Joe Biden defense thread

[JoeThree]

So, a lot of people on here are Leftists. I get that, I was young and dumb once too, but what I don't understand is the Leftist defense of Joe Biden after his accusations by Tara Reade. Whatever happened to believing all women?, or are Principles just something for the Right?

I know you're all going to say "Well, he's better than Trump hurr durr" or some such nonsense, so let's cut that off now. Instead, I want to know why you still support a man, with strong evidence he's a sexual predator, in this election, on his own merits.

In short, what has Joe Biden done for you lately that you're willing to overlook his child sniffing, back-of-the-head-kissing, up-skirt-groping, all-without-consent, senile ass WITHOUT just saying "Orange man bad".

[J!!]

Ok, I'll bite.

I do not believe Tara Reade.

My reasons for this are as follows:

- Men who commit sexual assault as described in Reade's typically do so more than once, especially if they get away with it. This may go unreported for years, but are often the subject of rumors, and once a public accusation is made, other victims will typically come forward with their own stories.
-- Joe Biden has been an elected official for nearly fifty years, and to my knowledge, there have been no similar claims or rumors.
--- When asked, women who have worked with Biden during this time have all stated that the behavior described is inconsistent with their own experiences. None claimed to remember any complaints or rumors of a sexual nature form that time.
-- Following the accusation, no other women have come forward with accusations of sexual assault.
--- While other women have stated that they felt uncomfortable by acts of unwanted physical contact by Biden, none of them described the contact as sexual in nature. Most consist of touches to the shoulder or head. None claimed the incident crossed the line into assault.

- The allegation is, to the best of my knowledge completely unsupported by any material evidence, or first-hand witnesses.
-- There are currently two second-hand witnesses who claim that Reade told them of the alleged assault, neither is able to provide contemporary documentation.

- Tara Reade herself has poor apparent credibility, as her story has changed numerous times since going public, and has a number of inconsistencies. Furthermore, it seems that every time she is challenged on verifiable facts, she backtracks and changes her story.
-- Reade initially claimed that she left Biden's employment because she felt "pushed out" after refusing to serve drinks at a fundraiser. However, a year later her story changed and she claimed that she had been fired after lodging a complaint complaint with the Senate's personnel.
-- Reade claims to have filed an official complaint with the Senate's personnel dept, however no such complaint has been found in any record.
--- The name of the supervisor that Reade claims to have complained to at the time of the assault has changed since the initial accusation. None of the people she mentioned claim to remember any such complaint.
--- When Biden asked that the Library of Congress search for and release any complaints against him, Reade's story changed again, now claiming that the report made no specific accusation, and no mention of sexual harassment or assault.

-If Joe Biden were a sexual predator, there have been forty-seven years for it to come to light, yet it's never come up.
-- He ran for senate eight times, and it never came up.
-- He ran for president four times, and it never came up.
-- He was vetted by the Obama team as a VP pick, and it never came up.
-- Republicans spent eight years trying to dig up dirt on the Obama administration, and it never came up.
-- Rudy Giuliani went to Ukraine to dig up dirt on Biden, and it never came up.

- Finally, there is a serious 'boy who cried wolf' problem with this entire story. Specifically that it's following a long pattern of attempts to vilify and discredit Joe Biden: an accusatory narrative is forged from cherry-picked half-truths, it gets traction in far-right and far-left echo chambers, it gets abandoned when it fails to catch on outside those echo chambers, the patterns starts again with a new narrative.
-- They tried to call him a segregationist because he voted against busing students between school districts in 1974.
--- People didn't buy that narrative, because it is inconsistent with what they know of his actual policy positions.
--- Most non-radicalized people are able to understand that disagreeing with a particular solution to a problem does not mean someone is against solving the problem.
-- They tried to claim he was undetectable because the 2016 election showed that Americans don't want a moderate liberal candidate.
--- This was disproven when Biden crushed all other candidates in the Democratic primary elections.
--- The narrative completely ignores all of the many, many complex factors that effected the outcome in 2016.
-- They cherry-pick video clips of Biden stuttering, or speaking off-the-cuff in order to claim that he's in a cognitive decline.
--- People outside the echo chambers don't buy this, because they can see the clips in their original context, which directly contradicts the narrative.
--- Furthermore, Biden's tendency to gaffe and lack of verbal filter is a well known part of his public persona, and was generally considered endearing throughout his service as vice-president.


It is possible that I am wrong, but this whole thing smells like a political smear-job, and unless further evidence comes to light, I am inclined to believe Joe Biden.

Accusations such as Reade's should always be taken seriously and investigated rigorously, but 'innocent until proven guilty' still applies for good reason. Specifically, that when accusations are treated as evidence in themselves, bad actors will take advantage of that bias for their own ends. Because of the tragic history of sexual violence, in which victims have often been ignored or dismissed, it can be extremely tempting to believe every accusation that comes forth. But our empathy for those victims, and regret for the injustices of the past must not lead us to overcompensate by neglecting due process, lest we create new injustices for the future.



