Joe Biden

Tara Reade Has New Evidence She Told Her Joe Biden Sexual Assault Story Decades Ago

"I'm for Biden, regardless. But still I have to come out and say this."

|

Tara Reade can no longer be ignored. The former staffer has accused current presidential candidate and former Vice President Joe Biden of sexually assaulting her when she worked in his Senate office in 1993, and now she has a non-trivial piece of corroborating evidence.

The biggest issue with Reade has been that she told a much tamer version of her story last year to The Washington Post, and implicitly acquitted Biden of any responsibility for the kinds of sexual harassment issues she says she experienced while working for him. She claimed that she told her mother and brother about the assault at the time it happened, but it's far from clear that their recollections included that much detail. Reade's mother, who is now deceased, allegedly called into Larry King Live to discuss Reade's mistreatment, but the call does not specifically reference the assault.

But now Business Insider has found a former neighbor of Reade's who recalls hearing about her assault in either 1995 or 1996. This neighbor, Lynda LaCasse, offers a plausible account:

LaCasse, 60, is a retired former medical staff coordinator and emergency-room clerk for San Luis Obispo General Hospital. She lived next door to Reade in 1995 and 1996 in an apartment complex near the beach in Morro Bay, California, a seaside community between Santa Barbara and Monterey. She told Insider that she and Reade shared a bond because they were both mothers, and their young daughters swam together in the apartment complex's indoor pool.

LaCasse said she would sometimes sit on her front stoop to smoke cigarettes after putting her daughter to bed, and that Reade would occasionally join her. It was during one of these evening conversations, she said, that Reade told her about the alleged assault. "We were talking about violent stories," LaCasse said, "because I had a violent situation. We just started talking about things and she just told me about the senator that she had worked for and he put his hand up her skirt."

LaCasse acknowledged that coming forward to support an allegation against the Democratic presidential nominee "may have repercussions for me." But she said she has no political ax to grind and intends to vote for Biden.

"I personally am a Democrat, a very strong Democrat," she said. "And I'm for Biden, regardless. But still I have to come out and say this."

Insider has verified, through publicly available records, that Reade and LaCasse were neighbors at a Morro Bay apartment complex in 1995. A review of LaCasse's social-media presence shows a long history of anti-Trump sentiments. She has written approvingly of both Biden and his Democratic rival Bernie Sanders on Twitter. In March, she shared a link on Facebook to a story detailing Reade's allegations, with the message, "This is my good friend Tara Reade, who was assaulted by Joe Biden in 1993."

This does not prove that the assault actually happened. But it does make it less likely that Reade invented the assault story only recently. That she told someone about it back then makes her harder to dismiss now. This is precisely the sort of corroboration that was missing from Christine Blasey Ford's story of abuse at the hands of teenage Brett Kavanaugh, and might very well have been treated by anti-Kavanaugh partisans as a smoking gun if a similar type of evidence had emerged during his Supreme Court confirmation hearings.

Biden will reportedly address these issues during a virtual town hall on Tuesday. This will be the candidate's first opportunity to respond to Reade's accusation since none of the CNN or NBC journalists who have interviewed him in recent weeks saw fit to ask him about it.

Advertisement

NEXT: South Texas College of Law Houston Student Uses 3D Printer To Create Ear Guards for Health Care Workers

Joe Biden MeToo Election 2020

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

Please to post comments

196 responses to “Tara Reade Has New Evidence She Told Her Joe Biden Sexual Assault Story Decades Ago

  1. Oddly missing from the article robbie.. the word credible.

    1. Lyin’ WHORE LIES!!!
      TRUMP RAPED MORE
      I DON’T CARE IF HE RAPED HER, I’M VOTING BIDEN!
      #BELIEVE ALL WOMEN NOT #PUTIN’S WHORE

      1. Cool it, Rev.

    2. Equally missing is a joint byline with “credible” ENB. She has avoided this like the plague.

      1. She wont know about the story until CNN or Vox cover it.

    3. That’s ok. “Credible” is now code for “things we want you to believe that you absolutely shouldn’t. “

    4. Trump proved that voters don’t give a fuck about sexual assault any more – if they ever did. The Con Man BRAGGED about assaulting women.

      1. Not always true, Mr. Buttplug. We in the progressive / libertarian alliance care a great deal about sexual assault. That’s why we wanted to #CancelKavanaugh. It’s just that Tara Reade isn’t nearly as credible as Dr. Ford.

        #LibertariansForBiden

        1. But particularly “not credible” because her story IS about Biden, right? Can’t have it both ways. If the same things were said about a Republican [or any out of office and therefore expendable Democrat for show], you wouldn’t be merely giving a tacit disapproval of a generic concept while exonerating him… cuz stuff. You’d be making the noose. YOU aren’t credible.

