The Trump observations thread

Politics and other such topical creams.
Low Down Low
Unknown Immortal
Posts: 4922
Joined: 21 Aug 2014, 9:08am

Re: The Trump observations thread

Post by Low Down Low »

Dr. Medulla wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 7:49pm
Flex wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 7:35pm
eumaas wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 7:20pm
I'm at the stage of my life where I'm acutely aware of how little my opinion actually matters, so all I'll say is I've found something to agree with in most of the posts in this discussion.
Well, you never know, Biden and Putin may both be lurkers. They're Terry era fans, though.
Putin loves GEER. Deal with that.
I heard he keeps a copy of GEER on his desk in the Kremlin with some of the titles crossed out and rewritten - Safe Crimean Home, Oligarch Stabbing Time, Stay Oppressed, Last Tsar in Town etc.

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 115994
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Straight Banana, Idaho

Re: The Trump observations thread

Post by Dr. Medulla »

Low Down Low wrote:
04 Oct 2022, 6:04am
Dr. Medulla wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 7:49pm
Flex wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 7:35pm
eumaas wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 7:20pm
I'm at the stage of my life where I'm acutely aware of how little my opinion actually matters, so all I'll say is I've found something to agree with in most of the posts in this discussion.
Well, you never know, Biden and Putin may both be lurkers. They're Terry era fans, though.
Putin loves GEER. Deal with that.
I heard he keeps a copy of GEER on his desk in the Kremlin with some of the titles crossed out and rewritten - Safe Crimean Home, Oligarch Stabbing Time, Stay Oppressed, Last Tsar in Town etc.
He cleverly changed "English Civil War" to "Brexit."
"I never doubted myself for a minute for I knew that my monkey-strong bowels were girded with strength, like the loins of a dragon ribboned with fat and the opulence of buffalo dung." - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft

Low Down Low
Unknown Immortal
Posts: 4922
Joined: 21 Aug 2014, 9:08am

Re: The Trump observations thread

Post by Low Down Low »

Dr. Medulla wrote:
04 Oct 2022, 6:33am
Low Down Low wrote:
04 Oct 2022, 6:04am
Dr. Medulla wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 7:49pm
Flex wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 7:35pm
eumaas wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 7:20pm
I'm at the stage of my life where I'm acutely aware of how little my opinion actually matters, so all I'll say is I've found something to agree with in most of the posts in this discussion.
Well, you never know, Biden and Putin may both be lurkers. They're Terry era fans, though.
Putin loves GEER. Deal with that.
I heard he keeps a copy of GEER on his desk in the Kremlin with some of the titles crossed out and rewritten - Safe Crimean Home, Oligarch Stabbing Time, Stay Oppressed, Last Tsar in Town etc.
He cleverly changed "English Civil War" to "Brexit."
Along with All the Dumb Remoaners, it is certainly a recurring theme.

JennyB
User avatar
Mossad Van Driver
Posts: 22257
Joined: 16 Jun 2008, 1:13pm
Location: Moranjortsville

Re: The Trump observations thread

Post by JennyB »

Dr. Medulla wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 8:41pm
Flex wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 8:38pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 7:49pm
Putin loves GEER. Deal with that.
*Quietly airbrushes a Z on the side of my bitchin' van*
If you pick up a Ukrainian chick, just say you're a ZZ Top fan, but you're waiting till payday to get more spray paint. In like Flynn.
I kind of have a soft spot for ZZ Top. They have more songs about food than Weird Al and Billy Gibbons is a huge DM fan.

Sorry for the interruption.
Got a Rake? Sure!

