1. #4061
    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    While I don't disagree with him, he should have absolutely gone further and pointed out that people should also not vote Trump if they believe her because, yes, this will absolutely be taken out of context and used against him no matter what. At least then people could get the full quote for the reality if they did some basic searching for it.
    There was more context to it, but context is dead in this world. Out of context sound-bites reign supreme.

    This is, yet again, his utter lack of campaign discipline rearing it's ugly head. I'm just hoping independent voters are gonna be smart enough to not fall for this garbage, but Biden is sure making it easy on Republicans.

  2. #4062
    Quote Originally Posted by Theodarzna View Post
    - Stripping people of Health Care they have to pay for isn't really a big concern. Given how quickly a tanking economy or a lost job can also strip people of their health care that is outrageously expensive and lousy anyway. This virus did more to strip people of their junk tier health care than the GOP ever did. Yeah, nobody likes dealing with Aetna or Blue Cross Blue Shield or whatever, nobody likes deductibles or co-pays, now do people like navigating a "marketplace" for health insurance. Plus, an economic downturn stripped millions of their health care during a pandemic in just a few short weeks, so the system sucks.
    - Is the Democratic Party talking about giving people UBI in some prompt and timely fashion?
    - Introduce.... does not mean pass.
    - You know the head of the Progressive Policy Institute is a coal industry lobbyist, so I don't expect big changes on climate out of Biden.
    - Currently for the average person there is no help ever coming for them. They aren't going to get UBI, they aren't going to get a health care program, they are just going to have bills pile up, owe it all at some point, and have no ability to pay. Intuitively most people recognize this is going to happen, or at least have a strong suspicion that their various lenders will demand back payment for stuff. Washington isn't sending any help, hell the Democrats seem allergic to any program that isn't means tested to death and already gave away their leverage with a four trillion dollar slush fund to their supposed enemy.

    As I said, there isn't a serious competitor. Means testing and making people buy a shitty product because the industry lobbyists are your good pales isn't exactly a "Workers Party" material.
    You are twisting yourself into knots to explain the basic positions of the GOP, you aren't even addressing them just going what about.

    - Millions of people losing health care is bad that was even before the pandemic and they are currently in court to get rid of health care not to mention trying to remove benefits from 700K people.

    - What does UBI have to do with telling people to go back to work even when it's not safe, if you get sick we're taking away your healthcare and if you die then we are taking away your ability to sue your boss for unsafe work conditions. That has nothing to do with what that's a sad whataboutism.

    - How do you figure that whatever Biden wants is worse than NO REGULATION FREE FOR ALL POLUTTION.

    - What does UBI have to do with the GOP telling working people to go die?

    Again your logic only works if you don't live in this reality.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Trunksee View Post
    So lets see if i can cherry pick through your cherry picking
    And you have just rambled and addressed none of my points, Donald Trump is openly calling for states to reopen even against the advice of health experts and HIS OWN DAM GUIDELINES. The WI supreme court removed a stay at home order while they themselves were staying at home calling it fascism. The right wing is telling people get back to work slave and if you get sick and die then tough shit there are worse things than dying.

    Oh and don't even think about suing your employers they are important, even if Scrooge and Ayn Rand got together they wouldn't openly say this kind of shit.

  3. #4063
    The idea that the two parties do not work in lockstep is absurd on its face. The reality is that shit passes both houses all the time with nary an objection. Is it really important for some reason to pick through the minutia and try to figure out which side did what good or bad thing? In general, both parties do the exact same shit.

    Let's just set aside that $1200 some of us got. The Bulk of what has been handed out ultimately measures as 4 trillion plus. And what exactly did any of it do to control Covid-19? How are people going to make it through the next several months? How are people going to get treatment when they fall ill?

    What was the Boeing thing?
    Why no oversight?
    Covid-19? No plan of any kind except roll the dice, hope for the best.

    Moving on...

    I dislike reminding myself that Mitch McConnell even exists, so let's talk about Pelosi for a moment. Nancy Pelosi is worth over a hundred million dollars (https://www.opensecrets.org/personal...7360&year=2015). How are people supposed to expect regulation of or anti-trust action against companies in which our legislators are deeply financially invested?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFcXyiIYOTY

    I dunno, what's your definition of a corporatist?

