If feminists continue to support Joe Biden then "Me too" is total bullshit

[22lcidw]

The MeToo movement was about believing women. That is what you did in the Kavanaugh hearing.


You believed women without question and without due process.

Except Kavanaugh got due process. He got a hearing. He ranted like a crazy person and the GOP put him on the court anyway, even though a lot of Republicans said (at least initially) they believed Ford.

Prog candidates for the Supreme court are not treated like that. Progs are dirty and run afoul of common decency to push their agendas. You do not even fix the ones you fixed already. So you blame someone else for any failures. Your cure for the disease is death.

 

[JoeB131]

Reade has the where, when, and corroborators. Basel-Ford had none of that.

Um, no, they both have the same thing. A story and people who weren't there they told the story to.

The difference is, Reade was apparently fired for Check kiting. But she knows her personnel records are sealed by law, so she can pretty much claim she was shipped to Area 51 and raped by aliens, and the government can't really contradict that.

The Check fraud does question Reade’s credibility but the ultimate issue is that Democrats and Liberals own the “Me too” “All Women should be believed” and now they are backtracking.

Actually, it kind of does. Given her story has changed from "I quit because they asked me to serve drinks" to "I quit because someone was harassing me, (not specifically Biden)" to "Biden put his hands on my shoulders" to "Biden stuck his fingers up my snatch", um, yeah, finding out that she was charged with check-kiting right before she got fired (the kind of security risk that would get you fired from a sensitive government job) is VERY relevant.

 

[JoeB131]

I probably don't need to comment here, just put this up and let the fact that you stand with Roman Polanski speak for itself. Here is a man who had his due process of law, the result of which was to establish, as fact, that he lured a 13-year-old girl to his home under false pretenses, drugged her, and anally-raped her. He even admitted it.

Then, after being duly convicted, he fled the country to avoid serving his sentence.

This is where you are confused, buddy.

He had consensual sex with a girl who was underage, but clearly had already had sex before, and knew exactly what she was doing. The prosecutors let him plead out because they knew their case was weak, for which he served a sentence of 90 days. (Well, 42 days before the prison decided it was a waste of resources to keep him locked up.)

Now, keep in mind, most "rapists" never see the inside of a jail cell. Polanski did.

Only because a judge decided he wanted a celebrity scalp on his mantle did he go back on the deal the government ALREADY AGREED TO.

So he fucked a teenage girl. So did Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, and you think those fuckers were TALKING TO GOD!!!!

You're very fond of throwing around false accusations of such misconduct, but here's a man who is known, proven, to have engaged in exactly that conduct, and you take his side. This tells us everything that we need to know about your character, not that any of it hasn't always been obvious.

That I believe in due process of law? Um. yeah. Polanski could have beaten the case in court, especially back in the 1970's when you could still bring sex conduct of a slut into court is she accused you of rape.

So the prosecutors had a holocaust survivor whose wife and unborn child was murdered by a cult, vs. a 13 year old slut. a 90 day sentence actually sounded like a pretty good deal. More than most actual rapists serve.

 

[JoeB131]

Prog candidates for the Supreme court are not treated like that. Progs are dirty and run afoul of common decency to push their agendas. You do not even fix the ones you fixed already. So you blame someone else for any failures. Your cure for the disease is death.

That's because they don't bring up awful candidates they fail to vet before they send them up.

Also, can you please get back on your meds so you can form coherent thoughts.

 

[LeftofLeft]

Reade has the where, when, and corroborators. Basel-Ford had none of that.

Um, no, they both have the same thing. A story and people who weren't there they told the story to.

The difference is, Reade was apparently fired for Check kiting. But she knows her personnel records are sealed by law, so she can pretty much claim she was shipped to Area 51 and raped by aliens, and the government can't really contradict that.

The Check fraud does question Reade’s credibility but the ultimate issue is that Democrats and Liberals own the “Me too” “All Women should be believed” and now they are backtracking.

