New Evidence Supporting Credibility Of Tara Reade's Allegation Against Joe Biden Emerges

[TexasTiger 12,888]

23 minutes ago, AUDub said:

For all intents and purposes, bordering on impossible.

This is the attempt to manufacture a "but her e-mails!" scenario for 2020. 

Exactly. It’s an effort to find anything else from 40 years in government to take out of context and harp on excessively.

[TexasTiger 12,888]

27 minutes ago, AUDub said:

My hackles went up immediately I saw the name Christine O'Donnell.

At least she’s not a witch. Look, anyone can forget which year they turned 14, right?

[AUDub 11,149]

"Hi I'm Kyle Kulinski and I give people brain worms."

 

These people are so hilariously transparent.

[DKW 86 7,425]

5 hours ago, AUDub said:

A formal complaint would not be there.

It is possible that there would be memos or meeting notes and the like where the issue was discussed at the time. 

Thank you...It is so freaking obvious but you know, we have some on here that are actually actively inflicting their stupidity on the world. 

[AUDub 11,149]

3 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

ABC spread that lie all across twitter.

Dan Abrams and Sasha Pezenik need to issue a formal apology immediately. 

[DKW 86 7,425]

Christine O'Donnell is one of those people in American politics that comes along every so often, like:

Julie Swetnick
Michael Avenatti
Alex Jones  (I literally cannot stand the sound of his voice.)
Rush Limbaugh (I literally cannot stand the sound of his voice.)
Sean Hannity  (I literally cannot stand the sound of his voice.)
Mark Levin (I literally cannot stand the sound of his voice.)

I know some of you think I am a closet Righty, I am not. Sometime about 2005, I just snapped. I just realized that 90% of what the Right talks about is just talk.  They dont mean a word of it. I dont listen to Fox, Hannity, Rush, Jones, Levin, ever.  I will and have gotten up and left a room or changed the dial whenever I have heard them on. There are nut jobs on the Left too. Several are here on this board. They have parked their brain and drunk the Kool-Aid, and i mean the whole damn Kool-aid pitcher, every drop, and tongued it dry. 

I force myself to evaluate everything I hear. And let me say this, I have no room in my life anymore for overblown rhetorical hyperbole. I just dont. People that say or listen to hyperbole are bound to eat their words almost 100% of the time. When everyone was attacking Kavanaugh, I do think he is a spoiled rotten rich kid that did indeed get away with something, even if the details are not proveable now, you just knew some of that over the top crap was coming back to haunt people like...Alyssa Milano. Etc. All the people that jumped all over the BK story, even tho there was not much actual proof nor corroboration from the witnesses, are now having to hear Tara Reade and her growing list of corroborating witnesses. Karma is bitch. 

Some here will be able to excuse anything Biden did. They do not care, he is not DJT and THAT is all that matters to them. Nothing else, truth, etc be damned. 
I supported Bernie, and he is off the table or so it looks. I think Biden is possibly the worst of all the Dem Candidates. Other than name recognition, I cant think if one reason to vote for him. Policy wise, he isnt far from Trump at all. In reality, we all know he will never be able to run for a second term, hell some here openly admit that Biden is a one time shot period. 

If he is as bad as I think he is, more will come out. And some here will find other excuses for supporting him just like some of the MAGA Crowd can excuse Trump. exactly the same way. Politics uber alles...sadly.

 

 

[AUDub 11,149]

2 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

Thank you...It is so freaking obvious but you know, we have some on here that are actually actively inflicting their stupidity on the world. 

This is very different from Ms. Reade's claim though. She claims the complaint is probably there. It almost certainly is not.

[AUDub 11,149]

*sigh*

 

[AUDub 11,149]

3 hours ago, AUDub said:

Dan Abrams and Sasha Pezenik need to issue a formal apology immediately. 

 

[AUDub 11,149]

6 minutes ago, AUDub said:

 

Ryan Grim absolutely beclowned himself on this one.

But the intercept has very little in the way of journalistic standards so I expect him to skate easily, apology or not. 

[DKW 86 7,425]

1 hour ago, AUDub said:

This is very different from Ms. Reade's claim though. She claims the complaint is probably there. It almost certainly is not.