    P.S. I know that 60 min thing is about 7 years old, and that some band-aid fixes have been made. But we still have a situation in which favors are traded in secret and our supposed leadership has the exact opposite of incentive to regulate any corporate entity for almost any thing they may do. Sure, they'll talk to Amazon and Facebook, and then nothing really happens.

  4. #4064
    Void Lord Felya's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    the other
    Posts
    58,334
    Quote Originally Posted by Louisa Bannon View Post
    The idea that the two parties do not work in lockstep is absurd on its face. The reality is that shit passes both houses all the time with nary an objection. Is it really important for some reason to pick through the minutia and try to figure out which side did what good or bad thing? In general, both parties do the exact same shit.
    Yes, it’s important. It’s how we don’t get stuck with Trump. You are arguing in favor of ignorance.

    Let's just set aside that $1200 some of us got. The Bulk of what has been handed out ultimately measures as 4 trillion plus. And what exactly did any of it do to control Covid-19? How are people going to make it through the next several months? How are people going to get treatment when they fall ill?
    Why do you care about minutiae now?

    What was the Boeing thing?
    Why no oversight?
    Covid-19? No plan of any kind except roll the dice, hope for the best.
    Well... before Trump, there was a pandemic response team and 19% more in CDC budgets, as well as a lower deficit... but, that’s minutiae...

    I dislike reminding myself that Mitch McConnell even exists, so let's talk about Pelosi for a moment. Nancy Pelosi is worth over a hundred million dollars (https://www.opensecrets.org/personal...7360&year=2015). How are people supposed to expect regulation of or anti-trust action against companies in which our legislators are deeply financially invested?
    By voting billionaire heads of corporations in, then complaining about millionaires.

    I dunno, what's your definition of a corporatist?
    What’s your definition of plutocracy?
    Folly and fakery have always been with us... but it has never before been as dangerous as it is now, never in history have we been able to afford it less. - Isaac Asimov
    Every damn thing you do in this life, you pay for. - Edith Piaf
    The party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command. - Orwell
    No amount of belief makes something a fact. - James Randi

  5. #4065
    The Insane Acidbaron's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Belgium, Flanders
    Posts
    18,230
    Quote Originally Posted by Louisa Bannon View Post

    I dislike reminding myself that Mitch McConnell even exists, so let's talk about Pelosi for a moment. Nancy Pelosi is worth over a hundred million dollars (https://www.opensecrets.org/personal...7360&year=2015). How are people supposed to expect regulation of or anti-trust action against companies in which our legislators are deeply financially invested?
    Don't some people also call her "far left" and a socialist? i mean at some point people do have to make up their mind.

  6. #4066
    Titan I Push Buttons's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    11,244
    Bernard once again demonstrating how well he fights for the people.

    During the reauthorization vote on the USA FREEDOM Act yesterday, an amendment was proposed on the bill that would limit the FBI's ability to seize internet browsing data without a warrant. 59 senators voted in favor of the amendment, but it required a 60 vote supermajority to pass... Thus it failed to pass by one single vote allowing the FBI to spy on your internet activity without a warrant.

    Guess who didn't even bother to show up and cast a vote at all? That's right, Bernard. He did, however, get a Tweet in about the evils of capitalism yesterday while doing whatever he was doing that was more important than protecting everyone's right to privacy.

  7. #4067
    Quote Originally Posted by UnifiedDivide View Post
    While I don't disagree with him, he should have absolutely gone further and pointed out that people should also not vote Trump if they believe her because, yes, this will absolutely be taken out of context and used against him no matter what. At least then people could get the full quote for the reality if they did some basic searching for it.

    On the other side of things, this will actually help others believe him (I've already seen this) because of his honesty about it. So, while some people may just look at it as him putting his foot in his mouth, others see the opposite.
    The soundbite is immaterial. Republicans will manufacture fake ones if real ones are not available. If this gets people to see him as believable and honest, well that MORE than outweighs the republican sound bites. BUT HER EMAILS - CREEPY JOE - it's not clear exactly what the main chant of the Trump supporters will be. But it really doesn't matter. Being thought of as being honest and decent instead of being corrupt and creepy is about the best strategy Biden - or any democrat - has against the upcoming 24/7 slime machine.

