“I would just say to Joe Biden, ‘Just go out and fight it,'” Trump said in a podcast interview with Dan Bongino. “He’s going to have to make his own decision, I’m not going to be telling him what to do. Biden is going to have to go out and fight his own battles.” “If President Trump had said yeah, ‘Joe Biden is guilty,’ that would totally open up Trump for the same accusations and you know that would be just automatic,” Adams said. “So President Trump didn’t really have a play to talk about it at all.” “There’s nobody else in the world who would have found that path, it’s so, it’s so perfect,” the Dilbert creator added, in awe. “The president is embracing Biden…” “The president is using as a kill-shot that his opponent is just like him. Do you understand how sublime that is?” Adams asked. “Because there’s only one person in the race who can survive being just like Trump, and it’s not Joe Biden.” “The more Trump says, ‘Yeah, we’re like brothers. We’re practically the same guy. I lie, he lies, I’ve got some allegations, he’s got some allegations. You know, … we’re practically bros,'” the better it is for the president’s campaign. By identifying himself with Biden and daring Biden to defend himself, Trump not only taints his opposition but also draws attention to Tara Reade’s claims. The president took a situation where the sexual assault claims against him might very well become the bigger story, but he pivoted around it perfectly. “This is like somebody getting out of the escape room when there’s no escape,” Scott Adams said. “How the hell did he find this path? You know, in a million years, if you hired the best consultants in the world… The way you know that this came from him and did not come from an advisor or a paid consultant is that no paid consultant could come up with this plan.”
Brian? wrote: » Get out of that. You were giving our about the media double standards, now that's been flatly disprove you're pivoting to a new angle of attack.
notobtuse wrote: » When did I ever say I was unbiased on anything? I'm biased as he'll, I thought it was evident. My point has always been you can't let the genie out of the bottle, as democrats did, and then pretend it didn't happen. I'm railing against hypocrisy and the double standards... one for democrats and another for republicans. You can't have your cake and eat it, too.
Pa ElGrande wrote: » Trump Said 'Good Morning.' Here's How 12 Different News Outlets Covered His Controversial Claim
Brian? wrote: » I thought you were unbiased on whether it was true or not? You only cared that it wasn’t being reported by the media? That tune has changed pretty quick now Biden was asked about it was on MSNBC, the American Pravda.
notobtuse wrote: » An excellent read and explanation of the clusterf#ck of a process it actually took for someone to make a sexual harassment complaint back in 1993. Seems records that could give validity will be released… in 2043. Also of importance note: Really worth the read. Curiouser and curiouserhttps://hotair.com/archives/ed-morrissey/2020/05/01/wapo-say-doesnt-biden-open-records-people-outside-campaign/
But that makes one thing all the more perplexing: the way Biden dodged co-host Mika Brzezinski’s repeated questions about the records of his Senate years that are under seal at the University of Delaware. Why, she asked him again and again, does he not open those archives to scrutiny? Biden didn’t adequately address the “why.” He simply kept repeating that those files do not contain personnel records. We are expected to take his word for that. There is a good chance that Biden is telling the truth. But even if he is, those boxes of material might hold many other items that could be relevant: memos from staff members that mention Reade or her allegation, schedules that convey a sense of how much contact he had with Reade. The materials might include documents that speak to the general culture in the office. There might be … Well, we just don’t know what might be there, because Biden won’t let anyone see them.
Bear in mind that Reade and seven other women went public with sexual-harassment claims in April 2019, immediately after Biden’s entry into the race. That certainly might have been the impetus for a records search — or perhaps a record purge — even before Reade’s allegation got more specific and serious. This review, at the very least, makes Biden’s insistence that no one can access the University of Delaware archives for some structural reason a clear and obvious lie.