        2. It is evident Biden has all the same qualifications as Trump the chump. Seems that to be a US president in these modern times, not only do you have to be a major dunce, Bush having set the precedent, you have to be a p*ssy grabbing dunce.

          When Trump and Hillary ran, it was easy, it was a simple choice of the worst of two evils. However, the qualifications of Trump and Biden are so close, voters will certainly have a hard time trying to decide between the two.

      2. And bill clinton actually raped people. JFK had his WH secretary blow him in front of people at the White House. Ted Kennedy killed a woman.

        But no, you’re right. Bad behavior started with Trump.

        You really are a dumbass.

        1. So you agree with me since you cited all those examples of winners? I didn’t say it started with Trump. He is just the latest example of a creep who went on to win.

          This Tara Reade story won’t mean shit just like Trump’s sexual assaults didn’t mean shit, idiot.

          1. You literally say Biden assaulting someone doesnt mean shit. Because you’re a piece of shit.

            At least with trump they are only allegations. Done wildly after he opted for the presidency. The examples I gave were lawsuits with evidence.

            1. He gets off on child pornography. Even going so far as to share links to his pastime here. So of course he’s on board with other kinds of rape.

        2. Buttplug never said it started with Trump, double dumbass.

          1. Unless you’re 12 or younger, plain wont fuck you dumbass.

            1. Is this PB’s own sock defending him? Or one of the other progtards?

          2. By the way, do you know what the word any more means? Sound out the following for the class: “voters don’t give a fuck about sexual assault any more”.

      3. Teddy Kennedy proved that politicians can literally kill someone. As long as they’re a Democrat.

        Bill Clinton proved that voters don’t care if you abuse a junior woman. As as they’re a Democrat.

        #AboutismForAChange

        1. Horn Dawg Bill actually raped several women while Gov. of Arkansas enabled by State Troopers & nobody batted an eye! And then his wonderful wifey threatened to ruin these women’s lives if they came forward, and nobody batted any eye about that either!

          Yes, the Dumbo-Crats care soooooo much about women!

      4. Kiddie Raper, you are such a retarded clown.

      5. Apparently, Tara Reade does not care much either….She is going to vote for the man that raped her! Can you beat that?….Can’t this LIB moron at least vote for the Green Party candidate? Or write in Bolshevik Bernie?….No Integrity at all!

        But, maybe she is just saying that so people will believe this is not a hit job?

        1. That was her neighbor, whom she told about the assault many years ago, who is still going to vote for Gropey Uncle Joe. Maybe she doesn’t believe Reade, or maybe she’ll vote for him anyway, just as many Democratic leaders who’ve talked to Biden in person recently are willing to endorse him even though his senility must have been obvious. These people hate America that much!

          AFAIK, Tara Reade hasn’t said who she will vote for.

    5. Not looking good for Sleep Joe.

      Of course, John would be the first to point out that LaCasse’s story is hearsay, not to be given credibility, right John?

      1. John’s not here man.

      2. I’ll say I doubt he did it.

        But the lack of curiosity by the press for Biden, who DOES have a record of inappropriately touching and kissing women, as opposed to Kavanaugh, who did not, it is odd.

      3. The Dems will eventually come out against this, set Biden aside and insert Cumo as nominee without any votes cast for him and declare that they hear all women. (Eventually and only when it’s politically advantageous).

        1. That will be interesting, since Bernie hasn’t relinquished his delegates. Inserting another candidate for the nomination who no one ever voted for in any primary will be controversial at a minimum.

  2. Biden could sexually assault a woman on Fifth Avenue and wouldn’t lose any Democrat voters.

    1. yeah funny

    2. It’s funny because it’s true.

      1. Yeah right, Democrats are the exact opposite of that if anything. See Al Franken.

        1. Or see Biden for a counter to Franken. Oh wait ….

          1. Or hell, Bill Clinton, serial staff rapist and child rapist. And Hillary, serial rapist enabler. But they don’t count.

            1. There’s some indications that Hillary had a way with the staff herself (though not the same ones as Bill).

              1. Allegedly, Bill boasted to his girlfriend de jour that Hillary had slept with more women than he had.

        2. Hahahahahahahahaha

        3. Al Franken fondled a flak jacket rather than the woman herself. But he was joking, and to the left-Nazis, humor about sexual assault is much, much worse than the assault itself.

          Or perhaps it’s that Franken was never really one of the leftist elite…

    3. “Biden could sexually assault a woman on Fifth Avenue”

      He probably has, and it was probably on camera. How many different pictures do they have of Biden grasping women on camera?

  3. >>”I personally am a Democrat, a very strong Democrat,” she said. “And I’m for Biden, regardless. But still I have to come out and say this.”

    is why nobody cares.

    1. Remarkable people will vote for someone they believe (she must believe it, or why would she bring it up?) sexually assaulted a woman. Not just any woman but a woman you knew personally, your neighbor and friend.

