I'm saying I'm not accepting a Medium piece from the Krassensteins as evidence. What's hard to understand about that?
Seriously, what the actual fuck are you arguing?
No, what I’ve posted is just fine and the fact that her story has changed over time is uncontroversial.Post something that's not from the Krassensteins (or any other thoroughly discredited grifters) and we can discuss it. I'm not going to sit here and try to pick that turd apart.
Hey @interchange, does this one count? Or nah...
You voted for Trump, I don't think your thoughts matter when it comes to sexual assault or mental acuity since you have already shown horrifically bad judgement on both fronts.I'd be more concerned, at this point, about Biden's lack of mental acuity. If he wins, his pick of VP will be probably more important than most historical VP picks. He won't make it a full term and she will ultimately become president.
Exhibit A for cognitive dissonance, well supported by false equivalencies, with a smattering of whataboutism.The only choices are clearly Biden or Trump. So, obviously as any sane person I will be voting for Trump.
Trump is the lesser evil. He isn't protected, they simply ignore it. Biden is the greater evil. He is protected, and vehemently they say everyone else is lying.
Local/State will definitely be democrat this year. Definitely at the national level have to be Trump as he is the only other choice. It's not like there is the GPUS, as the only other parties are technically in coalition with the Repubs(AIP/IAP/Const/LP).
No, what I’ve posted is just fine and the fact that her story has changed over time is uncontroversial.
If you have a specific critique then name it.
What statement of hers was fabricated?
What statement was taken out of context?
What statement was edited to change its meaning?
If you cannot provide an example of any of those then you have no argument. We both know of course if you did have an example you would have named it. I find this attempt at obfuscation funny from someone who so frequently calls me dishonest. Lol.
As if sexual assault and rape are Biden's only crimes. Treasure trove under Biden. Treasure trove under Trump.As if sexual assault and rape are Trumps only crimes.
You’re being childish and ridiculous.I'll tell you what. I'll do it. I'll go through the article and respond to it, bit by bit.
But first, you have to do something. You have personally endorse it. YOU have to say that YOU are standing behind that article as a factual and fair presentation of evidence, that the factual and fairly presented evidence in the article supports your argument that Tara Reade has changed her story about Joe Biden's sexual assault multiple times. Your reputation on the line. If the article does not do that, if it's full of unverifiable or irrelevant claims, then you are nothing more than someone posting a smear piece intended to shame and discredit a victim making a very serious allegation. Utterly beneath contempt.
Go ahead, I dare you.
You’re being childish and ridiculous.
I don’t need you to go through the whole article, I only need you to evaluate if the statements attributed to her are accurate or not. If you think one of the statements attributed to her is fabricated or inaccurate then say what it is instead of trying to puff yourself up like an idiot and make this into some colossal battle of reputations.
Seriously, how old are you?
He's directly said he'd love to have Michelle be his VP but that he doesn't think she wants to be anywhere near DC again. Michelle has herself said she has no interest in politics. She'd be a great choice though, she's one of the most universally loved and highly competent First Ladies ever. And at this point no one of human level intelligence, hell of any mammalian level intelligence, thinks that Hillary would have been anything other than vastly better than Trump. Based on Trump's actions so far, anyone paying attention should be significantly more concerned with his mental acuity than Biden's. Then again, there isn't a single person on the planet of sound mind who supports Trump or the Republicans.I'd be more concerned, at this point, about Biden's lack of mental acuity. If he wins, his pick of VP will be probably more important than most historical VP picks. He won't make it a full term and she will ultimately become president.
Yes, he could actually force Hillary Clinton or Michelle Obama on us. lol
Let’s be clear, yes! I have provided you with a piece that in essence argues that Reade has given different accounts of her interactions with Biden over the years, which damages her credibility. You appear to think this is not the case, so I have invited you to point out what element of that assertion is incorrect. You have instead thrown a temper tantrum.Wow, let's be very, very clear about what you're doing here. You're posting an article by known grifters that was published on a website with no editorial review, and you're doing this to diminish the credibility of a sexual assault victim. To top it all off, you refuse to stand behind the article as a fair and accurate account that supports your claims.
Fucking incredible.
You know that medium piece has links in it, right? Here, have a look at what she said in 2019:Wow, let's be very, very clear about what you're doing here. You're posting an article by known grifters that was published on a website with no editorial review, and you're doing this to diminish the credibility of a sexual assault victim. To top it all off, you refuse to stand behind the article as a fair and accurate account that supports your claims.
Fucking incredible.
Hmm, she didn't consider Biden's acts towards her sexualization.Reade said Biden’s senior staff protected the senator. She was considered a distraction. Reade said she didn’t consider the acts toward her sexualization. She instead compared her experience to being a lamp.
“It’s pretty. Set it over there,” she said. “Then when it’s too bright, you throw it away.”