Quin_Dub wrote: » You are correct "Sexual Harassment" is the term used , which she now says was "Biden made her feel uncomfortable" From the Fox News link From the Washington Examiner My point about the Outside Senate Personnel Office still stands - We are to take it they they got this complaint , did absolutely nothing with it and then simply handed all records of said complaint back to the office of the accused? I know the article says that all records eventually go back to the Senators office , but did they do nothing about it?. No follow up contacts , no interviews with the complainant?? She doesn't mention being contacted by people from that office at all , she only talks about talking with people from the Biden team, which they deny. Validation or denial of the report from someone from that Office would go a long way to bringing clarity . There can't have been massive numbers of people in that office in 1993 surely? She has also shared copious notes about other parts of her time working in the Senate in her other media pieces unconnected to this allegation ,but she has no copies whatsoever of this most important period?
notobtuse wrote: » Oh, thanks. It seems I continue to remain thick. I see the FoxNews piece notes that a "former staffer Tara Reade publicly accuses Joe Biden of sexual assault in a podcast," and in the WT piece "That would mean no operatives have accessed the archive since Reade went public with her allegations of sexual assault in late March," but I don't see where she claims she filed a 'sexual assault' charge back in 1993 against Biden.
Reade alleges that back in 1993, she had made informal complaints about the then-Delaware senator's unwanted touching to Biden's chief-of-staff Ted Kaufman, as well as Marianne Baker, his executive assistant, but waited until after the alleged assault to file an external sexual harassment complaint.
Reade suspects that a sexual harassment complaint she filed with an outside Senate personnel office in 1993 may be stored in the archives, or that it could include notes from meetings she said she had with top staff members about harassment or information about retaliation she said she suffered after coming forward with the claims.
Quin_Dub wrote: » Sorry for the confusion - The point about the Fox News and Washington examiner links were that in those articles she is quoted as saying she lodged a complaint of "Sexual Assault" however in the tweet I linked earlier she is now saying that the complaint was that "Biden made her uncomfortable" which are two very different things. I find it hard to believe that an independent Senate watchdog group would receive a complaint of Sexual assault , do absolutely nothing with it and then simply hand it back to the office of the accused Senator for Archive or Disposal. If that is/was actually the practice then who the hell knows who does what in the Senate?!
notobtuse wrote: » I read the FoxNews link you provided. I must be thick. Please point me to where in the piece it indicates she changed her story. I also read the Washington Examiner link. I'll not the following: Sure seems like she believed she filed a complaint. Also, isn't that bolded part interesting?
Quin_Dub wrote: » She initially claimed she had lodged a complaint of "Sexual assault" against Biden , she is now saying that the complaint was that "Biden made her feel uncomfortable". This was from an earlier Fox news Report There's also one from the Washington Examiner again talking about a "Sexual Assault complaint" So , did she lodge a complaint about Sexual assault or not? If I'm someone in a Senatorial oversight team dealing with these incoming complaints , I'd treat a complaint of "I was Sexually Assaulted" VERY differently to "He makes me uncomfortable" . The 1st one is absolutely a Criminal offence if found guilty , the 2nd could be anything from an overbearing Shouty Boss to sexual harassment that might rise to the level of criminality..
Reade suspects that a sexual harassment complaint she filed with an outside Senate personnel office in 1993 may be stored in the archives, or that it could include notes from meetings she said she had with top staff members about harassment or information about retaliation she said she suffered after coming forward with the claims. Three top staffers vehemently deny hearing about her allegations, but two former interns have said they remember Reade abruptly losing intern supervision duties. Ted Kaufman, Biden's then-chief of staff, who later became a senator and is now heading up putting together a Biden transition team in case he wins in November, "took notes when I spoke with him," Reade told Business Insider. "He's now denying that we ever had the meeting, and I watched him take notes. Those notes would be in my personnel file, along with sick days or any kind of extra notes that I turn in."There is no guarantee that the archive contains information about Reade. It is up to each former senator what they choose to make public from their personal files.
notobtuse wrote: » You say she had changing versions of events to the complaint? What were those changing versions on her part? We know they were allowed in when he announced he was running for president, as reported. I'm confident they were allowed in any time they wanted, including before 2008.