      She could just not vote, if there is no one else. But TEAM comes first.

      1. He didn’t assault her. He just didn’t hear her say no.

    2. My guess is she wanted to swing the nomination to Bernie, based on the timing of her allegations, and when nobody in the media cared, she got upset and is now fighting to be taken seriously, even though she really doesn’t want to aid Trump’s reelection.

  4. There is no evidence that she told anyone decades ago, but for a fuzzy recollection, for all the good that current pressures to ‘remember’ an event can cause the memory to be not itself credible.
    An old calendar with ‘brewskies with skeeter’ written on it is more meaningful simply because whether the writing is old or new may be reasonably assessed for veracity, whereas there is no way to pick apart a recovered memory for corroborating forensics.

    1. The 1993 larry king episode is evidence….

      1. Not certain what it evidences. An anonymous caller makes a non-specific claim regarding an unidentified daughter, about an unnamed person.
        Lacks any specificity. But if someone actually had a phone record from that era, or the King show had interview notes written down by the call screeners who make certain that they don’t have cranks getting air time, then there might be something.
        A fishing expedition through old transcripts, no voice to hear, and no one can identify the speaker (alleged speaker is now dead) gives nothing verifiable.
        Any of the above, and then the allegation at least has plausible contemporaneous documentation. But for now, its just too weak.

        1. An anonymous caller from the correct area code called into the Larry King Show and said that her daughter was assaulted by a senator she worked form. The mother has identified herself as that person.

          What more do you want? After some point, the coincidences are just absurd.

    2. Oh, and there is the supposed complaint at the university of Delaware they refuse to look for.

      1. From The Intercept:

        “[Reade Says] The complaint was left with Biden’s office, and if it still exists, is with Biden’s papers at the University of Delaware. The school recently told reporter Rich McHugh that the papers are sealed until two years after Biden leaves public life.”

        Any legal action against these would be tied up in court until the cows come home.

        1. The school recently told reporter Rich McHugh that the papers are sealed until two years after Biden leaves public life.

          What exactly is meant by “two years after Biden leaves public life?” He left office on January 21, 2017 and has not held public office since then. Does merely campaigning count as “public life?” He didn’t announce he was running for president until April 25, 2019, more than 2 years after he last held an elected office. When does this magical 2 year clock start?

          1. Well, he’s a lifelong politician, so 2 years after he dies.

          2. The clock starts when they say it does, because FYTW.

            Why would the papers be sealed anyway? What could possibly be so damning? Is this like Trump and his tax returns?

            1. No.

              Trump has actually accomplished things in his life.

    3. The thing I find most dubious about the story is that she claims this happened around 1993, when clearly it would be more believable if she had claimed it happened around 1973.

      1. Nah, Biden did pretty well with women when he was younger. ’93 makes more sense to me, because at that point he’s well past his prime and starts leaning on his position to trap his quarry.

    4. There is a second woman now corroborating the story. This one worked with Reade at the time on Capitol Hill. And she verified Reade filed a report and that is why she was demoted.

      1. so, would you say that the walls are closing in?

        1. I would say this is far more like how I’ve seen political scandals unfold in the past. An initial accusation, but not strongly supported by evidence at first, then a slow drip, drip, drip of new information until it builds into a flood of information. Not a flimsy accusation that is never further supported by any new information.

  5. No quote from Alyssa Milano. Why not?

    Oh because she’s a dumb cunt who can’t act but seemingly is important enough to attend Supreme Court nomination confirmation hearings.

    Well maybe dementia patient Joe Biden will put her up on the stage and demonstrate how to really get inside digitally.

  6. Seeing as how the progressive (and socialist, they are starting to blend together at this point) ideology is about government control of individual lives. A compleate distain for self ownership. And that people are property and pawns that need to be directed for the good of the state. I am starting to not care if progressives or socialists get abused in any way. If you chose an ideology where you are not an individual, and the stated goal of your ideological allies is that of use and abuse, can you really be supprised when you are the one getting abused? Sure the mensheviks were surprised when the bolsheviks started killing them, but haven’t the far left learned anything over the last 100 years?

    1. haven’t the far left learned anything over the last 100 years?

      First they would have to be capable of actually learning.

      1. They have learned to completely control the media.
        They have learned how to be openly hypocritical without the slightest shame.
        They have learned how to control the actions of the senate as the minority party.
        They have learned a lot, actually.

  7. Hey, it was the Nineties. Even democrats in Congress wouldn’t punish their own serial sexual predator even if he was impeached.

    1. Actually, the 90s was a time when simply dictating your memoirs counted as sexual harassment and got you run out of town. Well, if you were a Republican.

      The allegations against Bill Clinton put all of that on hold for a few years.

  8. Weak sauce for the goose is weak sauce for the gander?

  9. A second woman, who worked with Reade on Capital Hill has now come forward and verifies Reade filed a report and was demoted as a result of it.

