|
Abhorrence posted:Just to be clear here, about my own personal views I do believe Reide, but the circumstances make it unclear enough that I can understand why people would be skeptical, without being rape apologists. Unless you think that lying about something decades later is that damning, you can also look at the contemporaneous accounts from other women who made similar kinds of accusations, though to a different degree, who believed her, and the other people she told about it happening at the time, and how she was fairly unceremoniously removed from her duties around the time she said it happened. Also, if lying makes you not credible, then Biden should have much, much less credibility, since he lied about way more things that were much more consequential before, during, and after the time it happened.
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 17:50 |
|
|
Fallen Hamprince posted:Antioch University officials state categorically that she did not graduate. but in the same article seattle said that all students needed a degree to enroll quote:In a follow-up question about whether students in that program can be admitted without a bachelor’s degree, a spokesman pointed to current requirements, which require an undergraduate degree. so there is no actual proof that she did not have the degree, only that no records existed of her liberal arts degree at antioch and that any definitive proof one way or the other from seattle would violate federal privacy laws.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:07
|
|
|
Abhorrence posted:Just to be clear here, about my own personal views I do believe Reide, but the circumstances make it unclear enough that I can understand why people would be skeptical, without being rape apologists. If you want to be generous, yeah you can not believe Tara Reid without being an actual rape apologist. You are just functionally making rape apology easier by undercutting the MeToo movement. I'm not sure if that's any better.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:07
|
|
|
Aruan posted:this is such a weird false equivalency that reads like you desperately trying to insulting jill biden for... reasons? the only time that anyone 'praises' jill biden is to point out that, yes, its gross to scold her for using the professional title of a degree she earned (even if its tacky for her to use it), and it is somewhat notable that she is continuing to work while serving as first lady. regardless, it has nothing to do with this topic, and this is a gross post. It's definitely more of a trend on Twitter more than anything, and on second reading, I agree, this is not the best equivalency to make. I'll refrain from that in the future.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:09
|
|
|
Lemming posted:There are a bunch of accounts of her talking about it contemporaneously when it happened, as well as her mother calling in, and various other staffers who worked with her at the time said they also believe it happened. Do you have any links? I’ve never seen any corroboration from fellow staffers. One issue with relying on corroboration from friends is that in some cases, the stories have changed: quote:
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:10
|
|
|
I want to ask the following: If you believe that Biden raped Reade, what would it take for you to change your belief? Are you even open to changing it? If you don't believe that Biden raped Reade, what would it take for you to change your belief? Are you even open to changing it?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:11
|
|
|
Gods_Butthole posted:If you want to be generous, yeah you can not believe Tara Reid without being an actual rape apologist. You are just functionally making rape apology easier by undercutting the MeToo movement. I'm not sure if that's any better. The biggest thing is how stark the contrast has been between her treatment and the treatment of Ford. I haven't run into anybody who supports Democrats who has accused her of lying about Kavanaugh or even less flagrantly just said they're unsure about her, but people are willing to try to find any reason to discredit Reid. It's pretty hard to look at those two cases and treat them completely differently just based on the facts, you pretty much only can if there's an extra motivation behind it with regards to how one of them is accusing a Republican and one is accusing a Democrat.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:11
|
|
|
The fact that the US government is filled with sex criminals and rapists (some caught other skating by consequence free) makes the idea of there needing to be an insane level of proof required seem kind of silly to me too. I find it very unlikely that Tara Reade constructed a decades long deception convincing all these people she was raped by Joe Biden, than that Joe Biden, like Bill Clinton, Donald Trump, Bill Richardson, George Mitchell and Dennis Hassert, is a rapist.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:14
|
|
|
Fallen Hamprince posted:Do you have any links? I’ve never seen any corroboration from fellow staffers. The way memory and trauma work together, especially over decades is well understood to be murky and fluid. We went over this whole thing with the Blassie Ford testimony. Were you willing to over look inconsistencies in Ford's telling of events? If so, why are you unwilling to do the same for Reid? Personally when I look at the timeline of who she told and what, it strikes me as a woman struggling to determine who she is comfortable telling and what she's comfortable sharing at a particular time. It's not that difficult to see the plausibility in her story.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:14
