Patterico's Pontifications

5/1/2020

Joe Biden Denies Sexual Assault Allegations Made By Former Staffer

Filed under: General — Dana @ 7:01 am



[guets post by Dana]

Here is the full statement Joe Biden released before his appearance on the Morning Joe show. Relevant portion:

I want to address allegations by a former staffer that I engaged in misconduct 27 years ago.

They aren’t true. This never happened.

While the details of these allegations of sexual harassment and sexual assault are complicated, two things are not complicated. One is that women deserve to be treated with dignity and respect, and when they step forward they should be heard, not silenced. The second is that their stories should be subject to appropriate inquiry and scrutiny.

Responsible news organizations should examine and evaluate the full and growing record of inconsistencies in her story, which has changed repeatedly in both small and big ways.

But this much bears emphasizing.

She has said she raised some of these issues with her supervisor and senior staffers from my office at the time. They – both men and a woman – have said, unequivocally, that she never came to them and complained or raised issues. News organizations that have talked with literally dozens of former staffers have not found one – not one – who corroborated her allegations in any way. Indeed, many of them spoke to the culture of an office that would not have tolerated harassment in any way – as indeed I would not have.

There is a clear, critical part of this story that can be verified. The former staffer has said she filed a complaint back in 1993. But she does not have a record of this alleged complaint. The papers from my Senate years that I donated to the University of Delaware do not contain personnel files. It is the practice of Senators to establish a library of personal papers that document their public record: speeches, policy proposals, positions taken, and the writing of bills.

There is only one place a complaint of this kind could be – the National Archives. The National Archives is where the records are kept at what was then called the Office of Fair Employment Practices. I am requesting that the Secretary of the Senate ask the Archives to identify any record of the complaint she alleges she filed and make available to the press any such document. If there was ever any such complaint, the record will be there.

You can read the full transcript of the interview here.

Robby Soave points to a problem with Biden’s claims:

But the most important exchange occurred when Brzezinski asked Biden to square his current defense with his previous claims that women should be believed when they come forward as sexual assault victims.

Biden then denied that he had previously advocated such a standard.

“From the very beginning, I’ve said believing the woman means taking the claim seriously, and then it’s vetted, looked into,” said Biden. “Women have a right to be heard, and the press should rigorously investigate claims they make. I’ll always uphold that principle. But in the end the truth is what matters. And these claims are false.”

The presumptive Democratic presidential candidate is misrepresenting his past statements. He absolutely did not take the position that “believing women means taking the claim seriously.” (And if that’s what believe-all-victims means, why not just say that instead?)

Brzezinski… repeatedly reminded Biden that he had advocated believing Christine Blasey Ford, Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh’s accuser. She even read his own words back to him: “For a woman to come forward in the glaring lights of focus, nationally, you’ve got to start off with the presumption that at least the essence of what she’s talking about is real, whether or not she forgets facts, whether or not it’s been made worse or better over time.” Brzezinski also called out several of Biden’s high profile supports—Stacy Abrams, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D–Calif.), and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D–NY)—for participating in the Kavanaugh double standard.

Caught in an obvious contradiction, Biden then tried to say that victims should be believed until contrary evidence emerges.

“Women are to be believed, given the benefit of the doubt,” said Biden. “If they come forward and say something happened to them, they should start with the presumption they are telling the truth. Then you have to look at the facts.

“What I said during the Kavanaugh hearings was she had a right to be heard,” Biden continued. “And she came forward, the presumption would be she’s telling the truth unless it’s proved she wasn’t telling the truth, or unless it’s clear from the facts surrounding it that it isn’t the truth.”

But under this standard, Biden would be presumed guilty. If the former vice president is taking the position that women should be believed unless their accusations are disproven, then the burden of evidence is on the accused. No evidence has emerged that explicitly contradicts Reade’s story. Does that mean the public should default to believing her?

Biden seems to think the lack of evidence confirming Reade’s story is the same thing as evidence disproving it.