    1. Except her report didn’t mention the sexual assault so it’s not exactly supportive of the latest version of her story. It’s very possible she was made this up or exaggerated it out of spite for being fired. Then again it’s possible she’s now telling the full truth but that would mean she was being dishonest just last year. Her problem is that burden of proof is on her and she’s already made it almost impossible to overcome that.

      1. The report that no one has seen? That one? The sealed report that you have no way of knowing what was said. The report that she says she did mention the sexual assault? And the fact that two women now verify her details? You are getting her interview from last year and the report that no one has seen because it is sealed as part of Biden’s personal papers confused. Before you dispute something learn the facts.
        Funny how the burden of proof is with her, but I am sure you didn’t say that about the recent impeachment. I am sure you wanted Trump to prove his innocence.

        1. If I’m reading this right, Reade is the one who says she didn’t include the pussy grabbing story in the complaint. So I’m supposed to believe she complained about Biden giving her creepy looks but failed to mention being assaulted. It doesn’t make sense to me.

          1. Both contemporary witnesses say she mentioned the assault. The new witness is from 95 and mentioned the assault. Sorry you’re defending a deviant.

          2. Not in the interview but she did in the report she filed in 1993. The one that the Biden campaign is keeping sealed. She also told two different witnesses besides her family about it. It is basic, if Biden has nothing to hide, he just needs to release the report she filed in 1993.

          3. Also, she has filed a criminal complaint against Biden.

          4. Oh, well, that settles it then.

          5. Axeblood
            April.27.2020 at 6:36 pm
            “If I’m reading this right,
            […]
            It doesn’t make sense to me.”

            In the opinion of a 15yo gamer,…
            Fuck off.

            1. Oh Sevo, I sense a soft spot. Just fuck off. Today you shall have your wish. Till tomorrow, I am fuckimg off.

              1. That soft spot on your head is normal for infants but usually closes as you mature. If it is still soft, I would seek medical advice.

              2. “Oh Sevo, I sense a soft spot.”

                Your ‘sense’ is as pathetic as your bare acquaintance with anything like ‘fact’ or ‘truth’.
                15yo’s ain’t real bright…

        2. You are an exceptionally credulous clinger, soldiermedic.

          I hope American soldiers were never expect to rely on your judgment.

          1. Wow, you so expertly took apart my argument. Do you lack any ability to actually debate something intellectually? You claim to be superior to everyone else, yet you never demonstrate anything more than sophomoric trope.

            1. “Do you lack any ability to actually debate something intellectually?”

              I assume this is a rhetorical question, because there’s really no doubt about that

      2. Nothing she said last year contradicts her current story dummy.

        1. Leaving out the pussy grabbing allegation from the story is a red flag. It’s a contradiction because it’s not the same story. Soldier says pussy grabbing is rape so leaving out “the rape” from the story is a big deal.

          1. Ah, but failing to remember the year when it happened, who was present, how she got there and later got home, well, those are just minor details that anyone could miss.

            The fact is there is actual evidence this time.

          2. It isnt a red flag based on Fords very own psychologist witnesses who say it takes time for victims to reveal full details. You are protesting way too much.

          3. No, she left it out of a story, but claims she included it in the report she filed in 1993.

  10. “I’m for Biden, regardless. But still I have to come out and say this.”

    Stockholm Syndrome?

    What a strange thing to say about someone who you allege raped you.

    1. Trump was caught on take admitting to sexually assaulting women by grabbing their pussies and claiming he could get away with because he was a celebrity. Harvey Weinstein is in prison for damn near the same thing.

      1. No he stated the let him grab their pussy, meaning he had permission. She states Biden never even asked for permission.

        1. Oh the Weinstein defense.

          1. No it is a distinction. His exact words were they let him. If they file a complaint then you would have a point. But he implied consent was obtained and without further evidence that is far different than the Biden complaint or the Weinstein complaint.

            1. Nope, pay attention. Trump admitted to grabbing women without permission but that because he was a celebrity he could get away with it. Those were his words and his meaning. It’s straight up a Weinstein style sex assault.

              1. He never said without permission his quote said “they let him” he never said without their permission. He stated clearly they let him.

                1. Trump said in effect, bragging now, “I just do it, grab the pussy, and they let me because I’m a celebrity”. He’s bragging about doing it without explicit permission. That’s his whole point. I’m so badass because I’m a big shot that I can just grab pussy without permission.

                  1. You left out the sentence before that which I just quoted.
                    “And when you’re a star, they let you do it.”

                    1. See how far you get grabbing pussy on the hope and expectation it’s accepted. That soundd like Weinstein’s defense.

                    2. That isn’t what the quote says either. Your grasping here. First you deliberately leave out the first sentence, then you try to imply it says something it doesn’t say. At best, the tape is ambiguous. You can read it either way. However, I believe the word let implies some form of consent.

