Tara Reade is a person who exists

[Metaphor]

If you think my comment (that she started reading feminist propaganda) was an actual assertion of an event that happened, I don't know what to tell you. It was a jab at feminism.

Why are you jabbing at Feminism when the questions you're responding to are:

"What do you know about the others? Anything? Anything at all apart from the fact that they exist?"

I told you what I knew about them, from the daily beast article. The only mention of a male accuser was in the Jezebel article which I had not read before.

and

"If there were 3 additional people who claimed that Joe Biden had sexually assaulted them, people who had the same kind of close contact with Biden that Nungesser's accusers had with him, would that in any way affect your belief regarding Reade's accusation, or would it not matter at all?"

I was ribbing feminism because feminism ought be ribbed, and feminism - or a thought process like it - is probably related to 'discovering' a relationship was problematic months after it was over.

 

[Arctish]

[/I]

I told you what I knew about them, from the daily beast article. The only mention of a male accuser was in the Jezebel article which I had not read before.

and

"If there were 3 additional people who claimed that Joe Biden had sexually assaulted them, people who had the same kind of close contact with Biden that Nungesser's accusers had with him, would that in any way affect your belief regarding Reade's accusation, or would it not matter at all?"

I was ribbing feminism because feminism ought be ribbed, and feminism - or a thought process like it - is probably related to 'discovering' a relationship was problematic months after it was over.

And who said she 'discovered' it was problematic months after it was over, not before it was over?

Because discovering the relationship was problematic is the most likely reason the relationship ended, and your speculation that she "probably started reading Feminist propaganda" and only then decided that there had been problems in the relationship she and Nungesser had broken off is inane.

 

[Metaphor]

And who said she 'discovered' it was problematic months after it was over, not before it was over?

The article I linked said it:

The Bwog article mentions that she “was suffering from serious depression before meeting [Nungesser] and had recently ended an emotionally abusive relationship.” That story also makes clear that Natalie did not come to see her relationship with Nungesser as abusive, or their sexual relations as non-consensual, until “months after their breakup.”

Because discovering the relationship was problematic is the most likely reason the relationship ended, and your speculation that she "probably started reading Feminist propaganda" and only then decided that there had been problems in the relationship she and Nungesser had broken off is inane.

It was a jab at feminist propoganda, not a serious speculation on the events that led up to Natalie retroactively discovering her relationship was problematic.

 

[Arctish]

It was a jab at feminist propoganda, not a serious speculation on the events that led up to Natalie retroactively discovering her relationship was problematic.

Well next time use a goofy emoticon to indicate you're not serious.

This one looks appropriate:

 

[angelo]

I think that and then I remember: Bill Cosby.

But different circumstances here. Where I really get stuck is how she described her clothing: typical business wear skirt, blouse, no pantyhose. Back in my DC days, I was really thin and had a hard time finding skirts with a small enough waist band--there was some extra room there. Still, I am certain that it would have been quite a struggle for any adult to stick their hand down my waist to my crotch area, even if I were cooperative (not to suggest anything at all about cooperation or non-cooperation of Tara Reade--I'm just saying that it seems like a difficult thing to do under the best of circumstances.) Alternatively, up her skirt---a pencil skirt? Again, not impossible but hard to imagine unless the skirt were way too big and even then. Now pull her in for a kiss with tongue, suggestions of other stuff, grabbing her ass or her breast? Plausible. It's the whole digital penetration WEARING THE OUTFIT SHE DESCRIBED part that I have some trouble with. If she had said: mini skirt--then sure, I could imagine that happening because it would have been relatively easy to accomplish. What she describes seems difficult to accomplish, especially in a hallway in a building with people in it, not some dark corner somewhere.

Yea, I just have a real problem believing her story. First, the story changed several times. It was reported late. Twice reported late. These are two issues that severely goes towards credibility. Tara isn't a typical helpless victim who dosn't understand the system. She's a lawyer. Then she claims that she reported the assaults to several women in Biden's employ who don't remember the assaults. Then she dosn't remember the date, time, or location of the assault (again, I think that the typical lawyer would understand the importance of documenting this). This is important because it robs Biden the ability to note an alibi if he has one. Then she claims that she lost her job over this which appears to be a lie. Then the Larry King show is very strange. Tara's mom calls a TV show anonymous, and she dosn't feel comfortable talking about the assault? Why would she downplay the seriousness of the event if she were anonymous? That Tara's said nothing about her daughter being sexually assaulted would lead many reasonable people to conclude that sexual assault was not the problem that prompted the call to King. It was something else. This story just dosn't ring true to me. Tara appears to be me to have a political axe to grind with Biden. She seems to love the spotlight that she's in now. She'll be a very popular hit on fox news. And I'm sure the Russian Bots are excited about this story!