IMCT: Inane Middle-Class Twats - Dr. M

" *sigh* it's right when they throw the penis pump out the window." -Hoy

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 115994
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Straight Banana, Idaho

Re: The Trump observations thread

Post by Dr. Medulla »

JennyB wrote:
04 Oct 2022, 10:30am
Dr. Medulla wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 8:41pm
Flex wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 8:38pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 7:49pm
Putin loves GEER. Deal with that.
*Quietly airbrushes a Z on the side of my bitchin' van*
If you pick up a Ukrainian chick, just say you're a ZZ Top fan, but you're waiting till payday to get more spray paint. In like Flynn.
I kind of have a soft spot for ZZ Top. They have more songs about food than Weird Al and Billy Gibbons is a huge DM fan.

Sorry for the interruption.
I’ve got a nostalgic appreciation for Eliminator. Such an excellent early MTV kind of band.
"I never doubted myself for a minute for I knew that my monkey-strong bowels were girded with strength, like the loins of a dragon ribboned with fat and the opulence of buffalo dung." - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft

Howard Beale
Bang Ice Geezer
Posts: 172
Joined: 16 Jun 2008, 1:51am

Re: The Trump observations thread

Post by Howard Beale »

eumaas wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 7:15pm
Jesus, HB, you've really brought back the good ol' days of extended back and forth on politics on here.
I do what I can :mrgreen: I know you've left politics behind, and for understandable reasons, but anytime you feel compelled to weigh in, don't hesitate—your insight is always highly valued.


Flex wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 2:39am
I hear ya. I wasn't trying to disrupt the flow of yuk yuks—God knows I've laughed at and enjoyed plenty of Trump memes—I guess I just started getting a strong let's-all-point-and-laugh-at-the-dumb-inferior-rednecks vibe that seemed to have an air of classicism about it. That may have just been a misreading on my part. If most of these memes are aimed at the McCloskey types, then hey, I wholeheartedly endorse.
Yeah, I can only speak for myself but I think of that little video of that guy waving his flag in the hurricane and I assume that asshole owns a yacht.
Not just a yacht—he probably also owns a business and is a "pillar of the community" X( [also, I meant to write "classism," not "classicism" :disshame:]


Flex wrote:I think assault and rape should be disqualifying for any sort of office (or general position of leadership in society anywhere) in a sane world. It's not a sane world, people can make whatever calculations they think they need to, but I certainly find assault and rape disqualifying on their own.
Agreed 100,000,000%.
Flex wrote:For Reade, I think Andrew Feinberg's breakdown of the problems with her account here pretty persuasive that there are some serious issues
I don't. This is essentially the same line of attack that Trump and the Republicans used against Christine Blasey Ford.

It's also the same line of attack used by Wacko Jacko truthers to discredit MJ's victims from the Leaving Neverland documentary.

Any psychologist who specializes in sexual trauma will tell you that it's not uncommon for victims to forget or misremember these kind of details. Traumatic experiences aside, I'd imagine that most people wouldn't be able to give a very accurate description of the spatial dimensions of a building they worked in nearly thirty years ago.
Flex wrote:I think Nathan Robinson's behavior was also a massive red flag:
In his lengthy April 10 piece and subsequent tweets that have since vanished, Robinson wrote that he had spoken with Reade and her brother, Collin Moulton, as they were dealing with other media outlets. He wrote, “Back before the story came out, I actually warned Tara myself during our conversation that it didn’t sound from Marcotte’s inquiries that she was interested in being fair and recommended being cautious about her. I think that concern was vindicated. Marcotte used the fact that she couldn’t get a comment from Tara’s brother and friend as one of the ‘red flags’ that justified the media’s silence on Tara’s accusation.”

Moulton initially told The Washington Post that Reade had told him Biden had behaved inappropriately by touching her neck and shoulders and told ABC he had only heard about the sexual assault this spring. He subsequently told the Post that Biden had put his hand under her clothes and “clarified” to ABC that Reade had told him of the assault in 1993. But between his two statements to the Post, he had conferred over the phone with Robinson.