|
|
|
Lemming posted:The biggest thing is how stark the contrast has been between her treatment and the treatment of Ford. I haven't run into anybody who supports Democrats who has accused her of lying about Kavanaugh or even less flagrantly just said they're unsure about her, but people are willing to try to find any reason to discredit Reid. It's pretty hard to look at those two cases and treat them completely differently just based on the facts, you pretty much only can if there's an extra motivation behind it with regards to how one of them is accusing a Republican and one is accusing a Democrat. Right; the target is the only thing that makes people go to such lengths to discredit Reade while accepting Ford completely at the time of her accusation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:14
|
|
|
Fallen Hamprince posted:Do you have any links? I’ve never seen any corroboration from fellow staffers. I linked the relevant section in another post where NYT reporters asked some of the other women who accused Biden and clearly stated that some of them also believed her account: Lemming posted:https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/12/us/politics/joe-biden-tara-reade-sexual-assault-complaint.html Since you seem to be focusing on the fact that the stories have changed as evidence that she should be discredited, could you show me some research showing that that's not a normal thing to happen with this sort of case? Because my understanding is that things like details changing in your memory is actually massively common in this sort of thing, and it being used to try to prove that she's lying is pretty gross. I agree it makes the situation much stickier than it would otherwise be if everything was perfectly consistent and rock solid, but again there are enough contemporaneous accounts (and the call her mother gave is incredibly specific and damning, imo) that I don't think a few details changing is particularly relevant.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:14
|
|
|
Gods_Butthole posted:The way memory and trauma work together, especially over decades is well understood to be murky and fluid. We went over this whole thing with the Blassie Ford testimony. Were you willing to over look inconsistencies in Ford's telling of events? If so, why are you unwilling to do the same for Reid? One problem here is that corroborating witnesses only ever seem to remember hearing about the assault at the time after Reade discussed it decades later. Salon posted:It is also worth noting that Reade’s strongest corroborating witness at the time it was reported appeared to be her former neighbor Lynda LaCasse, who seemed to offer independent, near-contemporaneous corroboration of the full assault claim on the record in her conversations with Business Insider. Unfortunately, that piece failed to include in its initial roundup one key detail that was published alongside the article in an interview transcript that was behind a paywall: LaCasse only remembered her conversation with Reade after she was reminded of it during a phone call with Reade.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:16
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:I want to ask the following: I feel like if you're going to ask this type of question then you also need to answer it yourself
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:17
|
|
|
Lemming posted:I linked the relevant section in another post where NYT reporters asked some of the other women who accused Biden and clearly stated that some of them also believed her account: Again, it’s not only that Reade’s memory regarding the assault itself changed. It’s that other people’s memory of what Reade told her appears to change also.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:18
|
|
|
Fallen Hamprince posted:One problem here is that corroborating witnesses only ever seem to remember hearing about the assault at the time after Reade discussed it decades later. why would you remember something your neighbor told you decades ago without trying? do you think she's part of a conspiracy? what's the 'problem' here?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:19
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:I want to ask the following: I believe Reade, there'd probably have to be some big reveal that she was never actually working for Biden or there was some secret recording of her explaining her decades long plan to someday, in the future, falsely accuse Biden of rape to ruin his political career and that she was laying the ground work in the 90s of telling various people bits and pieces of the story to make it more believable.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:19
|
|
|
Fallen Hamprince posted:Again, it’s not only that Reade’s memory regarding the assault itself changed. It’s that other people’s memory of what Reade told her appears to change also. Needing to be reminded about something that happened almost 30 years ago isn't a "memory changing" it's that it happened 30 years ago and you probably aren't going to vividly remember every detail instantly. Why are you pointedly ignoring the phone call her mother gave which specifically mentions the event, which is unambiguous and objective evidence of someone talking about it without "changing their memory"?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:20
|
|
|