Reade is reportedly in talks to sit for an interview with Chris Wallace on Fox News. Before Biden’s appearance on Morning Joe, Wallace talked about Biden waiting until today to address Reade’s allegations:

“Now, here’s a woman, and they don’t want to believe her,” Wallace added. “And if Biden had denied it two weeks ago, when we were in this furor of the coronavirus, I think it would have been largely ignored. The story hadn’t gotten as big and people weren’t paying as much attention to Joe Biden.

“Now, the story has built. The story of him failing to come forward and refute it and kind of hiding behind women has grown.”

…Wallace said he expected Biden to categorically deny the claims…”But when he does, I think he’s going to have lost … much of the benefit for coming forward and confronting the allegations.”

Yesterday, Ben Smith questioned the inequity in reporting sexual asault allegations against popular politicians:

Ms. Reade told me Wednesday that the only offers she’s had to appear on television have come from Fox News, including a call from the prime time host Sean Hannity. She has so far turned them down.

“I’ve been trying to just kind of wait to get someone in the middle,” she said in a phone interview. “I don’t want to be pigeonholed as a progressive, I don’t want to be pigeonholed as a Trump supporter.”

CNN, NBC and MSNBC, whose DNA — even in a pandemic — is politics, have covered her on their websites and on air but haven’t put her on camera.

“They’re not offering to put me on TV — they’re just doing stories,” Ms. Reade told me. “No anchors, no nothing like that.” She’d most like to tell her story to a network television anchor she admires — CBS’s Gayle King is one, she said — but they haven’t called.

There’s still no clear explanation, however, for why Ms. Reade hasn’t been on mainstream TV. Representatives for CNN and MSNBC declined to explain why they haven’t booked a woman who is, whether you believe her or not, one of the few newsmakers right now who could cut through the pandemic.

Journalists cannot predict how viewers might react to television interviews with Ms. Reade, or where their reporting on her claims will lead. They don’t have to. They should just make sure their audience knows they’re reporting hard, and doing the work with an open mind.

Stay tuned…

–Dana

77 Responses to “Joe Biden Denies Sexual Assault Allegations Made By Former Staffer”

  1. What else would or could Biden say other than to offer a full denial of the allegations, no matter if guilty or not. To say anything else would be political suicide.

    I look forward to seeing whether Reade can convincingly address the inconsistencies in her story.

    Dana (0feb77)

  2. Biden satatement:

    The second is that their stories should be subject to appropriate inquiry and scrutiny.

    It would be better if this included the clause: “like any accusation of serious wrongdoing by anyone.”

    . News organizations that have talked with literally dozens of former staffers have not found one – not one – who corroborated her allegations in any way.

    According to Nic, they didn’t even corroborate her description of what the duties of the job she held were.

    Sammy Finkelman (af3697)

  3. As usual, my brilliant comments are in another thread before your posts come up, but well said.
    We’ll see how Chris Wallace does with Ms. Reade, but I expect he’ll do his job just as Mika did hers.

    Paul Montagu (b3f51b)

  4. Paul Montagu, I’ve taken the liberty of re-posting your comments here. I especially like observation #2. Is he gmabling on this being enough of a denial (and damage control), that this will be the end of it? Or is he simply that positive that there really was nothing to Reade’s allegations?:

    I saw Mika and Biden this AM. Several things.

    One, Mika knew her credibility would be suspect if she didn’t ask hard questions, and she did her job. Biden was his usual stumbling in-eloquent self.

    Two, Biden was emphatic that it “never happened”. That leaves no wiggle room.

    Three, he agreed to open up Senate archives, and his comments about his records at the Univ of Delaware seem plausible.
    Four, in light of his comments about Blasey-Ford, he’ll come off more as a hypocrite than as a sexual abuser. He would’ve been better off saying that we should take the charges seriously, but should reserve judgment on believability, but he jumped on that same wagon as all the other Democrats.

