Tara Reade
- Thread starter Snow Sled Baby
- Start date
You can always believe a woman who alleges sexual harassment unless she's talking about me!
I litigated sexual harassment claims. So far, even as one of the hated plaintiff’s trial lawyers, i would not take her case.
Last year she went public and said Biden put his hands on her shoulders and rubbed her neck. This year she says he put his hand(s) up under her dress in her genital area. Shifting stories about distinctly different areas of the body greatly weaken such a claim. In fact, if a potential client came to me with a history of conflicting versions like this of what happened, i would reject the case. Aside from various evidentiary issues in using it, the mother’s call-in to Larry King was too generalized and did not even insinuate groping. Now, if some of Biden’s staffers from back then (most of whom i figure haven’t worked for him for years, or even decades) come forward to corroborate Reade’s story, there’s a worthy discussion.
i know politics is a different arena than the legal field in these matters, with different considerations and different standards, but these are my thoughts and perspective as one lawyer (other lawyers on here may disagree).
Last year she went public and said Biden put his hands on her shoulders and rubbed her neck. This year she says he put his hand(s) up under her dress in her genital area. Shifting stories about distinctly different areas of the body greatly weaken such a claim. In fact, if a potential client came to me with a history of conflicting versions like this of what happened, i would reject the case. Aside from various evidentiary issues in using it, the mother’s call-in to Larry King was too generalized and did not even insinuate groping. Now, if some of Biden’s staffers from back then (most of whom i figure haven’t worked for him for years, or even decades) come forward to corroborate Reade’s story, there’s a worthy discussion.
i know politics is a different arena than the legal field in these matters, with different considerations and different standards, but these are my thoughts and perspective as one lawyer (other lawyers on here may disagree).
The media went all out on Bret Kavanuagh over much less solid evidence. Their silence over this lady's claims is laughable. Maybe you are correct it's not a good case to prosecute, but why is it not a good story for the Joe "biased" media?
This will never be tried in the courts...it will be in the court of public opinion. The left will refute it, the right will try to hinder him...the only thing that is real is that CNN has shown bias and can no longer be considered a real news site.
Respectfully, atl, i didn’t say it was or wasn’t. I clearly limited my comments to my personal view of the situation from my perspective as a lawyer. I did not address the viability of the story’s coverage from a media perspective. You make an issue of something extraneous to my post.
As to media coverage of these issues, i got fed up with media many years ago when so-called news reporters went from delivering the facts to us, to injecting their opinions. I don’t need some bozo from CNN or some bobble-head from Fox telling me what i should think about an issue. I view that as an insult. Give me the information and let me think about it and what i believe it means to me. If they want to give their self-important opinion on air, fine, do it like they used to. Have a segment at the end of the show titled “Editorial Comment”, as my cue to switch channels.
More Russians. Good lord. They find a bone and run with it. Nevermind the Russia angle has been completely discredited at this point.
That's fine, but if you were depending on them to form your "opinions" of this story, you'd be struggling to find the facts to form those opinions because they're not covering it. I'm not a Lawyer, I'm a news consumer and the media's behavior on this story compared to how they overdosed on any allegation of Trump should be evidence of not only their biased corruption, but incomprehensible incompetence.
These cases aren’t intended to make it to court. Just like Blazey Ford, Stormy and Roy Moore they are intended for the court of public opinion. They are intended to damage an image and take down a public figure.
Biden & his son could face this at an opportune time. About 6-8 weeks aged of the election. Time to hurt, little time to defend.
Following what the "all informative" news media covers of Joe's sexual peccadilloes, you'd think he was as clean and pure as Ivory Soap? [eyeroll]
Hey atl, you're not the only one who's clean and articulate 'ya know?
Sure Joe, but you're the only one who's creepy, and smelly don't YOU know?
Rhetorical question: Why spend one’s time and energy worrying about Network A or Network B or Network C? They just don’t matter to me. I choose to not give them my power. All of them are in it for ratings and advertising dollars. Nothing wrong with that per se, but i decided long ago that i would rather spend my time on my family and my business. Every now and then i spin the dial, so to speak, to compare how different networks handle the same story, but like this message board, it’s main value, to me, is to provide me with some entertainment. Jesse Ventura “ain’t got time to bleed.” Same attitude about news “reporters” hawking their spin on information for those precious advertising dollars. They are playing us all.
Their "scare tactics" and mis-reporting of this Covid-19 health risk is in part what forced public health officials to shut the country down economically. If they were half as responsible reporting the hard facts, as they are reporting their hype commensurate with all of their disinformation, most folks would be going about their normal lives just like any other spring day. We have the country virtually shut down economically primarily because of the fear and panic they've participated in spreading about this health threat and in my opinion their only objective in doing so has been to try and damage Trump and stir up public resentment towards him to replace him in the next election. It is not arguable that has been their primary objective, not properly informing the public.
They of course are all of those things you've mentioned in your post and you are wise not to give them power over your individual decisions, I join you in that assessment. However in my opinion they are also extremely dangerous to a free society and those who chiefly rely on them for accurate and unbiased information which they no longer provide if they ever did. Look what they put the country through on the Russia/collusion hoax? It was totally fabricated and made up, driven by a complaint anti-Trump hate filled media and it was all 100% false!
Meantime, the civil liberties of innocent Americans was illegally trashed and spit on as some Government officials with near impunity violated our Constitutional laws and our civil rights while the media promoted the lawlessness and cheered on its participants by endlessly promoting the scam in an all-out effort to smear Trump and diminish his support.
You dismiss the media and that's great. Personally, I can't stand them and I believe it's time they are replaced by communicators acting with verified accountability and professionalism so we can have unbiased information to make the important decisions free people need to responsibly make in order to remain free from tyrannical Big Government.
Last edited:
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand said today that she does not believe Tara Reade's sexual assault allegation against Joe Biden: “I stand by Vice President Biden. He’s devoted his life to supporting women and he has vehemently denied this allegation....Imagine that just like all the female liberal candidates wanting the VP nomination. MeToo'd!