Change the identities around to Trump instead of Creepy pedo Biden Tara Reade was accusing. Would you believe it then? We haven't heard from Biden as yet in his defense. He is supposed to make a statement Friday.
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/worl...llegation-on-friday/ar-BB13szeD?ocid=msedgdhp

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Change the identities around to Trump instead of Creepy pedo Biden Tara Reade was accusing. Would you believe it then? We haven't heard from Biden as yet in his defense. He is supposed to make a statement Friday.
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/worl...llegation-on-friday/ar-BB13szeD?ocid=msedgdhp

The sexual harassment claims fall in line with other complains of Biden acting a bit privileged. Much like how Trump's actions were backed by him actually saying he did it while bragging to Billy Bush on a bus.

Trump admits to the actions he was accused of and people are all like, it was just talk, but now these people want to hold Biden to the fire.

The accusation of sexual assault isn't in line with the other claims against Biden. Additionally, the claim of sexual assault wasn't part of Reade's original complaint. So there are some discrepancies.

 

[Toni]

Prove? No. But they are evidence. And the burden of proof is on the accuser, no matter how badly you want to flip it.

They aren't 'evidence' as much as you think they are. Lots of people who are assaulted need to continue to exist right alongside the person who assaulted them.

They were not married. They were not even boyfriend and girlfriend. In fact, evidence shows Mattress Girl wanted a relationship, and when he didn't want one, she decided to falsely accuse him of rape.

No, they weren't married but they attended the same school, had the same friends in common. It's really, really hard to stand against a member of your group. Boyfriend/girlfriend? Certainly not committed, but this was not the first time they slept together.

A lot of rape violence crimson blame themselves for the abuse, and seek to minimize what happened—even when they require treatment at the ER.

None of which applies here.

Of course it does.

The fact that multiple other individuals came forward to state that he was sexually violent with them gives a lot of credence to what is otherwise a he said/she said kind of case.

Not really. Columbia investigated and even with the low burden of proof Obama/Biden forced colleges to use, nothing came out of it.
Note also that the other accusers were friends with Mattress Girl. So collusion is likely.

They knew each other. They went to the same school, which is not large. It's not unusual to ask other people if something went missing after A was in their apartment/dorm room, if you noticed that A seemed to drink a lot if you think that A is depressed or why is A so angry. Crap, I had a girl in high school ask me about a guy she was dating that I had dated some time before (not involving sexual violence). I'm under the impression that a certain kind of guy asks more intimate details if he knows someone has slept with a particular girl. People talk to each other, and sometimes, it's to figure out if their perceptions/experiences match other people's perceptions/experiences.

And that he gets a lot of much needed therapy.

If anybody needs therapy, it's Mattress Girl.

Yes, victims of sexual assault tend to need therapy.

And so do people who have a problem with being violent or engaging in sexual violence. There's a better track record of helping victims than there is of helping perpetrators.

 

[repoman]

What is the plan to get Biden out before the convention?
He needs to "come down" with a medical condition unrelated to cognitive health.

Who will be nominated?

If you think about it, no one else could have beaten this half hearted effort from Bernie one on one other than Biden. The split field was also losing to Bernie. I think it will be Warren or Klobuchar.

The conspiratard in me says that Biden was setup to get here and then get Metoo'd (rightfully?) as a way to get someone other than Bernie nominated.

If Bernie was not a stalking horse, he would swoop in.

Trump has got to go, I hope it is done in a way to not bleed voters.

 

[ronburgundy]

I think that and then I remember: Bill Cosby.

But different circumstances here. Where I really get stuck is how she described her clothing: typical business wear skirt, blouse, no pantyhose. Back in my DC days, I was really thin and had a hard time finding skirts with a small enough waist band--there was some extra room there. Still, I am certain that it would have been quite a struggle for any adult to stick their hand down my waist to my crotch area, even if I were cooperative (not to suggest anything at all about cooperation or non-cooperation of Tara Reade--I'm just saying that it seems like a difficult thing to do under the best of circumstances.) Alternatively, up her skirt---a pencil skirt? Again, not impossible but hard to imagine unless the skirt were way too big and even then. Now pull her in for a kiss with tongue, suggestions of other stuff, grabbing her ass or her breast? Plausible. It's the whole digital penetration WEARING THE OUTFIT SHE DESCRIBED part that I have some trouble with. If she had said: mini skirt--then sure, I could imagine that happening because it would have been relatively easy to accomplish. What she describes seems difficult to accomplish, especially in a hallway in a building with people in it, not some dark corner somewhere.

