as if I started telling people you stole my dog after telling people I never had a dog. It would make as much damn sense as Tara Reade's actions since 1993.

This isn't " victim blaming" btw, it is just trying to figure out what Tara said was true and what was not because for her new claim to be true, she would have had to lie a lot. If she had to lie a lot, why would she have credibility now?
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,482
924
118
Country
USA
Trump showed that a Republican could do that. The Democrats absolutely do not have to follow suit; electing Joe Biden normalizes Trump.
Yes, the Democrats would never elect a person of questionable morals and accusations of sexual misconduct. I'm sure that the 5 of 7 Democratic presidents of the 20th century who cheated on their wives were perfect gentlemen.
 

lil devils x

🐐More Lego Goats Please!🐐
Legacy
May 1, 2020
3,330
1,045
118
Country
🐐USA🐐
Gender
♀
Yes, the Democrats would never elect a person of questionable morals and accusations of sexual misconduct. I'm sure that the 5 of 7 Democratic presidents of the 20th century who cheated on their wives were perfect gentlemen.
Of course they would elect a scum bag, just now they elect people who are less of a scum bag than the massive scum bag we have in office. Republicans have lost any "moral high ground" for our lifetimes over this already.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,482
924
118
Country
USA
Except that didn't happen, the only thing that normalizes trump is re-electing him. Numerous sources deemed Tara Reade's altered claim not to be credible due to contradictions in her story, and no where near as credible as the long line of veritably documented cases against trump. She just changed her story in March and they have just now found her old interviews and have been reviewing why they found her original clam to not be credible, and it makes this new claim even worse than the previous ones.
I don't think Biden assaulted Reade. I also don't think Kavanaugh assaulted anyone. I also don't think the allegations against Trump stand up to much scrutiny.

As much as I may disagree with the people who would crucify Biden over this, it's better than crucifying Republicans consistently and than changes stances here. Nobody can reasonably believe Kavanaugh is a rapist and Biden is innocent.
 

lil devils x

🐐More Lego Goats Please!🐐
Legacy
May 1, 2020
3,330
1,045
118
Country
🐐USA🐐
Gender
♀
I don't think Biden assaulted Reade. I also don't think Kavanaugh assaulted anyone. I also don't think the allegations against Trump stand up to much scrutiny.

As much as I may disagree with the people who would crucify Biden over this, it's better than crucifying Republicans consistently and than changes stances here. Nobody can reasonably believe Kavanaugh is a rapist and Biden is innocent.
Ford didn't go online and praise Kavanaugh for his work with helping end sexual assault.... It is far more likely that a drunk, obnoxious college guy did something stupid and terrible at a party and not even remember it than for Tara's new accusation to be true. Yea, it is reasonable to believe Tara is lying because she would have to have lied repeatedly in order for her new accusation to be even be true due to the contradictions. Not remembering the date is reasonable, praising your rapist repeatedly online that you have not been in contact with since 1993 for their work helping women and telling people you didn't get that "sort of vibe" from him and then turn around when your candidate did not get chosen for the primary and change your story dramatically isn't very reasonable. It isn't like we are comparing similar circumstances.

And honestly, I have more sympathy for what a stupid drunk college kid did because they do not even have their judgement centers of their brain fully formed at that age. Not saying it is okay or excusable, but I do not think they should be held to the same standard as someone over the age of 25 would be because of the differences in their brains while forming during puberty. Teens are hard wired for risk taking, and add alcohol and a bunch of stupid friends and only bad things can happen from there. Situations like Ford described are extremely common. Whether it is drunk teens putting trees in people's cars to or tying sheets together and swinging from the trees, this is pretty much what college was like for a good number of people in the US. Not that they would do any of that under normal circumstances, the insanity of the atmosphere makes things like this far more likely to happen.

If Ford had gone around praising Kavanaugh and telling people she didn't get that sort of vibe from him, I would have found her less credible as well.
 
Last edited:

Silvanus

Elite Member
Legacy
Jan 15, 2013
11,073
5,811
118
Country
United Kingdom
Yes, the Democrats would never elect a person of questionable morals and accusations of sexual misconduct. I'm sure that the 5 of 7 Democratic presidents of the 20th century who cheated on their wives were perfect gentlemen.
8: Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Clinton, Obama. You're not counting Carter "lusting in his heart" in Playboy, are you?