These are the sources I used while checking my facts.

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2020/04/29/what-is-disturbing-about-tara-reades-allegations/
https://www.businessinsider.com/joe-biden-allegations-women-2020-campaign-2019-6?op=1
https://www.npr.org/2020/04/19/837966525/on-the-record-a-former-biden-staffers-sexual-assault-allegation
https://apnews.com/aec7beb03e9e0e0e6e3c58111293e0ea

[JoeThree]

Ok, I'll bite.

I do not believe Tara Reade.

My reasons for this are as follows:

- Men who commit sexual assault as described in Reade's typically do so more than once, especially if they get away with it. This may go unreported for years, but are often the subject of rumors, and once a public accusation is made, other victims will typically come forward with their own stories.
-- Joe Biden has been an elected official for nearly fifty years, and to my knowledge, there have been no similar claims or rumors.
--- When asked, women who have worked with Biden during this time have all stated that the behavior described is inconsistent with their own experiences. None claimed to remember any complaints or rumors of a sexual nature form that time.
-- Following the accusation, no other women have come forward with accusations of sexual assault.
--- While other women have stated that they felt uncomfortable by acts of unwanted physical contact by Biden, none of them described the contact as sexual in nature. Most consist of touches to the shoulder or head. None claimed the incident crossed the line into assault.

- The allegation is, to the best of my knowledge completely unsupported by any material evidence, or first-hand witnesses.
-- There are currently two second-hand witnesses who claim that Reade told them of the alleged assault, neither is able to provide contemporary documentation.

- Tara Reade herself has poor apparent credibility, as her story has changed numerous times since going public, and has a number of inconsistencies. Furthermore, it seems that every time she is challenged on verifiable facts, she backtracks and changes her story.
-- Reade initially claimed that she left Biden's employment because she felt "pushed out" after refusing to serve drinks at a fundraiser. However, a year later her story changed and she claimed that she had been fired after lodging a complaint complaint with the Senate's personnel.
-- Reade claims to have filed an official complaint with the Senate's personnel dept, however no such complaint has been found in any record.
--- The name of the supervisor that Reade claims to have complained to at the time of the assault has changed since the initial accusation. None of the people she mentioned claim to remember any such complaint.
--- When Biden asked that the Library of Congress search for and release any complaints against him, Reade's story changed again, now claiming that the report made no specific accusation, and no mention of sexual harassment or assault.

-If Joe Biden were a sexual predator, there have been forty-seven years for it to come to light, yet it's never come up.
-- He ran for senate eight times, and it never came up.
-- He ran for president four times, and it never came up.
-- He was vetted by the Obama team as a VP pick, and it never came up.
-- Republicans spent eight years trying to dig up dirt on the Obama administration, and it never came up.
-- Rudy Giuliani went to Ukraine to dig up dirt on Biden, and it never came up.

- Finally, there is a serious 'boy who cried wolf' problem with this entire story. Specifically that it's following a long pattern of attempts to vilify and discredit Joe Biden: an accusatory narrative is forged from cherry-picked half-truths, it gets traction in far-right and far-left echo chambers, it gets abandoned when it fails to catch on outside those echo chambers, the patterns starts again with a new narrative.
-- They tried to call him a segregationist because he voted against busing students between school districts in 1974.
--- People didn't buy that narrative, because it is inconsistent with what they know of his actual policy positions.
--- Most non-radicalized people are able to understand that disagreeing with a particular solution to a problem does not mean someone is against solving the problem.
-- They tried to claim he was undetectable because the 2016 election showed that Americans don't want a moderate liberal candidate.
--- This was disproven when Biden crushed all other candidates in the Democratic primary elections.
--- The narrative completely ignores all of the many, many complex factors that effected the outcome in 2016.
-- They cherry-pick video clips of Biden stuttering, or speaking off-the-cuff in order to claim that he's in a cognitive decline.
--- People outside the echo chambers don't buy this, because they can see the clips in their original context, which directly contradicts the narrative.
--- Furthermore, Biden's tendency to gaffe and lack of verbal filter is a well known part of his public persona, and was generally considered endearing throughout his service as vice-president.


It is possible that I am wrong, but this whole thing smells like a political smear-job, and unless further evidence comes to light, I am inclined to believe Joe Biden.

Accusations such as Reade's should always be taken seriously and investigated rigorously, but 'innocent until proven guilty' still applies for good reason. Specifically, that when accusations are treated as evidence in themselves, bad actors will take advantage of that bias for their own ends. Because of the tragic history of sexual violence, in which victims have often been ignored or dismissed, it can be extremely tempting to believe every accusation that comes forth. But our empathy for those victims, and regret for the injustices of the past must not lead us to overcompensate by neglecting due process, lest we create new injustices for the future.