I just want them to look.  Never going to happen, even with the corroborated witnesses. 

[AUDub 11,149]

21 minutes ago, DKW 86 said:

I just want them to look.

Follow me here, David.

This is exactly what they're aiming for in asking for these records. They're FUDding you and others with your mindset. All kinds of other stuff that could be passed off as dirt in there. It's a "heads I win, tails you lose" scenario against Biden, and there will be no record of a formal complaint there.

[alexava 6,973]

8 hours ago, AUDub said:

Follow me here, David.

This is exactly what they're aiming for in asking for these records. They're FUDding you and others with your mindset. All kinds of other stuff that could be passed off as dirt in there. It's a "heads I win, tails you lose" scenario against Biden, and there will be no record of a formal complaint there.

What is he inflicting on the world?

[Mikey 16,604]

15 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Exactly. It’s an effort to find anything else from 40 years in government to take out of context and harp on excessively.

This is what politics had become these days. Sadly, it's not going away any time soon, if ever. "So, Ms. Presidential Candidate, a fellow who claims to be your ex-boyfriend says he got you pregnant and you had an abortion 42 years ago, when you were age 15. Any truth to that? Care to open your lifetime medical records for public examination? No? Why not? What are you hiding?

[TexasTiger 12,888]

8 hours ago, DKW 86 said:

I just want them to look.  Never going to happen, even with the corroborated witnesses. 

Tara Reade strongly contradicts what she told the AP a year ago. This case doesn’t warrant turning over every rock when the accuser directly contradicts herself .

[Grumps 3,704]

One problem for Biden is that he got the nomination by being the anti-Trump - stable, grandfatherly, professional. In November he will be running more as Trump-Lite - not-so-stable but he can't help it  - potentially a pervert but not as much as Trump. Will people be fired up to vote for Trump-Lite?

[TexasTiger 12,888]

7 minutes ago, Grumps said:

One problem for Biden is that he got the nomination by being the anti-Trump - stable, grandfatherly, professional. In November he will be running more as Trump-Lite - not-so-stable but he can't help it  - potentially a pervert but not as much as Trump. Will people be fired up to vote for Trump-Lite?

That’s the Republican strategy.

[homersapien 11,374]

15 minutes ago, Grumps said:

One problem for Biden is that he got the nomination by being the anti-Trump - stable, grandfatherly, professional. In November he will be running more as Trump-Lite - not-so-stable but he can't help it  - potentially a pervert but not as much as Trump. Will people be fired up to vote for Trump-Lite?

Trust me, people won't be voting for Biden as much as they will be voting against Trump.

[McLoofus 35,182]

21 minutes ago, Grumps said:

One problem for Biden is that he got the nomination by being the anti-Trump - stable, grandfatherly, professional. In November he will be running more as Trump-Lite - not-so-stable but he can't help it  - potentially a pervert but not as much as Trump. Will people be fired up to vote for Trump-Lite?

Not if they believe your characterization of it. Until 4 years ago, I maintained hope that most Americans were smarter than that. But now? Sure, yeah. If Russia wants trump to stay in office, it should be easy enough to convince the middle that your point of view isn't way off. 

And no, that's not a collusion accusation. While collusion wasn't proven to have happened, a massive disinformation campaign by Russia was. And it worked. And it still does. 

[Grumps 3,704]

34 minutes ago, homersapien said:

Trust me, people won't be voting for Biden as much as they will be voting against Trump.

That's very good news!

[aubiefifty 16,793]

while i believe biden at the worst might have thought the lady was interested and was wrong. i will never believe he would rape or attempt to rape anyone, period. but that being said no one mentions the slush fund set up to pay off women who had sexual complaints of some nature. thy brought it up and said it was true and promised to investigate it and that is the last i heard of it. and besides that i would claim that if senators and congressmen or women knew there was a slush fund readily available is that not another way of enabling these cats to misbehave?

[I_M4_AU 7,839]

3 hours ago, TexasTiger said:

Tara Reade strongly contradicts what she told the AP a year ago. This case doesn’t warrant turning over every rock when the accuser directly contradicts herself .

Heard this over the weekend; the #metoo movement is now the #movealong movement.  I do believe it was a right leaning quote, but still funny.

