• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Joe Biden's accuser finally tells her full story - Katie Halper's interview with Tara Reade

roguenuke said:
Did you? Did you give as much credence to Fords story as you are to Reades?

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Fair question.

But the point is that one can't have it both ways, aka the Democrat Way.

Believe, or suspend judgment, or condemn equally.

Consistency.
 
Tanngrisnir said:
Yes, they are. Just look at your god, Donnie Moscow.

Thanks for admitting she's a liar!
Click to expand...

Such astonishing bigotry... You have me confused with someone else - someone who likely doesn't exist.

You claim she's mentally ill, I don't.
 
3leftsdoo said:
Such astonishing bigotry... You have me confused with someone else - someone who likely doesn't exist.

You claim she's mentally ill, I don't.
Click to expand...

Yup, she's mentally ill and a loon and a liar.

Clearly she, like Donnie Moscow, has you completely fooled.
 
roguenuke said:
The Senate doesnt get to approve Presidential nominees.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

You said "Ford" so you weren't talking about presidential nominees.
 
3leftsdoo said:
Fair question.

But the point is that one can't have it both ways, aka the Democrat Way.

Believe, or suspend judgment, or condemn equally.

Consistency.
Click to expand...
Consistency is in listening and drawing an opinion on the info you have. You can determine if you believe the person or not.

However, the situations are different. This would be more akin to comparisons of accusations brought forth against Trump. Were those believable? Did I personally say he should drop out for those accusations against him or even be refused votes from his Party supporters just because of that.

I am consistent in my expectations of others. I had a bigger problem with Kavanaughs demeanor during the accusations, and his trying to cover up his past drinking/womanizing by some BS story about words meaning different things, despite his buddy writing a book about doing it. Kavanaugh is chosen, and specifically approved, for life. The President is voted in for 4-8 years.

And there is no consistency in believing Reade, but not believing Trump accusers.

The 25 women who have accused Trump of sexual misconduct - Business Insider



Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
bubbabgone said:
You said "Ford" so you weren't talking about presidential nominees.
Click to expand...
The Senate does get to approve SCOTUS nominees, which is the only reason Ford was brought before the Senate, as part of testimony against approving Kavanaugh. There is no such vetting process for President, or they should have also already called forth those who have accused Trump of misconduct.

The 25 women who have accused Trump of sexual misconduct - Business Insider

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
roguenuke said:
The Senate does get to approve SCOTUS nominees, which is the only reason Ford was brought before the Senate, as part of testimony against approving Kavanaugh. There is no such vetting process for President, or they should have also already called forth those who have accused Trump of misconduct.

The 25 women who have accused Trump of sexual misconduct - Business Insider

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Why did you mention "Ford" if you weren't expanding the topic?
 
bubbabgone said:
Why did you mention "Ford" if you weren't expanding the topic?
Click to expand...
Ford is linked to Kavanaugh and his confirmation hearing. He wasnt elected, but rather appointed and approved by the Senate.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
Felis Leo said:
First, zimmer, I would point out that Alexandra Tara Reade did not come forward with a rape allegation. She made an allegation of sexual assault and battery against Senator Joe Biden. When accusations of such a nature as nonconsensual sexual impropriety are made, it is important to be as precise as possible.

But, second, Ms. Reade certainly sounds credible. I would want to see further evidence before making any judgments against Mr. Biden. Anything to corroborate this would be helpful. But if this is true, I think this will destroy Biden's hopes for the presidency. We may just see the resurrection of Bernie Sanders' campaign OR a "Draft Cuomo" moment after all.
Click to expand...

This loosely reminds me of his treatment of Anita Hill but this case im gonna say i dont know if she is being honest or not. Trump’s enablers have been known to rig up false sexual assault allegations against those who challenge trump.
 
Last edited:
bomberfox said:
This loosely reminds me of his treatment of Anita Hill but this case im gonna say i dont know if she is being honest or not. Trump’s enablers have been known to rig up false sexual assault allegations against those who challenge trump.
Click to expand...

this is why it needs to be a question asked of joe during the debate
let's hear how honestly he responds

convince us now, before the nomination process, that there is no "there" there
because we can be certain tRump will bring it out during the run up to the election
it's time to see how biden responds to this issue before it is too late to change horses
 
CaughtInThe said:
that's pretty much it. when he paid off a porn star and has a bunch of women who say he sexually assaulted them and the Party of Jesus Christ elected him anyway (and support him heavily) then that is approval from the "decent" folks that this isn't an issue for the Prez anymore.

now, the real decent folks, currently in the Democratic party, may actually care.
Click to expand...

Yep. And they do care. When Bloomberg tried to roll in with all his money and buy the Dem nomination, he was shut out down due to his very questionable past involving racism, sexual assault allegations, etc. Was he better than Trump? Anyone is, but he was still a shady character and rightfully got ousted out of the nomination. Though in his defense, he looks to be keeping his word on supporting the Democratic nominee, and it looks like he will be terrorizing Trump from the sidelines, much to Trump's dismay.
 
bomberfox said:
This loosely reminds me of his treatment of Anita Hill but this case im gonna say i dont know if she is being honest or not. Trump’s enablers have been known to rig up false sexual assault allegations against those who challenge trump.
Click to expand...

Well I do not know about any such cooked up false allegations. What I do know is that it is incredibly easy for anyone to leap to believe the worst about their ideological rivals, because they consciously or subconsciously want to believe that they are not merely wrong but that they are evil. I think it is imperative to do everything in one's power to correct for one's biases by giving people the benefit of the doubt, most especially those whom one already strongly dislikes.

Personally, I extend the same standard to people I despise as I do to those who I like and admire: Strong corroborative evidence beyond the accusation is needed.
 
