Is this Trump’s start at protecting woman whether they like it or not?

...Oh the irony

Someone needs to explain why Tara Reade's complaint has any credibility. No complaint filed at the time, she  was fired for incompetence, claims an an anonymous caller on Larry King who did not mention sexual assault,  harassment, or Biden is her late mother talking about the incident,  who defected to Russia, and returned in 2023, just in time to go public with her claim before the election. Not saying nothing happened, but how is this accepted as true, when all those who accuse people on the right are lying? This post was edited by Jane S at November 26, 2024 5:49 AM MST

Her claim may very well not have any credibility.  My point was less specific to Reade than generally about a person who makes a claim of abuse long after the occurrence equating to that abuse never happening.  That was how I read the poster's comment.  That simply because a person makes a claim after a long period, it doesn't mean there was no occurrence.  

Exactly. But only those accusing Democrats are considered credible by the right-wing. 

Reade is creditable is because, There was indeed a complaint filed with Congress. They ignored it. And fired her (for incompetence... errr retaliation). The recording of the Mother on Larry King backs the story.  Not because she is accusing a Dem. 

I knew you'd chime in. None of what you claim about Reade can be verified, we only have her word for it, but you decided what is believable. I think we should have the same standards regardless of political party, but even though you claim it is not politics, you clearly demonstrate otherwise. Some accusers are blatantly lying and saying you don't believe them is just virtue signaling. This isn't an argument about the circumstances of any single accusation,  I'm just pointing out the double standard. 

There is the recording of the Mother on Larry King. Tha caller is from the Mother's town. Reade did not know exactly when she call only that she called. Media found the call. (A long time for a coincidence) She has people who she told about the incident then who back her up. Does this mean she is telling the truth? No one really knows but her. ( Biden likely doesn't know anymore)

But she knows the when and where, something other accusers who we were told to believe did not know.  She has people who back up her telling them about it back then. Also something other accusers we were told to believe did not have. 

Unless we view the abuse or the abuser confesses in most  cases we do not know what happened.   But I do not claim to know if it happened.  But waiting for a political campaign or appointment does not lead to me to give more weight to the accusations.  

There are many reasons for a victim to not report the incident. And if she bravely chooses to come forward at a time when it is in the public interest to know the true character of the candidate or appointee, then she deserves the respect of at least being open to what she says. 

If she bravely waits until an election campaign,  she/he had better have something to back her story up. And At least know the supposed date and year.  

Is there a accusation against RFKJ yet? Just wait I am sure it is coming. Or Holman?

The 26 women who have come forward with accusations against Trump meet your criteria. And Trump is on record bragging about assaulting women and walking in on them while they are undressed, including teenagers. But none of this seems to bother you. And for the record, in my opinion, not remembering the exact date or year of an unpleasant and perhaps traumatic event, a woman has tried to block from her memory does not automatically make her an opportunistic liar. Perhaps nothing of this nature has ever happened to you, or perhaps empathy isn't your thing, I can't say, but I have no illusions that you have an open mind about this.

Reade doesn't fit my criteria....she just has more credibility than the others we were told to believe.  Ie. Ford, Carroll

Trump is sleazy...I have never defended that.
I don't have the patience to go through 27 women.   But I give you one that the media had out there. I don't know the name But she was out there accusing Trump of assault. She says they were on a plane and she was making out with him. And he went under her clothes. And she told him to stop and he did.  That was not an assault.  But the media wanted to report it as if it was. 

Let's keep the comments to public people not users. 

In my opinion Reade's credibility is on a par with E. Jean Carroll 's. And the act described is the same. I have not formed an opinion on either accuser.

And Jessica Leeds said she was groped and forcibly kissed, had to force Trump off her and flee to seat in coach.

Don't have the patience to go through a couple dozen abuse allegations? Then don't talk about allegations against the other side either.

 What you call sleazy, I call sexual abuse, and in the case of the teenage girls, perversion. I am not okay with that. 
  
All I am talking about here is a double standard. 

No. Carroll cannot even name the exact year. She has a history of accusing several men of rape. One is the exact same story as her Trump story but it is in an elevator not a department store dressing room. The dress she claims it happened while wearing was not even created or thought of during the time period Carroll claims the allegation happened.  Her story is also matches up with an episode of Law and Order SVU.  She also posted on Twitter that her favorite show on Sundays was the Apprentice. 
Carroll is a nutjob.

Nothing similar to Reade at all other than both were allegedly assaulted.

There is an interview with Leed she says they were kissing etc for 15 minutes on the plane. Then he groped her....sorry but that does not cut it. And then not talking about it until a political campaign.   Nope.  This post was edited by my2cents at November 27, 2024 6:19 AM MST

Carroll does not know what year she was 52?  For someone with no patience to go through 26 allegations,  you seem to have gone through these allegations pretty thoroughly. If you want to debate these them,  find someone who cares. I'm not that person.

She has changed the year multiple times.  From the 1980s to 1990s to 2000s.  Finally settled on 1996 or at least the woman who testified at the trial  said she called her in spring of 1996,  this was after saying Carroll said  1994.  

Again the dress she claimed to have been wearing at the time had not been designed or even in conception at that time.   That alone should have disqualified the court case but instead the judge just did not allow that information to be used in court. 

I have went through the few the media pushed the most. This post was edited by my2cents at November 27, 2024 5:32 PM MST

I don't care. 

I don't either.  

Apparently, there are those wouldn't/couldn't view it that way.  Of course, if it was someone who came forward with such information about a Democrat, I'm fairly certain the opinion would be the polar opposite.

That's why I brought up Biden's accuser, Tara Reade. Her story is completely accepted by the same folks who think all the women accusing Trump and his team are lying. And then have the nerve to say it's not political. They also seem to have extra information that can't be verified and which differs from public interviews and statements. 

I must have been in a coma at some point because I failed to recall that Tara Reade was an accuser of Biden's.  Duh!

Considering that you will not likely be a juror should something change in that case, I guess your opinion is moot.