Celebrity Allegations, #MeToo etc

entropy said:
You just described Biden.
Click to expand...
Sure, he is a liar, no doubt there. Like most politicians (especially those who have been as long as him) are.

That does not make him a rapist though, especially when the credibility of Reade is very low, and the story is totally inconsistent.
 
He literally lied about his education, having 3 undergrad degrees, graduating top of his class, and receiving a full academic scholarship. And that is not even mentioning tons of other lies he has told over the course of his career, and his long history of disgusting behavior around women. Legit mindblowing that you think the term "serial liar" somehow doesn't apply to him and any claim against him shouldn't be taken seriously.
 
Last edited:
entropy said:
He literally lied about his education, having 3 undergrad degrees, graduating top of his class, and receiving a full academic scholarship. And that is not even mentioning tons of other lies he has told over the course of his career, and his long history of disgusting behavior around women. Legit mindblowing that you think the term "serial liar" somehow doesn't apply to him and any claim against him shouldn't be taken seriously.
Click to expand...
I never said that Biden is not a serial liar. Obviously, he is.

I just claimed that the accusations came from another serial liar, and the fate of a presidency should not be based on that alone. If there is some evidence that the rape (well, sexual assault) happened, then we are talking, otherwise move alone. I don’t think that the career or anyone should be destroyed by an accusation alone (without evidence), especially if the person who is doing the accusation is a serial liar, and the story itself of full of holes.

I don’t see the contradiction that both of them are serial liars, and there should be a tiny bit of evidence before we disqualify Biden from the presidential race.
 
entropy said:
You just described Biden.
Click to expand...
Holy what-aboutism Batman!

Seriously, for those of us that put a critical eye to her accusations and thought maybe some actual analysis was worthwhile before #believeitall we can feel somewhat vindicated that it was at least worth the effort.

Most of the people called out on this thread are essentially just on a windup with this one.

The real challenge is that - like the 3 above - this won't change the narrative for some - Biden is still now a rapist and just as bad a Trump. Because the internet is a cesspit.
 
Revan said:
Or you know, people who lie and cheat might actually be lying again, and at the very least, there should be some evidence before we blindly believe a serial liar.
Click to expand...
Yes people who have lied and cheated in the past might actually lie again in the future, just as people who have told the truth in the past might lie in the future, just like people who have lied in the past might tell the truth in the future. This is all very basic stuff, stuff that should be within the grasp of anyone with even very limited experience of human communication and mutability (yet the replies suggest otherwise).

I have yet to see any evidence supporting a correlation between past lying and an increased chance of being raped or sexually assaulted in the future (please provide evidence if it does exist). If Tara Reade has lied in the past, this had no obvious affect on the chances of her being raped/sexually assaulted in the future. So a known liar and a known cheat can both be victims of real rape and sexual assault, with there being no obvious evidence of them being any more or less likely to suffer these crimes based on their history of telling lies, than someone else who has a history of telling the truth.

So if liars and truth tellers are both as likely as each other to be victims of rape/sexual assault and we expect/hope both liars and truth tellers will report rape and sexual assault, then surely we have to take as seriously the accusations of those who have been proven to lie in the past, as the allegations of those who have not yet been proven to have lied in the past. And there is no short cut, using past behaviour, to verify the accuracy of current accusations. "the liar" is not a tool that can be used to unpick the truth of the situation. I know people think that it is, but it's not, it's an appeal to apophenia and faulty generalisations and just a very limited level of reasoning.

The "holes in the story" angle is not just built on crap reasoning but extensive crap reasoning, it's exhausting trudging through the layers of that shit. The "Liar"/"serial Liar" tag is simply a smear at this point.

And this reply is predicated on accepting the absurd narrative that the world is split between those who lie and those who don't.

As far as I'm concerned her accusation and its credibility stands up against any of the stuff that the Biden supporters/media have thrown at it thus far. At least anything I've seen.

And just for the record I don't consider the video tape of Biden groping young girls as corroborating evidence for the Tara Reade allegations.
 
Genuine question here because I’ve not followed this particular story closely enough, what is it about her allegations that makes them credible?

To be clear, I’m not saying there are or aren’t, I’m just trying to find out more.
 
Beachryan said:
Holy what-aboutism Batman!

Seriously, for those of us that put a critical eye to her accusations and thought maybe some actual analysis was worthwhile before #believeitall we can feel somewhat vindicated that it was at least worth the effort.

Most of the people called out on this thread are essentially just on a windup with this one.

The real challenge is that - like the 3 above - this won't change the narrative for some - Biden is still now a rapist and just as bad a Trump. Because the internet is a cesspit.
Click to expand...
The ''critical eye'' you're talking about is posting PBS links and thought experiments(Oh I've never called Biden a rapist btw). You're posting isn't investigative journalism it's just posting. You've put in the least amount possible(Clicking a mouse)and somehow this is has caused you to feel collectively vindicated ?