And honestly, I have more sympathy for what a stupid drunk college kid did because they do not even have their judgement centers of their brain fully formed at that age. Not saying it is okay or excusable, but I do not think they should be held to the same standard as someone over the age of 25 would be because of the differences in their brains while forming during puberty. Teens are hard wired for risk taking, and add alcohol and a bunch of stupid friends and only bad things can happen from there. Situations like Ford described are extremely common. Whether it is drunk teens putting trees in people's cars to or tying sheets together and swinging from the trees, this is pretty much what college was like for a good number of people in the US. Not that they would do any of that under normal circumstances, the insanity of the atmosphere makes things like this far more likely to happen.
Trees in cars and swinging from trees is a far cry from sexual assault, though. We're wired for lacking inhibitions and risk-taking; we're not wired for extreme cruelty.

That's not to say sexual assault is uncommon. It's not. But there's no biological get-out clause.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lil devils x

lil devils x

🐐More Lego Goats Please!🐐
Legacy
May 1, 2020
3,330
1,045
118
Country
🐐USA🐐
Gender
♀
8: Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Clinton, Obama. You're not counting Carter "lusting in his heart" in Playboy, are you?



Trees in cars and swinging from trees is a far cry from sexual assault, though. We're wired for lacking inhibitions and risk-taking; we're not wired for extreme cruelty.

That's not to say sexual assault is uncommon. It's not. But there's no biological get-out clause.
Your are correct, there is absolutely no " excuse" for sexual assault. Getting drunk at a party is by no means a free ticket to rape at will. Reality is though, in college, I knew so many people this exact thing happened to . With drinking and drugs involved, girls were frequently raped at parties, raped in cars, raped in the bathroom. During both High School and college, this was constantly happening all the time. The culture of it is what has to be changed to be able to reduce the frequency because for many of the boys growing up in that, it was often considered the norm in Jock culture social groups. Hell we have had people come on to the escapist who didn't know that getting a girl drunk to have sex with her was wrong and not how it was supposed to be done or they would never have sex or something. It seriously is that bad that many guys still do not even know this isn't okay to do in the first place. That is why I feel that we have to address it better all together in society and specifically in the social circles where it is seen as acceptable in order for us to be able to have an impact in this at all.
 
Last edited:

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,482
924
118
Country
USA
Ford didn't go online and praise Kavanaugh for his work with helping end sexual assault.... It is far more likely that a drunk, obnoxious college guy did something stupid and terrible at a party and not even remember it than for Tara's new accusation to be true. Yea, it is reasonable to believe Tara is lying because she would have to have lied repeatedly in order for her new accusation to be even be true due to the contradictions. Not remembering the date is reasonable, praising your rapist repeatedly online that you have not been in contact with since 1993 for their work helping women and telling people you didn't get that "sort of vibe" from him and then turn around when your candidate did not get chosen for the primary and change your story dramatically isn't very reasonable. It isn't like we are comparing similar circumstances.

And honestly, I have more sympathy for what a stupid drunk college kid did because they do not even have their judgement centers of their brain fully formed at that age. Not saying it is okay or excusable, but I do not think they should be held to the same standard as someone over the age of 25 would be because of the differences in their brains while forming during puberty. Teens are hard wired for risk taking, and add alcohol and a bunch of stupid friends and only bad things can happen from there. Situations like Ford described are extremely common. Whether it is drunk teens putting trees in people's cars to or tying sheets together and swinging from the trees, this is pretty much what college was like for a good number of people in the US. Not that they would do any of that under normal circumstances, the insanity of the atmosphere makes things like this far more likely to happen.

If Ford had gone around praising Kavanaugh and telling people she didn't get that sort of vibe from him, I would have found her less credible as well.
Ford told nobody at the time, had no corroborating witnesses, and the details of the event she had first recalled were that it happened in the mid-80s and her late teens. The only issue is that by the mid-80s Kavanaugh had graduated and wouldn't have been at the high school party. After speaking to Diane Feinstein's lawyers, Ford was convinced the attacked happened in 1982. Additionally, she cannot recall how she got home. Nobody can attest to having taken her home early, she insists she didn't walk, but she couldn't have driven herself in 1982 as she was 15 at that time. The perfectly obvious solution here is that her memories had been correct on the timeframe before it became a big public affair: she drove herself so nobody had to notice her leaving, half the people who could be witnesses in 1982 wouldn't have been there, and she just misremembered which specific boy she hardly knew from a different school had assaulted her at a party where they were drinking.

