A
similar argument was used in the Harvey Weinstein case. Of course, this doesn't mean that this behavior should be completely dismissed when evaluating this case.
Throughout history victims of sexual assault who were dependent in some way to a more powerful abuser would sometimes consent to some kind of relationship later and even speak positively about the dear leader. Sometimes they meant it in a sort of Stockholm Syndrome scenario.
Tara Reade was no beholden to Biden in any way after she left her job as a Senate aide.
Not sure about the 'up until a month ago'. Several months ago she alluded on Twitter that when she first came out she did not tell her whole story (I cannot find the tweet currently, unfortunately). Also she tried to get help from
Time's Up, as well as the
Warren and Harris campaign (I'm not finding the timestamp, unfortunately, but it's confirmed
here). All three of those did not support her request for help.
It also appeared she went on Dr Phil in 2019 claiming Vladamir Putin was in love with her
Thread by @blakesmustache: Thread: Is Tara Reade “Jennifer” who appeared on the Dr. Phil Show in late 2019 claiming Putin was in love with her and that she was getting…
She also claimed she would be coming forward with something that would help Putin.
Indeed, the timing is weird and it should definitely be further examined! However, the blog post before the edits does not diminish her assault allegations.
It is possible she was lying before, but with the preponderance of other evidence, her story is sketchy. I can't find it now, my SO came across something written by someone who knew Reade in the 90s. At the time Reade had a scuzzy boyfriend that the writer did not like at all. At the time Reade told her friend that her boyfriend had assaulted her exactly the way she now claims Biden did.
When I read her account, she was describing the acts of a practiced sexual predator. The moves are those of someone who has done that many times before and knows exactly what he's doing. Biden has been a public figure for 50 years and this is the only story of a sexual assault I've ever heard. I heard creepy stories about Harvey Weinstein and Bill Cosby years before there were any court cases and many stories started coming forward about Trump and Brett Kavanaugh when they became political news. There were many of them and they were consistent.
Thus far Tara Reade is the only story about Biden and her description is that of someone very practiced. So in this "me too" era, where are the other allegation?
That's not exactly true, she was an
Elizabeth Warren supporter (13:30 in the video). Only once the options were Bernie vs. Biden was when she supported Bernie.
OK, but it does appear she was looking for a more liberal candidate than Biden.
She said that she got into the Russian history and culture of the
70's and 80's (18:10 in the video) and now calls her blog post miss-informed (18:50 in the video).
It appears she went on Dr Phil with a story of having a love affair with Putin. (see link above)
Again, I'm not saying that this part of her history carries no weight but what I'm advocating for is that both person's histories should be examined! If a weird blog post about Putin is somehow relevant to the argument, then I think Biden's history should also be considered.
In particular, Biden's absurd history of outrageous lies. He
lied about his academic record and plagiarized speeches which was literally the reason he dropped out of his first presidential campaign. He lied about the death of his wife and daughter saying that the
truck driver was driving under the influence. So not only did the driver have to deal with the traumatic experience of the accident, he also had to experience Biden publicly telling lies about him. In the current campaign, he lied about
being arrested while seeing Nelson Mandela and that Mandela personally thanked him. This is particularly concerning because Biden played the exact opposite role during the Civil Rights era. There are many other lies that I did not mention here.
Biden has been known to make things up and exaggerate, but I'm not really listening to him much in this case. The accused is highly likely to claim innocence whether they are guilty or innocent. I'm looking at the other evidence.
Also, the comment did not include mentions about any corroborating evidence such as Reade's
mother calling Larry King to talk about Tara having a problem with the senator;
friends, her brother, and her former neighbor saying that she told them about the incident. And former interns confirming her story that she
suddenly was removed from her position as managing the interns.
I have seen the Larry King clip. It may or may not be Tara Reade's mother and all she says is that her daughter has an issue with a US Senator. And I believe she claims the incident happened in the late summer of 1993, which was just before her internship ended, which would be a reason to be removed from that position.