    One of the more effective stories for Biden is one where he says "I will not pardon Trump." He absolutely needs to repeat this and put it in ads and bring it up at least 7 times during each debate.

    Moderator: What plans do you have to deal with Global Warming?

    Biden: Well first of all I absolutely will NOT pardon Trump. This is one of the most important first steps in making progress against global warming. <rest of prepared statement>

    Moderator: Do you plan to take drastic deficit reduction actions (if he wins, the budget deficit changes from absolutely no importance to an obsession).

    Biden: Obviously I will not give Trump a pardon. <rest of prepared statement>

    "I will not pardon Trump" could be the democrat response to BUT HER EMAILS. The best part of it is that this has a decent chance of getting under Trump's skin and provoking him into making some really stupid mistakes. Getting Trump to overreact could very well lead to 60 democratic Senate seats. Or close to it.
    Last edited by Omega10; 2020-05-15 at 08:48 PM.

  8. #4068
    https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...ntances-260771

    ‘Manipulative, deceitful, user’: Tara Reade left a trail of aggrieved acquaintances

  9. #4069
    Interesting. I'm less interested in the fact that she talked up Biden (irrelevant IMO), but if those people have paper trails indicating her dishonest and attempts to manipulate them then is calls her character, and account, into question.

    This is the kind of deeper background that should have been done before the story broke, and it's the kind of deeper background you often saw with other #MeToo stories.

    If these people who knew her have records, especially legal documents, that support their stories, then this isn't some "smear" attempt against Reade. It's important information to present her claims in a more complete context.

  10. #4070
    Quote Originally Posted by I Push Buttons View Post
    Bernard once again demonstrating how well he fights for the people.

    During the reauthorization vote on the USA FREEDOM Act yesterday, an amendment was proposed on the bill that would limit the FBI's ability to seize internet browsing data without a warrant. 59 senators voted in favor of the amendment, but it required a 60 vote supermajority to pass... Thus it failed to pass by one single vote allowing the FBI to spy on your internet activity without a warrant.

    Guess who didn't even bother to show up and cast a vote at all? That's right, Bernard. He did, however, get a Tweet in about the evils of capitalism yesterday while doing whatever he was doing that was more important than protecting everyone's right to privacy.
    Yeah, I agree with Bernie on most things, but him not being there to vote, is bullshit. Feinstein, who's own staffer uncovered the CIA abusing the patriot act to use ineffective waterboarding and other torture voting nay on this is bullshit. Everyone who voted nay on this is bullshit. The only one who get's a pass is lamar alexander, even though i don't like him in the slightest, he is in quarantine and would have voted yay on this. Convenient the vote is put up the day after he goes to quarantine... Both my Senators voted yay.

    I'll be voting for Durbin not just for this vote, but he's been a great senator for us here. I don't agree with everything he does, but I agree far more then disagree, and having the number 2 Dem senator from your state, isn't a bad thing at all.
    Last edited by beanman12345; 2020-05-15 at 09:42 PM.

  11. #4071
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Interesting. I'm less interested in the fact that she talked up Biden (irrelevant IMO), but if those people have paper trails indicating her dishonest and attempts to manipulate them then is calls her character, and account, into question.

    This is the kind of deeper background that should have been done before the story broke, and it's the kind of deeper background you often saw with other #MeToo stories.

    If these people who knew her have records, especially legal documents, that support their stories, then this isn't some "smear" attempt against Reade. It's important information to present her claims in a more complete context.
    Some of the paper trails are already out on the internet...
    https://medium.com/@eddiekrassenstei...n-e276cac68a2b

    PBS Newshour just ran a story that also pokes tons of holes in Reade's story
    https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politic...es-allegations
    What 74 former Biden staffers think about Tara Reade’s allegations
    Over his decades-long career in the Senate, former Vice President Joe Biden was known as a demanding but fair and family-oriented boss, devoted to his home life in Delaware and committed to gender equality in his office.

    He was not on a list of “creepy” male senators that female staffers told each other to avoid in the elevators on Capitol Hill.

    Yet Biden, now the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, was also a toucher, seemingly oblivious to whether physical contact made some women uncomfortable. That behavior has persisted in recent years. Biden is now facing fresh scrutiny after a former aide in March charged that he sexually assaulted her when she worked in his Senate office in the early 1990s, an allegation Biden has categorically denied.