They aren't exaclty the same situation, but the red flags suggesting Kavanaugh is innocent are at least as big and as red. Anyone taking guilt for granted in either case isn't looking for the red flags.

8: Wilson, Roosevelt, Truman, Kennedy, Johnson, Carter, Clinton, Obama. You're not counting Carter "lusting in his heart" in Playboy, are you?
I am not. Obama is a 21st century president, so cut back to 7. Wilson, FDR, Kennedy, Johnson, and Clinton are the perps. Truman and Carter seem like good honest people in their personal lives.

Edit: Obama too seems like a good honest person in his personal life, to be clear. I did, in fact, limit to the century that best supports my argument.
 

lil devils x

🐐More Lego Goats Please!🐐
Legacy
May 1, 2020
3,330
1,045
118
Country
🐐USA🐐
Gender
♀
Ford told nobody at the time, had no corroborating witnesses, and the details of the event she had first recalled were that it happened in the mid-80s and her late teens. The only issue is that by the mid-80s Kavanaugh had graduated and wouldn't have been at the high school party. After speaking to Diane Feinstein's lawyers, Ford was convinced the attacked happened in 1982. Additionally, she cannot recall how she got home. Nobody can attest to having taken her home early, she insists she didn't walk, but she couldn't have driven herself in 1982 as she was 15 at that time. The perfectly obvious solution here is that her memories had been correct on the timeframe before it became a big public affair: she drove herself so nobody had to notice her leaving, half the people who could be witnesses in 1982 wouldn't have been there, and she just misremembered which specific boy she hardly knew from a different school had assaulted her at a party where they were drinking.

They aren't exaclty the same situation, but the red flags suggesting Kavanaugh is innocent are at least as big and as red. Anyone taking guilt for granted in either case isn't looking for the red flags.



I am not. Obama is a 21st century president, so cut back to 7. Wilson, FDR, Kennedy, Johnson, and Clinton are the perps. Truman and Carter seem like good honest people in their personal lives.

Edit: Obama too seems like a good honest person in his personal life, to be clear. I did, in fact, limit to the century that best supports my argument.
The issue isn't whether or not Tara or Christine told anyone about the assault, it is what they publicly stated about their accused attacker after the rape was to have occurred. Talking about the rape itself in't the issue. I was raped as a kid, I do not remember the year. I do not remember the date. I remember what happened to the point of reliving the horror of the event. I don't remember going home at all, but I obviously did at some point right? Often this is due to the impact of the traumatic stress on the brain:

It does not mean that I do not know who the attacker was and remember them with great detail, it is just I only remember the details that impacted me the most at the time. Now if I had gone online years later and praised the guy who raped me as a champion for ending sexual assault against women, that would be extremely strange thing to do considering the only thing I can think of when I think of him at all is overwhelming helplessness, disgust, the desire to flee and pain. I would not go online and praise them and vote for them and tell people how they aren't that type of person and then change my story later. It is unfathomable to me to even be capable of doing that. If Christine had done that, it would have completely changed how I viewed what she was stating here. I see it as more plausible about being wrong about the date then who actually raped her due to how the memory works with traumatic events. Being wrong about timing and other insignificant details that are not the event itself is more likely than being wrong about the event.
 
Last edited:

fOx

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2017
583
398
68
Country
United States
It would be wise for him to drop out, though im not sure who they would replace him with. His VP pick, when he makes it? Or would the establishment choose a new candidate? They could probably find someone stronger, but this raises issues about them ignoring the will of the people. The obvious next choice would be bernie, and they'll never allow it. The real question is whether he will make it to the finish line. Over the last year alone, it feels like he's gotten worse.

Should he? Hard to say. He was fairly elected, so even though I don't like it, he's the person the people chose. Depends on how credible the allegations against him are.
 
  • Like
Reactions: tippy2k2

Seanchaidh

Elite Member
Legacy
Mar 21, 2009
5,268
3,090
118
Country
United States of America
Yes, the Democrats would never elect a person of questionable morals and accusations of sexual misconduct. I'm sure that the 5 of 7 Democratic presidents of the 20th century who cheated on their wives were perfect gentlemen.
Are you meaning to equate rape with cheating on one's wife?

Regardless, the public becoming generally aware of such things concerning Democratic presidents is typically after they are in office, not before. However, I would agree that Bill Clinton's sexual misconduct also enabled Trump.

