How does one determine which claim of sexual assault should be taken seriously, and which one should be ignored?
Asked by
josie (
30934
)
April 29th, 2020
Some accusations of sexual assault that involve political figures seem to be taken very seriously and are investigated publicly and thoroughly. Those made against Donald Trump, and Justice Kavanaugh come to mind as examples.
Others do not.
Those made against Joe Biden is an example. The only person talking in that case is the woman.
How does an obselrver figure out what is the governing principle that identifies which accusation should be investigated and which one can be ignored.
Observing members:
0
Composing members:
0
71 Answers
I’m not sure we know whether the government, the police and DA, don’t take it seriously. We mostly know if the media is reporting on it or not.
Did Biden have multiple accusers? I don’t remember. It’s well known his part in the Anita Hill situation.
Trump we had video footage and multiple reports. Kavanaugh multiple reports also of his general behavior as a teenager and young man
Whether politically motivated or true, unless there’s a lawsuit or charges brought to bear, it should all be ignored as political noise.
Not bringing charges leaves others open to being victimized in the same way.
As citizens of a civilized society, one has a duty-to everyone in this regard.
It’s simple. You investigate an accusation if the accused is someone you don’t like or disagree with politically. If you do like them, then it’s important to defend them at all costs and ignore and dismiss any accusations. This is at least the method that the media (and political ideologues) employ.
I think any accusation should be investigated at the very least. The problem is that with accusations of sexual assault, you often will not have witnesses or hard evidence. You often will only have one person’s word against another person’s. Thus the only thing you can do is evaluate the credibility of the accuser and the accused and see how they match up (or don’t). Even then you may not be able to make a final decision on what occurred, only a decision on who is more believable. And that is so subjective and will factor in people’s emotions and biases.
(Emphasis on “often” in the previous paragraph. Sometimes there is more evidence. Not all accusations are the same. Some do have more corroboration and support, some accusers are more credible, and some might need to be ignored if no further evidence is provided).
If she says the fella has a bend in his dick & that’s not denied, then believe!
Political affiliation seems to be enough for the media.
That’s true @cheebdragon if it’s Trump or another Republican being accused Fox will say and do nothing, if it’s a Democrat ,Fox will be over it like a pack of wild dogs.
Whether it’s Biden or Trump, when you have to go back over 20 years to prove what kind of person they are NOW, it’s ridiculous. Biden’s accuser is from 1993 and also told someone at the time. Do I believe it, perhaps. Do I discount him as a valid law-abiding human being unfit for office because of it, not at all.
By a jury of one’s peers.
@kritiper Statute of limitations is often expired for prosecution if more than 10 years, depends on the state. Otherwise, I agree with you. It just makes you wonder what the motivation is if it’s not for legal justice.
It seems that the focus of the accusation depends solely on how adamant the Dems are against that person. Period. Kavanaugh…30+ year old accusation, no corroboration, no facts at all, never seen the light of day until he is up for confirmation to the SCOTUS and the Dems have no other reason to vote against him. Bill Clinton has 4 women out there that have claimed he molested and/or raped them and some have compelling stories…friends and/or family were told at the time it happened, there was some evidence, etc. The media and the Dems have fought against letting those stories get any credibility. We continually hear about the multitude of women Trump supposedly has molested, yet there really isn’t much there in the way of evidence. But the litany of women Biden has gotten a bit too handsy and familiar with, not to mention one that says he molested her, gets nothing from the MSM or the Dems. In fact, if they have anything, they blame the victims. Funny how we are supposed to blindly believe the accusers (Blasey-Ford) on one example but not on the other (Tara Reade).
As I’ve said before (and certainly will again) – investigate, then go from there.
My issue with Kavanaugh wasn’t the accusation, I knew that could not be proven one way or the other, but rather with the childish manner in which he conducted himself during his confirmation hearing.
All of them should be taken seriously.
Biden is just as much of a rapist as Drumpf, and both of them need to be disposed of into a damp dungeon until the end of days.
