The 2020 Presidential Election - Convention & General Election

[DevoHusker]

1 hour ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

The article you posted yesterday was a poorly written and researched article that relied on whataboutism, hearsay, and anonymous sources.  The only thing it actually got right was that she changed her story...and it is known that sexual assault survivors often do this due to trauma.

 

prominent female Dems speaking out...

 

https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/495340-democrats-begin-to-confront-biden-allegations

[knapplc]

27 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

This is so full of logic failures, I don't even want to respond Decoy.  But I will since you can't seem to understand.

 

Not speaking about something doesn't mean you support or do not support it.  It means you're not speaking about it at this time.  Stop trying to make this a false dilemma fallacy.

 

 

Seems that someone may need a reminder to discuss the post, not the poster.

[Ulty]

9 minutes ago, knapplc said:

An opinion piece that's worth a read. It's very long, but detailed and well-explained. The bullets are fully explained in the article, but per HuskerBoard policy I'm, of course, not copying all of it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Thanks for posting this article, knapplc. This is a good assessment. With a he said/she said case, without any direct evidence, the only thing you really have to go on it credibility. Unfortunately, Reade doesn't have it. 

 

I agree that we should take all such allegations seriously, and look at facts when available. But, for the folks that keep pushing this story, without more credibility and without evidence, what are we actually supposed to do with this story?

 

[Danny Bateman]

1 hour ago, BlitzFirst said:

We can talk about both, one, or none if we want to.

 

You sure can. And your choice in the matter sometimes betrays your agenda.

[Ulty]

3 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

 

That article is still full of whataboutism and supposition...just like everything Knapp has posted.

 

Speaks of her 'love of Russia' which has nothing to do with sexual assault allegations

Speaks of her support of Bernie which also has nothing to do with sexual assault allegations.

 

See, I'm pushing this to have it investigated.  It wasn't covered until just this past week by most major media outlets.  So I'm looking to have an investigative journalist get a crack at things instead of fluff opinion pieces using tweets as evidence of intent from a journalist who has #bluenomatterwho on his twitter masthead like the guy who wrote the article above.

 

What I want is for Biden to be asked about it.

I want his VP picks to be asked about it.

I want it to be investigated more.

 

After that, I'll have nothing to post about it unless it's true.

Okay, so what would your investigation look like? What evidence would you look for, that media outlets (even if it was mostly smaller media outlets) have not already gathered? Who would you interview (other than Biden of course) that have not already provided statements of some sort? How do you weigh credibility?

 

Yes, credible allegations should be investigated, but conclusions still need to be based on the evidence that is available. 

[Decoy73]

19 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

No, you're not understanding.

 

I'm speaking about Democratic Joe Biden because I'm a Democrat and I want to talk about it.  I'm not focusing AT THIS TIME on Trumps allegations.  I want to be able to vote for Biden and not be concerned that the allegation wasn't investigated thoroughly.

 

That does not mean I'm ok with Trumps allegations.

 

Now, STOP with this STUPID narrative.

Ok. Fair enough. You want to feel good about your voting.  Nothing wrong with that.  But why keep posting Reade/Biden allegations on HB?   
Can you not research this for yourself?
Are you (and a few others) trying to recruit others to get riled up about Biden too?   That’s what it looks like.   And considering  Trump’s own allegations, that doesn’t sit well with some of us.   Especially when we strongly believe Trump needs to be defeated in November. 
No one is telling you how to vote, but if you  or others continue with these posts on Reade/Biden and not Trump, it’s perfectly reasonable for people to criticize those posts.  

[RedDenver]

From NPR (emphasis mine):

New Information Emerges Around Biden Sexual Assault Allegation

Quote

 

New information has emerged in recent days about a sexual assault allegation against the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, Joe Biden, made by Tara Reade, a former staff assistant in Biden's Senate office. For the first time, someone has gone on the record to say that Reade detailed the allegation to her decades ago in the same way Reade is describing it now.

 

A former neighbor of Reade's named Lynda LaCasse told NPR on Wednesday about a conversation the two had approximately 25 years ago regarding the alleged assault. The revelation, first reported by Business Insider, comes with increasing pressure on Democrats to respond, as well as calls from Republicans for the accusation to be examined more openly.

 

 

[Danny Bateman]

25 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said:

That article is still full of whataboutism and supposition...just like everything Knapp has posted.

 

Speaks of her 'love of Russia' which has nothing to do with sexual assault allegations

Speaks of her support of Bernie which also has nothing to do with sexual assault allegations.

 

See, I'm pushing this to have it investigated.  It wasn't covered until just this past week by most major media outlets.  So I'm looking to have an investigative journalist get a crack at things instead of fluff opinion pieces using tweets as evidence of intent from a journalist who has #bluenomatterwho on his twitter masthead like the guy who wrote the article above.

 

What I want is for Biden to be asked about it.

I want his VP picks to be asked about it.

I want it to be investigated more.

 

After that, I'll have nothing to post about it unless it's true.

 

That's not what the article did, though. The author spent decades working with sexual assault victims as a prosecutor. So he wrote an article laying out the evidence as he saw it and why some of it damages her credibility. The Russia/Bernie stuff are relevant context when we're trying to piece together her credibility.

 

It's fine if you have beef with how this is being covered. But that article wasn't junk and it establishes that it is OK to be skeptical of Reade's credibility at this juncture.