    The PBS NewsHour spoke with 74 former Biden staffers, of whom 62 were women, in order to get a broader picture of his behavior toward women over the course of his career, how they see the new allegation, and whether there was evidence of a larger pattern.

    None of the people interviewed said that they had experienced sexual harassment, assault or misconduct by Biden. All said they never heard any rumors or allegations of Biden engaging in sexual misconduct, until the recent assault allegation made by Tara Reade. Former staffers said they believed Reade should be heard, and acknowledged that their experiences do not disprove her accusation.

    In all, the NewsHour tried to contact nearly 200 former staffers of Biden’s, based primarily on public records of his time in the Senate and White House and also from interviews with current campaign advisers. They include former interns and senior aides, from his 1972 Senate campaign through his time at the White House.

    Some are still in politics, others left long ago to pursue other careers. They were asked about Reade’s allegation but also whether they, or anyone they know, were ever uncomfortable around Biden. Many said that her sexual assault allegation was at odds with their knowledge of Biden’s behavior toward women.

    The interviews revealed previously unreported details about the Biden office when Reade worked there, such as an account that she lost her job because of her poor performance, not as retaliation for lodging complaints about sexual harassment, as Reade has said.

    Other recollections from former staffers corroborated things she has described publicly, such as Biden’s use of the Senate gym and a supervisor admonishing her for dressing inappropriately.

    Overall, the people who spoke to the NewsHour described largely positive and gratifying experiences working for Biden, painting a portrait of someone who was ahead of his time in empowering women in the workplace.

    “The one thing about Joe Biden is, he is a man of the highest character and that’s why these accusations are so surreal and just can’t comport with the man I worked with,” said Marcia Lee Taylor, a senior policy advisor on the Judiciary Committee, where women held leading roles when Biden served as chairman.

    But he had blindspots, which Biden himself has publicly acknowledged, when it came to how his interactions with women in public could make them uncomfortable.

    Reade declined the NewsHour’s interview request but her attorney, Doug Wigdor, sent detailed answers to a number of questions by email. He wrote that Biden’s public touching is evidence that he could have mistreated his client in the way she claims.

    “I don’t think anyone would describe these situations as normal,” Wigdor wrote. “They are troublesome, to say the least.”

    Many former Biden staffers said they believe Reade’s allegation is false.

    Addressing Tara Reade’s allegations
    Since Reade went public with her assault accusation in March, former staffers of Biden’s world have been scanning their memories, considering the details of her story and their own experiences.

    Reade, in interviews with multiple news outlets, has alleged that Biden attacked her in the Senate complex when she met him on an errand. But her accusations are also more sweeping. She has charged that the Biden office was a toxic place to work, that the senator touched her shoulders and neck multiple times, and that she was asked to serve drinks because he thought she was pretty. Reade has also claimed she was demoted and ultimately pushed to leave because she complained about workplace harassment.

    The NewsHour spoke with more than 20 people who worked for Biden when Reade was also a staffer. Some remembered her, many did not.

    Ben Savage, who said his desk was next to Reade’s in the Biden mailroom, disputed her charge that she was forced out of her job in retaliation for a sexual harassment complaint she claims to have filed.

    Savage, who worked as the office’s systems administrator, overseeing computers and information processing, told the NewsHour that Reade was fired for her poor performance on the job, which he witnessed — not as retaliation for her complaints about sexual harassment.

    But according to Savage, Reade had been mishandling a key part of her job and an essential office task — processing constituent mail, something they worked on together. Savage said he recalls reporting these issues to his boss, deputy chief of staff Dennis Toner. After that, Savage said he began diminishing Reade’s duties, taking over some of her tasks and rerouting parts of the process to exclude her.

    “Of all the people who held that position, she’s the only one during my time there who couldn’t necessarily keep up or who found it frustrating,” said Savage, who worked in the office for three years, from 1993 to 1996.

    Toner, who was Savage’s direct supervisor, told the NewsHour that he did not remember Reade. He said he did remember Savage as a good worker who stood out in the office.


    “I can’t take issue with Ben saying that her job performance was not up to par. We would have had a discussion with Tara or whomever the employee would have been to see how we could make it work,” Toner said. “I do not recall Tara being in the office. I can’t comment on why she would have left or anything like that,” he added.