                  2. “Trump said in effect”

                    Which means he didn’t say it, you just want to change his words to fit your point.

                    So the real question: are you a new lying leftie, of just another sock?

                    1. That’s the lying lefty sack of shit formerly known as Pod; seems 15 or so.

                    2. Makes sense. He is rather stupid.

              2. “And when you’re a star, they let you do it. ”
                Notice the word let? Keep saying he stated without their permission because it says they let you…

                1. You don’t understand. Trump is bragging he does it without permission.

                  1. The word let implies without permission in what world? Trump is a creep, and that is why I didn’t vote for him. But you can’t twist the word let you to mean without permission.

                  2. Now you are going to go with the it wasn’t rape rape defense?

                    1. Just listen. Trump is literally bragging specifically about grabbing it without permission. The whole point is that he gets away with it because he’s a celebrity.

                    2. No he isn’t he stated they let him. I have listened and just reread the transcripts.
                      Let:1 : to allow or permit to Let them go. 2 : to allow to go or pass Let me through. 3 : to cause to : make Let it be known that I’m not going to confess.
                      Let: 1.
                      not prevent or forbid; allow.
                      “my boss let me leave early

                2. “I’ve gotta use some Tic Tacs, just in case I start kissing her,” Trump said. “You know I’m automatically attracted to beautiful ― I just start kissing them. It’s like a magnet. Just kiss. I don’t even wait.”

                  “And when you’re a star they let you do it,” Trump said. “You can do anything.”

                  “Grab them by the pussy,” Trump added. “You can do anything.”

                  ————-

                  “They let you do it” refers to kissing.

                  The other is arguably hyperbole but more likely refers to a parade of bimbos happy to fck him. It doesn’t reasonably suggest that he routinely walks up to strangers and grabs them.

            2. Modern democrats:

              a scornful

              tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor

              less.”

              “The question is,” said Alice, “whether you can make words mean so many different things.”
              “The question is,” said Humpty Dumpty, “which is to be master — that’s all.”

            3. And Trump was accused of straight up rape if you’re so willing to believe.

              1. So is Biden here? Or do you think digitally penetrating a woman isn’t rape?
                So the best you can say then is Biden is as bad, if not worse then Trump, because Biden pretends to be a champion of women’s rights.

                1. It’s sexual battery and bad enough. It’s crazy that we have Trump on tape saying he did exactly this all the time.

                  1. Except he didn’t as I have pointed out with a quote from the exact tape you keep referencing. And no, penetration with any object is considered rape in most states. And by most people

                    1. In the video, Trump described his attempt to seduce a married woman and indicated he might start kissing a woman that he and Bush were about to meet. He added, “I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. … Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.” Commentators and lawyers have described such an action as sexual assault.

                    2. And what of the extensive video evidence of Biden molesting multiple women, some of them underage?

                    3. “In the video, Trump described his attempt to seduce a married woman and indicated he might start kissing a woman that he and Bush were about to meet. He added, “I don’t even wait. And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. … Grab them by the pussy. You can do anything.””

                      Your stupidity ate your cite.

                  2. You are truly dense. Is your name Jeffrey?

                  3. And other lawyers haven’t. An appeal to authority? So let me get this right, you are ignoring the word let?

          2. More like the Clinton defense.

            1. Well that depends on what the definition of is, is.

      2. “Trump was caught on take admitting to sexually assaulting women by grabbing their pussies and claiming he could get away with because he was a celebrity.”

        You.
        Are.
        Full.
        Of.
        Shit.

      3. You mean the same tape where Trump says he is irresistibly compelled to start kissing women? The one that ends with him visibly meeting a woman on camera and not kissing her?

        I think we can assume this was one of those times where Trump is stretching the truth.

      4. all trump said was that he grabbed them by the pussy. it was never established that the pussy grabbing was unwanted. there were no specific examples given.

    2. That was the former neighbor who said she was still voting for Biden, not Reade. Although I wouldn’t be surprised if Reade also intends to vote for ol’ Diamond Joe too.

    3. The quote is from LaCasse, not Reade.

  11. Biden will reportedly address these issues during a virtual town hall on Tuesday. This will be the candidate’s first opportunity to respond to Reade’s accusation since none of the CNN or NBC journalists who have interviewed him in recent weeks saw fit to ask him about it.

    I’m sure the “reporters” at CNN and NBC can’t wait to hear his excuse, err, I mean explanation so that they can accept it at face value without any further scrutiny.

    1. Read the Medium report, you half-educated bigot.

      1. Go fuck yourself you racist shithead.

      2. Read the two witnesses who have come forward to corroborate her story and the King interview, and ask why Biden is keeping the report she filed in 1993 sealed.