This has led to accusations that Robinson “coached” Reade and Moulton, which he has denied doing. But regardless of whether “coaching” accurately describes his interactions with them, what he did amounted to PR consulting, while operating in a journalistic capacity. This creates a significant conflict of interest — something that journalists are taught early on to avoid.
Full article: https://abovethelaw.com/2020/05/how-the ... ade-story/

If Reade was/is a genuine actor, then the best you can say is that Robinson did a massive disservice to her by engaging in such inappropriate manipulation. The piece also lays out a basic problem with the story from the jump: that you had a handful of reporters with a clear (and self-stated) agenda who viewed their roles as advocates to bring down Biden, not try to ascertain the truth wherever it leads them. And sometimes that's a fine mode of journalism, correcting for errors in mainstream, traditional reportage. But relying exclusively on that reporting can create its own issues. Like, for reporters, I think you have to eventually be open to scrutinizing claims even if you want them to be true. The writer of that piece, Clearment, seems like a jackass on a bunch of other stuff, but I think he's correct about this. Unlike those other women you mention, where a wide array of journalists scrutinized these stories and found them at least credible and plausible, even when journalists went in with an ethos of wanting to believe Reade (like McGann in this Vox piece: https://www.vox.com/2020/5/7/21248713/t ... accusation), no one is able to come back reporting a very coherent picture.
Hey, you'll get no defense of Mr. "Socialist"-Who-Fires-His-Entire-Staff-When-They-Try-to-Do-Socialism coming from me, but the question of his journalistic ethics is a separate issue—that's not on Tara Reade. Marcotte is a thoroughly repulsive character, and was actively trying to discredit Reade (with some help from the Pod Save America guys), so it's not like Robinson was wrong about that. I also have a very hard time believing that a writer for Vox—one of the most pro-Democrat outlets there is—"went in with an ethos of wanting to believe" a person accusing Joe Biden of sexual assault.
Flex wrote:If you search IMCT you can find me referring to Reade's accusation as credible... and my default position was to believe it. But as problems with the reportage and the basic mechanics of her claims came out over time, I think it became fair to drop the "credible."
The "not credible" mantra, IIRC, really took off in the MSM after Stacey Abrams used it during a CNN interview when she was making the rounds and begging for the veep slot in the most cringe way possible. She cited a New York Times article as having cleared Biden, but it was such an egregious misrepresentation of the article that NYT (who I'm sure would've loved to help Biden) issued a statement that the article absolutely did not conclude that Biden was innocent of the accusations.

Biden eventually appeared on MSNBC and did an interview with Mika Brzezinski to address the allegation. While it's annoying that she accepted the Biden's campaign's framing of having the conversation center around whether or not it's true that Reade filed a contemporaneous complaint, within that framing I think she did a pretty good job of grilling him. Here's an analysis of the interview from a commercial litigator who's experienced in conducting depositions:

I don't know much about this guy, but a quick Google search tells me he ran for office as part of some right-leaning party in Canada, so full disclosure, yeah, dude might have reason to dislike Biden—but having said that, I think his analysis here is valuable and fairly unbiased in its presentation.

Here is the full interview as it aired without the commentary, which I think is damning enough on its own.

Also worth noting, in addition to the testimony of people she told at the time, Reade mentioned that her mother had called in to Larry King's show back in 1993 when he was doing a segment on sexual harassment in Washington. Shortly thereafter, the clip surfaced:

That's more corroborating evidence than Christine Blasey Ford had for her claim and I believe Christine Blasey Ford. At a bare minimum, Reade experienced something that she interpreted as (at the very least) sexual harassment of some kind from Joe Biden and told her mother about it at the time. That much is not disputable. If she's lying, she began elaborately setting the lie up decades in advance.

