Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
ren hoek

Former staffer accuses Joe Biden of sexual assault

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, ren hoek said:

 

 

I'm curious, Ren.  You seem to be VERY interested in being an advocate for women who accuse someone of sexual misconduct.  You've posted a TON about the accusations against Biden.  Why haven't we seen the same vigor from you in discussing the credible allegations against Trump?  It makes it hard to take you seriously.  Or to think you are doing anything except sowing discord. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Widbil83 said:

If this were Bernie they would have been reported on it. No doubt at all. The MSM is going to protect the Democrat establishment at all costs. 

The contrived beef with Warren- not over alleged sexual assault, but saying a woman couldn't be president- was a huge media spectacle.  Meanwhile, a credible rape accusation against Joe Biden hardly registers a blip.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Let me know when this woman gets the Christine Blasey Ford treatment from the Fox crew

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Sweet J said:

I'm curious, Ren.  You seem to be VERY interested in being an advocate for women who accuse someone of sexual misconduct.  You've posted a TON about the accusations against Biden.  Why haven't we seen the same vigor from you in discussing the credible allegations against Trump?  It makes it hard to take you seriously.  Or to think you are doing anything except sowing discord. 

Because Trump was already well established as a misogynist pos.  I thought Ford was credible and I think Trump's accusers were credible too.  But he's already a known commodity in a sense- it's not exactly earthshattering or interesting to discuss him in that light.  Maybe I didn't look into it like I should have.  

Biden on the other hand has premised his entire campaign on the return of morality, decency, and civility.  That's more interesting to me. 

Knowing what you know now, would you have voted for Biden in your primary?  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason it is not being covered is because Biden is our guy now.  The others have dropped out and Bernie is toast.  There is no way there can be full blown coverage and taint Biden in his run against Trump.   Trump has to be ousted and Joe has already had creeper issues in his past. With the Corona this hopefully will wash through fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KiddLattimer said:

Symone Sanders (Biden's senior advisor) just deleted all of her Kavanaugh related tweets 🤔

It is hilarious watching these politicians act all holier than thou until it is there guy. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Widbil83 said:

If this were Bernie they would have been reported on it. No doubt at all. The MSM is going to protect the Democrat establishment at all costs. 

No doubt whatsoever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, KiddLattimer said:

Symone Sanders (Biden's senior advisor) just deleted all of her Kavanaugh related tweets 🤔

Interesting. She must have gotten the heads up from the NYT or CNN they have been shamed into running the story.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, msudaisy26 said:

It is hilarious watching these politicians act all holier than thou until it is there guy. 

Twitter always has a way to come back and bite you in the ###. "Do not judge lest ye be judged"

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The reason it is not a story is because she changed her’s since last April.

Plus the crazy Russian stuff.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Widbil83 said:

Interesting. She must have gotten the heads up from the NYT or CNN they have been shamed into running the story.

And I’m being completely serious about this btw. Remember Donna Brazile leaking debate questions to help Hillary and hurt Bernie at the CNN debate? It’s how these people work.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/donna-brazile-leaves-cnn/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOL...hilarious to see squishy and his band of merry but Trumpers cover up sexual assault allegations.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, BassNBrew said:

LOL...hilarious to see squishy and his band of merry but Trumpers cover up sexual assault allegations.

Wait...squis or anyone here are covering it up?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, sho nuff said:

Wait...squis or anyone here are covering it up?

You're correct...turning a blind eye to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, General Malaise said:

That link doesn't take me to NPR....

Not sure why the npr reference.  It is Democracy Now.  But regardless, this allegation merits an investigation.  This case has dozens of key factors which make it far more compelling than Blasey Ford's allegations.   We know date, location, very specific details, there was a report, friends and family were told, we can put the two people together, there are numerous concrete facts that can be investigated.  Anyone who doesn't demand an investigation who did support Blasey Ford should never again be listened to again on the issue of sexual assault.  Democrats lose ALL credibility on the issue.  Their claim they are champion of women is nothing but empty rhetoric and their faux outrage at sexual assault is nothing but a political tool.