Now if I had gone online years later and praised the guy who raped me as a champion for ending sexual assault against women, that would be extremely strange thing to do considering the only thing I can think of when I think of him at all is overwhelming helplessness, disgust, the desire to flee and pain.
Calling just about anyone a champion for ending sexual assault against women is a little out of left field, rapist or otherwise, unless they actually did something concrete concerning it. Like if they were a politician who advocated for and passed legislation on the subject. The typical rapist was never a senator or vice president of the United States nor had any involvement with the Violence Against Women Act, so it's supremely silly to make a comparison between your behavior and that of Tara Reade. Having mixed feelings about an attacker, before or after, is not consent, nor is it an indication of dishonesty.

This article rebuts that specific point pretty well too: https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/05/the-attacks-on-tara-reade-are-unbelievable-bullshit
7. “Compliments for Biden”

In 2017, Reade “liked” tweets praising Biden’s work on women’s issues, such as the Violence Against Women Act, and even issued a few tweets of her own praising him. Stern says “It is bizarre that Reade would publicly laud Biden for combating the very thing she would later accuse him of doing to her.”


For one, nobody likes the “like” police. For another, human beings (again, I think I might have mentioned this previously) are complicated and imperfect. Reade had once admired Biden; she told Katie Halper that initially she “looked up to [Biden], he was like my father’s age. He was this champion of women’s rights in my eyes.”) When someone is violated by a person they admire their feelings and reactions can be very mixed. Reade has spoken movingly of the contradictory feelings she has about Biden: On the one hand, she admires a lot of his work, on the other, she can’t forget what he did to her. One thing Reade’s friend told Current Affairs is that the friend has been frustrated by Reade’s persistent attempts to find the good in the worst people. Reade, said the friend, is a forgiving sort of person.


My colleague Vanessa A. Bee recently made an excellent point about how complicated victims’ relationships to their abusers can be. She wrote, “as we speak, people are sheltering in place with romantic partners who physically hurt them on a daily basis!” And people often maintain contact with abusers who are not romantic partners. When Anita Hill came forward to accuse Clarence Thomas of sexual harassment in 1991, Senator Alan Simpson of Wyoming said during her hearing, “Well, it just seems so incredible to me that you would not only have visited with him twice after that period and after he was no longer able to manipulate you or to destroy you, that you then not only visited with him but took him to the airport, and then 11 times contacted him.” That’s right, Anita Hill had significant contact with Clarence Thomas after he allegedly harassed her. If you think that’s abnormal, then you’re in for a rude awakening.
This isn't " victim blaming" btw, it is just trying to figure out what Tara said was true and what was not because for her new claim to be true, she would have had to lie a lot. If she had to lie a lot, why would she have credibility now?
Declining to make an accusation is not lying.
 

lil devils x

🐐More Lego Goats Please!🐐
Legacy
May 1, 2020
3,330
1,045
118
Country
🐐USA🐐
Gender
♀
Are you meaning to equate rape with cheating on one's wife?

Regardless, the public becoming generally aware of such things concerning Democratic presidents is typically after they are in office, not before. However, I would agree that Bill Clinton's sexual misconduct also enabled Trump.



Calling just about anyone a champion for ending sexual assault against women is a little out of left field, rapist or otherwise, unless they actually did something concrete concerning it. Like if they were a politician who advocated for and passed legislation on the subject. The typical rapist was never a senator or vice president of the United States nor had any involvement with the Violence Against Women Act, so it's supremely silly to make a comparison between your behavior and that of Tara Reade. Having mixed feelings about an attacker, before or after, is not consent, nor is it an indication of dishonesty.

This article rebuts that specific point pretty well too: https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/05/the-attacks-on-tara-reade-are-unbelievable-bullshit




Declining to make an accusation is not lying.
Not buying it. She wasn't in a relationship with him, according to her they hardly ever even spoke or interacted and according to her, she didn't even think Biden knew why she left. Why would her rapist not know why she left? She had no contact with him since 1993. That is not like a woman in abusive relationship, she was not under pressure by anyone to maintain any sort of rapport with him. She claimed herself to " be an alpha" and ALPHA's do not then pretend to be timid over being told she had nice legs. " Typical rapist?" seriously, there is no such thing as " the typical rapist" Many men, of all types rape, that isn't even a " thing". Rape is more prevalent in some social groups than others, but that doesn't mean that it can't happen anywhere. Men who rape can be of any political group, religion , ethnicity... They could be a physician or a politician, would not change how you actually feel about the rapist.

