SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

Post Reply
User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20912
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-04-09 09:53pm

muse wrote:
2020-04-09 09:42pm
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-04-09 09:32pm
FireNexus wrote:
2020-04-09 08:46pm
Yet, I somehow doubt that you would be consistent on this point if the story were the same but reported by two right wing reporters who’ve engaged in the same sort of Russia denial. You’d see it my way because it would be clearer to you that the reporters weren’t ”on your team”.
Don't make those assumptions about what I'd do. You don't know that and you don't have the right.
Oh really? :P
http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... 9#p4016369
That link doesn't show what you imply it shows. Its an example of me misreading an OP and taking satire at face value, not an example of me denying rape allegations by a Republican source.

But yeah, once again, "libel and mock TRR" is the order of the day. Because ad hominems are fun!

I should just stop posting here, shouldn't I? Then at least you fuckers wouldn't be able to uses me as a fits-all distraction to avoid having to back up your vile bullshit.

Seriously, everyone read that link. Because you'll see that muse just flat-out lied to accuse me of hypocrisy and rape apologism. She implied that her link proved FireNexus's accusation correct- that is, that it showed me dismissing rape allegations because they came from the other side. It shows nothing of the sort.

Just for everyone who thinks that this shit is just me having delusions of persecution.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
FireNexus
Cookie
Posts: 1992
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:10am
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by FireNexus » 2020-04-09 10:47pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-04-09 09:32pm
Don't make those assumptions about what I'd do. You don't know that and you don't have the right.
I know that you said this shit, casting doubt on the accusations against Michael Avenatti (while, admittedly, not quite fully dismissing them) because of the suggestion by moronic news grifter Jacob Wohl that he set Avenatti up.
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2018-11-15 02:14am
I could really believe either here. Avenatti strikes me as an arrogant and ambitious man who is using his clients to try to jumpstart a bid for the Presidency (an office he is wholly unqualified to hold), and there are certainly reasons to question his integrity. I could very easily see him in the role of faux defender of women who's actually an abuser, and plays "white knight" for personal benefit.

That said, I can also see Republicans trying to frame him, because Republicans have made it clear that they will use politically-motivated abuse charges to try to simultaneously silence dissenters and discredit feminism. I expect that we'll conveniently see a lot of Democratic politicians and activists accused of abusing women in the next year or two.
You directly and specifically suggested there that we should expect to see right-wing frame jobs of prominent public figures designed to muddy the water.

So you know exactly what the fuck I’m talking about, and have tiptoed right up to the line of doing it (and, pardon the reach, but from the context would clearly have danced right the fuck across it if the subject had been less of a giant opportunistic douchebag).

I’m not assuming you’d do anything, shit-for-brains. I’m modeling your behavior in an unfamiliar circumstance based on your behavior I familiar circumstances. And, given that I had no recollection of the quoted passage, I’d say I’m doing an impressive fucking job and it’s time for you to evaluate your own enormous blind spots.

Go fuck yourself, you self-righteous, hypocritical prick.
I had a Bill Maher quote here. But fuck him for his white privelegy "joke".

All the rest? Too long.

User avatar
FireNexus
Cookie
Posts: 1992
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:10am
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by FireNexus » 2020-04-09 11:03pm

I’m sure I will get an apology given the multiple posts in that thread gaming out the right doing the precise thing I’m talking about here, in order to gain political favor. And half-suggesting that perhaps the Avenatti accusations were false because of the Wohl claims.

TRR will finally see that perhaps others have insight into his personality that he doesn’t realize he’s provided and quit taking suggestions that he will behave in exactly the ways he will obviously behave because of fucking course he will as nothing more than attempts to slander him.

I don’t think highly enough of you to slander you, asshole.
I had a Bill Maher quote here. But fuck him for his white privelegy "joke".

All the rest? Too long.

User avatar
FireNexus
Cookie
Posts: 1992
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:10am
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by FireNexus » 2020-04-09 11:05pm

And, fin.
I had a Bill Maher quote here. But fuck him for his white privelegy "joke".

All the rest? Too long.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20912
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-04-09 11:23pm

So you admit that a Reich wing operative had taken responsibility for the Avenatti allegations. But apparently, that's not a reason for me to be skeptical of them, and I'm a horrible person for doing so, which by the power of Whataboutism, makes it okay for you to dismiss Reade's allegations despite there being no evidence whatsoever that they were engineered for political purposes.

Hey, everyone: this is what an ACTUAL rape apologist looks like.

Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out, Tough Guy.

Also, I know we don't enforce this shit any more, but multiple posts attacking me for shit from other threads is a violation of the vendetta rule, and multiple posts with no substantive arguments dedicated entirely to attack me personally and my character is a violation of the rules against ad hominem and dishonest debating.

Reported for misogyny, ad hominem, and vendetta. I know I'll probably get banned for doing so, or at best they'll ban us both, but I'm not putting up with this shit.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
FireNexus
Cookie
Posts: 1992
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:10am
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by FireNexus » 2020-04-09 11:52pm

Ah yes, there’s the apology and mea culpa. It’s definitely everyone else, TRR. You poor, persecuted little lamb.

How do you stand it? The horrible ad hominem attack of assuming you would act in nearly the precise way you did act. The blatant misogyny of mistrusting a story from reporters who lack credibility that has been explicitly unable to be verified to the standard of similar stories (including the Avenatti claims, which were Verifiable enough for an arrest irrespective of Wohl’s probably false bragging)by credible reporters. The vendetta of pointing out your actual behavior when someone on your teamish was in a similar situation with even the slightest hint (wholly lacking credibility) of malfeasance from Not Your Team.

Go. Fuck. Yourself.
I had a Bill Maher quote here. But fuck him for his white privelegy "joke".

All the rest? Too long.

User avatar
Dalton
For Those About to Rock We Salute You
For Those About to Rock We Salute You
Posts: 22582
Joined: 2002-07-03 06:16pm
Location: New York, the Fuck You State
Contact:

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by Dalton » 2020-04-10 01:42pm

Enough. Back on topic.
Attachments
115199C5-E277-4F33-9ED0-11A4912D1B0B.jpeg
115199C5-E277-4F33-9ED0-11A4912D1B0B.jpeg (97.94 KiB) Viewed 1171 times
Image
Image
To Absent Friends
Dalton | Admin Smash | Knight of the Order of SDN

"y = mx + bro" - Surlethe
"You try THAT shit again, kid, and I will mod you. I will
mod you so hard, you'll wish I were Dalton." - Lagmonster

May the way of the Hero lead to the Triforce.