Edited by jon_mx

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am actually thoroughly disgusted with the hypocrisy on this issue.  It is ####### unforgivable.  This is extremely credible and a very serious complaint.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ren hoek said:

Because Trump was already well established as a misogynist pos.  I thought Ford was credible and I think Trump's accusers were credible too.  But he's already a known commodity in a sense- it's not exactly earthshattering or interesting to discuss him in that light.  Maybe I didn't look into it like I should have.  

Biden on the other hand has premised his entire campaign on the return of morality, decency, and civility.  That's more interesting to me. 

Knowing what you know now, would you have voted for Biden in your primary?  

I don’t know anything now, and neither do you. 
 

An actual well written piece

 

you aren’t going to read this bc I don’t think you have an actual interest in the truth. But someone else may 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, jon_mx said:

I am actually thoroughly disgusted with the hypocrisy on this issue.  It is ####### unforgivable.  This is extremely credible and a very serious complaint.  

Read the article I posted

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Sweet J said:

I don’t know anything now, and neither do you. 
 

An actual well written piece

 

you aren’t going to read this bc I don’t think you have an actual interest in the truth. But someone else may 

Thank you for posting

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sweet J said:

Read the article I posted

That was a good piece of journalism, something that is sorely lacking these days.  A well written and balanced piece.  It does seem she has politically motivation and is somewhat of an attention hog, but at the same time has a compelling story with some basis of truth.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, msommer said:

Let me know when this woman gets the Christine Blasey Ford treatment from the Fox crew

She already has- from liberals insinuating she’s a Russian agent and trying to destroy her personally.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, jon_mx said:

That was a good piece of journalism, something that is sorely lacking these days.  A well written and balanced piece.  It does seem she has politically motivation and is somewhat of an attention hog, but at the same time has a compelling story with some basis of truth.  

I don't think that's all it says. It helps explains why journalistically a reporter or publication would find the story does not meet professional standards. Substantively it also indicates that Reade's story is lacking in a few ways, not that it has some basis of truth at all. I pointed out earlier to Ren that though multiple publications had raised Halper's interview, none others - besides the local Nevada Co. CA paper - had done any original reporting on it, this appears why. When a reporter sits down to write this stuff they have to check sources, Salon was not able to replicate that, and even Reade's explanations for certain events were faltering. It certainly doesn't help that Reade has gone about deleting her prior internet history of her posts on Medium. Also:

Quote

... Reade told Salon that she had considered describing the assault to the original reporter from the Nevada County paper, but the "way he asked the questions" had "shut me down." 

Do you believe that?

The thing about that Nevada Co. Union story that I find applicable is that that story is consistent with prior claims about Biden, that is inappropriate touching. This story, an abrupt change less than a year later, doesn't sound like anything Biden has been accused of, even remotely, before. 

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

She already has- from liberals insinuating she’s a Russian agent and trying to destroy her personally.  

You seem to have missed the requirement that the treatment was given by Fox News Network

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Salon article is excellent and fair. If I had to guess from what I’ve read so far (this article and the Amy Goodman interview) I suspect something inappropriate happened, on the level of the other accusations against Biden, but that the penetration she is now accusing him of is fictional. Again that’s just a guess based on the totality of what I’ve read. 

So where does this leave us? I think Joe Biden has been a chauvinist most of his life, unfortunately no different from Bill Clinton or George H W Bush (or, if we are being completely charitable, Donald Trump.) . Such behavior should always have been unacceptable but again unfortunately it hasn’t been, particularly among powerful men. Should it disqualify him? Yes if this woman is telling the truth now, but there’s no way to prove it. So I say it does not disqualify him. 

More importantly to me: does this sort of behavior  make Biden a bad guy, and not the good guy that I have claimed he is? Again if what I suspect is true it makes him a man with faults, imperfect, but no reason to believe he is a bad man. Of course if she’s telling the truth (now) then he is a bad man. 