One last relevant item here, and having nothing to do with Reade specifically: here is a 2008 article by Alexander Cockburn that has a very interesting allegation contained within it:
Biden is a notorious flapjaw. His vanity deludes him into believing that every word that drops from his mouth is minted in the golden currency of Pericles. Vanity is the most conspicuous characteristic of US Senators en bloc, nourished by deferential acolytes and often expressed in loutish sexual advances to staffers, interns and the like. On more than one occasion CounterPunch’s editors have listened to vivid accounts by the recipient of just such advances, this staffer of another senator being accosted by Biden in the well of the senate in the week immediately following his first wife’s fatal car accident.
The first part is worded slightly confusingly (at least to me) as to whether or not he's referring to a pattern of behavior by Biden specifically or of Senators in general, but the second half is unambiguously accusing Biden of making an unwanted advance toward a staffer as far back as 1972. Which would be remarkably similar to what Reade alleges she experienced in 1993. Cockburn died in 2012, it's extremely unlikely that he was aware of Tara Reade's existence in his lifetime.

So, there ya go—I report, you decide.

eumaas
User avatar
Klezmer Shogun
Posts: 23579
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 8:10pm
Location: deep in your Id

Re: The Trump observations thread

Post by eumaas »

Oh man, Alexander Cockburn. "Is your hate pure?"
I feel that there is a fascistic element, for example, in the Rolling Stones . . .
— Morton Feldman

I've studied the phenomenon of neo-provincialism in self-isolating online communities but this place takes the fucking cake.
— Clashy

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 115994
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Straight Banana, Idaho

Re: The Trump observations thread

Post by Dr. Medulla »

eumaas wrote:
05 Oct 2022, 7:12am
Oh man, Alexander Cockburn. "Is your hate pure?"
He was a climate change denialist, if my foggy memory is right, no? He was so fanatically opposed to all conspiracy theories and climate change seemed like a conspiracy to him, so that was that.
"I never doubted myself for a minute for I knew that my monkey-strong bowels were girded with strength, like the loins of a dragon ribboned with fat and the opulence of buffalo dung." - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft

Flex
User avatar
Mechano-Man of the Future
Posts: 35802
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:50pm
Location: The Information Superhighway!

Re: The Trump observations thread

Post by Flex »

Howard Beale wrote:
05 Oct 2022, 1:24am
I don't. This is essentially the same line of attack that Trump and the Republicans used against Christine Blasey Ford.
watch?v=pEogfGZYizw&t=48s
It's also the same line of attack used by Wacko Jacko truthers to discredit MJ's victims from the Leaving Neverland documentary.

Any psychologist who specializes in sexual trauma will tell you that it's not uncommon for victims to forget or misremember these kind of details. Traumatic experiences aside, I'd imagine that most people wouldn't be able to give a very accurate description of the spatial dimensions of a building they worked in nearly thirty years ago.
I mean, here's part of the problem right. Certainly Ford's claims that she doesn't remember particular details is in keeping with how trauma memory works, and I think Reade's misremembering of, like, what spot in a room something happened in is more than fair. But even if we take broad latitude with her description of the incident, it's simply makes no sense that an assault happened roughly as she described roughly where she says it did. I used to work at the Capitol, I agree with these assessments of the issues with location. Has she misremembered wholesale the broad description of an incident that took place? It's possible. The human mind is wild. But I think it's a problem to call an accusation credible where in order for us to believe it we have to disbelieve the actual story that Reade stands behind and instead rewrite one that would actually have been possible. That's a substantive difference between Reade and Ford. Ford told a coherent story that you can believe even if particular details weren't remembered by her. Reade required us to actually disbelieve parts of the story she stands by in order to believe her broader claim. Even if you think that's not disqualifying (and it wouldn't be with additional strong evidence, I think) it's substantively different than Ford's clam.

And, to center it back to the initial discussion, we're not (or I'm not) talking about whether the claim has any chance of being remotely true - I certainly don't think it's been discredited or debunked or whatever to the point where we could decisively say Reade is certainly lying/misremembering/etc. It's whether the evidence presented is compelling enough that, assuming no smoking gun is found, I'd go forward assuming it's more probable than not that Biden is guilty as accused. Maybe we have different definitions of credible, but that's mine. I don't think requiring me to rewrite Reade's accusation to something she isn't claiming meets that threshold.