Last edited:
bomberfox said:
This loosely reminds me of his treatment of Anita Hill but this case im gonna say i dont know if she is being honest or not. Trump’s enablers have been known to rig up false sexual assault allegations against those who challenge trump.
Click to expand...

Honest Americans no doubt see the gap between Ford's testimony and this woman's claims. The accounts smelled different. One did not pass the smell of guilt test and the other one stunk to high heaven of guilt on Biden's part.
 
Felis Leo said:
Well I do not know about any such cooked up false allegations. What I do know is that it is incredibly easy for anyone to leap to believe the worst about their ideological rivals, because they consciously or subconsciously want to believe that they are not merely wrong but that they are evil. I think it is imperative to do everything in one's power to correct for one's biases by giving people the benefit of the doubt, most especially those whom one already strongly dislikes.

Personally, I extend the same standard to people I despise as I do to those who I like and admire: Strong corroborative evidence beyond the accusation is needed.
Click to expand...

Sure. Im not saying i know this is a fake allegation just i know of one that was fabricated to get rid of Mueller.
 
marke said:
Honest Americans no doubt see the gap between Ford's testimony and this woman's claims. The accounts smelled different. One did not pass the smell of guilt test and the other one stunk to high heaven of guilt on Biden's part.
Click to expand...
There is absolutely no more reason to believe this woman than there was Fords. Especially since this womans story has changed since she first came forward, and there is no way to confirm either.

Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
 
roguenuke said:
That she should be listened to. I believed her story, although I said it could have been someone else that did it.

However, she didnt change her story, despite what some claim about her numbers of people at the party.
Click to expand...

She did indeed change her story.

But Ford also wasnt a self described actress or writer,
Click to expand...

No, she was instead an expert at creating false memories.

nor did she claim one thing and then a more serious thing later.
Click to expand...

Sort of. She claimed to have been abused, and then later claimed to have been raped, but she couldn't remember by who, "remembering" that it was Kavanaugh only when he got brought up as a possible SCOTUS judge. Her attorney has since admitted that part of Ford's motivation was to place an "Asterisk" next to his name, should he rule on Roe.

In fact, that is one of the things about this one that adds to the doubt. If more people are coming forward, saying they were touched, it is not reasonable for her to hold back the biggest part of her story at that time, only to tell the lesser stuff.
Click to expand...

I can understand someone only feeling more comfortable coming forward over time, just as I can understand someone changing their story over time (and believing it each time they change it), just as I can understand someone rationally concluding that one who changes their story over time is probably telling a story that - in and of itself - is less trustworthy.

However, less time has passed as in Ford's case.

She would have had far more support then, especially given that it would have been difficult to claim her story changed, as can be done now. There is no evidence from her that she planned to provide more, at that time. Her blogs were removed
Click to expand...

As was Ford's social media history.

The ones we have copies of from before are mainly about her admiration of Putin.
Click to expand...

So, I saw Tansgrinnr try a variant of this accusation, but it fell apart without supporting evidence, and turned out (seemingly) to have been entirely made up. Do you have a credible link for that claim?

Her insistence that he did more to her didn't even start until around January of this year.
Click to expand...

Mirroring Ford's insistence that she suddenly remembered not only being assaulted, but being raped, and that it was Kavanaugh who did it, as soon as he started being discussed as a potential SCOTUS nominee.

And it wasn't just the leaving out that is the issue, as I mentioned. It actually is the changes, from her sitting in silence while others argued about her serving drinks (story she wrote for the Union) to her arguing about it (later posts by her). The fact that she did leave out details or made them vague to prevent verification and/or plausibility. This was in DC, near the capitol, and yet she claims seclusion. Have you been to the Capitol? I did last year, and starting early in the morning, it is filled with visitors. It is the going from an alpha to an intimidated woman in parts of her own story. It is the words she remembers him saying that make little sense when put together.
Click to expand...

Actually those odd words "Cmon Man, I thought you liked me" I can absolutely hear Biden saying. That sounds like exactly his level of awkward, though the "you're nothing to me" afterwards seems less so.
 
justabubba said:
why no debate questions on this matter?

can see why joe would want to avoid any more debates where such questions could appear
Click to expand...


All of a sudden women are credible? Go figure.
 
justabubba said:
this is why it needs to be a question asked of joe during the debate
let's hear how honestly he responds

convince us now, before the nomination process, that there is no "there" there
because we can be certain tRump will bring it out during the run up to the election
it's time to see how biden responds to this issue before it is too late to change horses
Click to expand...

Fair enough. When does Trump come clean?
 
FWIW, I did not immediately believe Kavanaugh's first accuser. I needed a few days to mull it over before I did.

Seeing multiple witnesses come forward was a different story. IF this happens, I will change my tune with Biden. Because true predators almost never strike just once.

And let's not mince words with how hypocritical trump supporters are being with this accusation, acting as if all of a sudden sexual assault would be disqualifying. :roll: trump has a double-digit number of accusations against him, yet they enthusiastically lined up behind that monster.
 
Phys251 said:
FWIW, I did not immediately believe Kavanaugh's first accuser. I needed a few days to mull it over before I did.

Seeing multiple witnesses come forward was a different story. IF this happens, I will change my tune with Biden. Because true predators almost never strike just once.

And let's not mince words with how hypocritical trump supporters are being with this accusation, acting as if all of a sudden sexual assault would be disqualifying. :roll: trump has a double-digit number of accusations against him, yet they enthusiastically lined up behind that monster.
Click to expand...

A few of Trump/GOP voters on this forum have admitted that the SC, Tax Cuts, and gun laws are the most important to them, anything else be damned. I'm not saying Democrats should be as power hungry as Republicans, but it's good to know what you're dealing with in today's political environment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom