Wonder how much it blows your mind to realize I voted for Joe Biden in both the 2008 and 2020 primaries.

The truth is the truth no matter what spin or perspective you want to put on it. Joe Biden's denial is inconsistent with the evidence, while Reade's general story is consistent with the evidence. We have enough verifiable corroboration so far to say its implausible shes just making it all up, yet that's still the line you want to stick with. Even if you'd need to jump through giant plot holes like explaining why she'd stick to her story in private, why she'd wait 27 years, why theres no record to contradict her. Whats her motive? Shes a biden staffer and bernie supporter, and no friend of Trump. If she had done it to help Bernie, she'd go public before Joe won.

Theres too much evidence to pretend she made it all up. Thats just inconsistent with the verifiable facts. And its pretty ridiculous when you hold up Joe Biden's "reputation" as if its evidence against. There was already a website so infamous it was permabanned from reddit comments, devoted to showing Joe Biden putting his hands on women in public- before this scandal. He started his campaigb by apologizing for his handsiness. If thats how he is in public, how is a Joe with a hardon in private?

Im inclined to believe whichever side has the preponderance of evidence and a logical and consistent story, and much more inclined to believe an accusation when the accused acts as guilty as Joe has.

Problem is she spent years cheerleading for biden before she became a bernie bro, would you go out of you way to speak out about how awesome joe biden is for his work for woman if he molested you?

I think one easy trap that many people have fallen into when trying to piece together the black box puzzle of these political scandals is assigning too much of a one dimensional black and white motive, when real people have complicated reasonings and relationships. Theres lots of explicable reasons- she could simply be pragmatic and put politics before personal grievance and sincerely believe in Joe's mission and what he stands for, even if she can't stand him in person. Folks have been rationalizing that publicly with columns like this;
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/06/opinion/tara-reade-joe-biden-vote.html
but even that feels like a shallow exploration of motive. You'd have to contextualize it around the new empowerment of MeToo, the sting of seeing hypocrisy and at seeing Bernie get shut down again. I've seen people saying, why didn't she come forward in 2008 when he was running for VP? And I say, think about what could have happened. What if today Tara Reade was remembered as the white woman who made sure America didn't elect its first black president? I don't think theres any shortage of women on capitol hill who have stayed silent about uncomfortable experiences with politicians they support because they don't want to hurt their careers. I don't think its a dichotomy that Reade has to either hate everything Biden stands for, or support him in every regard.

Its the same as when people try to explore the motives in other scandals like Flynn or Russiaburger. If you look at the actions of the FBI agents who broke rules and fabricated evidence and wiretapped on bogus warrants and leaked to the media, someone trying to frame that in a one-dimensional mindset would have to see a giant deep state conspiracy with a secret cabal colluding to take down Trump. But once you usher Alex Jones out of the room, we can see that the real people behind the scandals are just flawed human beings with their own individual motives, own high minded ideals either run amok or compromised and their own incompetent self-interested schemes. A pit of vipers as likely to backstab each other as the president. Maybe in the alternate timeline, they were a thorn in President Clinton's side.

This post was edited by Goomshill on May 16 2020 03:53am

She was literally praising him for his work with womans rights.

Creepy uncle Joe is quite touchy feely, and has been for his entire career. Grown women, little girls, he's got issues, and the accrued video evidence of such is quite a large collection.

The level of corroboration would indicate to me that yes, something happened. I'd guess it'd be something very similar to the [at that point in time] incredibly common practice of male bosses taking advantage of female subordinates vulnerable position, and their own position of power.

That being said, the level of smearing going on regarding Reade is insane. Completely uncorroborated claims against Trump? All you fucktards lose your damn minds and assume it MUST be true! Somebody recounts a story regarding Biden and there's oodles of evidence that "something" happened? Character smears, don't listen to her, she's shilling for the repukelicans, whatever the fuck ever. It's a standard Clinton playbook for Joe when there's simply too much evidence that something happened for something NOT to have happened to just smear the woman in question and go with "Joe did nothing wrong". Trump? Shit, that billionaire can get more willing supermodel ass than your entire family tree can ever even hope to see. Why is there absolutely zero proof whatsoever? Well, do the math.

One side is clearly wrong here: Everyone who points at the orange man as guilty of this shit, while trying to defend Joe. Every other side? Who gives a fuck, we're so far beyond the statute of limitations it's not even a thing. This guy's losing his mind. Him winning would be 50x the shock of the 2016 Trump win.

No worries here.

Edit: Regarding the "deep state" comment, I'd like to know why Google Play removed the episode of Larry King Live, and renumbered all the other episodes? That's a lot of work, and too easy to catch. What happened?

This post was edited by InsaneBobb on May 16 2020 07:03am

iirc, google was automatically listing content for shows even if google didn't have them available, and none of those larry king live seasons were available not just that one episode.
google says they basically only do this so that if enough people try to add a show that isn't available, they'll pay for its license and make it available

Gotcha. Went and followed up on it, and read Dornic's comments on it as well. Thanks, finally spurred me to follow up!

Note: I didn't particularly think there was anything special there, as it's irrelevant. As I indicated above, the entire thing is immaterial. Suppose he's guilty of complete abuse of his position, and she was even completely unwilling: It's still past the statute of limitations. There's no crime here. Much too late. And given she's supported Joe for decades, I can't see her pressing on it even without the statute of limitations. So the entire matter is just meh, for practical purposes.

I think it only "matters" because the progressives constantly claim some mythical moral high ground, yet their reaction to this, as opposed to Trump or Kavanaugh, "Smear her!" instead of "Believe her!" shows the obvious double standard.

Everything about her is unraveling currently. In a month she will be the woman who cried wolf and Biden will look like a victim of slander and libel.

She has so many cheerleaders right now because they think she will be the death of #metoo.

This post was edited by Skinned on May 16 2020 07:37am

Ye like I was saying, I'm pretty sure that if she had gone public in 2008, some folks would vilify her as "The white woman who made sure we didn't elect the first black president"

Especially since she seems to be fabricating a sexual assault.