    Dana (0feb77)

  5. Biden’s statement is not going to go over well. At least it doesn’t with me. For one thing he calls Reade “she” without mentioning her name or acknowledging that Reade worked for him. Echos of “that woman” Miss Lewinsky. He “supports women” but can’t be bothered to use her name. Covering his a**.

    JRH (52aed3)

  6. 5. I think referring to her as she is OK. If he used her name extensively it might come across as trying to demonize her.

    Time123 (53ef45)

  7. Remember how much flack Biden got from the left for his treatment of Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings?

    Leviticus (06f2e0)

  8. We should throw something else in the mix. The Obama Administration, with support from Biden, strongly encouraged colleges and universities to tilt their procedures regarding sexual assault in favor of the accuser. Some accused, almost always men, have had their lives destroyed with little “due process” as a result, and there have been many successful lawsuits by such men against universities.

    So perhaps Joe Biden should be asked, why he should be treated differently than these men? Given that, acc. to him, this woman has made false accusations against him, is it not possible that the same thing might not happen on campus? Why should he be believed when these men were told they would not be?

    And, what position would his Administration’s Dept. of Education take on these issues? Is he opposed to the current Administration’s position on that?

    Bored Lawyer (56c962)

  9. There, it’s official… a flat denial. It never happened. No further inquiry will be made by teh MSM.

    Just like they did with Brett Kavanaugh.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  10. Great point, BL.
    Obama-Biden thought they were doing a great thing for women with their Dear Colleague Letter, and all it did was create a due process clusterf*ck, where too many administrators went too far and defaulted to believing all women and not giving the accused males their day in “court”.

    Paul Montagu (b3f51b)

  11. Dana, you’re a good egg. The other moderators as well.

    Paul Montagu (b3f51b)

  12. From Morning Jolt:

    ADDENDUM: Joe Biden appeared on MSNBC’s Morning Joe this morning. When asked by Mika Brzezinski why he would not allow a search for Tara Reade’s name in his official Senate records and papers being kept at the University of Delaware . . . Biden simply didn’t answer and stared at the camera, in one of the more awkward silences you will ever hear.

    Can Paul MonTagu confirm?

    He says he did give an answer: “he agreed to open up Senate archives, and his comments about his records at the Univ of Delaware seem plausible.”

    His prepared statement says:

    …The papers from my Senate years that I donated to the University of Delaware do not contain personnel files. It is the practice of Senators to establish a library of personal papers that document their public record: speeches, policy proposals, positions taken, and the writing of bills.

    There is only one place a complaint of this kind could be – the National Archives. The National Archives is where the records are kept at what was then called the Office of Fair Employment Practices. I am requesting that the Secretary of the Senate ask the Archives to identify any record of the complaint she alleges she filed and make available to the press any such document. If there was ever any such complaint, the record will be there.

    Incidentally, I find it hard to believe that she did not consult a lawyer and/or PR person. Maybe she’s not paying anyone, and didn’t obligate herself to pay, but some of the things she did, like making a vague police report now, don’t sound like something she might think up by herself.

    And is she negotiating the terms of her appearance on Fox News Sunday (that would be how I take the reference to Chris Wallace in the New York Post story) all by herself? No agent? How many guests negotiate anything?

    Sammy Finkelman (af3697)

  13. This woman, Miss Reade, is not going to influence my vote for the next President of the United States.

    nk (1d9030)

  14. Mr. Biden… you’ve sniffed the hair of women, gotten handsy with them and made them feel uncomfortable. There are news reports that you swam naked in front of female Secret Service agents.

    Did you, or did you not, finger-f*ck Ms. Reade?

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  15. Can Paul MonTagu confirm?

    I did in my initial comment, when I said Biden was his “usual stumbling, in-eloquent self”. I’m not interested explicating how stumbling and in-eloquent he was, because I don’t like putting myself to sleep while tapping on a keyboard.

    Paul Montagu (b3f51b)

  16. “I did not have economic intercourse with that woman, Ms. Reade.”

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  17. Starting the thing with an apology… Brave Sir Mika!

