Discussion in 'GatorNana's Too Hot for Swamp Gas' started by Gator515151, Apr 24, 2020.
The sniffers going down..The cupboards kinda bare..How did that happen?
Even the community organizer just last week had to hold his nose and endorse HIS former VP.. JS
This was the case all along. The Dem establishment wanted a candidate who was simply a vessel for them to run their radical agenda through, and Biden is the perfect fool...er, tool. Even he's unwilling to say whether or not he'd run for re-election in four years. Tells you all you need to know.
If you vote Democratic in 2020, you're voting for the Vice President to be the real leader of the party/agenda. Pay close attention to what they tell you about themselves...and believe them.
But we should believe a guy who plagiarized a paper in college?
Sexual assault has been expanded recently to mean any unwanted touching of sexual means, which in the past would have been considered sexual harassment.
Digitally penetrating a woman without her consent was not considered merely sexual harassment during the 90's. Regardless, I need not bicker with you over that. The issue isn't one of terminology. Her mother didn't use sexual harassment or sexual assault in the transcript. The point I made is that her mother's transcript matched the allegations she made in 2019, which wasn't one of digital penetration. It does not match the claims she's making now.
Then you get my point. Sexual assault was synonymous with rape at that time, and not unwanted touching. Her mom came from the generation where grabbing and inappropriate touching was acceptable and swept under the rug. Fear of retaliation would also cause someone to watch what they said.
That's not what I'm saying, but this conversation isn't important if you read my later post. Here it is:
The guy that died from ingesting fish tank cleaner was Gary Lenius and according to this article his wife was overbearing and potentially abusive of Mr. Lenius. Draw your own conclusions, but Mr. Lenius did not die because Trump was promoting hydroxychloroquine as part of a treatment regimen.
Man Who Died Ingesting Fish Tank Cleaner Remembered as Intelligent, Levelheaded Engineer
She told members of Biden's political staff and they claim she didn't? That is not exactly shocking, especially since it was the early '90's when Ted Kennedy was still in the Senate. As far as I have read, Ms. Reade's compliant would be part of Biden's Senate files which were dedicated to U of Delaware and will not be released before the 2020 election.
Again, you tell me on Reade's assault and why it did not happen. Personally, I don't buy it at this stage and I agree that the third woman has now caused me to pause and consider it and look at it more seriously, which is why I was asking you to lay out the background as it seems you have studied this more. Biden has always come off as handsy and overly familiar but he did not have the reputation in the Senate or in the Wilmington or Delaware shore communities as being a womanizer where stories of things like that do not stay quiet.
The biggest issue for me on this thing is the hypocrisy of the media and many on the left in the way they treated this story vs Dr. Fords. If Biden was a Republican running for POTUS, this would be on the news 24/7 just behind every COVID-19 story. Remember that the NYTimes ran a front page hit piece against McCain in '08 about him possibly having an affair with a lobbyist on much less than Ms. Reade has provided at this point.
I'm sorry but you want it both ways here. Either Dr. Ford could deal with flying when she had to whether for work or vacation or she could not. If you are saying she couldn't fly because of the pressure awaiting her in DC, why did she refuse an interview in California?
The Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman did offer to send a team to interview Dr. Ford in California. Either she or her lawyers she refused that offer.
Judiciary Committee Continues Effort to Accommodate Testimony from Dr. Ford Next Week | United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary
I know you will not agree with this but you have to admit this is plausible. As the Dr. Ford's legal team was in negotiations about if and when she would testify and the day before Grassley wanted Dr. Ford to testify, Ms. Rodriquez came forward, which Dr. Ford's legal team would likely be aware of, and Michael Avenatti stated he had a third woman willing to come forward. Avenatti states this woman was so trustworthy she had held a secret clearance in the past. This was following a pattern of the MeToo movement where one accusation would come out, followed by several more, and the person being accused would be fired or resign, Matt Lauer, Charlie Rose, etc. The momentum seemed to be against Kavanaugh at the time. The Dr. Ford's claims of fear of flying and refusing to meet with Senate Investigators that were willing to come and meet with her in California appear to be an attempt to delay having to testify or go on record in the hopes that Kavanaugh's nomination would be withdrawn before it had to happen and Dr. Ford could avoid being in the public eye.
Dr. Ford changed her story several times. As you noted, her therapist notes said it was four boys not two. That would be a pretty big detail to get wrong in the notes. Dr. Ford also changed the time of the alleged attack from the mid-80's to the early 80's. The mid-80's would have been problematic because Kavanuagh would have been in Yale in by then. Dr. Ford also changed the number of people at the party, first it was four boys and then it was four boys and a girl. Dr. Ford also changed the description of the house. Her first description did not fit the layout of any of the homes that the boys lived in at the time. During her testimony, she described the house differently.