Yea, I just have a real problem believing her story. First, the story changed several times. It was reported late. Twice reported late. These are two issues that severely goes towards credibility. Tara isn't a typical helpless victim who dosn't understand the system. She's a lawyer. Then she claims that she reported the assaults to several women in Biden's employ who don't remember the assaults. Then she dosn't remember the date, time, or location of the assault (again, I think that the typical lawyer would understand the importance of documenting this). This is important because it robs Biden the ability to note an alibi if he has one. Then she claims that she lost her job over this which appears to be a lie. Then the Larry King show is very strange. Tara's mom calls a TV show anonymous, and she dosn't feel comfortable talking about the assault? Why would she downplay the seriousness of the event if she were anonymous? That Tara's said nothing about her daughter being sexually assaulted would lead many reasonable people to conclude that sexual assault was not the problem that prompted the call to King. It was something else. This story just dosn't ring true to me. Tara appears to be me to have a political axe to grind with Biden. She seems to love the spotlight that she's in now. She'll be a very popular hit on fox news. And I'm sure the Russian Bots are excited about this story!

Change the identities around to Trump instead of Creepy pedo Biden Tara Reade was accusing. Would you believe it then? We haven't heard from Biden as yet in his defense. He is supposed to make a statement Friday.
https://www.msn.com/en-au/news/worl...llegation-on-friday/ar-BB13szeD?ocid=msedgdhp

Given that Trump was secretly recorded admitting to repeatedly engaging in sexual assault as casually as a hand-shake, yes, any rational person would give the accusation higher probability if it was against Trump. And given that 25 separate women have accused Trump of sexual assault that also massively raises the probable truth of any single accusation.

 

[Jarhyn]

So, I was in a problematic relationship. I was systematically abused, and both sexually and financially taken advantage of. There were at least two times where things came to a head with physical altercations.

I stayed in this relationship for about 6 years before I ended it. I didn't see the problems for around the first 4 years of the relationship.

It's entirely possible to be in a bad relationship and just not see how bad it is until long after.

It doesn't make him any less of an abusive fuck. It doesn't make me any less abused. It just means I was ignorant and let something awful continue because I was blinded by my own nievete.

And yet there are idiots who would claim that because I didn't leave him, or press charges at the time, or realize in the moment that I was being abused that I wasn't? Un-fucking-believable.

 

[PyramidHead]

Now we know that the same liberals who believed Kavanaugh and Moore's accusers were just doing that because it gave them another avenue to feel morally superior to Republicans, and have absolutely no compunctions about reading directly from the Republican playbook to cast aspersions on accusers who dare speak out against their preferred centrist pudding bowl of a candidate, or posting articles by champions of the Iraq WMD narrative to weigh in on what makes a story believable.

 

[Toni]

Now we know that the same liberals who believed Kavanaugh and Moore's accusers were just doing that because it gave them another avenue to feel morally superior to Republicans, and have absolutely no compunctions about reading directly from the Republican playbook to cast aspersions on accusers who dare speak out against their preferred centrist pudding bowl of a candidate, or posting articles by champions of the Iraq WMD narrative to weigh in on what makes a story believable.

As far as I can tell, no one is casting aspersions on Tara Reade. Her account is not terribly credible to a lot of people but people are calling for there to be an investigation or inquiry about these events.

As an inquiry was called for in Kavanaugh's case--but an inquiry was denied for Kavanaugh.

I'm sure there are people who want to play games about who is the most righteous but for the most part, people simply don't want to have people who rape or sexually assault other people elected or elevated to high office. Obviously, Republicans did not care at all about Trump's long, well documented and admitted history of sexually assaulting women. They also didn't care about Anita Hill's allegations against Clarence Thomas and one documented sexual abuser being insufficient, also successfully blocked any meaningful inquiry into Brett Kavanaugh, who had multiple allegations against him. Roy Moore was removed from office by the electorate who apparently gave more credence to the multiple accounts of his horrid behavior towards minor girls, including from people who stated that it was widely known what a creep he was and that the mall cops and people at ball games used to keep an eye on Moore for this very reason.

How much weight voters will give the allegations of ...touching someone's shoulders! or more improbably, wrestling some woman quite randomly in some hall or another in the Capitol Building is up to the voters.

 

[Koyaanisqatsi]

Now we know that...

You’re just as full of shit as you’ve ever been and pay no attention whatsoever to anything beyond your own preconceptions, at best.

 

[Emily Lake]

How do you go from the points I've made above to "Metaphor hates independent women"? Please spell it out for me, because I've never hated independent women.

I'm generally very open to discussions when I feel the other person is also interested and open to new ideas and thoughts. It's fairly apparent that your mind is made up, and that you are closed to any other way of thinking. That's fine, you're entitled to your beliefs, regardless of how objective or subjective they may be. But I'm not obligated to continue a discussion that will be fruitless and provides no enjoyment for me.

 

[Derec]

As an inquiry was called for in Kavanaugh's case--but an inquiry was denied for Kavanaugh.

What kind of inquiry are you envisioning? The accuser, CBF, claimed she could not remember where or when the alleged attack was supposed to have happened.