      3. “Read the Medium report,”

        Is this the one with an anonymous claim, followed by some irrelevancy regarding a claim she stole some money?
        That one?
        How far up your ass does your head have to be to buy *that* steaming pile of shit, asshole bigot? About as far ass yours is?

      4. a racist bigot piece of shit calling one of his betters a bigot Is too damn funny.

    2. I still don’t think there’s a lot to this story. What I hope comes out of it is a hard hit to the ability to trump up false allegations for use as political cudgels.

  12. Caption contest:

    “You see, I prefer the one knee approach because it puts the booty right here in front of your face.”

    Alternate caption:

    “Allow me to demonstrate my motor-boating technique…”

  13. Biden. Did. Nothing. Wrong.

    This is nothing more than a (possibly Russia-directed) plot to hurt his campaign now that the “cognitive decline” attack has been completely debunked.

    1. and we thought all the crazy conspiracy theorists were on the political right.

  14. I’ve seen Robby on Tucker and he seems like a reasonable person. So I am mystified how a reasonable person could vote for Biden, who has so many “drawbacks” .
    He is corrupt for using his position as VP to enrich family members. Every position he took on military strategy has been wrong. He wasn’t aware that China is our foe until people informed him that China is. He recently criticized Trump for restricting travel from China into the US as a precaution against the spread of the virus. He is a despicable hypocrite for supporting Kavanaugh’s accuser when he is in fact sexual predator….etc,etc….

    1. What makes you think Robby is voting for Biden?

      1. He states it in the line under the article title:
        “I’m for Biden, regardless. But I still have to come out and say this,”

        1. That’s a quote from the witness.

          1. Oops.. I didn’t see that..

  15. “This is precisely the sort of corroboration that was missing from Christine Blasey Ford’s story of abuse at the hands of teenage Brett Kavanaugh, and might very well have been treated by anti-Kavanaugh partisans as a smoking gun if a similar type of evidence had emerged during his Supreme Court confirmation hearings.”

    Actually, 25 year old testimony isn’t relevant now and shouldn’t have been relevant in the Kavanaugh story, and if the 25 year old story was corroborated by someone who heard the story 23 years ago, that doesn’t change anything.

    Robby’s little social justice instincts aside, stories from 25 years ago are noise, and the lesson to learn from this isn’t that your fellow social justice warriors should treat everyone the same. The lesson to learn from this is that we should all ignore social justice warriors when they dredge up shit from 25 years ago.

    1. I understand you’re trying to be the voice of reason here, but I prefer to withhold judgement about the relevance until I hear what Michael Avenatti and Gloria Allred have to say about this.

    2. You want to argue for a statute of limitations? OK. But understand this was an adult Senator accused at the time. There’s one key difference with Kavanaugh. And second, we now have contemporaneous corroboration. Not 25 year old testimony. Actual evidence from 25 years ago.

      And realize that selective enforcement of this rule will lead to even greater abuses in the future. We’ve already escalated from Clarence Thomas to Brett Kavanaugh.

    3. The other lesson is if someone sexually assaults you, you should report it soon after it happened.

      1. Which she did, and it got deep-sixed.

        See that’s what happens when you run up against the horrific democrat-marxist machine that grinds flesh and bone and makes sky-net look like Mary Poppins.

        1. Not only did it get deep sized, she was punished for reporting it, according to her.

  16. and might very well have been treated by anti-Kavanaugh partisans as a smoking gun if a similar type of evidence had emerged during his Supreme Court confirmation hearings.

    At least that would have been some evidence, a standard that you only adopted after the fact. You were more than happy to go with the emotional reasoning, “ZOMG, FIVE ACCUSERS MUST BE REALZ!” If you’d kept your head about you then, you might have a leg to stand on when you pretend to be rational.

    Oh, and can you explain why your fellow shrieker ENB won’t talk about this? Your question about media silence is extremely appropriate for her. Why don’t you print the response?

  17. The hilarious thing about this woman is she’s trying to have it both ways–she wants her story told, but she doesn’t want it to actually hurt Biden’s campaign because she votes Democrat.

    I mean, I get that her story didn’t get any traction until the DNC formally set about to make sure he was the last guy standing, but you can’t be so naive to think that throwing that kind of grenade on the table won’t have serious consequences. Plus, does she have any clue how it looks when she says, “Yeah, he used me like a hand puppet, but I’ll still vote for him”?

    1. The people who will be sympathetic to her (read suburban women), share her cognitive dissonance. They won’t even hear it.

      1. I think the bigger danger is from Sanders supporters. They are already uncomfortable with Biden. From what I’ve read this story has angered them, especially as it appears neither the media nor the DNC care.

        1. Well they’re far more likely to be Intercept readers, too. Biden was always going to have a struggle to keep them on the rez. This doesn’t help, which is why the story must be strangled quickly before any more Republicans can *pounce*.

          1. I think this genie is out of the bottle and like most political scandals, it is slow building but eventually becomes all consuming.

