Joe Biden Raped Tara Reade

ok doser

Well-known member
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.
 

chair

Well-known member
These kinds of unproven accusations are problematic, whether they be aimed at Brett Kavanaugh or Joe Biden.
 

chair

Well-known member
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
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.
The standards are completely different for the "chosen people" on the left.
 

Yorzhik

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
These kinds of unproven accusations are problematic, whether they be aimed at Brett Kavanaugh or Joe Biden.
:ROFLMAO: 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.
 

chair

Well-known member
:ROFLMAO: 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.
 

Yorzhik

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
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?
 

chair

Well-known member
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.
 

Yorzhik

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
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.
 

chair

Well-known member
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

Well-known member
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.
Did you bother to watch the video that I am posted in the OP?
Biden convicted himself with his own words.
 

chair

Well-known member
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.
 

Yorzhik

Well-known member
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
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
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?

, That is why the "technicality" is important.
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.
 

chair

Well-known member
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".
 
Top