Her allegations of retaliation may or may not have happened, but it's currently impossible to prove.
No one of us would enjoy being in the position of Tara Reade or Christine Blasey Ford. For instance, Tara Reade's social
security number got leaked and she is receiving death threats.
There are always nutters out there attacking people, and that's wrong. Nobody should ever be subject of attack for coming forward. The merits of the case should be weighed and decided on the merits.
I do not know myself what to believe, yet. I understand the frustration and the arguments on both sides. Of course I have my own political ideology and it is extremely hard to remove this ideology when talking about such sensitive and important topics.
Lastly, I'm not advocating that no one is allowed to vote for Biden because of this. If someone says that they believe Reade and will still support Biden to note enable Trump, this is a perfectly logical position. So is the position, after applying the same standards as with Kavanaugh, to say that the current data is not sufficient to not believe Biden.
Years ago I heard the mantra on a radio show: have an open, but not gaping mind. Tara Reade strikes me as someone who has been victim of sexual assault, but I don't see strong evidence that Biden did anything more than his usual overly touchy feely thing.
With very rare exceptions people's behavior follows predictable patterns. Even people with rare conditions like a severe personality disorder or a violent psychopath serial killer have patterns to their behavior.
Sexual assault tends to fall into patterns too. Some men may have one or a few sexual assaults when they are young and possibly abusing some kind of drug (including alcohol), but they stop as they grow older. Brett Kavanaugh appears to fit this pattern. There are multiple stories about assaults he did as a teen and into his 20s, but they stop at that point.
Then there are men who have a lifelong pattern like Harvey Weinstein, Jeffrey Epstein, Bill Cosby, and Donald Trump. These men started early, and continued throughout most of their lives. All of them had stories about their assaults circulating for years before anything came forward. In each of these cases victims have come forward with consistent stories that don't have holes.
Tara Reade's story has changed over the years, which could be due to being afraid to come forward with the full story earlier, but it could also be due to her making parts of it up. She describes the acts of a practiced sexual predator, yet there are no other similar stories about Biden out there.
I take every story of sexual assault seriously and I think every story should get a fair hearing. But that doesn't mean every story is true.
The Dems have again set themselves up by fielding a likely, but not strongest candidate with sincere popular support. It's deja vu 2016 all over again. (I know, reredundent.) What about Newsom as a surprise compromiser? Lots of experience as an executive. Much more so than a v.p. A lot more than Obama! who got snookered by the brilliance of Larry Summers. And even better, Newsom probably doesn't want it because it's a safer bet later.
Y'all know I'm in favor of the draft.
You silicon valley guys should mobilize about Newsom. I can see the posters now. "Newsom/Warren, don't worry about it, we've got you covered." "Democracy for all of us, not Populism for the few," "Newsom from California, where oranges are a fruit," "Covid-19, a perfect disease for Trump," "Putin Loves Trump," "Vote again for Russia, Re-elect Trump," "Remember when the doctors were always right?," "Bring sanity back to politics without hate." Some of these are ambiguous but still.... Give us your ten minute version.
I don't think it's a good idea to nominate any sitting governor right now. Newsom is bogged down 100% with COVID-19 and he shouldn't be distracted from that. Andrew Cuomo said as much when he was asked about the nomination.
The fact of the matter is there is no perfect Democrat eligible this year.
A former student, now a colleague, teaching a ROTC class asked me to talk years ago. I remember mentioning a British general who said something like, the unique point of a military career is to die for your country. (The way he said it made more sense than this memory.) The cadets didn't like that.
This is one of those things that for most people is so deeply ingrained they have never thought about it and I usually catch flak for bringing it up, but I've never quite understood blind patriotism. I can understand the desire to protect your home from attack and that can be expanded to the larger context of the country you live in. But if your country really isn't at risk, why die for it?
Of course the powers that be don't want people to think about that too much because it would make it more difficult to get young people to go out there and die for whatever cause the country is going to war for today.