Lemming posted:The biggest thing is how stark the contrast has been between her treatment and the treatment of Ford. I haven't run into anybody who supports Democrats who has accused her of lying about Kavanaugh or even less flagrantly just said they're unsure about her, but people are willing to try to find any reason to discredit Reid. It's pretty hard to look at those two cases and treat them completely differently just based on the facts, you pretty much only can if there's an extra motivation behind it with regards to how one of them is accusing a Republican and one is accusing a Democrat. Yea, this was honestly an unsurprising but depressing moment for me. I had to look up the news/late night talk show coverage of Ford soon after Reade's accusation came. For Ford, there were articles/late night shows talking about it a day or two later. For Reade, there was hardly any mention of it for (as far as I can remember) weeks. The difference in timelines is infuriating. Kalit fucked around with this message at 23:24 on Feb 7, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:20
|
|
|
Is there a breakdown somewhere of all the people she told, it keeps sounding like a bunch but everyone keeps talking about that one neighbor.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:20
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:
if there was proof that tara reade had made similar claims of rape or sexual harassment from other men or women previously that were proven false, it would shake my belief of her story's credibility i'm definitely open to the possibility that i'm wrong, but it would have to be something more than "there is some murkiness relating to a liberal arts degree decades ago"
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:21
|
|
|
Lemming posted:The biggest thing is how stark the contrast has been between her treatment and the treatment of Ford. I haven't run into anybody who supports Democrats who has accused her of lying about Kavanaugh or even less flagrantly just said they're unsure about her, but people are willing to try to find any reason to discredit Reid. It's pretty hard to look at those two cases and treat them completely differently just based on the facts, you pretty much only can if there's an extra motivation behind it with regards to how one of them is accusing a Republican and one is accusing a Democrat. i think one of the legacies of the last twenty five years has been a significant shift in the role a person's personal decisions and private life make in how we judge their fitness for office (and let me say up front that this shift is a good thing). up until nixon we barely knew anything about personal lives of politicians, both because information was just more limited, and also because the press explicitly worked to protect the privacy of politicians because they viewed their personal lives as off limits and irrelevant. when it comes to kavanaugh specifically one thing really disappointed me (and this is true of biden to some extent) is that there are so many objectively true things that are just fundamentally disqualifying - his court opinions alone would, in a better world, mean he would never come within a hundred feet of a seat on the supreme court. but because for some reason we can't acknowledge that, the conversation shifts to something else. its good to know he's a bad person, personally, too, of course, but i feel that we never should have had to be in a world where the deciding factor for supporting kavanaugh or not was believing an accusation - we already shouldn't be supporting him, and anything else is just confirmation. i don't know if this makes any sense. edit: to add, i always have felt kind of i guess 'gross' about how people use any accusation in this context because it always feels to be kind of exploitative - that we can't just reject someone for bad politics, so instead you have to use the worst moment in someone's life as the 'proof' that someone who is objectively bad is bad. does anyone else feel this way? you see it on both sides, too: look at franken, it was like 'aha! we found something we can use to force him out!' - just ignoring the tragedy and trauma and jumping to how to use it. it feels seedy. even this conversation is always within the implicit context of "joe biden: good or bad", which again just feels wrong. Owlspiracy fucked around with this message at 23:26 on Feb 7, 2021 |
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:21
|
|
|
Zook posted:why would you remember something your neighbor told you decades ago without trying? do you think she's part of a conspiracy? what's the 'problem' here? If your neighbour called you up and described a conversation that you had two decades ago and had forgotten. do you think you could reliably say whether or not that conversation had actually happened?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:22
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:Is there a breakdown somewhere of all the people she told, it keeps sounding like a bunch but everyone keeps talking about that one neighbor. Wikipedia has a good breakdown: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Biden_sexual_assault_allegation#Accounts_by_Reade%27s_associates The next two sections under it also talk about her family and ex-husband she also told
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:22
|
|
|