    Wigdor, Reade’s attorney, said that she does not remember Savage specifically, but said his story is wrong and her performance had nothing to do with her termination.

    “Ms. Reade recalls that there was a lot of nitpicking regarding her performance in the office,” he wrote. “She was also very nervous at that point and distracted so it is possible that from time to time there was a mistake made … but her performance had nothing to do with her termination.”

    More broadly, Wigdor said, it was “not surprising” that former staffers would say they did not believe the allegation against Biden. Wigdor argued that former aides have an incentive to stand with Biden because they could benefit personally if he becomes president, do not want to have “their lives turned upside down if they come out against him,” or are simply motivated by a desire to protect Biden to help bolster his chances of beating President Donald Trump in the general election.

    Reade’s story has been corroborated publicly by three people who spoke with other news organizations, saying she told them in the past about the alleged assault. Despite numerous attempts to contact them via phone, email and through a lawyer, none of them responded or could be reached for comment on this story.

    Biden’s presidential campaign responded with a statement from deputy campaign manager and communications director Kate Bedingfield.

    “Whether it was in his campaigns, his Senate office, his family, or in the Obama Administration, Joe Biden has always championed and empowered women professionals. He has and will always insist on a workplace culture built on respect, equality and dignity, leading by his own example,” Bedingfield said.

    Last year, after seven women — including Reade — publicly stated Biden made unwanted physical contact with them, like touching their shoulders and smelling their hair, he released a video and tweet addressing their concerns.



    “Social norms are changing,” he wrote. “I’ve heard what these women are saying. Politics to me has always been about making connections, but I will be more mindful about respecting personal space in the future.”

    Reade did not publicly accuse Biden of sexual assault until March of this year.

    Reade has claimed a supervisor admonished her for the way she dressed and asked her to be more modest. She has claimed this was a baseless criticism and retaliation for her complaint about sexual harassment from Biden.

    A woman who worked with Reade, but who spoke to the NewsHour on the condition she not be named, said she remembers Reade mentioning that she was scolded for her attire and that Reade asked her if it was a legitimate complaint. That coworker and two other staffers who worked with Reade said they believe she was not appropriately dressed for work.

    Reade has said that she was bringing Biden his gym bag, somewhere “down toward the Capitol,” when the alleged assault took place.

    Several staffers confirmed to the NewsHour that Biden regularly used the Senate gym, and that a person in Reade’s position might have been asked to bring him items, such as paperwork, or in one example given, Advil, that he needed. None of them recalled ever bringing him a gym bag.


    Biden’s Senate offices were in a prime location, bookending the second floor of the Russell Senate Office building, the closest to the U.S. Capitol.

    Reade’s attorney told the NewsHour that Reade recalls the assault happening “in a semiprivate area like an alcove” and that it was “somewhere between the Russell (building) and/or Capitol building.” He pointed out that survivors often have difficulty with specifics about trauma.

    Reade’s description aligns with other staffers’ recollections of Biden’s short indoor route between his office and the Capitol. It is a roughly 10-minute walk that consists of one flight of stairs and one long hallway inside the Russell Building, followed by a wide tunnel through which he could walk or take an internal subway train to the Capitol.

    The layout of that route and building has not changed. A recent walk through that area showed the subway tunnel contains no out-of-view areas, like an alcove. The remaining portion of the route includes multiple stairwells as well as corridors lined with offices. It is a main thoroughfare for senators and staffers.

    Some former staffers told the NewsHour that if Biden did assault Reade in any of these places, it would have been a brazen attack in an area with a high risk of being seen.


    “When I worked in the Senate, it was always crowded [and] packed with lobbyists, staff and tourists,” said Sheila Nix, who was Biden’s chief of staff on the 2012 presidential campaign and previously worked as chief of staff to two other Democratic senators.

    In interviews, staffers have also raised doubts about Reade’s claim that she was asked to serve drinks at a fundraiser, an incident she said she included in an official complaint of sexual harassment submitted while she worked in the office.

    But more than 50 former staffers said they didn’t remember ever attending a fundraiser for Biden in Washington, D.C., when they were on his Senate staff. And some recalled an office policy banning most of Biden’s Senate staff from doing campaign work.