User avatar
FireNexus
Cookie
Posts: 1992
Joined: 2002-07-04 05:10am
Location: Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
Contact:

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by FireNexus » 2020-04-11 12:54am

I told him to stay down...
I had a Bill Maher quote here. But fuck him for his white privelegy "joke".

All the rest? Too long.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20912
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-04-11 04:34am

Tara Reade has filed a criminal complaint against Joe Biden with the DC police:

https://businessinsider.com/former-bide ... int-2020-4
A woman who accused Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden of sexually assaulting her when she worked for him in 1993 has filed a formal criminal complaint with the Washington, DC, police about the alleged incident, Business Insider has learned.

Tara Reade says she told police that Biden assaulted her in a Senate corridor, shoving his hand under her skirt and penetrating her with his fingers. She was a staffer in his Senate office at the time. The statute of limitations for the alleged assault has passed.

Reade first made her allegations late last month, in a podcast interview, saying that Biden had assaulted her and touched her without consent while the two were alone after she delivered him a gym bag.

Late Thursday afternoon, Reade filed a report of the incident with the sexual assault unit of the Washington, DC, Metropolitan Police Department. Business Insider has obtained a public incident report recording the allegation.

When Reade first made the sexual assault allegation last month, Biden's team issued a blanket denial: "Women have a right to tell their story, and reporters have an obligation to rigorously vet those claims," Kate Bedingfield, Biden's communications director said. "We encourage them to do so, because these accusations are false."
I'm surprised by this, I admit, because I would have assumed that 1993 was outside the statute of limitations. But I pray to whatever God may be listening that this helps the DNC see sense before we end up running a nominee who is under an ongoing rape investigation.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20912
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-04-11 04:59am

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/ ... ber-143592
Now that he is the presumptive Democratic Party presidential nominee, Joe Biden needs to wrestle command of the political moment just like he often threatens to wrestle with voters.

The coronavirus pandemic has given President Donald Trump an opportunity to demonstrate national leadership, giving daily press briefings to reporters and millions of American television viewers. Even New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, whose state has been the worst hit by the virus, has had his approval numbers increase from his crisis management. Meanwhile, social distancing regulations have obligated Biden to remain in the basement of his Delaware home.

But now that Senator Bernie Sanders has withdrawn from the contest, Biden has an on-ramp to implement two crucial acts if he is going to win the presidency in November. First, he must reassert himself as a national leader superior to Trump; more empathetic, steadier, and more decisive. Second, he must build bridges to Sanders’ progressive supporters, and ensure that he maintains their votes in the general.

Yesterday, the former vice president published a post on the website Medium that outlines his future policy plans and attempts to achieve both goals simultaneously.

Biden was supportive of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, the $2.3 trillion legislation that congress passed two weeks ago in response to the pandemic. He is now joining congressional Democrats in calling for a second package that builds on the first.

This new package would further extend unemployment benefits, include a new direct cash payment to Americans, increase aid funding to states, provide healthcare coverage for any American left without due to the crisis, and include Senator Chuck Schumer’s idea for hazard pay for frontline workers. Finally, adopting a proposal from former presidential contender Elizabeth Warren, Biden’s relief plan would cancel a minimum of $10,000 of student debt per person.

It’s this last proposal that the seventy-seven-year-old is using as a launch point for his new, progressive solution to student debt. “Under this plan, I propose to forgive all undergraduate tuition-related federal student debt from two- and four-year public colleges and universities for debt-holders earning up to $125,000, with appropriate phase-outs to avoid a cliff,” explained Biden. “The federal government would pay the monthly payment in lieu of the borrower until the forgivable portion of the loan was paid off. This benefit would also apply to individuals holding federal student loans for tuition from private HBCUs [Historically Black Colleges & Universities] and MSIs [Minority-Serving Institutions].

In addition, Biden is calling for an age reduction in Medicare reception, lowering the starting age from sixty-five to sixty. Benefits would remain the same, while being extended to more people, while also not interfering with the private insurance industry. This is in contrast to conservative proposals, which have often said programs like Medicare and Social Security require age increases to prevent insolvency. However, this five-year reduction remains a far cry from the Medicare for All system campaigned on by Bernie Sanders.

Joe Biden is betting that these new policy proposals, and a coordinated shift left, will improve his odds of taking the White House this year.

Hunter DeRensis is the senior reporter for the National Interest. Follow him on Twitter @HunterDeRensis.
This reminds me of the pitch Robert Reich made to progressives who are wary about Biden- to paraphrase/summarize, that Biden reliably reflects the values of the Democratic Party, and to the extent that the party moves left, Biden will follow.

Its not the Bernie/AOC platform, but this is good, especially if he does follow it up by putting Warren on the cabinet. It means that Biden is receptive to pressure from Sanders and other progressives, and that progressives don't have to worry about being completely shut out for four years (unless, of course, Trump wins).

Of course, I would still prefer a different nominee, for reasons of personal character and fitness as opposed to policy.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20912
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-04-11 05:09am

Some more detail on Reade's complaint:

https://newsweek.com/joe-biden-sexual-a ... de-1497391
A woman has filed a police report claiming that presidential candidate Joe Biden sexually assaulted her in 1993, according to reports.

Tara Reade filed a criminal complaint with the Washington Metropolitan Police Department of accusing the 2020 Democratic nomination of pushing her against the wall in a Senate corridor and penetrating her with his fingers, according to Business Insider.

The alleged incident occurred while Reade was working as a Senate staffer for Biden nearly 30 years ago.

Reade first made the claims against Biden last month. In a tweet, Reade thanked those who helped her come forward with the allegations, as well as "luminaries" who have supported her such as Susan Sarandon, John Cusack, and Rose McGowan.

Reade also confirmed that the statute of limitations around the claims against Biden have passed.

"I filed a police report for safety reasons only. All crim [sic] stats beyond limitations. Gratitude for all who have stood by me," Reade tweeted.