My conclusion at this time is that I still strongly support Joe Biden for President. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/27/2020 at 12:35 PM, ren hoek said:

Reade told reporters about the way he would put his hands on her shoulders, run his fingers up and down her neck. She considered talking about the rest of her story. But she didn't because her claims of sexual harassment got her doxxed and smeared as a Russian agent. That was April 2019.

Just a point on this, it was a reporter, from her local paper, the Nevada Co. (CA) Union. Technically there would be no difference in social media reaction if she told the Union reporter that she had been raped than if she simply confirmed her claim that she had been inappropriately touched. She apparently had already received that reaction once and so she was engaging it again, it would be reacted to regardless. I mean the fact of it, not the magnitude.

I also listened to some of the interview (it's long). Just a point about Halper's summary - she completely avoided, at least in her twitter thread, part of Reade's discussion (~36:30) about why she did not raise the assault claim previously. She also told Halper, like she did Salon, that she "was shut down." Do you really believe that a reporter would reach out to Reade on this story and then when she raised an assault of this alleged magnitude, that they would shut her down? I just think it's interesting, listening to the interview, that she both says she willingly understated what happened (while nonetheless risking social media reaction anyway) but also that she was prevented from telling the full story.

I'm also curious about the claim about her being attacked for being a supposed Russian agent. I really wonder about some of these attacks, as the first most legitimate point of her past blogging about Putin isn't that she's an agent - which is ridiculous - but that she has a particular ideological orientation. Most especially in her twitter summary Halper just adopts this claim about the social media attacks without exploring it. - eta - Having said that, I believe her when she says she was doxxed (her home address accessed and used) and that she received threats or nastygrams from nutjobs. Unfortunately the contemporary internet can be a horrible place.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 3/27/2020 at 12:35 PM, ren hoek said:

Tara reached out to countless people to try to get her story out. Nobody would.  Not even the one organization that was made to support women like her.

Time's Up is a legal defense fund. Reade was put in touch with lawyers by TU and others, but apparently Reade does not ant any legal redress and does not want to engage in any kind of probity about her claim to Halper. She apparently only wants legal help to silence critics who have explored her prior online writings and she wants pr help to get her story out. Reade says as much (~44:00-46:20) about the fact that she was put in touch with lawyers, but she tries to imply that she was rejected for political reasons when apparently she's not interested in legal help about what happened to her at all.

Quote

Reade said that a large part of her reason for reaching out to Time's Up in the first place had been to seek assistance in clearing her name.

- Newsweek.

That's not help with a legal case, that's a pr campaign and C&D letters to various people online. It's absolutely true you have to pay people for that stuff and Reade is frank that she wanted free assistance.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, timschochet said:

The Salon article is excellent and fair. If I had to guess from what I’ve read so far (this article and the Amy Goodman interview) I suspect something inappropriate happened, on the level of the other accusations against Biden, but that the penetration she is now accusing him of is fictional. Again that’s just a guess based on the totality of what I’ve read. 

So where does this leave us? I think Joe Biden has been a chauvinist most of his life, unfortunately no different from Bill Clinton or George H W Bush (or, if we are being completely charitable, Donald Trump.) . Such behavior should always have been unacceptable but again unfortunately it hasn’t been, particularly among powerful men. Should it disqualify him? Yes if this woman is telling the truth now, but there’s no way to prove it. So I say it does not disqualify him. 

More importantly to me: does this sort of behavior  make Biden a bad guy, and not the good guy that I have claimed he is? Again if what I suspect is true it makes him a man with faults, imperfect, but no reason to believe he is a bad man. Of course if she’s telling the truth (now) then he is a bad man. 

My conclusion at this time is that I still strongly support Joe Biden for President. 

I love reading accounts of people dissecting her story and finding something that allows them to still support their guy when they previously opposed kavanaugh. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, jon_mx said:

I am actually thoroughly disgusted with the hypocrisy on this issue.  It is ####### unforgivable.  This is extremely credible and a very serious complaint.  

So was Ford's...yes...there is a lot of hypocrisy on this and no, its not just Democrats.