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  18. Mika did not want to intimidate Biden the way the first reporter to whom Tara Reade told her story intimidated her.

    nk (1d9030)

  19. It sounds like Joe Biden forgot the answer.

    How long did it take him to remember that those records at the University of Delaware shouldn’t be expected to contain any complaint?

    Are his “Eenate archives” the same thing as the papers at the University of Delaware? Morning Jolt thinks that they are.

    Sammy Finkelman (af3697)

  20. Reading the full transcript of the interview and I missed this earlier:

    MB: Go ahead. The first is about your University of Delaware records. Do you agree with the reporting that those records were supposed to be revealed to the public, and then they were resealed for a longer period of time, until you leave, quote, public life? And if you agree with that, if that’s what happened, why did that happen?

    JB: Because look, the fact is that there’s a lot of things, of speeches I’ve made, positions I’ve taken, interviews that I did overseas with people, all of those things relating to my job, and the idea that they would all be made public in the fact while I was running for public office, they could be really taken out of context. They’re papers or position papers, they are documents that existed and that — when I met, for example, when I met with Putin or when I met with whomever, and all of that could be fodder in a campaign at this time. I don’t know of anybody who’s done anything like that. And so the National Archives is the only place there would be anything having to do with personnel records. There are no personnel records in the Biden papers at the university.

    So he is not quite the “open book” he claims to be. Not when there is an election at hand. Why shouldn’t all of these papers be accessible and available for scrutiny? Why wouldn’t he wouldn’t complete transparency to erase any doubts voters might have? Every politician and political campaign takes things out of context, cherry picks to their advantage, etc. It’s part of the game. But this is a former vice-president who wants to ascend to the presidency. Shouldn’t everything be open for examination – especially when it involves an allegation of sexual assault?

    Dana (0feb77)

  21. My thought too. Where’s the supposed transparency? He’s gonna have to open those records up, or the questions about it/them will not stop. This thing is going to get uglier.

    JRH (52aed3)

  22. So he is not quite the “open book” he claims to be. Not when there is an election at hand. Why shouldn’t all of these papers be accessible and available for scrutiny? Why wouldn’t he wouldn’t complete transparency to erase any doubts voters might have? Every politician and political campaign takes things out of context, cherry picks to their advantage, etc. It’s part of the game. But this is a former vice-president who wants to ascend to the presidency. Shouldn’t everything be open for examination – especially when it involves an allegation of sexual assault?

    I absolutely agree that he should open his records.

    He’s no saint, he’s been a career politician for years and is *at best* no less corrupt than average.

    If he had any Comedic sense at all he’d have closed with “But I think transparency is generally a good thing. I’ll open the whole library up the same day as Trump releases the last 7 years of tax records for him and the trump organization.”

    Time123 (53ef45)

  23. He’s got a problem. Disorder. he *cannot* keep his hands off people, especially females, and especially young females. Add to that the smelling and creepy murmuring, and I mean. They had to have known this was going to be an issue.

    JRH (52aed3)

  24. JoeyBee is a documented plagiarist; plagiarism is a tell of character:

    A plagiarist is not a person of “integrity.”

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  25. DCSCA, what is fascinating about this election is that anybody saying either Trump or Biden are men of character are automatically identified as total hacks. You’re right that Biden is not a great man. But I don’t think anyone is seriously arguing that he is.

    It’s surreal.

    He’s got a problem. Disorder. he *cannot* keep his hands off people, especially females, and especially young females. Add to that the smelling and creepy murmuring, and I mean. They had to have known this was going to be an issue.

    JRH (52aed3) — 5/1/2020 @ 9:12 am

    I agree.

    But is this election a referendum on Joe Biden? I guess we’ll see.

    Dustin (e5f6c3)

  26. Biden takes a difficult position to defend… https://twitter.com/ByronYork/status/1256196982756032512

    He’d like to have all the info sealed that has a direct bearing on his fitness for office.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  27. The Obama Administration, with support from Biden, strongly encouraged colleges and universities to tilt their procedures regarding sexual assault in favor of the accuser.