I agree that internet is a cesspit but mostly because it destroys the brain cells of people like yourself. It gives dull liberals the idea they have agency, that there's some meaningful act to be achieved by merely posting online(Although most liberals are happy enough with only annoying their family members on Facebook and not complete strangers on a football forum)but again it's just posting.
 
Last edited:
Sweet Square said:
The ''critical eye'' you're talking about is posting PBS links and thought experiments(Oh I've never called Biden a rapist btw). You're posting isn't investigative journalism it's just posting. You've put in the least amount possible(Clicking a mouse)and somehow this is has caused you to feel collectively vindicated ?

I agree that internet is a cesspit but mostly because it destroys the brain cells of people like yourself. It gives dull liberals the idea they have agency, that there's some meaningful act to be achieved by merely posting online(Although most liberals are happy enough with only annoying their family members on Facebook and not complete strangers on a football forum)but again it's just posting.
Click to expand...
Alternatively, I could have been referring to reading all 3 of the original articles published about Reade, listening to both the show where she surfaced the accusation, and the hour long podcast with the Salon journalist that interviewed her, and then read half a dozen long-form pieces on her back story, the accusation and so forth, and continuing to follow the updates on sources that I believe are more trustworthy than not. (Atlantic, NY Times, Economist etc)

I agree posting on here is worthless. I was saying for those of us who tried to at least do some research before making up minds up, perhaps that was sensible.

Also, feel free to question our 'dullness' without knowing anything whatsoever about us. That seems like the kind of thing a clearly overwhelmingly intelligent person like yourself would do.
 
Beachryan said:
Alternatively, I could have been referring to reading all 3 of the original articles published about Reade, listening to both the show where she surfaced the accusation, and the hour long podcast with the Salon journalist that interviewed her, and then read half a dozen long-form pieces on her back story, the accusation and so forth, and continuing to follow the updates on sources that I believe are more trustworthy than not. (Atlantic, NY Times, Economist etc)

I agree posting on here is worthless. I was saying for those of us who tried to at least do some research before making up minds up, perhaps that was sensible.
Click to expand...
Well done you've listen to a podcast, the Pulitzer Prize will be incoming. The recent news doesn't dismiss her claims about Biden. So I'm not sure why anyone would feel vindicated about anything to do with story.

Reade could very well be lying out of her arse but the issue at least with regards to MeToo(And this thread) has really nothing to do with the allegations but the way liberal organisations and liberals have handle them, which has clearly been very poorly(The allegations were completely dismissal due to the political inconvenience it caused).
 
Revan said:
Sure, he is a liar, no doubt there. Like most politicians (especially those who have been as long as him) are.

That does not make him a rapist though, especially when the credibility of Reade is very low, and the story is totally inconsistent.
Click to expand...

Both credibilities are very low

And that doesn't make Biden a rapist, but neither Reade unrapeble
 
Rado_N said:
Genuine question here because I’ve not followed this particular story closely enough, what is it about her allegations that makes them credible?

To be clear, I’m not saying there are or aren’t, I’m just trying to find out more.
Click to expand...
For me it's that she made the allegations, she worked for Biden and there was the very real possibility that such an incident could have taken place, and the simple application of good faith. If Biden had just denied the allegations and nothing more came of it then to me the only thing to do is to live with the two contradictory accounts, favouring neither one nor the other unless subsequent evidence is provided. It's basically what I do with the Woody Allen case amongst others. It's the dissonance that demands that you can and must get a conclusion that fecks a lot of this stuff up from all sides. Rashomon bitches.

What I don't think you should do, and what many on team Biden have done, is to pile the fire high and burn the accuser as a witch.
 


Long thread there with more people joining in on twitter too.

Sometimes the creeps are the ones you don't expect. Other times it's guys you immediately think are probably creeps. Chris D'Elia definitely falls into one of those two camps.
 
sullydnl said:
Sometimes the creeps are the ones you don't expect. Other times it's guys you immediately think are probably creeps. Chris D'Elia definitely falls into one of those two camps.
Click to expand...
:lol: Chris D'Elia being a creepy jerk does not surprised me at all.

roseguy64 said:
Click to expand...

I heard about this a few years ago. I thought he was already arrested and got bail. It's the reason he got kicked out from his comedy series in Netflix
 
We are finally on Michael Bay now, I can't believe it's taken so long, he always been top of my list as a prime suspect...
 
Ron Jeremy's epitaph will read: Ron Jeremy, He Clearly Never Had Enough.
 
Saw the Syndicate allegations on BBC, used to follow him as a teen. Big fan of his during the zombie days.
checked back when he had that csgo lotto scam douchebag.

Now seen the allegations from Kate and someone else.



x5 videos, hard to watch.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.