Reade also referenced scrutiny she received after it emerged she wrote a blog post in 2018 praising Russian President Vladimir Putin as a "compassionate, caring, visionary leader." The blog post has since been deleted and she has distanced herself from the remarks.

"I have been smeared and called vile names by Biden supporters. I was also accused of being called a Russian agent. I am not," Reade tweeted. "I will continue to speak out."

Speaking to Newsweek, Reade said she decided to come forward with the claims against Biden to ensure that "powerful men" are held accountable for their actions.

"I was trying to have a deeper conversation about sexual harassment in the workplace and powerful men," Reade said. "I'm not going to get traditional justice, like with [Harvey] Weinstein's case. I'm looking for something more existential-to not have to keep a secret because it's somebody powerful."

In a statement at the time, Biden's team denied the accusations against him.

"Women have a right to tell their story, and reporters have an obligation to rigorously vet those claims," said Deputy Campaign Manager and Communications Director Kate Bedingfield. "We encourage them to do so, because these accusations are false."

Marianne Baker, who served as executive assistant to then-Senator Biden from 1982 to 2000, also rejected the claims.

"In all my years working for Senator Biden, I never once witnessed, or heard of, or received, any reports of inappropriate conduct, period-not from Ms Reade, not from anyone," she told Newsweek.

"These clearly false allegations are in complete contradiction to both the inner workings of our Senate office and to the man I know and worked so closely with for almost two decades."

Biden's office and the Washington Metropolitan Police Department have been contacted for comment.
So yeah, outside the statute of limitations, because apparently our society feels that if you get away with rape for long enough then its okay. But this does seem to be getting the story some more news coverage.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20912
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-04-11 05:34pm

https://thehill.com/opinion/campaign/49 ... r-a-decade

"Bernie Sanders's parting gift to Wisconsin voters may last for a decade"
Despite coronavirus fears, voter turnout in Tuesday's election in Wisconsin was high. The biggest driver of turnout may have been Sen. Bernie Sanders's (I-Vt.) persistence in the presidential race, which may have moved hundreds of thousands to the polls — and could potentially swing a key judicial race.

As we wait to hear final results, it's worth pausing to think about the hidden motivations that may have driven major players, including Sanders and the state Supreme Court. Their decisions this week may have significant long-term implications for Wisconsinites, especially when it comes to redistricting for the coming decade.

In national news, Wisconsin's election was billed as a presidential primary — the last one before Sanders suspended his campaign. But it was also a general election. At stake were hundreds of local offices, several dozen local judgeships, three seats on the state Court of Appeals, and one seat on the powerful state Supreme Court. The Supreme Court race, between conservative Daniel Kelly and liberal Jill Karofsky, was heated and closely-watched. The winners of all these elections will shape life for Wisconsin's citizens for years — including next year's redistricting.

That same state Supreme Court made the news by forcing the election to take place in the first place. Gov. Tony Evers, a Democrat, had ordered the election delayed until June because of the current coronavirus epidemic. Four conservative judges (excluding Kelly, who recused himself) outvoted two liberal judges to block the governor's order.

The result was a severely understaffed election. In Milwaukee, a Democratic stronghold, voting was conducted at just five polling stations rather than the 180 stations that were planned. Despite this, 1.04 million people voted absentee so far, and hundreds of thousands voted in person on Election Day. Of the outstanding 230,000 or so mail-in ballots, they will be counted if they arrive before April 13, a deadline that the U.S. Supreme Court forbade from being extended.

In a state with 4.4 million eligible voters, 1 million votes might sound low. But it's par for the course in Wisconsin when only one party has a contested primary. In 2004 and 2012, average turnout was 1.07 million. (In 2008 and 2016, turnout averaged 1.81 million.) This year, with the Biden-v-Sanders contest on the ballot, Democratic voters had a reason to turn out, despite fears of coronavirus.

(By the way, the health consequences of having an election during the peak of the epidemic can be estimated. As of Tuesday, 94 people had died of coronavirus in Wisconsin. Assuming a fatality rate of 1 percent, that corresponds to approximately 10,000 infected people statewide. If 300,000 Wisconsinites stood in line to vote out of a population of nearly 6 million, we might expect that 500 people positive for COVID-19 — at any stage from newly-infected to recovered — were standing in line on Tuesday. Runaway epidemics double in 3 days, and I calculate that without any social distancing precautions, 500 infected people could cause about 130 new infections in the course of one unprotected day. But with precautions and the brief interaction time of voting, the number of infections caused by the court-ordered election would be considerably lower. It's hard to say exactly, but one might expect a dozen infections or so. This is unlikely to be detectable in statewide statistics, and it might not lead to any additional deaths.)

The presence of down-ticket judicial races might have induced Bernie Sanders to stay in the presidential race. Ever since Super Tuesday, Sanders has come under pressure to drop out in the face of insurmountable odds. But at least one analyst, Stephen Wolf of the liberal website Daily Kos, suggested that having an active contest could boost turnout. By waiting until after the election to suspend his campaign, Sanders may well have boosted the prospects of liberal judges.

If Karofsky succeeds in defeating Kelly, that would shift the court leftward. Although there would still only be three liberals on the seven-justice court, it would make the divide closer, in time for the 2020 election and 2021 redistricting. And with another state Supreme Court election in 2023, that same court could rule on the fairness of any new map, no matter how it is passed.

Wisconsin's state legislative map is among the most gerrymandered in the nation. Republicans, who controlled the redistricting process in 2011, engineered an insurmountable advantage for themselves. In 2021, Gov. Evers could break that hold by forcing a bipartisan approach. But there's been talk that the legislature might try to pass a new map by resolution, which would bypass the governor. Such a maneuver would have to pass muster with the state Supreme Court, which would have to overrule a precedent set in 1964.

What was the impact of court decisions on turnout in this week's election? Since Bush v. Gore in 2000, conservative judges have increasingly emphasized regulation of voting over maximizing the number of votes cast and counted. The decisions in Wisconsin and U.S. Supreme Courts fit that pattern — especially the sharp time limit on counting absentee ballots.

Increased voting is generally thought to lead to more Democratic votes. Viewed through a political lens, this week's court decisions look like defensive actions against high turnout. But compared to Bernie Sanders's persistence, those actions had small effect.