    This is an inaccurate characterization.

    They said disposition of harassment complaints should be based on the preponderance of the evidence.

    That ’tilts the procedures’ in favor of the side that offers more credible evidence, not the accuser.

    Dave (1bb933)

  28. what is fascinating about this election is that anybody saying either Trump or Biden are men of character are automatically identified as total hacks. You’re right that Biden is not a great man. But I don’t think anyone is seriously arguing that he is.

    Dems clearly don’t have an airtight case for “Our guy’s not pervy or corrupt, like your guy.” But Trumpsters are hardly credible when they purport to be offended by Biden’s character issues or “trouble with truth,” and then act outraged at those who point to Trump’s pathologies, and say that such people are superficial or elitist to be concerned about “personality” or “style.”

    If people say “they’re both disgraceful human beings, but one has policies more in line with my views,” that’s a reasonable take.

    But many voters appear to be thinking: “One of those guys is not as deeply dishonest, self-centered, callous, petty, vindictive, erratic and loony as the other guy.” And those people will probably vote Biden — not because they admire him, but because Donald Trump is so uniquely horrible.

    Radegunda (539c00)

  29. I’ll repeat, it’s the perfect time to replace Biden with Amy Klobachar, or John Kasich. And the Republicans can replace Trump with anyone, there are 25M newly unemployed that are more qualified and available.

    Colonel Klink (Ret) (305827)

  30. If Biden were politically smart, he would turn this thing around and make it about Trump, by making this statement/demand:

    “I’ve asked [fill in credible persons’ name here] to play the role of special masters and look through all my records at the University of Delaware, to look for one thing: Any reference whatsoever to Ms. Reade. They would serve a similar role as the special master at Michael Cohen’s trial, where they looked through his workpapers and decided which of them was privileged and which involved his efforts as Trump’s fixer. So here’s a message to you, Donald Trump, I’m putting it all out there, jack.”
    “And what’s more, so there’s complete transparency on both sides, I’m asking–no, we’re all demanding–, that Donald Trump release all the women from his Non-Disclosure Agreements. Let them speak out. It’s time for the truth to come out and let the chips fall. No malarkey, no balderdash!”

    Or something like that.

    Paul Montagu (b3f51b)

  31. I want the putin transcript

    mg (8cbc69)

  32. I want the putin transcript

    Of Flynn’s cozy Kremlin dinner with him?

    Dave (1bb933)

  33. because Donald Trump is so uniquely horrible.

    Radegunda (539c00) — 5/1/2020 @ 9:54 am

    We’re seeing a lot of attempts to get traction on Biden. Biden should release a lot of documents (from folks who don’t think Trump should release his tax returns). Biden acted sketchy and creepy (from folks who don’t mind that Trump boasted to Howard Sterm that he peeped on teenaged pageant contestants getting dressed). Biden speaks in word salad (from folks who defend the secret genius of Trump’s injection therapies). The interesting thing is that Trump’s fans are right about all the things they ask of Biden, but they don’t seem to learning anything from this.

    For all their ‘why can’t the MSM see its folly with Kavanaugh’ they don’t ever stop and say ‘you know, maybe Trump’s approach didn’t make America great again’.

    Dustin (e5f6c3)

  34. It’s amazing that it took Joe Biden for liberals to admit that the treatment of Kavanaugh by the Dems and the media was shameful…..

    Just don’t look at what those same people were saying at the time…..
    _

    harkin (8f4a6f)

  35. I want the putin transcript

    Which of the 16? Or all of ’em?

    Paul Montagu (b3f51b)

  36. Another thing I note from reading the transcript: Biden mentions that news organizations were unable to find any staffers that could corroborate Reade’s allegations, but neglected to mention that there were those who did corroborate Reade’s allegations of sexual assault. Well coached, skilled manuever.