It actually reminds me of the assault claim brought against Bob Dylan that was recently dropped in court. The accuser claimed an assault happened during a period where he was touring and, if the event happened precisely as described, it would have been impossible for the incident to take place. Now, again, maybe the event as described was wrong and an alternate version with some moderate details changed happened and Dylan is guilty! But the case was recently dropped and, while I wouldn't say it's impossible it didn't happen, I'm not going to go around assuming Bob Dylan is guilty of assault either.
Hey, you'll get no defense of Mr. "Socialist"-Who-Fires-His-Entire-Staff-When-They-Try-to-Do-Socialism coming from me, but the question of his journalistic ethics is a separate issue—that's not on Tara Reade. Marcotte is a thoroughly repulsive character, and was actively trying to discredit Reade (with some help from the Pod Save America guys), so it's not like Robinson was wrong about that. I also have a very hard time believing that a writer for Vox—one of the most pro-Democrat outlets there is—"went in with an ethos of wanting to believe" a person accusing Joe Biden of sexual assault.
I mean, again, this part of my issue: yeah, Marcotte is a bad actor who we shouldn't trust to give a fair hearing to these accusations. She is working in the same style of reportage as Robinson, Halper and Grim just for people and positions we don't like! But the problem is that in both cases the goal of all these folks isn't to evaluate the truth of a claim, it's to pursue straightforward political advocacy. I've come to really regret the pivot to that as being the near-exclusive means of news coverage in the Left Discourse. Hell, even Chomsky used to say the best reporting used to come out of places like the Financial Times and so forth. You had to then do your own analysis (or, if you're a big dumb asshole like me, find smart people to explain what everything means) of the facts but I think we really lose something having our foundational sense of what's happening in the world come out of outfits and from people primarily devoted to advocacy and who don't view reportage as a separate exercise (as imperfect as that attempt to separate is!). I think the old model was bad too for reasons that have been documented for decades, but I'd like to see find some sort of middle ground or at least figure out how to vary our diet of news and analysis a little more.
Also worth noting, in addition to the testimony of people she told at the time, Reade mentioned that her mother had called in to Larry King's show back in 1993 when he was doing a segment on sexual harassment in Washington. Shortly thereafter, the clip surfaced:
youtube.com/watch?v=aivzaeV8qxY
That's more corroborating evidence than Christine Blasey Ford had for her claim and I believe Christine Blasey Ford. At a bare minimum, Reade experienced something that she interpreted as (at the very least) sexual harassment of some kind from Joe Biden and told her mother about it at the time. That much is not disputable. If she's lying, she began elaborately setting the lie up decades in advance.
I mean... it's not disputable that Reade's mother called in to mention her daughter had an unspecified problem with a Senator. It's definitely disputed whether it was sexual assault because that's not what her mother called and said! Reade also characterized her time in the office as being unfairly treated at her job and Reade and her colleagues of the time recall an incident where she was reprimanded for her attire. You have people saying she complained about her treatment during Biden's office at the time, none of this is disputed by Reade or her colleagues, and it's an extremely plausible scenario she would have also complained to her mother about her treatment at the time. I would call this weak corroborating evidence since there's a multiple plausible explanations for it. With Ford, since you mentioned it by contrast, I think stuff like catching Kavanaugh in lies about his behavior around drinking and partying at the time is more compelling and stronger than this. YMMV, obviously.
The first part is worded slightly confusingly (at least to me) as to whether or not he's referring to a pattern of behavior by Biden specifically or of Senators in general, but the second half is unambiguously accusing Biden of making an unwanted advance toward a staffer as far back as 1972. Which would be remarkably similar to what Reade alleges she experienced in 1993. Cockburn died in 2012, it's extremely unlikely that he was aware of Tara Reade's existence in his lifetime.
From the PBS list above:
[Biden] was not on a list of “creepy” male senators that female staffers told each other to avoid in the elevators on Capitol Hill.
By all accounts Biden behaved poorly (in some broad latitude of that word) with women at different times in his career. He's admitted that, current and former colleagues and staff have said as much, and it would almost be more shocking if he was a model 21st century gentleman in 1972 than if he essentially engaged in the median behavior of a Senator. I would say the Cockburn quote is the most damning supporting evidence in this whole specific discussion, since it suggests a pattern of behavior, although I also don't discount that he did seem to have a better reputation amongst staffers than a number of his other colleagues as above. So, I dunno, Cockburn isn't here to elaborate on that single line, which could mean a bunch of things. It could refer to behavior he's admitted to, or it could refer to something even worse. That's both this and the Larry King piece could just as plausibly refer to facts and issues that aren't in dispute makes them less compelling as strong corroborating evidence for a disputed account which, again, relies on us to modify at our discretion to make work.