[Auburnfan91 1,407]

Quote

Secretary of Senate says she cannot comply with Biden request to release records on purported Reade complaint

 By Chad Pergram, Tyler Olson | Fox News

 

 

The secretary of the Senate on Monday said her office cannot comply with a request by presumptive Democratic presidential nominee Joe Biden to order a search for a purported complaint made by the woman accusing him of sexual assault when he was a senator.

In a statement, Julie Adams said their legal counsel has reviewed the relevant statute governing such records and advised that “the Secretary has no discretion to disclose any such information as requested in Vice President Biden’s letter of May 1.”

CONFUSION OVER PURPORTED COMPLAINT AGAINST BIDEN

The statement cited the law’s confidentiality requirements and past Senate guidance.

DRAFT PROPOSAL WOULD BRING TAIWAN TO THE TABLE AT WHO, IN BID TO PUSH BACK AT CHINA INFLUENCE

"Based on the law’s strict confidentiality requirements (Section 313) and the Senate’s own direction that disclosure of Senate Records is not authorized if prohibited by law (Senate Resolution 474, 96th Congress, Section 3(a)), Senate Legal Counsel advises that the Secretary has no discretion to disclose any such information as requested in Vice President Biden’s letter of May 1," Adams said.

According to the Biden campaign, they’ve since reached out again to the secretary of the Senate to ask if even the “existence of any such records” is subject to the same “prohibition on disclosure,” if there is anyone who could lawfully view them, and if the Senate could release the procedures followed for the year in question for such complaints.

This comes after Biden on Friday called on the secretary to essentially resolve confusion over where personnel complaints from the 1990s would be held, after demanding hours earlier that any complaint from former staffer Tara Reade be located and released.

“We had understood that the Senate stores records from this office, and from this period, in the National Archives. The Archives now states that the records would have remained under the control of the Senate,” Biden wrote.

“Accordingly, I request that you take or direct whatever steps are necessary to establish the location of the records of this Office, and once they have been located, to direct a search for the alleged complaint and to make public the results of this search," he continued. "I would ask that the public release include not only a complaint if one exists, but any and all other documents in the records that relate to the allegation.”

 

JUSTICE THOMAS ASKS RARE QUESTIONS DURING SUPREME COURT ORAL ARGUMENTS, IN TELECONFERENCE SESSION

Biden's letter and Adams' statement that she cannot get involved with Biden's request come after confusion over where such a complaint would be and who would control it last week.

Biden, who has denied Reade's charge that he sexually assaulted her while she was a staffer in his Senate office in 1993, sent the request to Adams Friday evening after he said in a written statement that morning that if such a complaint exists, it would be kept at the National Archives, putting the focus squarely on the agency that houses hundreds of years worth of American history.

"There is only one place a complaint of this kind could be — the National Archives," Biden said. "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."

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

That statement from Biden tipped off confusion and speculation on who exactly controls documents from the Fair Employment Office. The National Archives issued a statement claiming that a Fair Employment Office complaint "would have remained under the control of the Senate." It did not, however, deny that the complaint could physically be in its possession but legally under the control of the Senate.

Adams' Monday statement did not deny that the complaint might exist or that it could be at the National Archives. It said that she would not be able to release the complaint if it does exist because of a law that ensures the confidentiality of such complaints.

Fox News' Brooke Singman contributed to this report. 

 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/secretary-of-senate-says-cannot-comply-with-biden-request-to-release-records-on-purported-reade-complaint

[McLoofus 35,182]

1 minute ago, Auburnfan91 said:

Yeah I know it's FOX so you can dismiss if you want:

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/secretary-of-senate-says-cannot-comply-with-biden-request-to-release-records-on-purported-reade-complaint

So either that's true and there are documents, that's true and there aren't documents, or this is a carefully crafted response to suggest that the documents might in fact exist when they in fact do not. 

 

[wdefromtx 3,159]

12 minutes ago, McLoofus said:

So either that's true and there are documents, that's true and there aren't documents, or this is a carefully crafted response to suggest that the documents might in fact exist when they in fact do not. 

 

So basically we have Schrodinger's Documents.