Sam Wang is director of the Princeton Election Consortium and a professor of neuroscience at Princeton University. Follow him on Twitter @SamWangPhD
One may, of course, question whether high turnout is a good thing during a pandemic. And I still have my doubts over whether Wisconsin should be regarded as a legitimate vote, in light of the Republican voter suppression. Then again, if Republicans started putting armed groups of thugs at polling stations to suppress the vote, would we tell people not to turn out for their safety? Would we tell that to people in countries like Iraq or Afghanistan, who risk getting shot or bombed every time they go to vote? Or would we tell them that democracy is worth fighting for, even at the risk of ones' safety? I'm not sure its functionally much different.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
Darth Yan
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2035
Joined: 2008-12-29 02:09pm
Location: Cali

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by Darth Yan » 2020-04-12 03:27pm

FireNexus wrote:
2020-04-09 11:52pm
Ah yes, there’s the apology and mea culpa. It’s definitely everyone else, TRR. You poor, persecuted little lamb.

How do you stand it? The horrible ad hominem attack of assuming you would act in nearly the precise way you did act. The blatant misogyny of mistrusting a story from reporters who lack credibility that has been explicitly unable to be verified to the standard of similar stories (including the Avenatti claims, which were Verifiable enough for an arrest irrespective of Wohl’s probably false bragging)by credible reporters. The vendetta of pointing out your actual behavior when someone on your teamish was in a similar situation with even the slightest hint (wholly lacking credibility) of malfeasance from Not Your Team.

Go. Fuck. Yourself.
Dude. You’re the problem. You shamelessly ignored that Bernie’s policies are far better than Hillary or Biden’s, you shamelessly ignored that the vast bulk of Bernie supporters did go vote for Hillary and probably will here, or that Bernie did far more for Hillary than she did for Obama. Bernie’s not the problem, nor are his supporters. Biden and Hillary and the centrist Dems like them are the problem

You also ignore that Biden has a history of being a creep

Progressives are the future. DEAL WITH IT YOU WHINY LITTLE CHILD.

User avatar
Darth Yan
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2035
Joined: 2008-12-29 02:09pm
Location: Cali

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by Darth Yan » 2020-04-12 03:34pm

FireNexus wrote:
2020-04-09 10:47pm
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-04-09 09:32pm
Don't make those assumptions about what I'd do. You don't know that and you don't have the right.
I know that you said this shit, casting doubt on the accusations against Michael Avenatti (while, admittedly, not quite fully dismissing them) because of the suggestion by moronic news grifter Jacob Wohl that he set Avenatti up.
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2018-11-15 02:14am
I could really believe either here. Avenatti strikes me as an arrogant and ambitious man who is using his clients to try to jumpstart a bid for the Presidency (an office he is wholly unqualified to hold), and there are certainly reasons to question his integrity. I could very easily see him in the role of faux defender of women who's actually an abuser, and plays "white knight" for personal benefit.

That said, I can also see Republicans trying to frame him, because Republicans have made it clear that they will use politically-motivated abuse charges to try to simultaneously silence dissenters and discredit feminism. I expect that we'll conveniently see a lot of Democratic politicians and activists accused of abusing women in the next year or two.
You directly and specifically suggested there that we should expect to see right-wing frame jobs of prominent public figures designed to muddy the water.

So you know exactly what the fuck I’m talking about, and have tiptoed right up to the line of doing it (and, pardon the reach, but from the context would clearly have danced right the fuck across it if the subject had been less of a giant opportunistic douchebag).

I’m not assuming you’d do anything, shit-for-brains. I’m modeling your behavior in an unfamiliar circumstance based on your behavior I familiar circumstances. And, given that I had no recollection of the quoted passage, I’d say I’m doing an impressive fucking job and it’s time for you to evaluate your own enormous blind spots.

Go fuck yourself, you self-righteous, hypocritical prick.

Also again he wasn’t denying the allegations. He was saying they could be true but they could also be false.

Honestly you DO have a vendetta. You’d literally sooner cut your own balls off than admit that progressives and Bernie aren’t Satan

User avatar
Coop D'etat
Jedi Knight
Posts: 633
Joined: 2007-02-23 01:38pm
Location: UBC Unincorporated land

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by Coop D'etat » 2020-04-12 04:39pm

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-04-11 05:09am

So yeah, outside the statute of limitations, because apparently our society feels that if you get away with rape for long enough then its okay. But this does seem to be getting the story some more news coverage.

Society does it this way for nearly every crime for some very good reasons that you don't seem to understand. But lets not let that get away from your latest ignorant ass gripe about how the world doesn't conform to your ill-considered American left wing blogpost opinions.

User avatar
Darth Yan
Jedi Council Member
Posts: 2035
Joined: 2008-12-29 02:09pm
Location: Cali

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by Darth Yan » 2020-04-12 06:46pm

People have mixed feelings about rape being subject to statue of limitations. And while Romulan can be overly passionate he isn’t wrong in suggesting that a lot of people have a murderous hatred of Sanders and that they’re willing to ignore that in many ways Biden is worse. Fire in particular has his head so far up centrists ass that he’s basically everything he accuses a Bernie supporter of being.

Omega18
Jedi Knight
Posts: 738
Joined: 2004-06-19 11:30pm

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by Omega18 » 2020-04-12 08:55pm

I'm going to point out the degree of inconsistency really is glaring with regards to Reade's story beyond merely the specific assault incident. While I am much more wary of accepting the Russia link allegations this article brings up, there are specific other glaring inconsistencies in how her story has changed.
In an article Reade wrote in 2009, she claimed to have left Washington DC for the midwest because her husband Tate, at the time, had received a job offer for a Congressman. She claims to have also received a job offer to work for a Governor’s race in California around the same time period.

"Soon I received an offer to work on a Governor’s race in California and I almost accepted. Tate kept me up that night, pleading with me to go with him while he managed the Congressman’s campaign. I agreed and we moved to the frozen tundra of the Midwest. I would not even last a full winter."

However, in the article “Bring on the Light,” which Reade wrote in December of 2018, and has since deleted, she stated that she left politics and Washington DC because she was sick of American imperialism and because she “love[d] Russia with all her heart.”

Then in her article for The Union in April of 2019, her story changed yet again, blaming her move on Joe Biden essentially having her blacklisted.

