(03-26-2020 06:59 AM)Eldonabe Wrote: I really hope it is not true. No woman should have to endure a sexual assault. If it is true however, the assaulter should be held accountable.
What would be awesome is of there was actual investigation and no rush to judgement (you know, like Kav's should have been). That said, where in Fuk are Harris and Pelosi, and Schumer etc.... with the "I believe her" statements.
Unfortunately this is one of those things you'd never be able to "prove" one way or the other. The reporter who wrote about this for the Intercept did confirm she did work for Biden during this time period and she said she told her friend, her mom, and her brother at the time. Her mom is dead, but the reporter spoke to the friend and brother and they both confirmed she did tell them this at the time and that she seemed credible. Sadly that's all you'll ever get in this situation and then it's gonna be up to who sounds most believable about the story. Biden does have the advantage of now being able to say it didn't happen and because he can't remember it in his mind it didn't.
Fox News is very conveniently (and smartly IMO) ignoring this for now. Give it till around August or September if Biden hasn't dropped dead or dropped out.
(03-26-2020 06:59 AM)Eldonabe Wrote: I really hope it is not true. No woman should have to endure a sexual assault. If it is true however, the assaulter should be held accountable.
What would be awesome is of there was actual investigation and no rush to judgement (you know, like Kav's should have been). That said, where in Fuk are Harris and Pelosi, and Schumer etc.... with the "I believe her" statements.
Gilibrand? Where's Gilibrand, the great crusader for the womyns?
Quote:The Time's Up Legal Foundation will represent any woman accusing any man of sexual assault — unless the man in question is Joseph Robinette Biden, Jr.
"...You know who has talked publicly about the importance of taking women seriously? Biden. During the Brett Kavanaugh hearings, Biden stood up for Dr Christine Blasey Ford, noting: “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.”
Does this presumption not apply when the guy being accused is a Democrat running for president? It would seem that way. In January, according to reporting from the Intercept, Reade asked for help from the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund, which has supported accusers of high-profile people like Weinstein. Reade was reportedly told by the National Women’s Law Center, the organization within which the Time’s Up fund is housed, that it couldn’t assist with accusations against a presidential candidate because it would jeopardize their non-profit status...."
(This post was last modified: 03-29-2020 12:26 PM by bullet.)
"...You know who has talked publicly about the importance of taking women seriously? Biden. During the Brett Kavanaugh hearings, Biden stood up for Dr Christine Blasey Ford, noting: “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.”
Does this presumption not apply when the guy being accused is a Democrat running for president? It would seem that way. In January, according to reporting from the Intercept, Reade asked for help from the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund, which has supported accusers of high-profile people like Weinstein. Reade was reportedly told by the National Women’s Law Center, the organization within which the Time’s Up fund is housed, that it couldn’t assist with accusations against a presidential candidate because it would jeopardize their non-profit status...."
Enemy of my enemy is my friend. The far left and MAGA have both fully realized the game the corporately owned MSM is playing. Both have very different solutions to the issues, but both see the same issues and see who the real enemies to the American people are.
So you’re telling me that when vetting a justice nominee we were able to uncover alleged assaults from high school days that had little to no evidence but we vetted and allowed a man VP of our country when there was an alleged assault in Washington WHILE IN CONGRESS!?!?
(03-29-2020 02:49 PM)uofmcamaro Wrote: So you’re telling me that when vetting a justice nominee we were able to uncover alleged assaults from high school days that had little to no evidence but we vetted and allowed a man VP of our country when there was an alleged assault in Washington WHILE IN CONGRESS!?!?
One is a republican, the other is a democrat. Makes perfect sense.
(03-29-2020 02:49 PM)uofmcamaro Wrote: So you’re telling me that when vetting a justice nominee we were able to uncover alleged assaults from high school days that had little to no evidence but we vetted and allowed a man VP of our country when there was an alleged assault in Washington WHILE IN CONGRESS!?!?
One is a republican, the other is a democrat. Makes perfect sense.
The Dems only care about this #MeToo stuff when it's politically helpful to them. Obviously I don't think the GOP cares about it either, but they at least don't pretend to.
"...You know who has talked publicly about the importance of taking women seriously? Biden. During the Brett Kavanaugh hearings, Biden stood up for Dr Christine Blasey Ford, noting: “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.”