        2. There will be a big flurry of anger from the Warren crowd as well. Women who wanted a woman in the White House and found their own candidate tossed aside in favor of a senile serial molester. I doubt they will vote for Trump, but they will either stay home or vote third party.

    2. I don’t think Reade says she is voting for Biden. Not in this story anyway. This quote is from LaCasse, the corroborating friend:

      “I personally am a Democrat, a very strong Democrat,” she said. “And I’m for Biden, regardless. But still I have to come out and say this.”

      1. Reade herself is a Bernie supporter, which has been used as one of the excuses given not to cover this story.

    3. You might want to take a remedial english class, the woman still voting for Biden is a neighbor corroborating her story that an assault occurred and she told the neighbor about it.

  18. Right now its even money on betting sites that Biden utters “stinky” and “finger” in the same sentence in some connotation (perhaps “I did not get my finger stinky with that woman . . .” ) while trying to deny that he did.

    1. He’s either gotta go with continuing to deny everything, or the teary-eyed apology.

      Besides this affecting the November vote, Biden is also right in the middle of choosing a running mate, and everybody expects him to pick a woman. Makes this even more ill-timer and awkward for him.

    2. laughed out loud a little bit

  19. “…since none of the CNN or NBC journalists who have interviewed him in recent weeks saw fit to ask him about it.”

    The return of the lap-dog press!

  20. I’m sure she must be some trailer trash floozie like all those women who accused Bill. Definitely not as credible as Stormy Daniels and her highly reputable attorney.

    1. The Stormy Daniels thing was actually pretty funny, if only for confirming that porn stars will hook on the side if the pay is high enough.

    2. Stormy Daniels story was that she had a consensual, if gross, affair. A one night stand, to be more accurate. And she look for and received a payoff to keep quiet about it. Then she looked for more payoffs to keep quiet about it. And then she looked for payoffs to talk about it.

      But other than catting around on his woman, there is nothing untoward about their interaction.

      1. Just because a man shits on a woman or vice versa doesn’t make it “gross.” Further, one could make an argument that it’s a primal expression of love. So unless you think love is “gross,” hot enema sex is nothing but vanilla lovemaking.

  21. Two things:

    Yes, she can be ignored since there is still zero evidence of an assault.

    And Biden is a corrupt, hypocritical jerk. But still deserving the presumption of innocence he denied others.

    1. you sure? He and his friends wanted a whole new set of rules and were happy to push them on everyone, as far as I’m considered turnabout’s fair play. Especially since there’s some pretty convincing evidence at this point that it actually happened and it’s not just a hit job like Kavanaugh.

    2. Presumption of innocence is all well and good.
      However, given this, we have a valid basis to start a criminal investigation, as Biden was in violation of both sexual assault law and whistleblower laws. He also concealed the crime by punishing the report, which a judge can invalidate the statute of limitations.

  22. The question Democratic voters must answer is not whether Biden is guilty of sexual assault, but whether the evidence for sexual assault is meaningfully less compelling than the evidence for sexual assault by Trump — for it has been, more than anything, Trump’s character that Democrats have repeatedly thrown out as reason for his presidency being so toxic and “unfit”.

    This race will demonstrate that all those people who rebuked people who voted for Trump simply because he was a perceived lesser of two evils on a political policy level, will make the same decision and vote for an “unfit” candidate simply because they align more with their own political interests. To be consistent with their criticisms, they are obligated to vote for a third party candidate. Or they could acknowledge their own wrong. That is, if they find integrity to be a virtue.

    1. They dint have integrity, so it looks like Biden is their only choice.

  23. “I’m for Biden, regardless.”

    This is all the media and rank-and-file Democrats want to hear. It means they don’t have to cover it because it doesn’t matter. She’s cool with it.

    1. The quote isn’t from Tara Reade.

  24. I still maintain this will build until he is forced to withdraw from the race and the powers that be can run the person they really wanted all along…Michelle Obama.

  25. Deep fake.

  26. The fact is that nobody cares how many pussies Biden, Trump, Clinton, or whoever the guy in power grabs, especially if they are a democrat. Who was the chick who said women should be lining up to blow Bill Clinton? This behavior was 100% acceptable if not encouraged until Trump came along.

  27. I don’t remember Reason getting this excited about Trump’s recorded admissions of serial rape.

    1. Because that never happened.

    2. I’m sorry, but the critical part of that statement was “they let you grab them by the “. Trump may be a creep and an adulterer, but as far as I can find, he is not and has never done anything of what you say.