[knapplc]

19 minutes ago, Decoy73 said:

Ok. Fair enough. You want to feel good about your voting.  Nothing wrong with that.  But why keep posting Reade/Biden allegations on HB?   
Can you not research this for yourself?
Are you (and a few others) trying to recruit others to get riled up about Biden too?   That’s what it looks like.   And considering  Trump’s own allegations, that doesn’t sit well with some of us.   Especially when we strongly believe Trump needs to be defeated in November. 
No one is telling you how to vote, but if you  or others continue with these posts on Reade/Biden and not Trump, it’s perfectly reasonable for people to criticize those posts.  

 

One naturally wonders why this allegation is more important than those against Trump.

 

The sad truth is, the more this is investigated, the more it becomes clear the story changed over and over and over, as detailed in the stories I've been posting. But that's not the result some people want to hear.

 

Because what's going to happen is, Biden is finally going to get asked about this by the press and he's going to say, "Didn't happen."

 

Then what? 

[Ulty]

7 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said:

I'm not a cop or investigative journalist so I have no idea how to proceed. 

But the cops and investigative journalists DO know how to proceed in cases like this. What the hell do you think they have been doing?

 

There was no police report until recently, and it is inactive because there is nothing that they can do with it. So the cops are out.

 

Now, the investigative journalists? They absolutely live for a story like this. Sexual assault allegations against a political candidates are juicy. If there was a scoop to be had, they would be all over it. So most likely, they have been all over it, trying to dig up credible information. You see, credible journalists don't report on a story without sources and evidence. That is why all we have really had on this case until recently were tweets, opinion pieces, and small media outlets. As the story became trendy, major media had to report on it, but they have been able to only piece together the small bits of info that has already been collected - and they have come up more doubt than they have with credible info.

 

Biden's campaign folks have been making statements. Possible VP picks have been making statements. The only one who really hasn't been grilled is Biden himself. What do you think he is going to say? 

 

So again, what is there that can be investigated that already hasn't been investigated? It's fair for you to say that you don't know because you aren't an investigator. But I am an investigator...and I don't know either.

[Ulty]

1 minute ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

 I'm pretty certain a few weeks is not enough time to give this a full investigation.

 

4 minutes ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

All of those conclusions are based on faulty logic.

 

[RedDenver]

7 minutes ago, knapplc said:

 

One naturally wonders why this allegation is more important than those against Trump.

 

The sad truth is, the more this is investigated, the more it becomes clear the story changed over and over and over, as detailed in the stories I've been posting. But that's not the result some people want to hear.

 

Because what's going to happen is, Biden is finally going to get asked about this by the press and he's going to say, "Didn't happen."

 

Then what? 

The allegation isn't more important than Trump, but Biden's allegation is currently being investigated.

 

I just posted an article that has a person that confirms Tara Reade's story was the same 25 years ago as what she's telling now.

[knapplc]

4 minutes ago, RedDenver said:

The allegation isn't more important than Trump, but Biden's allegation is currently being investigated.

 

I just posted an article that has a person that confirms Tara Reade's story was the same 25 years ago as what she's telling now.

 

Which version that Reade is telling now? Where was this person 25 years ago? Or in 2008? Or 2012? Or last year when Reade started talking to the press for the first time?

 

Trump's allegations are being currently investigated, so that's not an excuse today any more than it was last week when this argument was offered up.

[RedDenver]

1 minute ago, knapplc said:

 

Which version that Reade is telling now? Where was this person 25 years ago? Or in 2008? Or 2012? Or last year when Reade started talking to the press for the first time?

From the article:

Quote

 

LaCasse said she remembers stepping outside her home in California to sneak a cigarette away from her kids sometime in 1995 or early 1996, when she was joined by Reade on her front stoop. They were emotional, discussing custody issues and violence, and she recalls Reade then mentioning Biden, a man LaCasse was not particularly familiar with at the time.

 

"I do remember her telling me that Joe Biden had put her up against a wall and had put his hands up her skirt and had put his fingers inside her," LaCasse said. Reade, as detailed in a previous NPR report, has accused Biden of pinning her against a wall in the hallway of a Capitol Hill building and penetrating her vagina with his fingers in the spring of 1993.

 

 

[Ulty]

1 minute ago, BlitzFirst said:

 

I'm certain that it takes more than a few weeks to investigate sexual assault allegations.  You're welcome to disagree.  I agree to disagree on this notion.

You are certain...based on what? Given more time, what else can be dug up that has not already been made available? What else can be done that has not been done? How much time do you need, and what else is there to be investigated?

 

Indeed, complex investigations take time. But when there is no more evidence to collect, and the outcome is unsatisfying (which happens a lot), continuing to beat the drum about it accomplishes nothing. 

 

Take this article, for example, it just popped up in my email a few moments ago: https://news.yahoo.com/tara-reade-joe-biden-sexual-assault-allegation-205643745.html?.tsrc=daily_mail&uh_test=1_04

It says there have been a couple of corroborating accounts, as reported by an investigative journalist. Some very interesting info that you and I would both agree is important. But then what else can you do with it? There are important facts that are still unknown, yes? The AP interviewed 21 former Biden staffers. Do you need a few more weeks to find the 22nd staffer who is suddenly going to provide the smoking gun?

 

Investigative journalists have taken a crack at this, which is what you wanted. You don't know the efforts that have been taken to find the truth, all you know is that the results have been unsatisfying. There has been a lot of interesting info, but not enough to actually do anything with. Sometimes investigations reach a dead end. Investigators have to deal with that. So should you.