    “Never would have happened,” said Melissa Lefko, who was a staff assistant in Biden’s office during the time Reade was there. “We all knew there was a very hard line there.”

    Dozens of staffers, from different eras, said Biden rarely attended any events in Washington, racing to catch his train home to Wilmington, Delaware, as soon as Senate voting ended each night.

    Further, two men who worked as junior staffers for Biden said the senator specifically did not want women to serve beverages, like coffee, or perform other menial tasks in his Senate office or on the committees he chaired. Men were typically asked to perform such tasks.

    “He didn’t want an image of a young woman staffer serving him,” said John Earnhardt, who took over Reade’s duties. Reade left the office in mid-1993, after working there approximately nine months.


    Biden’s treatment of women
    In separate and in-depth interviews, women who worked for Biden generally did not want to weigh in with certainty on whether they believed Reade’s allegation was true. But they all said it is at odds with their experience.

    Numerous former Biden staffers said they felt he treated men and women equally, and that he was known for hiring women for top jobs that women seldom held in other Senate offices.

    “Biden has a terrific record on hiring women at very high levels and doing it long before other people did,” said Diana Huffman, who served as the staff director for the Judiciary Committee in the late 1980s, when Biden was chair.

    “He was fully embracing the idea that women should have the same opportunities and be taken with the same seriousness as male staff. That was distinctive,” said Liz Sherwood-Randall, a former senior foreign policy adviser to Biden.

    The experiences of former Biden staffers underscore the complicated nature of sexual assault reporting and how to judge conflicting portraits of an individual. It is a current topic of research and heated debate among experts.

    “It only takes one act to be worthy of consideration,” said Juliet Williams, a gender studies expert at the University of California, Los Angeles, pointing out that years of inoffensive behavior with many or even most women does not indicate whether someone is capable of ever committing an offense.

    “When we try someone for murder it’s not like, ‘Well there’s serial murders and one-offers,’” Williams said. “There’s certain kinds of behavior that are never acceptable. Quantity is not the only metric.”

    Sherry Hamby, the founding editor of the academic journal The Psychology of Violence, also said that any pattern is possible.

    She described the idea of a 50-year-old man, the age Biden was at the time of the alleged attack, committing his first and only act of sexual assault as improbable. “In terms of likely statistical pattern, that would be an incredibly unlikely trajectory to see,” Hamby said.

    But she and others also noted that false reports of sexual assault are rare, and that the way women’s accusations are evaluated is flawed because they face more pressure than men to have their stories corroborated or to prove that they’re part of a larger group of victims.

    Still, Williams said, “I do think it is worth recording if the evidence shows that in the case of the former vice president there are scores of women who actually praise him for his collegiality and professionalism and respect.”

    Biden’s office was known for having women-friendly work policies. For example, he promoted at least one Senate staffer while she was on maternity leave. As vice president, he helped secure paid family leave for White House employees.

    Female staffers who spent countless hours with Biden, including in one-on-one settings, like his small private office in the U.S. Capitol, known as a “hideaway,” said he never made passes at them or behaved in other ways that suggested sexual impropriety.

    Victoria Nourse, who served as Biden’s top lawyer on the Judiciary Committee in the early 1990s, recalled Biden’s reaction when another official made a comment about her looks in front of Biden during a flight in 1991. The man said, “‘Oh Joe, let me sit next to the pretty girl,’” recalled Nourse, who later served as Biden’s chief counsel in the White House.

    Biden told the man off, Nourse said, “making it clear that we were here for work, and that was inappropriate — in a very no nonsense way.”

    “I traveled with him all over the world, all over the country. I was alone with him all the time,” said Elizabeth Alexander, a former Senate and White House aide. “Never, ever, ever did I feel uncomfortable.”


    Hill culture
    The Reade accusation is part of a larger, decades-long discussion about misogyny on Capitol Hill. It highlights a pivot point in the Senate in the 1990s, when a then-record four women were newly elected to the chamber, and prominent claims of sexual harassment drew more attention to the behavior of male senators.

    Biden was a central figure and front-row witness to this shift.