Quin_Dub wrote: » What about her changing version of events relating to the complaint? When were Bidens staff "allowed to comb through these files" ? Before 2008 when he would have been vetted for VP?
notobtuse wrote: » That assuming the people responsible for keeping such a report didn't put it in the 'circular file' to protect Biden. And even if they did file it, remember Sandy "docs in my socks" Burger? Biden's staff were allowed to comb through those sealed files. Lovely people those democrats are.
Quin_Dub wrote: » Just on this - Tara Reade now says that she didn't report the assault , she now says that she lodged a complaint saying that "Biden made her feel uncomfortable" , which is not quite the same thing at all. This is yet another shift of the story from Tara Reade.https://twitter.com/marykbruce/status/1256197317235027968 The 1st reply to the above tweet makes a valid point - If this report was in fact lodged back in 1993 and was in the records , then the Obama/DNC teams would have found it back in 2008 or so when they were vetting Biden for VP and if it had merit , Biden would not have been selected.
dark crystal wrote: » I believe she has a right to be heard
and for justice to be served if her account can be proven.
The difficulty with sexual assault cases without independent witnesses present, is that there is always a 'he said, she said,' aspect, which can be notoriously difficult to prove on either side.
notobtuse wrote: » Tara Reade has tried to track down the complaint she made against Biden back in 1993. Complaints of this kind were handled by the Senate Office of Fair Employment Practices in 1993, which was replaced by the Office of Congressional Workplace Rights (OCWR) following the passage of the Congressional Accountability Act in 1995. But she was told the records would have been returned to Biden’s office. Yeah, like he would have held onto them so they could bite him in the ass with any future political ambitions. I’m confident they won’t find anything in his sealed Senate files. It’s democrats we’re talking about! Remember Sandy “docs in his socks" Burger? Right after Biden announced he was running for president his staff was given access and combed through his records. Think anything incriminating remains? If you do I have a bridge in New York to sell you. That complaint of Reade’s probably went directly in the ‘circular file’ and then they stripped her of duties supervising interns, stuck her in a small office without windows, and told her to go find another job. Face it... if people involved back in 1993 who were responsible for handling, dealing with, and holding onto such complaints are now lying and saying it never happened in order to protect Biden, they surely covered up for him back then as well. You don’t get to the point of running for president as a democrat without avoiding a lot of landmines.
2u2me wrote: » Your premise is faulty Just because 'Kavanaugh got the job' doesn't mean Ford 'was disbelieved'. Thankfully his jury wasn't one of public opinion. The presidency IS! She raised millions of dollars on her go fund me. I bet you ask just about any democrat in the US they will say they believe her. Now ask those same people about Tara Reade. Due process... something something... no facts.. something something...
dark crystal wrote: » You haven't heard her (almost identical) story? Yet you've heard Tara Reade's?Hmm..biased media didn't seem to do their job very well with that one!
notobtuse wrote: » Haven't heard about that one. Couldn't say one way or another unless I went back and looked at all the reporting done on it.
dark crystal wrote: » Let's leave Blasey Ford aside for a moment. She got her hearing and her story was disbelieved to the extent that Kavanaugh got the job. Therefore, it's a bit of a non sequiter when discussing Reade's accusations v Trump's numerous accusers, who haven't been given such a forum.
dark crystal wrote: » Ouch? I believe she has a right to be heard and for justice to be served if her account can be proven. I believe that to be true of any accusation, not just those made of politicians. The difficulty with sexual assault cases without independent witnesses present, is that there is always a 'he said, she said,' aspect, which can be notoriously difficult to prove on either side. My point being, Notobtuse can throw shade at Biden over one accusation, yet he is less prone to throw the same shade at Trump over 22 accusations. He then talks in terms of hypocrisy, which rankles somewhat, given his own biased position.
Outlaw Pete wrote: » Do you believe her?
notobtuse wrote: » Ouch!
Brian? wrote: » I'll and again so. What legal mechanism is there for a Senate investigation?
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) said on Thursday that he expected former Vice President Joe Biden will "have to participate" in releasing information related to a sexual assault allegation from former Biden staffer Tara Reade.