Tara Reade 27+ year old accusation. No witnesses, only a neighbor that says she was told a few years later. Someone called in Larry Kings show in 2016 claiming her daughter left a job in Washington over problems with a prominent senator. Again, no names and only a “problem “ mentioned, not rape.
I don’t know why this story is coming to light now other than to ruin his career. Same with the Kavenaugh case. These stories may well be true, but these are prominent men. I never read that “some random dude” raped someone or sexually harassed someone 30 years ago and the woman is just now coming forward.
Due process. That’s the only “way”
There usually aren’t any witnesses to rape. Only my rapists and I were there.
I never spoke about my rapes until 20 years later. I did tell my close friend about my first rape after it happened but he didn’t believe me so I kept quiet.
I believe all victims.
I’d also like to add that if someone was a rapist 20–30 years ago they didn’t become a better person decades later, especially if they got away with it. They are still horrible people.
I think timing is a factor.
@SQUEEKY2 Yeah, no shit. FOX is a conservative news station, it’s not surprising that they are probably going to focus more on democrats being accused of sexual misconduct.
For those of you with the “investigate and then go from there” attitude, I will tell you I am in total agreement. But you first have to hold to that same attitude for ALL accused, not just the ones you don’t like. AND you need to call out the MSM for smearing people with innuendo and allegation broadcast 24/7 when they see a political gain for their boys and girls.
Don’t need to do shit just to appease you, Wulfie.
@chyna ”...only a neighbor that says she was told a few years later. Someone called in Larry Kings show in 2016 claiming her daughter left a job in Washington over problems with a prominent senator. Again, no names and only a “problem “ mentioned, not rape. I don’t know why this story is coming to light now other than to ruin his career.”
Tara’s story has been corroberated by her brother, her neighbor and a former coworker, all of whom confirmed they were told the story at the time. The voice of the caller on Larry King was confirmed to be Ms. Reade’s mother by people who knew her. Remember Reade mentioned that the call existed before they found the footage of it (that would be a hell-of-a-thing to fake retroactively).
As for the timing, well she tried to come forward much earlier, seeking help from the #MeToo group: Times Up Legal Defense Fund. They told her to fuck off. Interestingly, Anita Dunn is both the managing director for Times Up Legal Defense Fund’s PR firm, and also happens to be a top adviser to the Biden campaign.
@Darth_Algar That is true. You can continue to be a hypocrite if you like.
@Darth_Algar: “My issue with Kavanaugh wasn’t the accusation, I knew that could not be proven one way or the other, but rather with the childish manner in which he conducted himself during his confirmation hearing.”
Kavanaugh’s behavior alone should have been disqualifying. It was clear to everyone watching it that he was definitely either drunk or coked up to counter the alcohol. This is a guy you wouldn’t allow in your house, but he was making the case to be one of the most powerful people in the country.
“It was clear to everyone watching it that he was definitely either drunk or coked up to counter the alcohol.”
What a crock of shit
@JLeslie: “Did Biden have multiple accusers? I don’t remember.”
Besides the fact that the Tara Reade accusation has multiple people corroborating it (and the CNN video of the mom calling in), remember that we have decades of this guy fondling women and children in public. His “gropey” reputation has been around for years, and provides valuable context. If a guy will do what he has done to women in public, what do you think he’s capable of in private.
Remember – exactly one year ago, we were discussing this problem with Biden. There was the Lucy Flores incident, and much discussion at the time of how Biden would survive a candidacy in the time of #MeToo. There were clips back in 2015 of the Daily Show joking about it.
Well, we found out what happens when #MeToo comes up against capital. Turns out #MeToo can be discarded.
#metoo was destroyed when democrats and activists weaponized it. Can’t say I did not see that coming from a mile away. At least it took out some of the worst offenders before it was ruined.
It’s interesting how almost every Democrat regrets what happened to Al Franken. That was the moment they realized it had gone too far, but there was no going back at that point. Biden being given a pass is proof that #metoo is opportunistic.
@seawulf575
You throw that word around a lot, but I don’t think you understand it.
Biden is not only being given a pass, but there are strong efforts to try discrediting Ms Reade. Imagine how #MeToo would have reacted if they did that to Beverly Young Nelson or Christine Blasey-Ford. But as I said, the focus on either the crime or the accuser is solely up to the Dems and their propaganda media. Look at Kathleen Willey, Juanita Broaddrick, or any of the other Clinton accusers. Hillary and the media have demonized them and absolutely no investigations were ever held.
@Darth_Algar I don’t think I understand how you and so many other libs can be that way. That’s what I don’t understand.
@seawulf575 Just to clarify…..haha!
Hypocrisy: the practice of claiming to have moral standards or beliefs to which one’s own behavior does not conform; pretense.
^ Yeah, Twitter has been a shitshow today. Liberals are all coming out as rape apologists via the “Well, Trump has raped more women” response.
This is an interesting time. The MSM is doing its job…covering for the Dems. But the Dems are starting to eat themselves. They claim to be for women but aren’t showing it, they aren’t holding Biden accountable to even answer questions about this claim, the MSM purposely avoids asking him tough questions that he hasn’t been prepped for and this entire thing is starting to get a life of its own. Meanwhile Biden creates talking points he hands out to all Dems (and liberal media outlets) that basically call the accuser a liar and a troublemaker. While at the same time he’s bragging about how he’s going to have a woman as a running mate. Hey, @KNOWITALL, what was that definition again? Oh yeah…hypocrite.
@seawulf575 How did we get to the point where things like @hmmmmmm posted are normalized. So worst-case scenario, if you believe both sides are horrid, we have both major parties putting up a rapist as President. #mindblown
“Liberals are all coming out as rape apologists via the “Well, Trump has raped more women” response.”
You’re bitching about deflecting,HA good one!
you guys said sure investigate see if there is a crime but don’t wreck the persons life until found guilty unless of course that person is a democrat then feed them to the lions.
@SQUEEKY2 I think if you go back and look at a different thread, on this same topic, I came up with the same basic answer I always have. It isn’t guilty until proven innocent….it’s innocent until proven guilty. But doing an investigation would be warranted. That is how I feel about ALL of these things. The only one on which I felt an investigation was unwarranted was with Kavanaugh. Not because I like him or he is a conservative or any of that garbage, but because the way that one played out showed it was entirely politically motivated. The accuser had no solid facts to investigate. She was at a party, couldn’t remember the date or even the month, couldn’t remember the location, swore her good friend was there and would support her except the friend shot her story to pieces. Not to mention Kavanaugh had been through 6 FBI investigations prior to that point in time. Ever had the FBI do an investigation into you? I have. I had to get a Top Secret clearance for the navy. I gave them a few names and a couple addresses from my past and they did the rest. They talked to those friends, got other names and talked to them, went to addresses and talked to neighbors, checked with employers…basically they dug pretty deep into not only my recent past but also my more distant past. I’m going out on a limb here but I’m betting those investigations into Kavanaugh’s past were every bit as thorough, if not more so. So doing another investigation was useless. And at the time it looked like nothing more than a Democrat trick to try avoid confirming him. But do the investigations. Absolutely. And make them honest investigations, not like the impeachment inquiry which was extremely one-sided. Take politics out of the equation and treat both the accuser and the accused as human beings that disagree about something. Get the facts and make the determination.
@KNOWITALL ”...we have both major parties putting up a rapist as President…”
They are both disqualified IMO. I’m voting 3rd party instead of the lesser of 2 sexual predators. If more Dems would realize it’s the only correct vote, maybe we’d have a party that wasn’t sabotaging their candidates to put senile sexual predators on the ballot.
@seawulf575 “I came up with the same basic answer I always have. It isn’t guilty until proven innocent….it’s innocent until proven guilty. But doing an investigation would be warranted.”
And yet you claim I’m a hypocrite for taking the same stance.
@Darth_Algar No, you are a hypocrite because you don’t have that same attitude when it is a conservative being accused.
@seawulf575
You’d be incorrect there, but I know that, like some others here, you live in your own reality.