    Dana (0feb77)

  37. Republicans can replace Trump with anyone, there are 25M newly unemployed that are more qualified and available.

    That idea shouldn’t be too objectionable to the Trump fans who rail against the folly of “experts” vs. the wisdom of ordinary Americans (or is it the wisdom of Fox talkers?), and who have quoted with approval W.F. Buckley’s “I would rather be governed by the first 2000 names in the Boston phone book … ”

    OTOH, they’ve also insisted that Trump is uniquely competent to save America, and have never questioned his “I alone can fix it” posture.

    It’s hard to reconcile those two viewpoints.

    Radegunda (539c00)

  38. That ’tilts the procedures’ in favor of the side that offers more credible evidence, not the accuser.

    Yeah, right. It’s who called the cops; who’s the frail flower; who’s the practiced liar; and don’t you dare call that lady a slut and a liar!

    nk (1d9030)

  39. They said disposition of harassment complaints should be based on the preponderance of the evidence.
    That ’tilts the procedures’ in favor of the side that offers more credible evidence, not the accuser.

    The institutional practice sometimes comes down to “We’d better punish the guy, or we’ll lose federal funding.” USC expelled someone on the grounds of a 3rd-hand complaint, even though the woman who was alleged to have been assaulted was adamant that no such assault ever happened. The university told her to shut up.

    Radegunda (539c00)

  40. Dems are calling in the experts to put out this fire:

    Richard N Komi [Member, NH House Of Representatives]
    @KomiRichard
    ·
    Judging by the position of the female vagina, it will not be easy for anyone to just put their finger into the vagina unless their is some Cooperation from the female herself. That is why I believe Tara Reade’s allegations is false. She is looking for attention.
    _

    Just a feeling but I’m thinking that one won’t age well.
    _

    harkin (9a8c5f)

  41. Dana (0feb77) — 5/1/2020 @ 11:15 am

    Another thing I note from reading the transcript: Biden mentions that news organizations were unable to find any staffers that could corroborate Reade’s allegations, but neglected to mention that there were those who did corroborate Reade’s allegations of sexual assault.

    You mean people who were not staffers?

    The corroboration consists of claims that, several years later, Tara Reade told them something.

    Sammy Finkelman (af3697)

  42. in the interview i thought slow joe said he had a conversation with putin

    mg (8cbc69)

  43. In 2014, the Obama administration issued another guidance for colleges which expanded what “sexual violence” could include, citing “a range of behaviors that are unwanted by the recipient and include remarks about physical appearance; persistent sexual advances that are undesired by the recipient; unwanted touching; and unwanted oral, anal, or vaginal penetration or attempted penetration.” By that standard, ignoring the Reade allegation entirely, Joe Biden has been practicing “sexual violence” for decades.

    https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020/05/andrew-sullivan-by-bidens-own-standards-he-is-guilty.html

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  44. “Hey, come on…I thought you were into me…. you’re nothing…you’re nothing”. That’s what Reade claims Biden said to her when rebuffed. That sounds like Biden, doesn’t it? We’ve heard and seen him talk to voters the same way during his campaign stops.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  45. Here’s the definition of “rape” from the DOJ:

    “The penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”

    https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/blog/updated-definition-rape

    So when Mika B. asked Biden the question, even though she graphically described the allegation, she did not use the appropriate word: “rape”.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  46. you’re nothing…you’re nothing”. That’s what Reade claims Biden said to her when rebuffed. That sounds like Biden, doesn’t it? We’ve heard and seen him talk to voters the same way during his campaign stops.

    Sounds an awful lot like Trump. But it’s okay when Trump does it, right?

    Radegunda (539c00)

  47. Sounds more like you are pleased with Biden’s actions over several decades.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  48. Leviticus (06f2e0) — 5/1/2020 @ 7:46 am

    Remember how much flack Biden got from the left for his treatment of Anita Hill during the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings?

    He didn’t get flack at the time, on;y in the last few years, because most of the people who saw the hearings believed Clarence Thomas and did not believe Anita Hill.