I wish the Dems hadn't nominated Biden. I think there were better alternatives at the time (Bernie, obviously. But essentially any of the other candidates would have at least come without the historical baggage of being in the Senate over many decades during which norms of behavior changed quite a bit). I wish Dems took accusations of assault more seriously (the lamenting of Al Franken - who admitted to his behavior! - resigning is reprehensible) and it wouldn't, like, shock me if the Reade allegation (or the incident Cockburn references or some other unnamed incident) turned out to be true. I wish Reade had better advocates for her than what I view as a handful of disreputable reporters (the Marcottes of the Left, if you will) clouding the reportage going on about the alleged incident.

But, as it stands, I think you have a weak allegation coupled with weak corroborating evidence all masked by some very opaque reporting practices without any third party reporters willing to take the ball and run with it. So, somewhere less than credible in my eyes until/unless there's some additional movement in the story. Everyone's mileage may vary obviously.
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a bowl of soup
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a rolling hoop
Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle like a ton of lead
Wiggle - you can raise the dead

Pex Lives!

Howard Beale
Bang Ice Geezer
Posts: 172
Joined: 16 Jun 2008, 1:51am

Re: The Trump observations thread

Post by Howard Beale »

Flex wrote:
05 Oct 2022, 12:33pm
And, to center it back to the initial discussion, we're not (or I'm not) talking about whether the claim has any chance of being remotely true - I certainly don't think it's been discredited or debunked or whatever to the point where we could decisively say Reade is certainly lying/misremembering/etc. It's whether the evidence presented is compelling enough that, assuming no smoking gun is found, I'd go forward assuming it's more probable than not that Biden is guilty as accused. Maybe we have different definitions of credible, but that's mine.
No, I don't disagree. I think that's a fair standard to have.
It actually reminds me of the assault claim brought against Bob Dylan that was recently dropped in court. The accuser claimed an assault happened during a period where he was touring and, if the event happened precisely as described, it would have been impossible for the incident to take place. Now, again, maybe the event as described was wrong and an alternate version with some moderate details changed happened and Dylan is guilty! But the case was recently dropped and, while I wouldn't say it's impossible it didn't happen, I'm not going to go around assuming Bob Dylan is guilty of assault either.
How was I completely unaware of this? Glad to hear it's unlikely to be true.
I mean, again, this part of my issue: yeah, Marcotte is a bad actor who we shouldn't trust to give a fair hearing to these accusations. She is working in the same style of reportage as Robinson, Halper and Grim just for people and positions we don't like! But the problem is that in both cases the goal of all these folks isn't to evaluate the truth of a claim, it's to pursue straightforward political advocacy. I've come to really regret the pivot to that as being the near-exclusive means of news coverage in the Left Discourse. Hell, even Chomsky used to say the best reporting used to come out of places like the Financial Times and so forth. You had to then do your own analysis (or, if you're a big dumb asshole like me, find smart people to explain what everything means) of the facts but I think we really lose something having our foundational sense of what's happening in the world come out of outfits and from people primarily devoted to advocacy and who don't view reportage as a separate exercise (as imperfect as that attempt to separate is!). I think the old model was bad too for reasons that have been documented for decades, but I'd like to see find some sort of middle ground or at least figure out how to vary our diet of news and analysis a little more.
We shouldn't let the mainstream media off the hook here, either. Reade's story was completely ignored for weeks (even by conservative media like Fox News, interestingly enough). Even with whatever credibility issues the people who were initially reporting the story in the indie mediasphere may or may not have, mainstream outlets could have reached out to Reade directly and simply chose not to.
I mean... it's not disputable that Reade's mother called in to mention her daughter had an unspecified problem with a Senator. It's definitely disputed whether it was sexual assault because that's not what her mother called and said! Reade also characterized her time in the office as being unfairly treated at her job and Reade and her colleagues of the time recall an incident where she was reprimanded for her attire. You have people saying she complained about her treatment during Biden's office at the time, none of this is disputed by Reade or her colleagues, and it's an extremely plausible scenario she would have also complained to her mother about her treatment at the time. I would call this weak corroborating evidence since there's a multiple plausible explanations for it. With Ford, since you mentioned it by contrast, I think stuff like catching Kavanaugh in lies about his behavior around drinking and partying at the time is more compelling and stronger than this. YMMV, obviously.
Well sure, she didn't mention sexual assault, so it's fair to say that we shouldn't just jump to the conclusion that that's what she was getting at—but, the Larry King segment was explicitly about sexual harassment, so I think it's fair to say that we can deduce that that's what her mother was talking about. If memory serves, the reprimand for her attire was from another higher-ranking staffer, not Biden himself (I could be misremembering, though), and her mother mentioned the problem involving a "prominent senator," which implicates Biden pretty directly.