Obviously, Republicans did not care at all about Trump's long, well documented and admitted history of sexually assaulting women.

What particular assault did he admit to?

They also didn't care about Anita Hill's allegations against Clarence Thomas and one documented sexual abuser being insufficient,

The allegations against Thomas were quite ridiculous and the beginning of these witch hunts. These days any man can be frivolously accused and have their career derailed.

also successfully blocked any meaningful inquiry into Brett Kavanaugh, who had multiple allegations against him.

There was only one allegation of anything criminal and the accuser did not even specify time or place other than that it was about 30 years ago.
What kind of "meaningful inquiry" do you envision here? The farce of those Senate hearings was bad enough!

 

[Toni]

What kind of inquiry are you envisioning? The accuser, CBF, claimed she could not remember where or when the alleged attack was supposed to have happened.

So, this is different than Tara Reade how, exactly? Ford did tell others contemporaneously, not years later as Reade supposedly did and there were other people who spoke about how often Kavanaugh got black out drunk and how his habit of spiking drinks with qualuudes and engaging in gang rapes of unsuspecting female party goers and another who spoke out about Kavanaugh forcing her to touch his penis. You can read about it here. The Senate, in all of its wisdom, declined to investigate such claims against a nominee for the Supreme Court.

No one is suggesting that Tara Reade's allegations should not be investigated.

What particular assault did he admit to?

I'm sure you've heard the tape about pussy grabbing and I'm sure you've also heard about him talking about 'moving on her like a bitch but I couldn't get there.' The allegations against Trump are significantly worse than those against Biden with the lone exception of this new claim by Reade.

They also didn't care about Anita Hill's allegations against Clarence Thomas and one documented sexual abuser being insufficient,

The allegations against Thomas were quite ridiculous and the beginning of these witch hunts. These days any man can be frivolously accused and have their career derailed.

The allegations against Thomas were not ridiculous. His behavior was abhorrent. So far, I cannot think of a single man whose career has been derailed by any allegation of sexual misconduct, including Thomas, Kavannaugh, Trump, Or Bill Clinton.

also successfully blocked any meaningful inquiry into Brett Kavanaugh, who had multiple allegations against him.

There was only one allegation of anything criminal and the accuser did not even specify time or place other than that it was about 30 years ago.
What kind of "meaningful inquiry" do you envision here? The farce of those Senate hearings was bad enough!

Please read the link above. He allegedly spiked drinks and lured unsuspecting women into rooms where they were gang raped. That is certainly criminal. It may/may not have been criminal by statute in the day to force a woman to touch your penis. I'm not familiar with the code in that day. Trump's ex accused him of rape and his defense was that it was impossible for a married man to rape his wife. And by statute, at that time, it was not considered rape or sexual assault. There was no counter allegation of: she's being vindictive. Nope, just: It wasn't rape because they were married.

 

[ZiprHead]

They also didn't care about Anita Hill's allegations against Clarence Thomas and one documented sexual abuser being insufficient,

The allegations against Thomas were quite ridiculous and the beginning of these witch hunts. These days any man can be frivolously accused and have their career derailed.

It's been a long time but there were other women who said CT harassed them the same way AH said she was harassed. They weren't allowed to testify. There was also a reporter that checked video stores near where Thomas lived and found he did indeed rent Long Dong Silver.

He perjured himself in his confirmation hearing.

 

[Elixir]

He perjured himself in his confirmation hearing.

Yeah? So?

 

[Metaphor]

How do you go from the points I've made above to "Metaphor hates independent women"? Please spell it out for me, because I've never hated independent women.

I'm generally very open to discussions when I feel the other person is also interested and open to new ideas and thoughts. It's fairly apparent that your mind is made up, and that you are closed to any other way of thinking. That's fine, you're entitled to your beliefs, regardless of how objective or subjective they may be. But I'm not obligated to continue a discussion that will be fruitless and provides no enjoyment for me.

Okay, so you have nothing. You can't point to a single thing I've written to demonstrate that I hate "independent women". It's an accusation you manufactured and declared without evidence.

 

[laughing dog]

How do you go from the points I've made above to "Metaphor hates independent women"? Please spell it out for me, because I've never hated independent women.

I'm generally very open to discussions when I feel the other person is also interested and open to new ideas and thoughts. It's fairly apparent that your mind is made up, and that you are closed to any other way of thinking. That's fine, you're entitled to your beliefs, regardless of how objective or subjective they may be. But I'm not obligated to continue a discussion that will be fruitless and provides no enjoyment for me.

Okay, so you have nothing. You can't point to a single thing I've written to demonstrate that I hate "independent women". It's an accusation you manufactured and declared without evidence.

If anyone should appreciate that beliefs are involuntary and that one cannot will what one believes, it ought to be you.