    In October 1991, Biden chaired the Judiciary Committee when Anita Hill testified that Clarence Thomas, then a Supreme Court nominee, had sexually harassed her in the workplace. Biden has been roundly criticized by advocates for women and former Democratic senators for agreeing to keep other female witnesses from testifying about Thomas’ conduct toward them, and for appearing tone-deaf on sexual harassment.

    Five months later, in March 1992, Sen. Brock Adams, D-Wash., announced his retirement after the Seattle Times reported that eight women had accused him of sexual crimes, including drugging and molesting them.

    At the time, a climate of harassment and sexual entitlement existed in some offices in the Senate, driven by some male senators whose behavior was well known on Capitol Hill.

    “We all worked in a culture where men put their hands on you, often,” said Mary Byrne, who worked in the Senate from 1988 to 1995. “I remember sitting at a desk outside the Agriculture Committee and one staffer would come in and give you a shoulder massage, say you are doing good,” Byrne said. “Men there felt they had access to your body as a young woman.”

    Byrne also said she remembers walking in on a female deputy chief of staff sitting on a senator’s lap. Another person who worked in the Senate at the time told the NewsHour he recalled seeing a senator with his arm around the waist of a young female staffer on an elevator.

    Byrne, like many women working on the Hill in those years, talked with other female aides about a “list” of senators to avoid.

    “You got to know which senators you didn’t want to be on an elevator alone with,” said Liz Tankersley, who was Biden’s legislative director from 1985 to 1993. “No one ever said Joe Biden was one of them.”

    On that list in 1993, according to multiple staffers, was Sen. Bob Packwood, R-Ore. He later resigned, in 1995, after the public revelation that he had engaged in years of aggressive sexual behavior toward women, including staffers. The late Sen. Strom Thurmond, R-S.C., was also infamously on the avoid-elevator list, staffers claimed. So was another now-deceased lawmaker — Sen. Ted Kennedy, D-Mass.

    “I know some of those people on the list,” said former Sen. Dennis DeConcini, a Democrat from Arizona who served from 1977 to 1995 and sat on the Judiciary Committee with Biden for many years. “There were several, it was almost common knowledge. And Biden was never mentioned in any of that. He went home every night to Delaware.”

    Around the time Reade alleges Biden attacked her, he was building a reputation as a leading crusader on behalf of women. Biden had already introduced and was pushing for passage of the landmark Violence Against Women Act. In March 1993, he held a hearing on protecting women from stalkers.

    But Byrne, who was then press secretary to Democratic Florida Sen. Bob Graham, and others told the NewsHour that Biden was known for his habit of touching people when interacting with them.

    “We knew that about Biden,” Byrne said. “He was always massaging somebody’s shoulders. But never anything more than that. There was no vibe about him.”

    Many staffers stressed that people frequently gravitate to Biden, as a kind of “comforter-in-chief,” and look for an arm around a shoulder or a kiss on the cheek.

    However, staffers agree it was not in Biden’s nature to gauge social signals about whether someone wanted to be hugged or touched. Many said they learned that he might do so without warning, though most saw it as an endearing quality that wasn’t sexual in nature.

    A former staffer said that when Biden does things like stroking women’s hair, there’s a complicated dynamic at play.

    His behavior toward women can be “somewhat infantilizing,” the staffer said. “That doesn’t look like equality, right? But that was an expression of empathy, as opposed to flirtation.”

    For others, Biden’s touching evoked some regret. “There were times as I now look back that I think we messed up. We should have said something about that,” a different former staffer said. “We probably should have recognized that made people uncomfortable.”
    Last edited by kaelleria; 2020-05-15 at 10:05 PM.

  12. #4072
    Quote Originally Posted by kaelleria View Post
    Some of the paper trails are already out on the internet...
    https://medium.com/@eddiekrassenstei...n-e276cac68a2b

    PBS Newshour just ran a story that also pokes tons of holes in Reade's story
    https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politic...es-allegations
    Interesting. The PBS link has some info in it, but given that they're all Biden staffers that does call their impartiality into question. As for the Medium post...I don't trust Medium given that it's an open source blogging platform (IIRC). I tend to stick with more established outlets for that kinda info.

  13. #4073
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    Interesting. The PBS link has some info in it, but given that they're all Biden staffers that does call their impartiality into question. As for the Medium post...I don't trust Medium given that it's an open source blogging platform (IIRC). I tend to stick with more established outlets for that kinda info.
    Ok sure that's fair...