These are the sources I used while checking my facts.

https://washingtonmonthly.com/2020/04/29/what-is-disturbing-about-tara-reades-allegations/
https://www.businessinsider.com/joe-biden-allegations-women-2020-campaign-2019-6?op=1
https://www.npr.org/2020/04/19/837966525/on-the-record-a-former-biden-staffers-sexual-assault-allegation
https://apnews.com/aec7beb03e9e0e0e6e3c58111293e0ea

What about the phone call from her mother to Larry King in 1993?

There's also been at least 2 other women who have claimed assault by Biden.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/25/politics/tara-reade-mom-larry-king/index.html

[BridgeConsoleMasher]

I like how this forum has its own G Gordon Godfrey now.

[J!!]

What about the phone call from her mother to Larry King in 1993?

There's also been at least 2 other women who have claimed assault by Biden.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/25/politics/tara-reade-mom-larry-king/index.html

It was an anonymous call, which mentioned no names. So there's no way to verrify that it was Reade's mother. And even if we could, there were no specific details mentioned, making it of limited evidentiary value.

Also, I am not aware of any other assault accusations against Biden. Do you have a link to that?

[JoeThree]

What about the phone call from her mother to Larry King in 1993?

There's also been at least 2 other women who have claimed assault by Biden.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/04/25/politics/tara-reade-mom-larry-king/index.html

It was an anonymous call, which mentioned no names. So there's no way to verrify that it was Reade's mother. And even if we could, there were no specific details mentioned, making it of limited evidentiary value.

Also, I am not aware of any other assault accusations against Biden. Do you have a link to that?

Sure thing: https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/04/joe-biden-inappropriate-touching-accusations-list.html

Even from a Left-y site.

[JoeThree]

I like how this forum has its own G Gordon Godfrey now.

Ha! This post makes me want to change me name to that, now.

[Captain Crimson]

The point in the end is there is no defense. It's just a severe case of massive confirmation bias on either side. Why not bring this to trial to determine the validity of those allegations, with some actual forensic evidence? Because, in the end, they can't do it. A trial takes months, which hurts Mr. Biden's PR image, and they are too razor-focused on winning the election. We gotta make those sacrifices for the "greater good," after all. They just dismiss it because it's "my side, your side is the only one that's guilty of that!" Yet they never reflect on the possibility it could be true. What if it is? Mr. Biden would essentially be a horrible president for women and girls because he's a man who got away with it. As for me, while belief costs me nothing, I have that luxury, because I'm a low-grunt warehouse worker. I'm not in any position of power to affect the outcome here one way or another. They need to be held to a higher standard. This is just ridiculous to the H...

[Draco Dracul]

So, a lot of people on here are Leftists. I get that, I was young and dumb once too, but what I don't understand is the Leftist defense of Joe Biden after his accusations by Tara Reade. Whatever happened to believing all women?, or are Principles just something for the Right?

I know you're all going to say "Well, he's better than Trump hurr durr" or some such nonsense, so let's cut that off now. Instead, I want to know why you still support a man, with strong evidence he's a sexual predator, in this election, on his own merits.

In short, what has Joe Biden done for you lately that you're willing to overlook his child sniffing, back-of-the-head-kissing, up-skirt-groping, all-without-consent, senile ass WITHOUT just saying "Orange man bad".

First and foremost the only major accusation against Biden has been largely non credible with a story that has constantly been shifting, witnesses that actively contradict her later claims.

Second even if we assume it's true, then I'd rather have the sex offender that's going to expand healthcare and raise minimum wages than the sex offender that expands concentration camps and slashes taxes on the rich.

[JoeThree]

So, a lot of people on here are Leftists. I get that, I was young and dumb once too, but what I don't understand is the Leftist defense of Joe Biden after his accusations by Tara Reade. Whatever happened to believing all women?, or are Principles just something for the Right?

I know you're all going to say "Well, he's better than Trump hurr durr" or some such nonsense, so let's cut that off now. Instead, I want to know why you still support a man, with strong evidence he's a sexual predator, in this election, on his own merits.

In short, what has Joe Biden done for you lately that you're willing to overlook his child sniffing, back-of-the-head-kissing, up-skirt-groping, all-without-consent, senile ass WITHOUT just saying "Orange man bad".

First and foremost the only major accusation against Biden has been largely non credible with a story that has constantly been shifting, witnesses that actively contradict her later claims.

Second even if we assume it's true, then I'd rather have the sex offender that's going to expand healthcare and raise minimum wages than the sex offender that expands concentration camps and slashes taxes on the rich.

Obama constructed those "Concentration camps", and so much for no "orange man, hurr durr".