    Sammy Finkelman (af3697)

  49. Sounds an awful lot like Trump. But it’s okay when Trump does it, right?

    It does sound an awful lot like Trump. And it sounds an awful lot like Biden. Blame it on the time period they came up in, when women were supposed to take unwanted advances and more, and society gave powerful men tacit permission to do that. Or maybe they’re just both gigantic asses who need to be held accountable.

    Dana (0feb77)

  50. Lol at the lefty news heads declaring there is no double standard in the treatment of Kavanaugh vs Biden.

    They think no one has a memory.

    Kind of incredible they still fail to realize this kinda stuff is what got Trump elected.
    _

    harkin (8f4a6f)

  51. OT… in virus news… Just talked with one of our sons… he tells me they’d converted Sleep Train arena (the old Arco Arena) into a covid hospital with 400 beds, and it has had one patient… one of his friends with the State that worked on the project was just telling him it is costing $500k a month operating costs to keep it going.

    Colonel Haiku (2601c0)

  52. Jen Psaki
    @jrpsaki
    ·
    stop just stop anyone who is buying into GOP point that there is a double standard with Dr. Ford. Kavanaugh hid behind GOP trying to silence her, @JoeBiden just did an interview and has ordered all records released
    __ _

    Guy Benson
    @guypbenson
    ·
    The double standard is so obvious that no amount of gaslighting will work. Kavanaugh did a nationally televised interview and endured hours of sworn public testimony. And the FBI conducted follow-up interviews that uncovered witness tampering by Ford allies.
    __ _

    harkin (8f4a6f)

  53. And how does that double standard tend to make either woman’s accusation more or less likely true, Mr. harkin? That is the real question. The lefty news’ double standard is irrelevant.

    nk (1d9030)

  54. Sounds more like you are pleased with Biden’s actions over several decades.

    Where have I expressed any such approval of Biden?
    But nice try in evading the obvious point that your description of Biden is even more applicable to Trump

    Radegunda (539c00)

  55. There are DOZENS of women who have said that Trump assaulted them or otherwise treated them inappropriately. And Trump himself boasted openly about being “allowed” to barge in on teenage girls in a state of undress.

    Anyone who has ever held Trump’s behavior to be irrelevant to his fitness for office cannot honestly be offended by handsy Joe Biden. It’s just hypocritical posturing.

    Radegunda (539c00)

  56. Sounds more like you are pleased with Biden’s actions over several decades.

    Forgot the quote formatting in #56.

    Radegunda (539c00)

  57. The best I’ve said about Joe Biden is that he’s not as horrible a human being as Donald Trump. And that’s a pretty low bar to clear.

    Radegunda (539c00)

  58. Channeling Nelson Mandela— or Bob Packwood, eh JoeyBee: “It is not true. I am saying unequivocally — it never, never happened, and it didn’t. It never happened.”

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  59. @60. Very Creepy. On the other hand, Joe at least doesn’t visit his creepiness on his own family, so far as we know. Trump repeatedly hits on and remarks on the sexual viability of his own daughter. Crickets from the supposed “family values” crowd.

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EW2gsQEWoAcFkQL?format=jpg&name=900×900

    JRH (52aed3)

  60. Those are the Trumpkins’ “family values”, JRH.

    nk (1d9030)

  61. So when Mika B. asked Biden the question, even though she graphically described the allegation, she did not use the appropriate word: “rape”.

    Now do “grab ’em by the p*ssy”.

    Dave (1bb933)

  62. Hm:

    “I remember walking into the lobby and being in awe of all the people in such fancy clothes,” Murry said in an interview. “Our two parties of people gravitated towards each other and everyone started saying their hellos. When it was Biden and my aunt’s turn to say hello he quickly turned to me and asked how old I was. I replied with my age and he replied with the comment ‘Fourteen? You’re very well endowed for 14!’ I was confused but it was definitely weird, he looked me up and down and hovered his eyes on my chest so I had some clue [about] the notion of his comment but didn’t fully understand at the time. We quickly separated from his area after the encounter.”