One other thing that doesn't help Dr. Ford, she told the WahPo that she was upset about Trump winning because Kavanaugh was mentioned as a possible SCOTUS pick for Trump. The problem is Kavanaugh was not on the list Trump said he would pick from in '16 and was only added to a revised list in Nov of '18.
This is actually the most relatable thing any politician has ever done
Does anyone really think he's going down? He'll deny it (or not say anything about it) and nothing will happen, a lot of people will lose their credibility on anything #MeToo related, and the world will still be as awful as it already is, that's how these things work.
Since the subject is sure to come up again, Biden technically committed an act of plagiarism because he quoted a paragraph from a law review article verbatim in a paper and only included a footnote at the end of the last sentence of the paragraph. If he bothered to reset the tabs on his typewriter (a quaint technology long obsolete) offsetting the paragraph from the rest of the text in the paper what he did would have been perfectly acceptable or alternatively used a footnote at the end of every sentence in the paragraph.
I have no idea weather accusation is true or not.
Joe Biden’s #MeToo Karma
Indeed, the caller doesn’t even mention sexual harassment, and it is worth noting that Reade has claimed that some of her issues at Biden’s office were unrelated to harassment — for instance, that she “pushed back” on diversity in the intern pool after being directed to hire only children of Dupont employees. (Bizarrely, she says she wanted to hire “more women,” as if Dupont employees had mainly sons.) But let’s assume that the call was about perceived sexual harassment. Why would Altimus leave out the worst part of her daughter’s experience, use as mild a term as “problems” in reference to sexual assault, and claim that her daughter was staying silent out of “respect” for a rapist — a rapist masquerading as an advocate for rape victims, no less?
What are you talking about? @gator_lawyer called @CaptUSMCNole out twice in this thread for his loose relationship with the truth, including in the post I quoted.
Post 170 -- Capt says "two more people just came forward to say that Ms. Reade told them about it as well." "It" being her current sexual assault allegations. But oh wait. A cursory look shows only one person did that, while the other claims that Reade only told her about harassment (consistent with her brother's original account as well, before he changed his story to match Reade's).
Post 197 -- Capt says "Ms. Reade doesn’t have four people who were supposed to be there denying it happened." Except multiple witnesses deny core aspects of her claim, including that she made a complaint about the assault and was supposedly let go because of it. Again, this is easily verifiable. At best, you can parse the word "there" to be limited to the alleged assault itself and not the supposed events surrounding it. But the problem is, when you try to mince words such that they are only truthful from a "certain point of view," but are otherwise grossly misleading, people quickly see through the charade and your credibility is shot -- permanently. Anyone who has been in front of a jury knows that.
As for your last comment, if Reade is willing to go under oath and subject herself to cross exam, I'm all for it. Despite her troubled past, her changing story, and her apparent political activism, if she's willing to raise her right hand and swear to the current version of her story, she deserves to be heard. So far, there's no indication she's willing to do so. Until that happens, there's a whole host of reasons to discount her claims and very few to suggest they are true.
If Biden wants to go give anything to possibly help make this go away, just have the complaint of Tara Reade that was filed released to the media and public.
How you on the left are reacting to this after the disgusting display against Brett shows everything I need to know about the dems. Hypocrisy on full display here. Believe all women and MeToo... we see you now for what you really are.
Again, the therapist was jotting down notes during Blasely-Ford's session. The therapist notes are second hand information, and Blasely-Ford actual, first-hand account of the story never changed. The therapist is not a stenographer, and as the game of telephone we all played in grade school shows, every time a story is told and then re-told, there is a chance that the second hand person retelling the story doesn't get all the details 100% correct. Is it not possible that the therapist notes are not 100% correct, since at the time the therapist wrote the notes, he/she was listening to the story, writing it down, all while analyzing the situation so he/she could help Ms. Blasely-Ford?
With Reade, the story she tells herself has changed. Significantly, from one of harassment to outright assault. It's possible the story Reade told her Mother was one of refusing to serve drinks and not the assault story itself because Reade was embarrassed to tell the truth and was scared that if the truth got out, it would further damage her career. It's highly unlikely that Reade told her mother the full out assault story, because during the call to King, Reade's mother said Reade doesn't want to pursue criminal charges out of respect for the Senator. What women, or women's mother, respects the person they allege assaulted them like Reade accuses Biden of assault?
If we are to hold both Blasely-Ford and Reade to the same standard, we need to believe both women could be telling the truth, but the corroborating evidence in both cases isn't very strong. Perhaps had the FBI investigated the second allegation against Kavanaugh, the story might have been different. With Reade, there is still time for more evidence to come to light, and nobody should be ready to dismiss the allegation today. But assuming no more evidence is ever presented, Reade's case is at best as weak as Blasey-Ford's case.
If you really want it, here it is, in all its one-sentence, anonymous glory.