It's all starting to make sense re: Reade

[catbyte]

One of Tara Reade's new attorneys donated $55,000 to Trump in 2016. The other is a former writer and editor for a Russian propaganda network. https://apnews.com/10d2842623b2c299e2c673bf5a9e23ff …

Link to tweet

[samnsara]

1. shes a sham the accusations are a sham. Im not saying shes not been victimized by someone..

...shes just blaming the wrong person..and shes STILL being victimized by others. I hope she gets some help soon.. as for me I'm not taking my eye off the election or the pandemic. Trumps TOO dangerous for distractions.

[dalton99a]

2. It's plain as day.

[Baitball Blogger]

3. She's Paula Jones, Redux.

In the end, it will be a question of proportion. If a voter is going to believe Tara Reade, then why not the 20+ accusations for Trump, that actually resulted in hush money?

[brush]

7. No. With Jones something actually happened.

[Baitball Blogger]

9. Of course. But the right's strategy is to copy the success they had with Paula Jones.

It's not going to work for them for a number of reasons, and one of them is that Reade's story is not truthful.

But you are going to have those who will insist on pushing her claims. And for them, there's everything else.

[Hortensis]

13. But it wasn't what she said. Reade worked in a Biden office.

Jones was invited up to Clinton's hotel room and went. That actually happened.

But what they said about it then -- Jones's being "tickled" at chatting with a hotshot like Clinton according to her sister (!) and Reade giving a series of stories about not getting along with Biden's staff, changed later -- after Jones was cultivated by RW operatives, and likely Reade -- to very different, political attack stories.

Jones's experience may be different from Reade's in that she declined to repeat what they wanted her to say publicly, so they "outed" her and her new story by having the author of a character-assassination book name a "Paula" who'd been provided to Clinton for sex.

[brush]

15. Right. With Jones something actually happened. With Reade, no...

it's calculated, intentional make believe.





i

[Hortensis]

22. Yes, except with Jones, what she later SAID happened also did not.

By her own accounts, and her husband's and relatives', for some years. Then later by evidence contradicting details of her new, attack story -- including, very famously, her incorrect description of Clinton's penis.

[Vogon_Glory]

20. Tara Reade strikes me as being an updated Kathleen Wiley

Just sayin’

[Sneederbunk]

4. Won't take a polygraph.

[catbyte]

5. Heck, she won't even allow herself to be interviewed by Chris Wallace.

[kysrsoze]

6. Bye, Felicia.

[Dandelyon]

8. Then there's this

Link to tweet

[ehrnst]

10. Her target audience is very, very obvious, as well as who's behind her message.

[DFW]

11. On Russia Today

Now, THERE'S a really credible source to consult--if you believe there is no climate change and that the earth is flat. Of course, Reade believes Putin is God, and Russia Today is not exactly the place where you will find opposing views to that.

[ehrnst]

24. And those in the U.S. who lap up RT as "progressive."

[DFW]

28. Are there any of those left?

There can't be too many, can there?

[ehrnst]

30. Yes. Many - some right here on DU. They also tend to be consumers of

Glenn Greenwald, and the Intercept.

Not that all who consume Greenwald and the Intercept are of the same far left "the DNC is the Deep State and wants to take out Bernie, Russia had nothing to do with the 2016 election" mindset, but all those with that far left mindset consume those two sources along with RT.

[DFW]

33. I barely know the name Glenn Greenwald, don't know the Intercept

Not exactly household names here in Europe, or with the Democrats I know back in the States. Travelers in different circles, I guess. If they believe that kind of stuff, then no wonder we don't have each other on speed dial. But then, any post with "corporatist" or "corporate" in it is usually one I fly right over. There are plenty of interesting posts on here without having to contend with ones I know straight off that I will have issues with.

[catbyte]

16. And this Instagram post:

Welcome to DU!

[DFW]

29. An English-speaking person really wrote "sole-less?"

That's hard to imagine, unless the subject was shoes.

There IS an elementary school requirement still in the USA, isn't there?

[Yavin4]

23. Halper, like a lot of Sanders supporters, turned on Sen. Warren when she made a claim about Bernie

saying that a woman could never be elected president.

[ehrnst]

27. You mean when someone leaked that conversation to the press.

Senator Warren didn't repeat her conversation with Sanders to anyone but close associates.

Just clarifying.

[Marrah_Goodman]

12. Looking at her past, she is a grifter looking for a payday

She will be setting up a go fund me to bilk the trumpers out of their money.

[SheltieLover]

14. K&R!

[ScratchCat]

17. Yes, this likely has Rudy and Trump

All over it. This is probably all Rudy could drudge up in his globe hopping expedition. The fact that there is a Trump and Russia connections tells you all you need to know.

[gratuitous]

18. I'm guessing these attorneys aren't working for free

I wonder who's paying them, because I'd bet a shiny nickel it isn't Ms. Reade.

[Gothmog]

19. Putin is pushing this bogus story

[MustBeTheBooz]

25. Well... duh! ☹️ n/t

[Cha]

26. And, there's a whole lot more to the puzzle.. that

brilliant minds are piecing together and it ain't pretty.

[George II]

31. Someone got her employment record (dates and actions) from the Senate Office of the Secretary....

...in April 2019. Here it is, and it should be noted that she was charged with check fraud on August 2, 1993.

Did she resign or was she fired six days after the check fraud charge? She claims that she couldn't find another job in Washington because of the complaint against Biden, but perhaps it was because of her record (docked 4 weeks pay in February 1993 and the check fraud charge in August 1993)?

[honest.abe]

32. Clearly this is an organized attempt to help Trump.

This fabricated story is completely full of holes and woman behind it all is a know liar, exaggerator and fraudster who loves the spotlight.

I dont see it having much impact except with those who dont like Joe in the first place.

[Proud Liberal Dem]

34. This seems more and more like a straight-up smear operation

designed to drag Biden's numbers down or get him out of the race. Trump has to have all of the advantages that he can have to be able to slither back into office, given how everything else seems to be going to sh*t for him right now. Fortunately, the only people (I know) whom are paying any attention to it or promoting it are people on the left whom hate Biden and pretty much any politician other than Bernie and were probably never going to vote for him anyway. A tiny few have gone towards voting Biden as "harm reduction" but most Democrats seem solidly behind Biden, which is good. I'm sort of glad that this came out now, when we're still pretty far out from November and we've already coalesced around Biden as the presumptive nominee, so, hopefully, this will have little to no impact in November unless something explosively worse comes out about Biden before then but then again it's hard to believe that something explosive like this would have been missed by the Obama team in 2008 (and he ran for POTUS after 1993 didn't he?)