@cheebdragon That report confirms what most rational people already suspected; that the entire accusation was nothing but a political smear job. None of her claims were verified or corroborated and, in fact, many of her claims were refuted by many. But an investigation was done. Too bad the MSM didn’t do an honest follow up with this report to clear his name as diligently as they smeared it.
Then why did he act like such an ass when questioned on it??
His behaviour was a little shocking for some one about to take such a powerful position.
And don’t go on the poor slob was stressed and anyone would have acted that way, sure for joe blow right wing red neck, not a candidate for supreme court judge.
He was cleared, he got the job,but he still acted like a complete asshole during questioning that alone should be tons of red flags, but it wasn’t.
@SQUEEKY2 Did you read the report @cheebdragon supplied? He had just gone through a confirmation the likes of which we have never seen. Let me give you some examples:
As is routine, the FBI report included statements from individuals who knew the nominee, as well as an examination of his finances and credit history, tax payments, criminal and employment histories, medical history, substance abuse history, and foreign contacts. These six FBI reports over a 25-year period, containing interviews with nearly 150 individuals who knew Justice Kavanaugh personally (including many individuals who have known Justice Kavanaugh his entire life), did not reveal any alcohol abuse or inappropriate sexual behavior.
The Committee sent Justice Kavanaugh the most comprehensive Senate Judiciary Questionnaire (SJQ) submitted to any Supreme Court nominee in history, and it received and reviewed Justice Kavanaugh’s response of nearly 18,000 pages. The Committee reviewed all of Justice Kavanaugh’s published writings, his 307 judicial opinions and the hundreds more opinions he joined, all available footage and transcripts from his public appearances, all books that used him as a resource, and more than 500,000 pages of documents related to his past legal service in the Executive Branch. While the Committee reviewed these materials, Justice Kavanaugh participated in one-on-one meetings with 65 senators. Justice Kavanaugh also testified before the Senate Judiciary Committee for more than 32 hours from September 4–6, 2018. He subsequently responded to nearly 1,300 post-hearing written questions for the record (QFRs) submitted by members of the Committee—more questions than have been asked of all prior Supreme Court nominees combined.
So, the FBI investigated his background 6 times. The Senate Judiciary committee put him through more scrutiny than all other SCOTUS nominees combined. And they found nothing to keep from confirming him. THEN: The day before they are supposed to vote to confirm him, Feinstein pulls out some report of him sexually assaulting a woman. Mind you, she (Feinstein) was made aware of this report in July and said nothing to the committee. Then, later, she made only the Democrats aware of this report, not the entire committee. It was an obvious smear job from the start.
So you ask why he acted like such an ass when questioned on it? He was just dragged through the wringer without a peep. He was inspected from every angle and with malice. And when he dealt with it all stoically and there was no reason to not confirm him, the Dems decide to try smearing his character. Nothing else left but a scam. So yeah, I can see getting entirely fed up with that and reading them the riot act and vehemently denying the entire thing as nothing but what it was…a cheap attempt to destroy his good name and reputation.
Nice that you always have an excuse ready for your beloved fright wingers, yeah he was questioned more than the others poor liilte guy, but he was facing allegations of a pretty serious charge, he was found not guilty of that charge and you say because he was grilled more than the others it was just fine to act that way.
I don’t doubt for a second he was under a great deal of stress, he probably thought all this grilling wasn’t fair, still he was a candidate for a Supreme Court judge he should have kept he composure more professional but seeing he is one of your beloved it was fine he acted like a total asshole.
@SQUEEKY2 How did he act like a total asshole, exactly?
You go back and watch the hearing and tell me he was very professional.
You want a supreme court judge to act like that?
@SQUEEKY2 I’ve already seen it. I want to know what kavanaugh said that you believe was so inappropriate?
I thought he acted appropriately considering what he was being accused of and the clear political motivations behind it. I remember watching the spectacle, hearing people on the left say things like “look at how bad he is acting” and thinking what they were saying was nonsensical and bordering on gaslighting.
@ARE_you_kidding_me Understatement of the year, completely ridiculous. Especially now as Biden sinks further into insanity.