"Then, I went to Senate personnel for help. No one helped me. I resigned or I would say, I was forced to resign. I was told to look for another job. In the aftermath, I did not feel competent or worthy of anything. My self-esteem plummeted and my career nose-dived. What started with promise and possibility, ended because some prominent Senator decided that he liked my legs. I was sad and lost and moved on."

Also in an article she wrote on April 6, 2019, Reade claimed that she didn’t even know if Biden knows why she left working for him:

"I wish I could say there was a happy ending, that Senator Biden apologized or that he helped make amends, he did not. I do not even know if he realized why I left."

But then in March of 2020, Reade says that Biden fired her:

Only one story can be correct.
https://medium.com/@eddiekrassenstein/e ... cb3ee38460

Obviously the glaring issues include that as recently as April of 2019 she was claiming she didn't even know if Biden knew why she left, but suddenly in March of this year she is suddenly claiming Biden fired her.

Even if you try to argue the blackballed claim sort of resembles the later fired claim in the most recent account in spite of an effectively inconsistent other account that same month, it really does not work. Basically something resembling an actual resigning instead of being fired would be "your choices are to sign this letter of resignation or be fired" or at most "you have 48 hours to write a letter of resignation or you will be fired" and clearly neither matches what she was actually describing with the earlier account.

Maybe you argue it is perfectly plausible more minor details of the situation can't be consistently remembered, but whether you chose to leave a job on your own or were outright fired should certainly not be one of them. It is not something that could be explained somehow by the trauma of an earlier assault either.

The article also notes further inconsistencies in her outside the story of the her story of the assault itself which clearly don't help her credibility.

User avatar
Elfdart
The Anti-Shep
Posts: 10398
Joined: 2004-04-28 11:32pm

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by Elfdart » 2020-04-12 10:44pm

Gandalf wrote:
2020-04-09 04:08am
Saying that Sanders was winning until SC gave Biden a world of momentum ignores the fact that he was against a fractured field of fairly similar candidates. Had it just been him versus one of those people, it would likely be 2016 all over again.
None of those candidates were Obama's sidekick for eight years. Not only is it HUGE to be the loyal retainer of the only black president in states with large percentages of black voters, but the fact that Obama picked Biden after Biden had made a number of patronizing and downright racist comments about him ("He's so clean!") gave Old Joe a kind of retroactive pardon for all the racist bullfuckery he pulled over the decades.
"One way we recognize a mass hysteria movement is that everyone who doesn’t believe is accused of being in on the plot. This has been going on virtually unrestrained in both political and media circles in recent weeks."

--Matt Taibbi

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20912
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-04-13 12:13am

Coop D'etat wrote:
2020-04-12 04:39pm
The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-04-11 05:09am

So yeah, outside the statute of limitations, because apparently our society feels that if you get away with rape for long enough then its okay. But this does seem to be getting the story some more news coverage.

Society does it this way for nearly every crime for some very good reasons that you don't seem to understand. But lets not let that get away from your latest ignorant ass gripe about how the world doesn't conform to your ill-considered American left wing blogpost opinions.
Rape is hardly a typical crime. Its frequently regarded as just below murder in terms of seriousness and the damage it does (and murder generally does not fall under Statute of Limitations). It is also a crime with a notoriously low conviction rate, where it is well-known that victims often take years to come forward. Of course, you don't address any of these points, or offer any argument as to WHY rape should fall under statute of limitations, much less why it is so obvious that it should that I deserve ridicule for thinking otherwise. You just imply its self-evident with a vague handwave, followed by the usual round of ad hominem attacks on me and my nationality.

Why don't you elaborate as to why you feel a rapist should get off scott-free, regardless of evidence, if he manages to run out the clock because his victim was too scared or traumatized or worried that she wouldn't be believed (gee, I wonder why?) to come forward?
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20912
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-04-13 12:25am

Omega18 wrote:
2020-04-12 08:55pm
I'm going to point out the degree of inconsistency really is glaring with regards to Reade's story beyond merely the specific assault incident. While I am much more wary of accepting the Russia link allegations this article brings up, there are specific other glaring inconsistencies in how her story has changed.
In an article Reade wrote in 2009, she claimed to have left Washington DC for the midwest because her husband Tate, at the time, had received a job offer for a Congressman. She claims to have also received a job offer to work for a Governor’s race in California around the same time period.

"Soon I received an offer to work on a Governor’s race in California and I almost accepted. Tate kept me up that night, pleading with me to go with him while he managed the Congressman’s campaign. I agreed and we moved to the frozen tundra of the Midwest. I would not even last a full winter."

However, in the article “Bring on the Light,” which Reade wrote in December of 2018, and has since deleted, she stated that she left politics and Washington DC because she was sick of American imperialism and because she “love[d] Russia with all her heart.”

Then in her article for The Union in April of 2019, her story changed yet again, blaming her move on Joe Biden essentially having her blacklisted.

"Then, I went to Senate personnel for help. No one helped me. I resigned or I would say, I was forced to resign. I was told to look for another job. In the aftermath, I did not feel competent or worthy of anything. My self-esteem plummeted and my career nose-dived. What started with promise and possibility, ended because some prominent Senator decided that he liked my legs. I was sad and lost and moved on."

Also in an article she wrote on April 6, 2019, Reade claimed that she didn’t even know if Biden knows why she left working for him:

"I wish I could say there was a happy ending, that Senator Biden apologized or that he helped make amends, he did not. I do not even know if he realized why I left."

But then in March of 2020, Reade says that Biden fired her:

Only one story can be correct.
https://medium.com/@eddiekrassenstein/e ... cb3ee38460

Obviously the glaring issues include that as recently as April of 2019 she was claiming she didn't even know if Biden knew why she left, but suddenly in March of this year she is suddenly claiming Biden fired her.

Even if you try to argue the blackballed claim sort of resembles the later fired claim in the most recent account in spite of an effectively inconsistent other account that same month, it really does not work. Basically something resembling an actual resigning instead of being fired would be "your choices are to sign this letter of resignation or be fired" or at most "you have 48 hours to write a letter of resignation or you will be fired" and clearly neither matches what she was actually describing with the earlier account.

Maybe you argue it is perfectly plausible more minor details of the situation can't be consistently remembered, but whether you chose to leave a job on your own or were outright fired should certainly not be one of them. It is not something that could be explained somehow by the trauma of an earlier assault either.

