Joe Biden Raped Tara Reade
- Thread starter ok doser
- Start date
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
The left and the MSM are complicit in this rape. You can't find coverage of her claims that describe it as a rape. They minimize it as a claim of sexual assault or sexual harassment.
But what she describes in her description of his actions includes digital penetration which meets the legal definition of rape.
But what she describes in her description of his actions includes digital penetration which meets the legal definition of rape.
Idolater
"Matthew 16:18-19" Dispensationalist (Catholic) χρ
From today's Wikipedia:
"when a powerful person is accused . . . the reaction should be a presumption that the less powerful accuser is 'likely telling the truth, because the risks of going public are great.'"
en.wikipedia.org
"when a powerful person is accused . . . the reaction should be a presumption that the less powerful accuser is 'likely telling the truth, because the risks of going public are great.'"
MeToo movement - Wikipedia
Right Divider
Body part
Did you not notice the radical difference in our media coverage of these two?
I don't follow American media that closely, but I'm not surprised that they lean towards the liberal side of things.
It doesn't make any difference as far as the basic fact: these unproven accusations are unfair.
Right Divider
Body part
The standards are completely different for the "chosen people" on the left.
annabenedetti
like marbles on glass
What do you consider "American media?" Do you realize that there are two parallel streams of American media?
Right Divider
Body part
One stream is a mile wide and the other is a trickle.
Yeah, unproven accusations that he's creepy when he displays it on video... repeatedly. That you put the accusations with the same weight as each other is laughable. That you do means you view Kavanaugh as 100% evil and Joe Biden as God's gift to world leadership.You can twist my words as much as you like- but it's you doing the twisting. My words were straightforward. Unproven accusations are problematic, no matter who makes them about who.
You're kidding, right? If I had an uncle that acted like Joe, I wouldn't call the police on him, but I wouldn't let my daughters around him, either. Would you? Seriously? Did you see all the girls in those videos squirming? They were squirming for good reason.
Point is, it might not be a provable as a math problem, but not even you would say there is NO evidence for creepy Joe being creepy.
Do you have any reason to believe this is true of Kavanaugh?
QED.
You'd like to think so. But we can go back and remind everyone what you said:
"These kinds of unproven accusations are problematic, whether they be aimed at Brett Kavanaugh or Joe Biden."
No, chair, when people pursue reasonable evidence it's not problematic. Joe has reasonable evidence, bolstered by the fact that he's protected in such an irrational way, making him very suspect. Brett has no evidence saying he is deviant. So you might hide behind the technicality of the word "unproven" and its antonym "proven". But in normal discourse when someone says something is proven they mean something has such a great amount of evidence for its truth that most anyone would agree it's true, and likewise "unproven" in normal discourse means such little evidence exists for something to be true that almost no people would be sure it was true.
You use words like "reasonable", "irrational", "very suspect" so freely. There is nothing to prevent somebody with other political views truing around and using them in another direction, That is why the "technicality" is important.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
Did you bother to watch the video that I am posted in the OP?
Biden convicted himself with his own words.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
How do you prove or disprove a claim with no witnesses?
Indeed, a major problem in cases like this. The court of public opinion can easily convict somebody based on rumors and lies. And it has a cost- people have lost their jobs because of this, and it has turned into a political tool- one which both sides are apparently all too willing to use.
No kidding. I would expect it. But the evidence says I'm right and they are wrong. Isn't it reasonable to follow the evidence?
No, a person that would use a technicality to avoid a challenge is not doing something important. It would be as important as a congressman telling fart jokes during a discussion on how to defend the country from an invading army.
The "technicality" I am talking about is "evidence".