@KNOWITALL – Well there is one thing we now know for sure. The Democratic dabbling with #MeToo and the concept of “believing women” was certainly just a disingenuous partisan exercise. They’ve since dismissed the whole thing as absurd because of Biden – just like they did with the concept of cognitive decline.
That said, there is a conversation to be had around the concept of who to believe and how sexual assault and trauma need to be handled that is not wrapped in partisan nonsense.
One of the biggest consequences of cynical weaponizing of identity politics and the concept of sexual assault is that it minimizes the fact that there are real issues here. When it’s used in ways that can easily be dismissed due to their insincere weaponization, the risk is that the actual phenomenon can now be dismissed.
Is there better evidence against Biden than there was against Kavanaugh? Is Reade more credible than Blasey-Ford? Otherwise I don’t see why one case should be treated differently than the other.
@hmmmmmm Interesting you say that. That is EXACTLY what I said when Kavanaugh was being accused and there was zero evidence of an actual assault and more than ample evidence of a political smear job. I said then that when cases are weaponized for political reasons, it takes away the credibility and believability of the actual victims. Not to mention hearing #MeToo thrown around 24/7 on some cases pretty much numbs everyone down to the importance of giving actual victims support and encouragement to come forward. Funny thing, though…when I said it I was a misogynistic asshole who hated women and supported rapists.
@Demosthenes Is there more evidence against Biden? Well, possibly. Ms Reade did talk to family and friends about the episode shortly after it happened. So right there is a big difference. Ford talked to no one for decades. It looks like the possible first time she talked to anyone was with a therapist some 25 year later. Ms Reade does have people willing to come forward and testify about when they heard about it and what her demeanor was. Ms Ford couldn’t even summon one person to actually say the party happened, much less any assault. So from a background, there is more evidence in the form of witnesses close to the time of the event.
Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Response moderated
Response moderated
Response moderated
@Darth_Algar I’m sorry, I don’t really see the relevance there. I see someone has said Trump assaulted her, he says he didn’t and that he never met her at a hotel or greeted her inappropriately. Her attorney says his phone records show he called her a number of times. So what? He never said he didn’t call her and a phone call is not a sexual assault. I just don’t see this as the “irrefutable proof” claimed by her attorney. At best, Zervos will say he was calling to harass her, but that would need to be proven as well. It might be that she was getting called in reference to something going on with the TV show. What a shock…he might call someone on his TV show! In fact, that article just sort of highlights the guilty until proven innocent you on the left are so fond of.
Of course you don’t Wulfie, of course you don’t. I wanted to see how you’d respond and you didn’t disappoint. But by all means, call the rest of us hypocrites.
@Darth_Algar I am responding to what was in the article you gave. I’m not discussing whether I think Trump is a dog or not. I just don’t see anything in that article that points to some smoking gun…a slam dunk case. Maybe you see something I don’t in what was in that article? Please, enlighten me.
@seawulf575
You don’t read very carefully, do you Wulfie? I never claimed there was smoking gun or anything of the sort. I said it was as much evidence as in the claim again Biden. In other words – zero.
But apparently hearsay against Biden should be taken as substantial evidence, while hearsay against Trump should be dismissed out of hand.
@Darth_Algar Apparently you don’t read very carefully, do you Darthy? I’ve already stated in this (and on other threads) that innocent until prove guilty is the way it should be in all these cases…Biden’s included. But we do need to investigate AND we need to treat all these cases the same…especially from the MSM. And you are the one that posted a link to some media smear job attempt, not me. So gee…when you post something with no other explanation, you sort of leave it up to the reader to figure out what you are getting at. I responded to what I saw in your link, which is a sane, rational thing to do in a discussion. I addressed the article twice, in fact, and all you did was try to use my responses as a way to try slamming me. Maybe you should stop trying so hard to find fault that isn’t there.
“Maybe you should stop trying so hard to find fault that isn’t there.”
Take your own advice Wulfie.
Hhhmmm….so…when you give a link I shouldn’t comment on the content of that link? You are a strange, frustrated sort of person it seems.
Response moderated (Personal Attack)
Response moderated (Writing Standards)
Answer this question 
Composing members:
0