Also, regarding the MSNBC interview, because I think this got lost in the mix—it does, IMO, send off major red flags that Biden seemed so dead-set against anyone doing a search of the records he donated to the University of Delaware.
I wish the Dems hadn't nominated Biden. I think there were better alternatives at the time (Bernie, obviously. But essentially any of the other candidates would have at least come without the historical baggage of being in the Senate over many decades during which norms of behavior changed quite a bit).
Yeah. It's funny, he had two campaigns (in '88 and '08) that went disastrously, then basically had the nomination—and by extension, the presidency—handed to him because of circumstance, i.e., the Dems desperately needing somebody, anybody who isn't Bernie.
the lamenting of Al Franken - who admitted to his behavior! - resigning is reprehensible
Image

revbob
User avatar
Unknown Immortal
Posts: 25333
Joined: 16 Jun 2008, 12:31pm
Location: The Frozen Tundra

Re: The Trump observations thread

Post by revbob »

JennyB wrote:
04 Oct 2022, 10:30am
Dr. Medulla wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 8:41pm
Flex wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 8:38pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 7:49pm
Putin loves GEER. Deal with that.
*Quietly airbrushes a Z on the side of my bitchin' van*
If you pick up a Ukrainian chick, just say you're a ZZ Top fan, but you're waiting till payday to get more spray paint. In like Flynn.
I kind of have a soft spot for ZZ Top. They have more songs about food than Weird Al and Billy Gibbons is a huge DM fan.

Sorry for the interruption.
They are coming to play here in 2023

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 115994
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Straight Banana, Idaho

Re: The Trump observations thread

Post by Dr. Medulla »

revbob wrote:
06 Oct 2022, 9:06am
JennyB wrote:
04 Oct 2022, 10:30am
Dr. Medulla wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 8:41pm
Flex wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 8:38pm
Dr. Medulla wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 7:49pm
Putin loves GEER. Deal with that.
*Quietly airbrushes a Z on the side of my bitchin' van*
If you pick up a Ukrainian chick, just say you're a ZZ Top fan, but you're waiting till payday to get more spray paint. In like Flynn.
I kind of have a soft spot for ZZ Top. They have more songs about food than Weird Al and Billy Gibbons is a huge DM fan.

