How? The Senate does not consent to a President.
By the media
But the two are distinct.
Perhaps some preliminary investigation was warranted wrt Blasey-Ford, before Pelosi outed her and used the media to create a fanfare.
Considering what came out about Blasey-Ford and her stories, the entire thing could have been avoided.
But that is not what the Dems wanted, is it?
And the media plays right along now: move on, nothing to see here wrt Reade, who had somewhat more than Blasey-Ford did.
Reade is just about finished as a story
Yes, things came out which caused a lot of doubt about her story. But things came out which cast a lot of doubt on Blasey-Ford’s story and the Ds just kept pushing it until they could do no more with it, as opposed to dropping it when her credibility fell apart.
What came out casting doubt on Blasey-Ford’s story?
There are reams of info right on CAF; this was hashed out incredibly thoroughly at the time.
Here is the memorandum written by Rachel Mitchell, the AZ prosecutor brought in to question Blasey-Ford and Kavanaugh. She concluded that a prosecutor would probably not press charges with the information she had.
There were other problems with Blasey-Ford’s stories as well.
I don’t think we should discuss this further in this thread. If you read some of the threads on the topic from when it happened, you will understand why
Yes, I remember this. So, basically, anyone who uses this as a reason to not believe Blasey-Ford should never consider Reade’s story to be true because Reade has much bigger problems then things like ‘early 80s’ vs. ‘mid 80s’
Yes, my point is Reade’s story was shakey, as was Blasey-Ford’s, and neither should have seen the light of the media shine upon them. However, having made such a big deal of the accusations against Kavanaugh begs the question of why not the same against Biden?
I don’t really find Blasey-Ford to be nearly as shaky as the document you provided was not particularly compelling, but, as you said, discussing that would derail the thread. I think many others see it that way, which is why you are not seeing the Reade accusations into Biden have the same response as Blasey-Ford;s accusations of Kavanaugh.
As I mentioned, there were lots of other problems with Blasey-Ford’s story, and I think they were apparent early enough that it should not have ever been taken seriously.
She had problems with how old she was from the beginning, and that, to me, is a huge one, not to mention lack of backup from the friend who she said was with her.
Reade at least had people who remembered her having mentioned problems she had in the office that she spoke about at the time, which to me gives a slight more solid foundation than Blasey-Ford’s, or slightly less unsolid one.
Given that, when asked, the first thing you gave to discredit Blasey-Ford’s claims was weak tea, I am doubting that there is much better out there.
Potaytoes/potahtoes, I guess!
I’m also trying not to get involved in a deep discussion, especially when this was gone over so thoroughly at the time.
I agree. It’s unlikely we would agree on Blasey-Ford.
The time frame alone should have made the whole story irrelevant. No woman (or man) has any business starting an accusation 3 decades after the fact. Physical evidence almost never exists. Even personal testimony has to be suspect.
Ilhan Omar Believes Joe Biden Accuser Tara Reade: ‘Justice Should Never Be Denied’
Alex Wong/Getty Images
24 May 2020
Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) has revealed that she believes Tara Reade’s sexual assault claims against presumptive Democratic nominee Joe Biden, warning that the historical nature of the allegations should not deny her justice.
In an interview with Britain’s Sunday Times, the far-left congresswoman said she trusted Reade’s claims that Joe Biden sexually assaulted her in the halls of Congress while she was working for him as a staffer when Biden was the Senator for Delaware.
“I do believe Reade,” she told the newspaper. “Justice can be delayed, but should never be denied.” According to the interviewer, Omar added that if it was up to her, Biden would not be the Democratic nominee.
Omar’s comments underlined the sharp divisions between the Democratic Party establishment and its growing number of far-left lawmakers, all of whom opposed Biden’s candidacy.
Despite being cheerleaders of the #MeToo anti-sexual harassment movement, practically all major party figures (including Biden himself) have ignored or dismissed the allegations outright, having previously argued that all women should be believed whether or not they can provide evidence.
Meanwhile Omar’s most prominent ally in Congress, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), admitted last week that it “certainly seems as though something has happened.” Both women were strong supporters of Bernie Sanders’s unsuccessful bid for the nomination.
“There have been investigative journalists that have corroborated certain aspects of her account — that is undeniable — [and] have raised questions about other aspects of her account,” . . .
That woman has never struck me as the brightest. She is too naive and young. Of course justice can be denied, must be denied in fact, when guilt is uncertain, discernible, unknowable. It is in fact a point of justice that it is better that ten people go free, than one innocent person is punished. This should especially apply in a case when the one alleging the crime is primarily responsible for not being able to determine guilt.
I agree with the substance of your post except this bit. Yes, it’s tragic that silence allows offenders to go free but I would not blame a victim of rape for “allowing others to be raped.” Rape is a very traumatic thing and many people cope by trying desperately to shut it out of their minds. Among the reasons some might come forward later is they’ve healed enough to do it or the environment has been availed that allows them to feel safe to do it. Of course, there are opportunists and we have no way to tell them apart from real victims except by objective evidence. Sadly, that means decades old cases can almost never be prosecuted fairly; not even when the case ends with someone in prison can we be comfortable (in my opinion) that he did it, since it boils down to whom you believe more. All around a sad affair.
When you come forward after 20+ years right after Super Tuesday, you are suspect