The article also notes further inconsistencies in her outside the story of the her story of the assault itself which clearly don't help her credibility.
"Her story changed!"

"She lacks credibility!"

These are standard attacks leveled against rape victims. Practically archetypal. Who are you to determine what inconsistencies are credibly explained by the trauma of being raped? I posted an article by someone who worked professionally with rape victims and teaches the subject at the university level who felt Reade's story is credible. Show me your psychiatry degree, if you're going to make those sorts of assertions.

The Russia allegations also matter here, because even if you don't support them, they are indicative of your source's overall approach to this story (ie, character assassination of the accuser). I particularly like how the article simply says she "deleted" her post about Russia, implying that she was trying to dishonestly hide her views, as opposed to the more accurate "she has since recanted those views".
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20912
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-04-13 12:47am

Belated edit: While this is obviously speculative, and I don't pretend to know what is or was going on in Tara Reade's head, it wouldn't surprise me if her favorable comments about Russia were in part due to her experiences with Biden. Being raped by a respected Senator might damage anyone's faith in the virtue and trustworthiness of the Washington establishment, to put it mildly. And unfortunately, many who lose faith in the Western establishment start looking to its main geopolitical rival instead. If you knew from horrific personal experience that the Washington mainstream was full of shit in one way, you might be susceptible to believing that it is full of shit in other ways (for example, its view of Russia).
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

User avatar
Elfdart
The Anti-Shep
Posts: 10398
Joined: 2004-04-28 11:32pm

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by Elfdart » 2020-04-13 01:21am

FireNexus wrote:
2020-04-09 07:18pm
Also, as far as the Biden allegations, the only two reporters who have been able to confirm the details appear to be the Russia-skeptical Bernie or Busters who’ve already reported them. I don’t know about Reade’s accusations, but when Salon tried to confirm her story they couldn’t get one of the people to confirm it and couldn’t get Reade to give them the identity of the other one.
Bullshit much? Here's Salon's account:
Salon/Amanda Marcotte wrote:Reade did not respond to Salon's request for her friend's identity, and Reade's brother has not responded to Salon's requests to talk.
You make it seem as though Salon talked to one of Reade's alleged witnesses (boldface above) who refused to back her story when in fact he never talked to them.
I know plenty enough about Halper and about Grim be deeply suspicious of their reporting, and their assurances of having done their homework given what I know about them.
Do tell. Or don't. So far it's your credibility that's in the shitter.
When you add the Putin praise shit that’s baked in to Reade to their weird leftist Russia skepticism, it smells too much.
Since you want to traffic in ad hominem horseshit, let's take a look at Amanda Marcotte, your hall monitor of choice:

1) She was fired from the John Edwards campaign for some pretty rancid, bigoted anti-Catholic ravings.

2) She was a big promoter of two infamous stories of gang rape: the Duke Lacrosse case, as well as the UVA case -both of which were complete hoaxes. In the former case, the prosecutor was disbarred while the second led to Rolling Stone having to fork over $1.65 million to a fraternity they had libeled.

3) Marcotte tried to smear Bernie Sanders as a commie because back in the 1980 he refused to support Von Reagan's death squads in El Salvador and Guatemala, or his merry band of narcoterrorists (the Contras) in Nicaragua. Like the Contras, Reagan's Einsatzgruppen went out of their way to rape, torture and murder women, whether it was local peasants or relief workers from abroad. So it's odd to see a self-proclaimed feminist pooh-poohing instances of rape. I guess if you can pretend El Mozote was no big deal, dismissing allegations of rape must come easy.
"One way we recognize a mass hysteria movement is that everyone who doesn’t believe is accused of being in on the plot. This has been going on virtually unrestrained in both political and media circles in recent weeks."

--Matt Taibbi

Omega18
Jedi Knight
Posts: 738
Joined: 2004-06-19 11:30pm

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by Omega18 » 2020-04-13 03:18am

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-04-13 12:25am
These are standard attacks leveled against rape victims. Practically archetypal. Who are you to determine what inconsistencies are credibly explained by the trauma of being raped? I posted an article by someone who worked professionally with rape victims and teaches the subject at the university level who felt Reade's story is credible. Show me your psychiatry degree, if you're going to make those sorts of assertions.
Frankly when the claim is "believe women" this does not mean "no matter what." In any case where someone is leveling serious accusations, if multiple major basic parts of your story keep on changing it starts to be a problem, and this is true of any alleged crime where we are lacking any physical evidence not just this category.

Clearly as I already noted, the explanation in the article very clearly clearly can not explain the inconsistency and the psychologist either clearly was not aware of this issue when writing the article, or clearly is problematic as an evaluator because they can't explain a discrepancy and outright dodged it when writing. (I.E. they really never want to believe an accusation might be untrue.)

The author wrote about at least somewhat more minor details somewhat associated with the event and memory. We're talking about a major at least somewhat separate event which happened measurably later by Reide's own versions of the story, which means that other explanation clearly does not explain it. (In at least all her versions so far she did not get fired or forced to resign right after the event but it took awhile.)

Getting fired is the sort of thing which obviously sticks in your mind and you do not forget, especially for a real job. While I could perfectly see the 2009 apparent discrepancy in isolation as remaining explainable by her not wanting to hurt herself professionally and not wanting to talk publicly about what really happened, this certainly does not for instance explain the 2019 discrepancy in particular.

There are also remaining big problems with more recent actions by her in relation to her current story that the article also notes. In particular the article notes the following relatively recent posting behavior by her.
In the below instance, Reade retweeted a tweet by Margaret Cho that appears to commend Joe Biden for working with Lady Gaga to end sexual assault.

Then again in April of 2017, Reade liked a tweet by the Huffington post that praised the former Vice President for helping men realize how important they are in the fight against sexual assault. The article commends Biden for the steps he has taken to encourage men to take responsibility in stopping assaults against women.

Also in March of 2017, Reade made a tweet claiming that Joe Biden “speaks truth,” and encouraged her followers to “listen” to him.
https://medium.com/@eddiekrassenstein/e ... cb3ee38460
(You can more directly see the actual tweets or what she tweeted in the article.)

All of these three tweets are in 2017, and the author found other ones basically praising Biden from the same period. Now theoretically I suppose you could try to explain some of them by her deciding she liked Biden's politics at the time and was suppressing her story and what it should mean for Biden for political reasons (although you think she could just refrain from criticizing him rather than outright praising him), but dramatically changed her mind shortly after this. However the two involving praising Biden's stance on handling sexual assaults strike me as far harder to explain. Even given such a general view, you certainly would think there would be other positive things about Biden she could have chosen to retweet instead. In fact retweeting such specific sentiments given what she is now claiming would have been actually quite deceptive if her newest claims are true. This certainly does not help her credibility.

Now you may not like the article's general biases, but that does not let you ignore the factual issues the article brings up. It incidentally seems incredibly hard to explain why if this event was responsible for shaking her faith in the Washington establishment so much as you are now suggesting, she was going out of her way to praise Biden so much so relatively recently. (I might buy some earlier for professional reasons, but by 2017 this clearly was not necessary and she could have picked other Democrats to praise if she was going to.)

Furthermore when NBC has now tried to check her story
NBC News has spoken with Reade multiple times since she came forward with the assault allegation on March 25 and has also spoken with five people with whom Reade said she shared varying degrees of detail over time. Three of those people said on the record that they do not recall any such conversation with Reade.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-e ... t-n1182296

By contrast the medium article managed to reach a longtime friend of Reade who said:
UPDATE 4/2/20: We were able to contact a longtime friend of Reade’s who wished to remain anonymous, but they said they “do not believe her allegations,” claiming she has always been one to seek attention. Note: We reached out to Ms. Reade for comment but she refused.
https://medium.com/@eddiekrassenstein/e ... cb3ee38460

Regardless of what you think of Medium in general, I don't see why they would outright so blatantly risk a libel suit so clearly a friend of her said this. This is the sort of thing Reade would be able to successfully sue them for damages for if the person was not her friend or it turns out the friend did not actually say this. So this is another piece of evidence with Reade having had time at this point to at least go public with a denial any of her friends had said this and threatening to sue.

For good measure one of two remaining people only said that Reade made a claim of being inappropriately touched not an actual assault. I could perhaps conceivably buy that one of the three people decided to just lie about this or completely forgot, but a full three of them doing so is way more problematic. (If they had been actually told something, I would expect them to at least hedge things by saying they think they were told something like that but can't remember the details or if any names were used if it simply was a matter of worrying about getting involved with this situation to any significant degree rather than outright undermine her.)

Basically at some point when someone changes his/her story about so many things, and did so recently in most cases and not simply in relation to shortly after the even, the only reasonable thing to do is become highly skeptical of that persons story. I suppose you can argue theoretically even though Reade has clearly lied about so many things in the past (and made other posts which would be incredibly problematically deceptive if her latest claims were true) she is telling the truth now about what happened to her, but at some point it is not longer reasonable to hold it against the accused.

Otherwise anyone could lie about getting sexually assaulted to damage a politician and unless the allegation could be absolutely 100% definitively disproved (which is obviously often not going to be possible) people would hold it against the politician in question. This is not a Kavanaugh situation where the allegations were vastly more creditable and that makes a big difference in how it should be treated.

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 20912
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by The Romulan Republic » 2020-04-13 04:21am

"There are contradictions! The woman must be lying!"

"She just wants attention!"

These are very familiar lines, because they're used pretty much every time a (white) man is accused of rape.

First, again, there are reasons besides lying or deceitful intent why a rape survivor might give contradictory accounts over the years. I'm admittedly no expert on the psychology of trauma victims, but its pretty well known that memory can be unreliable, and traumatic memories particularly. Hell, I got laid off a couple weeks ago, under far less stressful circumstances, and I couldn't give you exact quotes of what was said between me and my manager if I was asked to under oath. This is well-understood, just as it is known that such contradictions are routinely used to assassinate the character of rape survivors and claim that they must be lying. And its why you should be very, very careful before dismissing an accusation by treating contradictions as proof of lying.

Again, I cited an expert who said he found Ms Reade's story credible. You, surprise surprise, simply asserted again that the contradictions "clearly" cannot be explained- then go on to insinuate that my source is being dishonest.

If I understand you correctly, you are essentially arguing that the firing was a separate incident than the rape, so the trauma of the rape could not be used to explain inconsistencies in the account of the firing. I admittedly lack the psychiatric knowledge to refute this point without further research, but I'm also pretty sure that you lack the expertise to make it. You also never actually refuted the argument from my source, that the specific details offered about the alleged rape give credibility to Ms. Reade's story. You've just tried to argue that inconsistencies about a subsequent event destroy the credibility of anything Ms. Reade says.

So, again, I ask you: Where's your degree? What credentials do you have to assume that you can tell when a woman's story is credible in a case like this? And to assume that you know better than an actual fucking professional in the field?

As to why she would say complimentary things about Biden, you yourself offered a possible explanation. She wasn't ready to come forward with her story, and decided that Biden's policies outweighed his personal sins. That does not mean that she thereby waved the right to ever change her view, or that anything she says must be presumed to be a lie.

As to the attempts to verify her story, I'll note two things:

-Three of the people they contacted said they didn't recall her telling them about it. What about the other two?

-They found one "longtime friend" who claimed that they did not believe her and that "she has always been one to seek attention" (an accusation thrown at practically every woman who's ever alleged rape ever). Yeah, definitely sounds like someone you would say about a friend. :roll: Interesting that they don't give the person's name, though.

Is it still possible that Tara Reade is lying? Sure. But there is no getting around three simple facts which add considerably to her credibility.

1. As you're probably aware, false rape allegations are pretty rare, much less rare than the constant fear-mongering about lying women out to frame powerful men make them out to be. The reasons for this should be obvious: women (and men for that matter) make such accusations at considerable risk to their reputation, financial security, emotional well-being, and even physical safety. These risks are amplified when the subject of their accusations is as powerful a man as a Presidential candidate with millions of supporters and massive resources to dig up dirt on the accuser and try to assassinate their character. Most women are not going to be willing to subject themselves to that for political ideology, much less "for attention", and anyone who thinks they are is, frankly, a misogynist.