You know that medium piece has links in it, right? Here, have a look at what she said in 2019:
Hmm, she didn't consider Biden's acts towards her sexualization.Nevada County woman says Joe Biden inappropriately touched her while working in his U.S. Senate office
A Nevada County woman has added her voice to a recent spate of allegations that former vice president and possible presidential candidate Joe Biden touched her when she worked inwww.theunion.com
I have to admit I hadn't read that whole article, and still haven't read it thoroughly. Skimming the part about how from 2016-2017 she hated Putin and then from 2018-2019 she fucking loved him I honestly can't even process it.I mean the whole thing I've been referring to is essentially a series of direct quotes from her with screenshots and links to the relevant material (some are screenshots because she's subsequently deleted the pieces). The only relevant defenses are that the quotes are fake, that the quotes lack relevant context that would change their meaning, or that the quotes are misleadingly edited.
I seriously don't even know what he's having a meltdown about although it was pretty funny when he challenged my Internet Honor.
I agree the Putin part is weird, I really don't know what to make of it though or if it relates at all to this. To me the part I care about is she's given numerous different accounts of her time with Biden, a number of which are mutually exclusive, meaning she has falsely described her interactions with him at some point. It is also concerning that she seemed to be a big Joe Biden fan until the recent past, and specifically a big Joe Biden Defense of Women fan. It's pretty strange to repeatedly praise someone for their defense of women when they sexually assaulted you.I have to admit I hadn't read that whole article, and still haven't read it thoroughly. Skimming the part about how from 2016-2017 she hated Putin and then from 2018-2019 she fucking loved him I honestly can't even process it.
You know that medium piece has links in it, right? Here, have a look at what she said in 2019:
Hmm, she didn't consider Biden's acts towards her sexualization.Nevada County woman says Joe Biden inappropriately touched her while working in his U.S. Senate office
A Nevada County woman has added her voice to a recent spate of allegations that former vice president and possible presidential candidate Joe Biden touched her when she worked inwww.theunion.com
I mean, in one article she said she drove across the country to work for Biden and in another, she said she flew? Makes no damn sense.I agree the Putin part is weird, I really don't know what to make of it though or if it relates at all to this. To me the part I care about is she's given numerous different accounts of her time with Biden, a number of which are mutually exclusive, meaning she has falsely described her interactions with him at some point. It is also concerning that she seemed to be a big Joe Biden fan until the recent past, and specifically a big Joe Biden Defense of Women fan. It's pretty strange to repeatedly praise someone for their defense of women when they sexually assaulted you.
Now maybe she has a good explanation for this but to the best of my knowledge she has not offered one. Anyone who is accepting her account without her addressing the obvious contradictions in her story is either stupid or is engaging in motivated reasoning.
Then why would she explicitly say she didn't consider Biden's acts sexual in nature? She didn't have to say that. She volunteered it.Yes, this is an excellent example. It's a quote that Reade gave before she decided to come forward with her story. She was talking about other things that he did. She did that because she was adding her voice to other accusers, rather than putting her own neck on the line, and we can now see why she was so reluctant to do that. The Krassensteins are trying to pretend that she changed her story from A to B. She didn't. She still, says 'A', now she also says 'B'.
Yes, this is an excellent example. It's a quote that Reade gave before she decided to come forward with her story. She was talking about other things that he did. She did that because she was adding her voice to other accusers, rather than putting her own neck on the line, and we can now see why she was so reluctant to do that. The Krassensteins are trying to pretend that she changed her story from A to B. She didn't. She still, says 'A', now she also says 'B'.
Then why would she explicitly say she didn't consider Biden's acts sexual in nature? She didn't have to say that. She volunteered it.
And then why would she tell one interviewer that Biden probably doesn't know why she left and then tell another that Biden fired her?
I mean, in one article she said she drove across the country to work for Biden and in another, she said she flew? Makes no damn sense.
Yes, it's not at all strange to say specifically that you didn't view someone's actions as sexualization and then later say 'oh yeah but he also sexually assaulted me'.
Because she didn't consider those acts to be sexual. And if she did, she was concealing it, just like she was concealing the assault. You can think that strange, but it doesn't matter, it has nothing to do with the claims she's making now.
Who cares? It has nothing to do with her allegations. Digging up random inconsistent stuff that she's said in the past is not an attempt to get at the truth, it's an attempt to smear her.
She also claims in one article that she was fired for refusing to be a cocktail waitress for an event and then other times said she said she left to be with her boyfriend and then another time said she quit to protest US imperialism and then another time said she was forced to resign and Biden didn't know why and then another time said Biden had her fired.
She has like five different stories for how she left her position, nearly all of which are mutually exclusive.
Yeah guys, what possible relevance could the truthfulness of statements about her time working for Biden have on the truthfulness of her statement about being assaulted while working for Biden.