Does this presumption not apply when the guy being accused is a Democrat running for president? It would seem that way. In January, according to reporting from the Intercept, Reade asked for help from the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund, which has supported accusers of high-profile people like Weinstein. Reade was reportedly told by the National Women’s Law Center, the organization within which the Time’s Up fund is housed, that it couldn’t assist with accusations against a presidential candidate because it would jeopardize their non-profit status...."
Enemy of my enemy is my friend. The far left and MAGA have both fully realized the game the corporately owned MSM is playing. Both have very different solutions to the issues, but both see the same issues and see who the real enemies to the American people are.
Here's her first on air interview. I haven't watched it yet.
From the article with the link:
""...Tara says she tried to get her story out in other ways too," Krystal Ball reports. "She went to Elizabeth Warren's office and Kamala Harris as well. She got nothing back from Harris and a standard form letter from Warren. Two women who heavily ran on their gender and what their election would represent for women."
"Tara wasn't exactly hard to find after [Ryan Grim's article in The Intercept] and Katie Halper's podcast interview. [Listen below] I reached out to her on Twitter and heard back in minutes," she said. "I'll be honest, I didn't want "Rising" to be the first on-camera interview for Tara... I thought Tara deserved a full vetting and a fair hearing from a mainstream outlet."
"If a claim like this had been made against Bernie Sanders, or even Donald Trump, or another media villain like Edward Snowden, do you think the accuser would have any trouble getting press? Do you think it would fall to independent and alternative news to break the story if a woman who worked with Bernie in the 1990s made a credible claim of sexual assault? Do you think CNN and MSNBC would bury their heads in the sand? Every reporter in this town would be breaking down their door to be the first to tell that story....""
You wonder if these people are so flipping out of their minds they really believe this, or if its propaganda.
The scary answer is that I think its the former.
"...There's a reason why mainstream journalists such as Ronan Farrow of the New Yorker and Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey of the New York Times — all Pulitzer Prize winners for their meticulous coverage of the 2017 Harvey Weinstein investigation — are so careful when reporting allegations of sexual harassment and assault. (Salon is not addressing any individual outlet's choice not to cover this specific story, but the general considerations typically involved in such a decision.) It's not just about fairness to the accused, but also to the accusers. Women who tell these stories inevitably get blasted by skeptics who pick their stories apart, so it's critical to their safety that the reporting holds up under close scrutiny. That's only going to be more true when the story has major political implications or confusing twists that could be interpreted as red flags — or both, like this one does...."
"...Ford could not remember when or where her alleged assault happened; her family did not back her up; and there is no proof that Ford ever even met Kavanaugh.
By contrast, Reade claims that her alleged assault happened in 1993; her brother says that she told him at the time about it; and she used to work for Biden when Biden was a senator...."
Contrasts the Ford coverage vs. the Reade coverage, making the argument that Reade more deserved coverage. What makes the case that Salon (above article) is totally fos is the coverage of Ramirez and Avenatti's client. Wall to wall coverage of total nonsense.
(04-02-2020 09:34 AM)bullet Wrote: Maybe the NYT and WaPo could donate their paper to people who can't find toilet paper in the stores and do something useful for a change.
Cheap azz newspapers, particularly liberal ones, are known to cut their ink costs by illegally adding formaldehyde to the ink to thin it and save on overhead. Would you want that ink running off their rag and into your bunghole?
"...Ford could not remember when or where her alleged assault happened; her family did not back her up; and there is no proof that Ford ever even met Kavanaugh.
By contrast, Reade claims that her alleged assault happened in 1993; her brother says that she told him at the time about it; and she used to work for Biden when Biden was a senator...."
Contrasts the Ford coverage vs. the Reade coverage, making the argument that Reade more deserved coverage. What makes the case that Salon (above article) is totally fos is the coverage of Ramirez and Avenatti's client. Wall to wall coverage of total nonsense.
Yep. Let's be honest here just judging on the confirm-able pieces of the story (being he said-she said quite frankly you can never know for certain) Reade's story is so much more credible. Unlike Ford she has an exact timeline and location of where it happened, it's a verifiable fact that she did work for Biden, and the people she told at the time still back up that she told them. The fact that this has been outright ignored is shameful.