Sorry for the interruption.
They are coming to play here in 2023
They're still going? I wouldn't have assumed they'd quit when Dusty Hill died.
"I never doubted myself for a minute for I knew that my monkey-strong bowels were girded with strength, like the loins of a dragon ribboned with fat and the opulence of buffalo dung." - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft

revbob
User avatar
Unknown Immortal
Posts: 25333
Joined: 16 Jun 2008, 12:31pm
Location: The Frozen Tundra

Re: The Trump observations thread

Post by revbob »

Dr. Medulla wrote:
06 Oct 2022, 9:26am
revbob wrote:
06 Oct 2022, 9:06am
JennyB wrote:
04 Oct 2022, 10:30am
Dr. Medulla wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 8:41pm
Flex wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 8:38pm


*Quietly airbrushes a Z on the side of my bitchin' van*
If you pick up a Ukrainian chick, just say you're a ZZ Top fan, but you're waiting till payday to get more spray paint. In like Flynn.
I kind of have a soft spot for ZZ Top. They have more songs about food than Weird Al and Billy Gibbons is a huge DM fan.

Sorry for the interruption.
They are coming to play here in 2023
They're still going? I wouldn't have assumed they'd quit when Dusty Hill died.
Yeah me too and I was way off with the date. Its 10 days out, tix are steep though starting at $85.
https://www.flynnvt.org/Events/2022/10/zz-top

Dr. Medulla
User avatar
Atheistic Epileptic
Posts: 115994
Joined: 15 Jun 2008, 2:00pm
Location: Straight Banana, Idaho

Re: The Trump observations thread

Post by Dr. Medulla »

revbob wrote:
06 Oct 2022, 10:07am
Dr. Medulla wrote:
06 Oct 2022, 9:26am
revbob wrote:
06 Oct 2022, 9:06am
JennyB wrote:
04 Oct 2022, 10:30am
Dr. Medulla wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 8:41pm


If you pick up a Ukrainian chick, just say you're a ZZ Top fan, but you're waiting till payday to get more spray paint. In like Flynn.
I kind of have a soft spot for ZZ Top. They have more songs about food than Weird Al and Billy Gibbons is a huge DM fan.

Sorry for the interruption.
They are coming to play here in 2023
They're still going? I wouldn't have assumed they'd quit when Dusty Hill died.
Yeah me too and I was way off with the date. Its 10 days out, tix are steep though starting at $85.
https://www.flynnvt.org/Events/2022/10/zz-top
Yikes. That's what you get for messing with Texas.
"I never doubted myself for a minute for I knew that my monkey-strong bowels were girded with strength, like the loins of a dragon ribboned with fat and the opulence of buffalo dung." - Richard Nixon, Checkers Speech, abandoned early draft

gkbill
Unknown Immortal
Posts: 4729
Joined: 23 Jun 2008, 9:21pm

Re: The Trump observations thread

Post by gkbill »

revbob wrote:
06 Oct 2022, 10:07am
Dr. Medulla wrote:
06 Oct 2022, 9:26am
revbob wrote:
06 Oct 2022, 9:06am
JennyB wrote:
04 Oct 2022, 10:30am
Dr. Medulla wrote:
03 Oct 2022, 8:41pm


If you pick up a Ukrainian chick, just say you're a ZZ Top fan, but you're waiting till payday to get more spray paint. In like Flynn.
I kind of have a soft spot for ZZ Top. They have more songs about food than Weird Al and Billy Gibbons is a huge DM fan.

Sorry for the interruption.
They are coming to play here in 2023
They're still going? I wouldn't have assumed they'd quit when Dusty Hill died.
Yeah me too and I was way off with the date. Its 10 days out, tix are steep though starting at $85.
https://www.flynnvt.org/Events/2022/10/zz-top
Hello,

Unfortunately, $85 isn't steep anymore. Try Stubhub the day of/before the show.

Post Reply