Going out of your way to " tell your story" and leaving out the rape part is sort of a big deal, especially when she wasn't appearing to hold anything back in her numerous retellings. Saying that he doesn't even know why she left and that she wasn't scared of him and wasn't worried about him taking her into a room or anything and it wasn't that sort of vibe, is the opposite of her talking about him raping her and trying to take her into a room. That is not " expanding your story, that is changing it entirely.

How can you reconcile :
“It happened at once. He’s talking to me and his hands are everywhere and everything is happening very quickly,” she recalled. “He was kissing me and he said, very low, ‘Do you want to go somewhere else?’”
Ms. Reade said she pulled away and Mr. Biden stopped.
“He looked at me kind of almost puzzled or shocked,” she said. “He said, ‘Come on, man, I heard you liked me.’”
With:
She said of Biden: “I wasn’t scared of him, that he was going to take me in a room or anything. It wasn’t that kind of vibe.”

"I do not even know if he realized why I left. Biden was protected by his chief of staff from unpleasant events, like a young king. "

If someone raped you, they would know why you left. If someone raped you, you do not go around telling people that they didn't put off that "sort of vibe." Her original complaints were more about being " bullied by staff" for not serving drinks. How is Biden being protected from unpleasant events like a king unaware while at the same time the guy who was responsible for the unpleasantness? She did make prior accusations, but clarified in those earlier accusations that she wasn't worried about anything like that happening..
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,482
924
118
Country
USA
Are you meaning to equate rape with cheating on one's wife?
No, I'm suggesting that the history of morally upstanding Democrats is one president deep. I don't think those things are equivalent, but I would not be surprised to find out any of those 5 men did in fact assault a woman.

Regardless, the public becoming generally aware of such things concerning Democratic presidents is typically after they are in office, not before. However, I would agree that Bill Clinton's sexual misconduct also enabled Trump.
Kennedy's behavior was known to insiders well before he was president. They covered for him. LBJ as vice president liked to claim he slept with more women than Kennedy, and allegedly would flash people his genitals. All of this could have been public information, but all of these people were covered for at the time.

What makes Clinton stand out isn't what he did, it was the response. The Republican prosecution of Clinton was unprecedented and vicious, probably too extreme if anything, but it only existed because of conservative media (also probably to extreme). Conservative talk radio didn't get going until the 90s. Nothing like Fox News existed until the 90s. The Fairness Doctrine didn't allow such things to exist. And without them, there wasn't an outsider voice in media to push the issue. Presidents, mostly Democrats, did more salacious things than any credible accusation against Trump, and the media covered for them for decades.

I see it as more plausible about being wrong about the date then who actually raped her due to how the memory works with traumatic events. Being wrong about timing and other insignificant details that are not the event itself is more likely than being wrong about the event.
a) The assailant, Kavanaugh or not, was an almost perfect stranger, and she was likely intoxicated.
b) Her friends didn't corroborate her story, suggesting she might be misidentifying some of the less important details.
c) Her story changed to not specifically conflict with the claim against Kavanaugh at exactly the time she was talking with lawyers with a vested interested in taking down Kavanaugh. They talked her into the wrong conclusions, while hiding her from professionals who might find the truth and demanding a public hearing that she didn't want.
 

lil devils x

🐐More Lego Goats Please!🐐
Legacy
May 1, 2020
3,330
1,045
118
Country
🐐USA🐐
Gender
♀
No, having one party of rape normalizes Trump a lot less than having two.
I am not seeing that we have two parties doing that right now considering we only have ONE party who actually elected a court documented Rapist. TBH , I would not be remotely surprised if Tara Reade wind up detracting her statements later because of how contradictory they are. This seems like an impulsive thing to do as a last ditch effort to get them to replace Biden with Bernie, not that I wouldn't love for that to happen, I do not think it is fair to do so by making up something as awful as this to do it.
 

Agema

You have no authority here, Jackie Weaver
Legacy
Mar 3, 2009
8,598
5,963
118
Yes, the Democrats would never elect a person of questionable morals and accusations of sexual misconduct. I'm sure that the 5 of 7 Democratic presidents of the 20th century who cheated on their wives were perfect gentlemen.
I suspect most presidents have cheated on their wives. Up to the early 20th century, affairs amongst the upper classes were almost de rigeur. Postwar, it's more a matter of being sufficiently discreet that it remained rumour more than common knowledge.