Actually, it kind of does. Given her story has changed from "I quit because they asked me to serve drinks" to "I quit because someone was harassing me, (not specifically Biden)" to "Biden put his hands on my shoulders" to "Biden stuck his fingers up my snatch", um, yeah, finding out that she was charged with check-kiting right before she got fired (the kind of security risk that would get you fired from a sensitive government job) is VERY relevant.

How could Reade be fired for check fraud if Biden says he does not remember her? Is the check fraud accusation in the Senate report? Finally, there aren’t many sources out there with insight into the report other than “she was charged” in a one sentence report. Anyone can be charged with any crime. Where is the conviction?

 

[FA_Q2]

Aren't you the one who wants to still go after poor Roman Polanski for some bullshit that happened 40 years ago? (Even though he plead guilty and served jail time for it.)

I probably don't need to comment here, just put this up and let the fact that you stand with Roman Polanski speak for itself. Here is a man who had his due process of law, the result of which was to establish, as fact, that he lured a 13-year-old girl to his home under false pretenses, drugged her, and anally-raped her. He even admitted it.

Then, after being duly convicted, he fled the country to avoid serving his sentence.

You're very fond of throwing around false accusations of such misconduct, but here's a man who is known, proven, to have engaged in exactly that conduct, and you take his side. This tells us everything that we need to know about your character, not that any of it hasn't always been obvious.

No you really did not need to state this.

It is like trying to reason moral or ethical standards with a Nazi - a pointless endeavor. In another thread he was justifying gulags.

There is a serious lack of morals in general or a blatant troll.

 

[JoeB131]

How could Reade be fired for check fraud if Biden says he does not remember her? Is the check fraud accusation in the Senate report? Finally, there aren’t many sources out there with insight into the report other than “she was charged” in a one sentence report. Anyone can be charged with any crime. Where is the conviction?

You think Biden was dealing with this low-level stuff.

A couple of interesting articles came out yesterday. .. This first one was from Politico. Turns out old Tara is pretty much a lifelong grifter.

‘Manipulative, deceitful, user’: Tara Reade left a trail of aggrieved acquaintances

A number of those who crossed paths with Biden’s accuser say they remember two things: She spoke favorably about her time working for Biden, and she left them feeling duped.

www.politico.com

Reade had spoken highly of Biden, the former boss who employed her as a staff assistant from late 1992 to August 1993, and never mentioned assault or harassment, Wrye recalls. But what Wrye remembers most is that by the time Reade left their property and moved on, Wrye felt burned.

After her husband suffered a brain injury that forced the couple to sell the property, Wrye said, Reade turned on them.

“She became really difficult,” Wrye said. “She said, ‘You’re going to have to pay me to get me to leave.’”

“She was manipulative,” said Wrye, a self-described feminist and social activist. “She was always saying she was going to get it together, but she couldn’t. And ‘could you help her’?”

Oh, wait, there's more. Turns out she was fired for poor performance after all.

Ex-Biden staff member says Tara Reade was fired for poor performance, not harassment complaint - Washington Examiner

A man who worked in Joe Biden's Senate office at the same time as Tara Reade in 1993 said that she was fired due to poor performance, not because she was retaliated against for complaining about experiencing sexual harassment in the office. Dozens of other staff members questioned other key...

www.washingtonexaminer.com

A man who worked in Joe Biden's Senate office at the same time as Tara Reade in 1993 said that she was fired due to poor performance, not because she was retaliated against for complaining about experiencing sexual harassment in the office. Dozens of other staff members questioned other key aspects of her allegations, including that she was asked to serve drinks at a fundraiser.

Ben Savage, who was a systems administrator in the then-senator's office from 1993 to 1996, told PBS NewsHour in an article published Friday that he witnessed Reade mishandling her job of processing constituent mail.

“Of all the people who held that position, she’s the only one during my time there who couldn’t necessarily keep up or who found it frustrating,” Savage said.