Fallen Hamprince posted:Again, it’s not only that Reade’s memory regarding the assault itself changed. It’s that other people’s memory of what Reade told her appears to change also. Memory is a fluid changing thing. There are multiple people who at least say they recall Reade telling them about an event in the 90s and combined with the Larry king call should be pretty loving damning. Would you be bending over backwards this much to brush it away if the accusee were someone like Mitch McConnell? Hell Biden is even creepier than McConnel and publicly demonstrates a lack of personal boundaries particularly with women
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:23
|
|
|
Thorn Wishes Talon posted:I want to ask the following: i'm in a position where i get irritated with most reade skeptics and everyone who seeks to weaponize her accusations against bidenlikers  For myself, there would have to be something extremely smoking-gunny to disbelieve Reade. At this point, given that any possible low-hanging fruit would have been plucked, it would be along the lines of "Russian Intellligence announces that yes they plotted with Tara Reade to go after Biden and here is a video of the interview in which Tara Reade says 'yes, I will lie publicly about Joe Biden raping me, thank you for the rubles'". So practically speaking, no, I am not actually open to disbelieving her. I do not believe the marine who announced alongside Jacob Wohl that Elizabeth Warren hosed him into therapy, and I do not believe the woman who was approached by Project Veritas to accuse Robert Mueller. Absent that sort of incredibly obvious bullshit business or extremely clear evidence of deliberate falsehood, I feel an obligation to default to believing women. See also, Keith Ellison, who I am obligated to assume is a domestic abuser. This incidentally means that I am not actually personally all that interested in the details of either Reade's possible past perjury or circumstantial concerns about the accusations, except insofar as I have to moderate them, which is certainly going to be Fun. They're just not relevant to the position I must take as far as whether I, personally, believe the accusation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:23
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Why are you pointedly ignoring the phone call her mother gave which specifically mentions the event, which is unambiguous and objective evidence of someone talking about it without "changing their memory"? The phone call to Larry King does not mention any instance of sexual assault or harassment, by Biden or anyone else. The earliest recorded mention of anything like that is in the court documents relating to her ex husband, but these again do not mention Biden specifically.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:25
|
|
|
Fallen Hamprince posted:If your neighbour called you up and described a conversation that you had two decades ago and had forgotten. do you think you could reliably say whether or not that conversation had actually happened? Potentially, especially for something like a sexual harassment from their boss. Other people have asked, but what do you make of Reade's mother's phone call into Larry King's show? Edit: Fallen Hamprince posted:The phone call to Larry King does not mention any instance of sexual assault or harassment, by Biden or anyone else. The earliest recorded mention of anything like that is in the court documents relating to her ex husband, but these again do not mention Biden specifically. Ok, you're just being willfully obtuse then, gotcha
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:25
|
|
|
Fallen Hamprince posted:The phone call to Larry King does not mention any instance of sexual assault or harassment, by Biden or anyone else. The earliest recorded mention of anything like that is in the court documents relating to her ex husband, but these again do not mention Biden specifically. Yeah I'm done with this charade, this guy was banned for being gross about calling Reade a liar before and it's clear no amount of good faith discussion is going to amount to anything. Who the gently caress else could it be, she was working for Biden.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:27
|
|
|
Fallen Hamprince posted:The phone call to Larry King does not mention any instance of sexual assault or harassment, by Biden or anyone else. The earliest recorded mention of anything like that is in the court documents relating to her ex husband, but these again do not mention Biden specifically. Something about if it walks like a duck and swims like a duck and quacks like a duck....
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:28
|
|
|
IIRC didn’t it later turn out through court documents that Ellison was the one who had been abused?
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:28
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Yeah I'm done with this charade, this guy was banned for being gross about calling Reade a liar before and it's clear no amount of good faith discussion is going to amount to anything. Who the gently caress else could it be, she was working for Biden. A senators staff includes dozens of people. The reporters investigating the allegations interviewed more than 70 colleagues.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:29
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:Is there a breakdown somewhere of all the people she told, it keeps sounding like a bunch but everyone keeps talking about that one neighbor. https://news.yahoo.com/another-tara-reade-friend-comes-080000628.html "Joseph Backholm is at least the eighth person to corroborate aspects of Reade’s claims, following her mother, brother, ex-husband, former neighbor, former coworker and at least of her two friends."