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

I love reading accounts of people dissecting her story and finding something that allows them to still support their guy when they previously opposed kavanaugh. 

 

 

But Blasey Ford was consistent in her story the whole time. And prior to her testimony I liked Kavanaugh and thought the criticism against him was unfair. I’m sure you are correct that there are hypocrites out there but it doesn’t apply to me (though I’ve been a hypocrite for sure in other situations.) 

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
7 minutes ago, timschochet said:

But Blasey Ford was consistent in her story the whole time. And prior to her testimony I liked Kavanaugh and thought the criticism against him was unfair. I’m sure you are correct that there are hypocrites out there but it doesn’t apply to me (though I’ve been a hypocrite for sure in other situations.) 

No she wasnt. She settled in to her story. Which wasnt much of a story. 

Eta: she also had legal counsel at a very early point, and it showed. 

Edited by parasaurolophus
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

The Salon piece takes care to note "Is Reade a Russian agent? That's also highly doubtful, and here's why."   "Ultimately, Salon is forced to conclude that anyone actually working for Russian intelligence would have done a better job covering her tracks."  

Not really balanced to equate delusional Russia conspiracy fetish with the suspicion that there is a very open media blackout on this as if they're the same thing.  That is not a "reckless conspiracy theory" being "spun" by anyone.  I think we can safely decouple her views on Russia & Putin from her willingness to talk about being sexually assaulted by one of the most powerful men in the United States.  The idea that she would invite this kind of blowback to her reputation and nightmarish public lashing in order to somehow serve Russia is completely absurd.  

It is interesting that the piece mentions reporting on Weinstein and #metoo, but not that Biden advisor Anita Dunn helped Harvey Weinstein in the leadup to his collapse.  I didn't know that Time's Up focuses on active or actionable court proceedings rather than unactionable items that don't really have legal liability, which seems fair enough.  But there has been an inordinate amount of hatred against Reade.  

The piece asserts that media outlets don't report on this out of respect for the victim as well as the accused, but there is nothing stopping news rooms from covering all angles of the story in a fair and measured way.  Why it's taken them this long is anyone's guess, but the response to this is markedly different from Blasey Ford's reception.  It's different in that the partisan rancor has essentially flipped sides- but it's also different in that the extremely vocal support group for #metoo has virtually disappeared with regard to Reade.  To me they are both credible, and deserve to be taken seriously.  Listening to Reade in the Goodman interview was very convincing. 

Given Biden's history of touching children and being insanely creepy around women in public settings, swimming naked in front of female secret service agents, lying compulsively, and the fact that there is not just one but eight women who have accused Biden of inappropriate contact, I believe Reade is telling the truth.  

Edited by ren hoek

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
44 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

The Salon piece takes care to note "Is Reade a Russian agent? That's also highly doubtful, and here's why."   "Ultimately, Salon is forced to conclude that anyone actually working for Russian intelligence would have done a better job covering her tracks."  

Not really balanced to equate delusional Russia conspiracy fetish with the suspicion that there is a very open media blackout on this as if they're the same thing.  That is not a "reckless conspiracy theory" being "spun" by anyone.  I think we can safely decouple her views on Russia & Putin from her willingness to talk about being sexually assaulted by one of the most powerful men in the United States.  The idea that she would invite this kind of blowback to her reputation and nightmarish public lashing in order to somehow serve Russia is completely absurd.  

Fwiw I agree with a good deal of this. It should have been a flat 'no.' - I'll add the point that 'a Russian agent would have done a better job' is the sort of weak deflection that was raised during the Russia investigation for those attacking reporting by government and media about actual findings. By the same token here it's also a weak deflection. There are discernible facts and events around active measures and there is none of that here. It simply doesn't exist. That's not to say her prior postings and her deletions of them are irrelevant, they're not, and IMO it's also not helpful that Reade similarly claims skeptics raising such as being Russophobes or those engaging in "McCarthyism" (her word). In general listening to the interview she layers a lot of political viewpoint around her claims and that's one of them. I'd agree however that her claim, for the extent she discusses it in that hour plus interview, needs to be considered by itself absent all that.