2. Related to the above, Joe Biden has a Presidential campaign backed by the full power of the Democratic Party and the support, official or tacit, of most of the major news media outlets. I have absolutely no doubt that Tara Reade's allegations and reputation are being gone over with a fine-tooth comb for evidence that she is lying, that she was bought, etc.

In past cases of fraudulent allegations from the Right, like the ones they tried to set up against Mueller, it came out pretty quickly that they were fake, that women were being offered money to make them, etc. That hasn't happened here. The best they've got is "She said some nice things about Putin" and "She supported Bernie". Which tells me they haven't found anything better to discredit her.

3. Tara Reade is not the only woman to have accused Biden of inappropriate conduct. She is the only one, thus far at least, to accuse him of outright rape, but numerous others have alleged inappropriate touching or harassment, and IIRC at least some of this is backed by photographic evidence. So it is not as though the idea that Joe Biden is a creep is based on only one woman's word.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.

Omega18
Jedi Knight
Posts: 738
Joined: 2004-06-19 11:30pm

Re: SUPERTHREAD: 2020 United States Elections

Post by Omega18 » 2020-04-13 05:07am

The Romulan Republic wrote:
2020-04-13 04:21am
First, again, there are reasons besides lying or deceitful intent why a rape survivor might give contradictory accounts over the years. I'm admittedly no expert on the psychology of trauma victims, but its pretty well known that memory can be unreliable, and traumatic memories particularly. Hell, I got laid off a couple weeks ago, under far less stressful circumstances, and I couldn't give you exact quotes of what was said between me and my manager if I was asked to under oath. This is well-understood, just as it is known that such contradictions are routinely used to assassinate the character of rape survivors and claim that they must be lying. And its why you should be very, very careful before dismissing an accusation by treating contradictions as proof of lying.

Again, I cited an expert who said he found Ms Reade's story credible. You, surprise surprise, simply asserted again that the contradictions "clearly" cannot be explained- then go on to insinuate that my source is being dishonest.

If I understand you correctly, you are essentially arguing that the firing was a separate incident than the rape, so the trauma of the rape could not be used to explain inconsistencies in the account of the firing. I admittedly lack the psychiatric knowledge to refute this point without further research, but I'm also pretty sure that you lack the expertise to make it. You also never actually refuted the argument from my source, that the specific details offered about the alleged rape give credibility to Ms. Reade's story. You've just tried to argue that inconsistencies about a subsequent event destroy the credibility of anything Ms. Reade says.

So, again, I ask you: Where's your degree? What credentials do you have to assume that you can tell when a woman's story is credible in a case like this? And to assume that you know better than an actual fucking professional in the field?
You are simply trying to explain the unexplainable at this point and frankly are not being reasonable about it. You are appealing to authority clearly highly inappropriately when the psychiatrist obviously did not reference anything like this kind of discrepancy and was talking about dates and other specific details very closely associated with the event itself, not really major somewhat separate events.

In case you still do not get this, the problem is not anything like she can't remember the exact details of the conversation with a manager when she got fired. Its she was claiming just over a year earlier than today (when she was already making the earlier version of the allegation) that she left on her own and Biden may have had no idea why she left, to Biden outright fired her now. This is an incredibly massive discrepancy and not a minor one, with her 2018 explanation also being quite different with you at least thinking that she could have referenced not being fairly treated at her job or something as a factor even if she was not ready to truly public yet.
As to why she would say complimentary things about Biden, you yourself offered a possible explanation. She wasn't ready to come forward with her story, and decided that Biden's policies outweighed his personal sins. That does not mean that she thereby waved the right to ever change her view, or that anything she says must be presumed to be a lie.
She clearly indisputably outright was blatantly deceptive any possible way you interpret things. (The only possible argument is when.) She in particular went out of her way in praising Biden's handling of sexual assaults at least 3 times since 2009, and if he actually sexually assaulted her and as she claimed the office refused to investigate and fired or forced her to resign in response, this was actually clearly spectacularly deceptive praise. (Again she could have at least avoided praising him in that area.) Going so out of her way to do so when he was no longer even Vice-President also seems pretty strange any way you slice it since for example there were obviously other possible Democratic Presidential candidates for 2020. If nothing else, if her most recent story was true, you would think even looking at things purely pragmatically from a political perspective by 2017 if not earlier she would have supported another candidate and refrained from praising him because she would be worried he presumably did the exact same things to others and there was a risk they would come forward and torpedo his campaign once he was actually nominated.
In past cases of fraudulent allegations from the Right, like the ones they tried to set up against Mueller, it came out pretty quickly that they were fake, that women were being offered money to make them, etc. That hasn't happened here. The best they've got is "She said some nice things about Putin" and "She supported Bernie". Which tells me they haven't found anything better to discredit her.
Uh, this is an incredibly rare thing to happen and generally is not going to be the case. (Even to my knowledge with the conservative activist who claimed he did drugs and had gay sex with Obama I am at least not aware of anything quite that blatant coming out although admittedly I didn't follow the details of that case that closely and that guy had a obviously sketchy background.) Even in the Duke Lacrosse case to pick another example, to my knowledge no-one has ever provided any actual indication Crystal Magnum received money to make the false charges.
3. Tara Reade is not the only woman to have accused Biden of inappropriate conduct. She is the only one, thus far at least, to accuse him of outright rape, but numerous others have alleged inappropriate touching or harassment, and IIRC at least some of this is backed by photographic evidence. So it is not as though the idea that Joe Biden is a creep is based on only one woman's word.
The problem is nothing else resembles the accusation is question with basically everything else falling under the potential category of not really knowing what are considered appropriate boundaries today. In fact the striking thing is in the 48 years he has been in national politics no-one has made an accusation actually comparable to this. This was even the case when he ran for President multiple times and then was the Vice-Presidential candidate. This fact in my view very much goes in the other direction. The related problem is nothing about the latest version of the story strikes me as the sort of thing that if it had been true Biden would have done only once. You would absolutely expect a Weinstein type situation and the fact no-one else has come out with a truly similar accusation very much strikes me as considerable evidence against this. You really are coming across to me as simply wanting to justify an accusation against Biden that makes him look worse at this point (or at least not being properly careful about evaluating an accusation of sexual assault given the full available evidence.)

It is probably going to be a bit until I could potentially respond further, but these are the issues I see with your position on this.

Post Reply