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:31
|
|
|
Fallen Hamprince posted:If your neighbour called you up and described a conversation that you had two decades ago and had forgotten. do you think you could reliably say whether or not that conversation had actually happened? If I remembered it I would say yes I remembered it if I didn't I wouldnt say that, this is 99% of people imo, the neighbor is one of many people who corroborate being told by her about it over the years though.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:33
|
|
|
Lemming posted:Wikipedia has a good breakdown: quote:Natasha Korecki of Politico interviewed several former acquaintances of Reade's who said that they had bad experiences with Reade. Korecki describes two emerging themes from their stories: As recently as 2018, Reade "spoke favorably about her time working for Biden", and Reade "left them feeling duped."[56] These acquaintances believe Reade had been "deceitful" and "manipulative" with them.[56] One, attorney and domestic violence victims' advocate Kelly Klett, had rented a room in her home to Reade in 2018. Klett said that Reade phoned her in 2019 after Reade's interview with The Union alleging Biden touched her neck and shoulders. Klett said that she became suspicious of the motives behind the call, because of a sense that she "was trying to plant a story with me, so she could later say: 'I told the story to this attorney I worked with.'"[56] Huh I hadn't heard about that, now I understand why people question that one neighbor that did not remember until Reade not that I agree with them. This whole thing is a mess did Reade ever press charges so there could be a full real investigation or has it been too long I'm not sure if sexual assault has a statute of limitations.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:35
|
|
|
christmas boots posted:IIRC didn’t it later turn out through court documents that Ellison was the one who had been abused? The evidence against Ellison was significantly weaker than that against Biden. IIRC by that standard the only allegations against Biden that aren’t believable are the ones made by Christine O’Donnell’s niece, which were alleged to have happened at a public event held when Biden was verifiably in a different state.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:36
|
|
|
christmas boots posted:IIRC didn’t it later turn out through court documents that Ellison was the one who had been abused? i havent found anything that specifically states that Ellison was abused, only that the video that instigated the claims never surfaced you might be confusing him with lee carter, who was also accused of being an abusive partner before writing an article about how he was the one who was abused, with a copy of a protective order the court granted him https://twitter.com/carterforva/status/1126522033494474753
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:36
|
|
|
Aruan posted:i think one of the legacies of the last twenty five years has been a significant shift in the role a person's personal decisions and private life make in how we judge their fitness for office (and let me say up front that this shift is a good thing). up until nixon we barely knew anything about personal lives of politicians, both because information was just more limited, and also because the press explicitly worked to protect the privacy of politicians because they viewed their personal lives as off limits and irrelevant. when it comes to kavanaugh specifically one thing really disappointed me (and this is true of biden to some extent) is that there are so many objectively true things that are just fundamentally disqualifying - his court opinions alone would, in a better world, mean he would never come within a hundred feet of a seat on the supreme court. but because for some reason we can't acknowledge that, the conversation shifts to something else. its good to know he's a bad person, personally, too, of course, but i feel that we never should have had to be in a world where the deciding factor for supporting kavanaugh or not was believing an accusation - we already shouldn't be supporting him, and anything else is just confirmation. It is not gross to speak up about a rape victim who the entire media suppressed in order to propel her rapist into the most powerful office in the world, I don't know how you even square that. Edit: Something that WAS especially gross to me is the number of people who are on the Bernie/"socialist" left who dropped Reade's allegations like a sack of hot potatoes once it became clear Bernie was out of the race.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:37
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:did Reade ever press charges so there could be a full real investigation come on come onnnnnnnnnnn We can not be having this discussion in 2021.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:38
|
|
|
socialsecurity posted:Huh I hadn't heard about that, now I understand why people question that one neighbor that did not remember until Reade not that I agree with them. This whole thing is a mess did Reade ever press charges so there could be a full real investigation or has it been too long I'm not sure if sexual assault has a statute of limitations. Statute of limitations, for a crime committed in the 1990s only murder could still be prosecuted. And obviously “beyond a reasonable doubt” is not a reasonable standard of evidence for “should this person hold the most powerful elected office in existence”.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 17:50 |
|
|
socialsecurity posted:Huh I hadn't heard about that, now I understand why people question that one neighbor that did not remember until Reade not that I agree with them. This whole thing is a mess did Reade ever press charges so there could be a full real investigation or has it been too long I'm not sure if sexual assault has a statute of limitations. quote:Reade and her brother stated that their mother had encouraged Reade to call the police after the alleged incident, and that her brother regretted having previously told Reade to "move on, guys are idiots".[35] She didn't, but the fact that she didn't doesn't do anything to prove things one way or the other. It is incredibly common not to try to do that in these situations, and a lot of people will say they regret trying to press charges because they still weren't believed and it made their lives much worse.
|
|
#
?
Feb 7, 2021 23:39
|
|