    Dana (0feb77)

  63. Dana (0feb77) — 5/1/2020 @ 10:21 pm

    If Biden did that, it was crude, boorish, and inappropriate. So, pretty much what we’ve come to expect.

    But calling it sexual harassment seems to me an exaggeration.

    According to the definition on the Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission website:

    Although the law doesn’t prohibit simple teasing, offhand comments, or isolated incidents that are not very serious, harassment is illegal when it is so frequent or severe that it creates a hostile or offensive work environment or when it results in an adverse employment decision (such as the victim being fired or demoted).

    Dave (1bb933)

  64. Dave,

    First, it didn’t involve the workplace, and second, the girl was a 14 year old minor.

    Dana (0feb77)

  65. Yes, Dana. But “sexual harassment” has a well-established legal meaning, and I don’t think Biden’s alleged behavior in this case comes close to meeting it.

    That doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be criticized if it happened. But calling an isolated tasteless remark made in passing “sexual harassment” seems to me to trivialize the term, and the offense itself.

    Dave (1bb933)

  66. “I remember walking into the lobby and being in awe of all the people in such fancy clothes,” Murry said in an interview. “Our two parties of people gravitated towards each other and everyone started saying their hellos. When it was Biden and my aunt’s turn to say hello he quickly turned to me and asked how old I was. I replied with my age and he replied with the comment ‘Fourteen? You’re very well endowed for 14!’ I was confused but it was definitely weird, he looked me up and down and hovered his eyes on my chest so I had some clue [about] the notion of his comment but didn’t fully understand at the time. We quickly separated from his area after the encounter.”

    If it’s a lie it’s an amazingly good one, because I can’t not see Biden saying that. Totally gets to the root of what feels off about him.

    Dustin (e5f6c3)

  67. Agreed, Dustin. There is extensive video footage of Biden touching women and young girls in an inappropriate manner. There is no doubt in my mind that he has a history of more extensive sexual harassment off camera, and it is not at all difficult for my to believe that he has a history of sexual assault as well. Reade’s allegations don’t ring untrue to me.

    It will be an incredibly difficult decision in November if Biden is the anything more than the ticket’s figurehead. I’m the meantime, I will not waste the slightest hint of breath defending him.

    Leviticus (6159e1)

  68. I deeply appreciate the moral clarity that Dana has continued to bring in her coverage of this particular topic.

    Leviticus (6159e1)

  69. One major point: the latest accusation is that the esteemed Mr Biden made a creepy comment about a woman’s breasts when she was only 14-years-old. This may be true, not that there is any way to prove or disprove it, but the woman making the claim is the niece of Christine O’Donnell, the Republican nominee for the US Senate against Mr Biden in 2008, and the TEA Party candidate who upset Representative Mike Castle (R-DE) for the GOP Senate nomination in 2010, effectively handing the seat to Democrat Chris Coons.

    She may be telling the truth, but she has a partisan political reason to make the claim.

    The Dana in Kentucky (a2adc1)

  70. Right, right – and if it had been this lady’s friend who was accusing Biden, it would have been “she is the friend of the niece of Christine O’Donnell!!” and so on and so forth.

    The people of this country are incredibly blinkered by their ill-conceived and servile partisanship.

    Leviticus (6159e1)

  71. Nothing partisan about what Dana in Kentucky just said. He is a Trump supporter and no friend of Biden.

    Me, I had a lot more reason to believe Christine Blasey Ford, a neuroscientist, than I do to believe Tara Reade, a lawyer and political hanger-on. Who does look like a witch. Who eats children. Tara Reade that is.

    nk (1d9030)

  72. It’s a blinkered partisan lens that assumes that a familial relation to Christine O’Donnell has any impact on the credibility of an allegation like this one.

    Leviticus (06f2e0)

  73. If she was doing making these allegations for the benefit of Christine O’Donnell, it would have been better strategy to do so before Christine O’Donnell became a political punchline.

    Leviticus (06f2e0)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.4309 secs.