2020 Presidential Primaries

The list of Republicans cited above is not calling Trump out as an alleged sexual assailant. Rather, they are reacting to the grab-em tape. They gave no craps about the possibility that he has actually perpetrated sexual assault, just that he might lose because he used crass language. Point me to a single one of those people who called for an investigation of whether or not Trump has in fact sexually assaulted any of the women who have accused him.

The guy is running for the highest office in the land and likes sniffing and licking people. While the DNC is deciding which person to run for president it might be the time to speak up about these things? You are such a malignant snot. Yes, this would be the precise time people who have complaints about Joe biden, or Bernie, or Trump, or anyone else running for president should come forward. If that is being political then it is time to be political because it is a political election you fucking dolt.

While @spot261 can better speak to this from a professional standpoint, people with emotional trauma often behave in rather unexpected ways in regards to their abusers. I've known a number of people who suffered severe physical and/or emotional abuse who have suddenly flipped their statements about their abusers. Some of them have gone from denying that they were ever abused, to then laying out in graphic detail the kind of abuse that they were subjected to. While others have suddenly stopped claiming that they were abused and downplay every incident that happened to them if it's brought up.

Mind you, in the case of some of these people, I've been a witness to some of the abuse that they were subjected to, and I know just how awful it was, yet they now deny it was abuse. Or they try to wave it away with a, "He didn't really mean it." response. You can argue that when somebody says something cruel in a fit of anger (though I think we can all agree that no matter how angry you are, certain things should never be said to a person), but when it comes to punching a woman or shoving the fingers of a 15-year-old boy into spinning lawnmower blades, that excuse doesn't hold water.

That's the same friggin thing you idiot. They are reacting to Trumps bragging about assaulting women. Or do you have a different definition for what grabbing them by the pussy is?

He's the party nominee for President and those republicans denounced him immediately after. Show me a Democrat in office who is doing the same for Biden.

Those accusations didn't surface until after the access Hollywood tape aired. But nice attempt at moving the goal posts. Far as I'm concerned both politicians are not worthy of public office and those who defend them have no moral high ground to stand on. But I do enjoy watching you try to spin yourselves as morally superior people while defending a politician who at best is a senile old man who can't keep his hands to himself.

So far the only WFer who's a declared Biden Bro is @Ancalagon. You're pissing into the wind.

What? Really?
Because to me the only confirmed Bernie Bro is you.

I said "Biden Bro," knucklehead.

Totally glossed right over that.

Your error? I was trying to be kind and overlook it.

Biden was neither my first nor my second choice. Right now I'm hoping your hypothesis is right and he's just a placeholder. But if he's a stand-in for Kamala Harris...

You got that right, fat..jack.

Hey, I'm just taking Joe's advice to go vote for someone else.

There is a difference between saying someone should drop out because they think that sexual assault allegations are possibly true (which is what the Democrats who are asking for Biden are doing, for the most part) versus saying should step down because they don't think that the person can win in the face of sexual assault allegations. Trump had allegations of sexual assault against him well before the Access Hollywood tape. No one as far as I know said purely based on the sexual assault allegations that were out there. Rather, (or at least, I believe) they were saying he should step down because they thought he would lose. Prior to Trump proving them wrong, it seemed like a death sentence. When he managed to win the presidency, none of the people (as far as I know) cared about the sexual assault allegations themselves.

Admittedly, I do not know of anyone in office who is saying that Biden should step down because of the Reade allegations. I'm fairly sure I could find some officeholders who say that the allegations should be investigated, though, if it were worth my while. Which is again, more than Republicans did with the allegations against Trump. And between now and the nomination, I would not be surprised if some publicly say that Biden should step aside.

Finally, I'm not trying to spin the left as morally superior based on the notion tha tsome might want Biden to step down. I was disputing the notion that the left is in lockstep. Which again, I don't think is any more true of the left than it is of the right if you are talking about Democrats as the Left versus Republicans on the Right. You don't have Democrats denouncing other Democrats as DINOs for example.

Bullshit.

(gotta say, not seeing that I'm missing any spike in sanity around here)

You're back! I was worried about you. Hope everything is OK.

No, we tried to grow a new brain but @Max Rebo walked by and it spontaneously combusted.

Memes and hashtags are cool and everything, but neither Joe Biden nor as far as I know anyone on the left has ever meant that all women must believed at all times and all aspects of their allegations regardless of what the evidence is and regardless of what the contradictions in her account might be.

Nothing about this suggests that it is not a rebuttable presumption. No one would say that you should still believe Tawana Brawley or the woman who claimed she was sexually assaulted by the Duke lacrosse team years ago. Their stories unravelled. They were liars. Other women may be mistaken in their memories, while the essence of what they remember is true.