  28. Sarah Y. James paycheck was for 1500 dollars… All i did was simple online work from comfort at home for 3-4 hours/day that I got from this agency I discovered over the internet and they paid me for it 95 bucks every hour… More Details

  29. How much do you want to bet that this town hall Biden’s doing today won’t allow any real questions against him

    1. Only question is if he’ll refer to it as a “virtual” town hall the whole time, or if he’ll slip up at some point and call it “digital”
      I’m hoping for the latter

      1. i’m hoping he completely breaks down and admits to assaulting her, or saying something equally damning

  30. That’s what comes of two-party rule: people who can actually believe a candidate sexually assaulted someone, and who are strongly against sexual assault, and yet who will still vote for their team.

    It’s amazing. On paper, I’d always prefer a libertarian candidate to either of the two major parties, but i could easily imagine refusing to vote for any of them if the libertarian candidate didn’t appeal to me.

    These people are so utterly indoctrinated with the “you must always vote—even if it’s for the lesser of two evils” bullshit. They might as well move to China, where the single-party system makes it even easier for numbed brains confused by too many choices.

    1. See ‘you want granny to die’ bots whenever they hear skepticism of the lockdowns.

    2. Indigo, great points.

      And I’m glad you found the man that killed your father.

  31. In the article you say
    “…This does not prove that the assault actually happened. But it does make it less likely that Reade invented the assault story only recently. That she told someone about it back then makes her harder to dismiss now…”

    If she told someone about it in the mid 1990’s then it is true that she did not invent it recently. It’s not less likely, it is true that this is not a new story for her. right? or did I miss something here?

    1. Soave has updated his Skepticism software and recalibrated his truth-o-meter since Professor Ford’s tale (i.e. the corroborating neighbor might just could be a dirty rotten liar, also).

      The old app was vulnerable to malware designed by experts in psychometry to elicit false positives for credibility by exploiting human emotional responses.

  32. Hate to say I told you so, but just read a story from the New Yorker on this subject, like I said this is going to keep growing until he withdraws from the race, and who do you think they will pick to take his place?

    1. If they don’t pick Sanders, who is still in the race officially and is sueing New York to get his name back on the ballot and force a primary in the state, then his supporters will be ready to riot. I also wouldn’t be surprised to see him launch a third party run then.

  33. Has been extremely entertaining watching all the usual suspects in my family/friend group completely flip their scripts based on how they reacted to Kavanaugh.

    My ultra conservative, MAGA hat wearing folks believe her as if she had it on tape, and want Biden crucified. They are absolutely disgusted and offended by his behavior.

    My obnoxious lib friends dont want to hear it, and whatabout-trump was worse, and these arent even CREDIBLE accusations. It has been fun to compare these accusations (which, to be sure, are stronger than those against Kavanaugh) to the ones from Avenati’s fake client which they bought hook, line, and sinker as proof.

    Man its like watching a fun, but tragic, social experiment play out in real time.

    1. The cornerstone to partisanship is to judge by the who, not by the what.

    2. Biden advanced bills to have men with guns kick in your door with no warning or warrant, shoot your dog, shoot others, plant plant leaves, frame you in one of their Army of God courts, confiscate your home, car and savings, and wreck the economy in the process. Read Senate Bill 1762 for 1984. The lying looter joined the Gee-Oh-Pee sniffers crushing rights at home and exporting prohibitionists terrorism abroad. Biden gave people south of Brownsville cause to shoot Americans on grounds that “we” elected the cowardly prig.

  34. Nice principles LaCasse has there. Wonder what she thought about Kavanaugh.

    “Biden will reportedly address these issues during a virtual town hall on Tuesday.”

    “I did not touch that girl. Everyone knows I have a soft spot for transgender queers.” /Biden wink.

  35. Dear Author,

    What is wrong with you? Seemingly legitimate evidence and your first line is – “I’m for Biden, regardless. But still I have to come out and say this.” If her story is correct, the guy is a rapist. This wasn’t a situation where a make out session got out of control, communication was poor and the guy went too far. That is assault. He forced himself on her. If you think she is lying, OK. That is at least a defense. But to support a rapist? I don’t care how bad Trump is.

    How about this Robbie. Stop being a pig. Then, suggest that the Democrats dump the guy and pick the second choice. At least then you could be respectable. Yes, I despise socialism, but if it is socialist vs rapist, I’m going with the socialist.

  36. This was already hashed and settled.

  37. Voters don’t care. After all, promising to financially rape a voter’s neighbor is what gets politicians elected.

  38. [LaCasse] “I personally am a Democrat, a very strong Democrat,” she said. “And I’m for Biden, regardless….”

    Trump Derangement Syndrome test: passed.

    For the DNC the allegation is an ace in the hole. Their product never had much of a chance. Now they can virtue signal by wheeling out Michelle or Stacy, or both, at the appropriate time.

  39. Thanks admin for giving such valuable information through your article . Your article is much more similar to https://www.bocsci.com/darunavir-cas-206361-99-1-item-62615.html word unscramble tool because it also provides a lot of knowledge of vocabulary new words with its meanings.

Comments are closed.