Edited by SaintsInDome2006

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

the fact that there is not just one but eight women who have accused Biden of inappropriate contact, I believe Reade is telling the truth.  

I might be wrong but I think Reade is one of the 8 women, right? I think the other 7 have claimed behavior which is nowhere near this. Inappropriate contact is correct, that would be consistent - and in fact that was Reade's first claim. This later claim is the departure.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also -- I DO think there is at least one comparison to the Ford situation:  Weren't there OTHER woman trying to say that Kavanaugh acted inappropriately and the "media" decided not to give those people a voice -- precisely because those women couldn't stand up to those publications' level of scrutiny?  If that's the case, there are similarities here.

I may be mis-remembering.  But that sounds familiar.  Anyone remember? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, jon_mx said:

Not sure why the npr reference.  It is Democracy Now.  

So why attribute something to NPR when it's clearly not from NPR?  Seems strange to me. Discredits the post entirely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, General Malaise said:

So why attribute something to NPR when it's clearly not from NPR?  Seems strange to me. Discredits the post entirely.

Because I made a mistake.  Don't know if you ever made one of those.  I thought better of letting mistake stand than edit post.  

They're both pretty insufferable centerleft publications that fell for trumprussia scam and I got them confused.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ren hoek said:

Because I made a mistake.  Don't know if you ever made one of those.  I thought better of letting mistake stand than edit post.  

They're both pretty insufferable centerleft publications that fell for trumprussia scam and I got them confused.  

Ah, I see.  You make a mistake and then instead of correcting it, you decide to hurl an insult at NPR who was just sitting there, minding its own business.  Interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

treat Biden the same as you treated Trump and his accusers - that's how everyone should handle this 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sweet J said:

Also -- I DO think there is at least one comparison to the Ford situation:  Weren't there OTHER woman trying to say that Kavanaugh acted inappropriately and the "media" decided not to give those people a voice -- precisely because those women couldn't stand up to those publications' level of scrutiny?  If that's the case, there are similarities here.

I may be mis-remembering.  But that sounds familiar.  Anyone remember? 

Misremembering. 

The times originally passed on the ramirez story. They ended up running it anyway once other publications did. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

treat Biden the same as you treated Trump and his accusers - that's how everyone should handle this 

X2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stealthycat said:

treat Biden the same as you treated Trump and his accusers - that's how everyone should handle this 

Should we also treat Biden's accuser the same way Trump's or Kavanaugh's accusers were treated?   

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stealthycat said:

treat Biden the same as you treated Trump and his accusers - that's how everyone should handle this 

Ok - Jean Carroll sued. So did Stormy Daniels and so did Karen McDougal. So did Summer Zervos. I think a host of others have sued as well.

One major distinction here is Reade isn’t suing and isn’t hiring a lawyer to press charges. So yeah if you treat them the same you don’t get past square 1.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sweet J said:

Also -- I DO think there is at least one comparison to the Ford situation:  Weren't there OTHER woman trying to say that Kavanaugh acted inappropriately and the "media" decided not to give those people a voice -- precisely because those women couldn't stand up to those publications' level of scrutiny?  If that's the case, there are similarities here.

I may be mis-remembering.  But that sounds familiar.  Anyone remember? 

This story has more credibility and corroboration than Ford's.  The other stories against Kavanaugh were complete fabrications which were completely discredited.   There was one college rumor which had several people repeat, but the supposed victim does not recall such an event.  It is COMPLETELY disingenuous to compare this story to the fruitcakes which came out against Kavanaugh as none of the facts stood up to even a cursory investigation.   This lady worked with Biden, made reports against him going through the appropriate channel, told relatives and friends at the time, etc and had dates and locations.   Ford could not establish a date or location and every person she identified including a close friend denied the party she described ever happened.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Stealthycat said:

treat Biden the same as you treated Trump and his accusers - that's how everyone should handle this 

How did we treat it/them?  He’s never suffered any damage or harm or political fallout.  NONE

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.