In the case of Reade, it is possible that things happened as Reade now says they did: Biden pushed her up against a wall, started kissing her and put his finger(s) in her vagina. It's possible that Biden's denial is accurate and nothing of the sort happened. Some sort of middle ground is possible where Biden did make a physical pass at Reade but stopped short of penetrating her. (I suppose it is also possible that Reade has downplayed what actually happened, and Biden did more than put his fingers in her vagina and stopping when she told him to.)

It is difficult in cases of alleged sexual assault because scrutinizing stories puts one in the position where you are potentially retraumatizing a victim rather than uncovering falsehood, and many of the things that might be taken as signs of falsehood (memory gaps, inconsistent stories, wlward affects) coincide with effects of sexual trauma.

"Why won't they vote for Joe Biden?" ask people who have been repeatedly told for over a year why many leftists will not vote for Joe Biden.

Oh, and I thought this was something neat:



It could be a simple slip of the tongue, just a miswording, but I still find it interesting enough to post here, because I'm bored and I've locked all of the doors to the Red Room.

Probably just a slip of the tongue but still funny.

Presented without comment:


PBS Talked to 74 Ex-Biden Staffers About Allegations

In a bit of irony, a Trump PAC called "drain the swamp" has released a Facebook ad critical of Biden in regards to women. Can't find it on youtube but it's playing on social media right now. The ad even goes so far as to try and draw a connection between Biden and Harvey Weinstein and of course mentions the whole Tara Reade affair.

You "can't even find it on YouTube," but you by God believe it. Aren't you special?

What about the 75th one? What did she have to say?

There are several different answers to that question, depending on the date.

https://draindcswamppac.com/our-ads/

Amash says...nope.

Smooth answer, Lindsey.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opin...ies-not-credible-kavanaugh-column/1497661002/

Not to nitpick, but it's an opinion that was printed in USA Today rather than USA Today's own opinion. It is the opinion of a lawyer who teaches as an adjunct at Notre Dame.

She lists four contradictions in Ford's account:
1. Ford said that the assault happened in the summer of 1982 but her therapist notes and a text message said it happened in the mid-80s.
2. Ford may have said different things about how many were involved in the alleged attack (though her explanation is that the notes of her therapist were confused)
3. Ford said that the party occurred near the country club but later said it occured not as near the country club
4. Ford described the interior of the house where the assault allegedly occurred different ways.

That's the best she could come up with after news accounts and lengthy testimony under oath, including questioning by a hostile attorney.

Pretty weak sauce IMO. All explainable by time and none of which goes to the substance of the accusation or Ford's general credibility. I should point out that Ford passed a polygraph.

By contrast, here's just some of what I would point out is contradictory about Reade's allegations.

1. Reade and at least one friend told various newspapers about a year ago that Biden sexually harassed her and specifically ruled out sexual assault. In fact, the friend who was serving as corroboration specifically said that Biden never kissed her. Now Reade is of course saying that Bidem kissed her and digitally penetrated her.

2. When she updated her accusations to include sexual assault, Reade was asked why she had not said originally she had been sexually assaulted. Her original response was that the reporter she spoke to from a small California paper didn't seem receptive to the sexual assault allegations. It now turns out she had spoken not only to that reporter, but reporters from the NYT, the Washington Post, the AP, Vox and other outlets last year.

https://www.salon.com/2020/03/31/a-...-hell-breaks-loose-online-heres-what-we-know/

https://www.vox.com/2020/5/7/21248713/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-accusation

3. When she spoke to the AP last year, she said that she had "chickened out" of making a formal written complaint about the harassment she suffered. Now she is of course saying that she did make such a complaint.

https://apnews.com/aec7beb03e9e0e0e6e3c58111293e0ea

4. In her Megan Kelly interview, Reade said she did not have a lawyer. She definitely had an attorney a day after that interview aired, and I think it is fairly a safe bet that the attorney represented her before the interview.

5. Reade has voluntarily said or tweeted various positive things about Biden, including about his efforts to address sexual assault. Seems odd behavior to do about someone who sexually assaulted you.

6. Reade is now saying she was fired in retaliation for complaining about sexual harassment/assault. She previously wrote online that she left DC out of love of Russia.

(see the Salon link above).

That's putting aside the odd "I love Russia" behavior, the campaigning for other candidates, the timing of the allegation (waiting until after Biden basically had the nomination sewn up to come forward as opposed to last year or January), and her apparently having a history of cheating landlords.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/05/15/tara-reade-left-trail-of-aggrieved-acquaintances-260771

None of the alleged contradictions Ford is guilty of is close to the inconsistencies with Reade. If someone said Reade belonged to a group dedicated to fighting conservative judges, spoke glowingly about Kavanaugh in other contexts, changed her story about what Kavanaugh did in some fundamental way (say, from catcalling her to attempted gang rape, or from attempted rape to actual rape), people would be laughed at for believing her.

I don't see how someone could attempt to apply the "Ford is lying because of these inconsistencies" approach and not also conclude that Reade is lying.