In terms of the Republicans, both Bush presidents are reputed to have had extramarital affairs, and also Reagan (who by at least one accusation had also committed rape, albeit possibly pre-Nancy). Numerous people who knew Nixon believe he had a mistress. Gerald Ford and Eisenhower at least, I'm not aware of anything. As said, pre-war, very likely anywhere between most and all.
 

tstorm823

Elite Member
Legacy
Aug 4, 2011
6,482
924
118
Country
USA
I am not seeing that we have two parties doing that right now considering we only have ONE party who actually elected a court documented Rapist. TBH , I would not be remotely surprised if Tara Reade wind up detracting her statements later because of how contradictory they are. This seems like an impulsive thing to do as a last ditch effort to get them to replace Biden with Bernie, not that I wouldn't love for that to happen, I do not think it is fair to do so by making up something as awful as this to do it.
Every rape you think is documented in the court suffers the same flaws as Reade. Except the one that was stolen shot for shot from an SVU episode. Not even entertaining that one.

It's a lot of women who claim Trump did something sexually aggressive with them and then ended up reconnecting with him later. If that makes you doubt the claims against Biden, why does that not make you doubt the claims against Trump?
 

lil devils x

🐐More Lego Goats Please!🐐
Legacy
May 1, 2020
3,330
1,045
118
Country
🐐USA🐐
Gender
♀
No, I'm suggesting that the history of morally upstanding Democrats is one president deep. I don't think those things are equivalent, but I would not be surprised to find out any of those 5 men did in fact assault a woman.



Kennedy's behavior was known to insiders well before he was president. They covered for him. LBJ as vice president liked to claim he slept with more women than Kennedy, and allegedly would flash people his genitals. All of this could have been public information, but all of these people were covered for at the time.

What makes Clinton stand out isn't what he did, it was the response. The Republican prosecution of Clinton was unprecedented and vicious, probably too extreme if anything, but it only existed because of conservative media (also probably to extreme). Conservative talk radio didn't get going until the 90s. Nothing like Fox News existed until the 90s. The Fairness Doctrine didn't allow such things to exist. And without them, there wasn't an outsider voice in media to push the issue. Presidents, mostly Democrats, did more salacious things than any credible accusation against Trump, and the media covered for them for decades.



a) The assailant, Kavanaugh or not, was an almost perfect stranger, and she was likely intoxicated.
b) Her friends didn't corroborate her story, suggesting she might be misidentifying some of the less important details.
c) Her story changed to not specifically conflict with the claim against Kavanaugh at exactly the time she was talking with lawyers with a vested interested in taking down Kavanaugh. They talked her into the wrong conclusions, while hiding her from professionals who might find the truth and demanding a public hearing that she didn't want.
a) I have never even spoken to the man who raped me prior to it happening.
b)I thought it was his friend that was in the room , not hers. I also wouldn't necessarily expect people to even remember a party that many years later. There were so many parties in High school and College, if you asked me about any specific one, I likely would not remember which one you were talking about as they were all just one big blur. She was the one who experienced the trauma, not the other people. That would be why she would remember it and they would not because they don't have a reason to.
c) Is that just speculation?
 

fOx

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2017
583
398
68
Country
United States
I am not seeing that we have two parties doing that right now considering we only have ONE party who actually elected a court documented Rapist. TBH , I would not be remotely surprised if Tara Reade wind up detracting her statements later because of how contradictory they are. This seems like an impulsive thing to do as a last ditch effort to get them to replace Biden with Bernie, not that I wouldn't love for that to happen, I do not think it is fair to do so by making up something as awful as this to do it.
Honestly, this is the same sort of thing republicans were saying about kavanaugh. I mean, we've now called her a liar, accused her of making up the allegations to get bernie elected, and painted biden as an innocent victim. Based on what? Him not being a court documented rapist? Of course not, this didn't go to court. She didn't press charges. Which is extremely common for victims of rape. But because she won't take him to court now, during the middle of an election, against a candidate she hates, she must be lying. I really thought that the Metoo era had fixed this culture of victim blaming, but I see I was mistaken. It's rampant in both parties.

I'm not even saying that she is guaranteed to be telling the truth, or that biden is guaranteed to be lying. But the claims deserve to be taken more seriously then this. People are refusing to believe the claims because they they're inconvenient, and in some cases, saying that they'll vote for biden even if they *are* true.