    But none of her corroborating witnesses can be reached or back her up anymore -
    https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2020...bs-doubts.html
    2. Reade’s friend admitted to lying to a reporter to fit Reade’s narrative. McGann spoke with one Reade friend, who told her last year that Biden had harassed Reade but had definitely not sexually assaulted her:

    Last year, Reade encouraged me to speak with a friend of hers who counseled her through her time in Biden’s office in 1992 and 1993. The friend was clear about what had happened, and what hadn’t.

    “On the scale of other things we heard, and I feel ashamed, but it wasn’t that bad. [Biden] never tried to kiss her directly. He never went for one of those touches. It was one of those, ‘sorry you took it that way.’ I know that is very hard to explain,” the friend told me. She went on: “What was creepy was that it was always in front of people.”

    After Reade changed her allegation, McGann circled back to the friend, who explained that she had said something the friend knew to be false because Reade “wanted to leave a layer there”:

    I spoke with Reade’s friend again this week. She said that Reade had told her about the alleged assault the week it happened in 1993. I asked the friend why, then, did she volunteer so explicitly that Biden “never tried to kiss her” or touch her inappropriately. “It just organically rolled out that way,” the friend said. “[Reade] and I had many conversations a year ago about what her degree of comfort was. She wanted to leave a layer there, and I did not want to betray that. It just wasn’t my place.”

    Omitting a relevant detail to protect your friend is one thing. Adding false detail is another.

  14. #4074
    Banned JohnBrown1917's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Обединени социалистически щати на Америка
    Posts
    28,394
    Shitting on rape victims to own the conservatives.

  15. #4075
    Quote Originally Posted by CommunismWillWin View Post
    Shitting on rape victims to own the conservatives.
    K. Have a nice life.

  16. #4076
    Banned JohnBrown1917's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2011
    Location
    Обединени социалистически щати на Америка
    Posts
    28,394
    Quote Originally Posted by kaelleria View Post
    K. Have a nice life.
    I bet it won't be as fun as how much you same to enjoy attacking rape victims. Is this a hobby of yours?
    No wonder the US has a rape culture.

  17. #4077
    Quote Originally Posted by CommunismWillWin View Post
    Shitting on rape victims to own the conservatives.
    Dude, they are poking holes on the story, because said story does have gaping ones. This is what always should happen (by that i mean, they should investigate). Believe the accusation, but do not do so in a blind way, because that's not far of a witch hunt.

    By that i mean, Tara Reade was (with a high probability) not a rape, or sexual assault victim. And her accusation only serves to throw some shade to other women who were raped/sexually assaulted
    Last edited by Thepersona; 2020-05-15 at 11:08 PM.
    Forgive my english, as i'm not a native speaker



  18. #4078
    Quote Originally Posted by Thepersona View Post
    Dude, they are poking holes on the story, because they have gaping ones. This is what always should happen (by that i mean, they should investigate). Believe the accusation, but do not do so in a blind way, because that's not far of a witch hunt.
    We all remember the wise words of Ronald Reagan, "Trust, but who gives a shit about verifying if you agree with it?"

  19. #4079
    Quote Originally Posted by Edge- View Post
    We all remember the wise words of Ronald Reagan, "Trust, but who gives a shit about verifying if you agree with it?"
    Lol. Its even more funny when you know that it was originally a russian saying.
    Forgive my english, as i'm not a native speaker



  20. #4080
    Yeah, that Bernie not voting thing...

    None of these folks are angels, far from it. But I would have voted for that guy. Still disappointing. And a good reminder of why policy is what matters, not whether the guy is likable or charismatic or whatever.

    Now, that Reade thing. I don't really care about these 20-30 years later allegations that get trotted out from time to time. I don't really care about Dem identity politics either. But...

    If that's the hill the Dems have chosen to die on, then they can't look like total fucking hypocrites like they do right now. I suppose they shall not get the Senate because Collins won't lose, the Dems themselves have muddied the waters of having moral superiority over a POS like Collins. Now Collins looks as good the Dems themselves.

    Genius!

    Not a lot of difference between these two parties. To the elites its just the name they are writing on a check.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •