Joe Biden, Senator from Citibank (oops, DELAWARE), to Run for President

what are you, Joe Biden's nephew or something?

Why are you so obsessed with me Hadrian? It's creepy as fuck

dude tens of thousands of people are literally suffocating to death right now and you are barfposting *all day long* about an accusation made against a presidential candidate in a country you don't live in

just give it a fucking rest

Yeah, I know that, one of those people was a friend of mine.

ok then. perspective.

Give it a fucking rest yourself. That would save both of us time.

just stop constantly posting in these u.s. politics threads. I'm begging you.

ok ilx liberals you have successfully defended Joe Biden's honour for the day. give yourself a pat on the back

Go to hell. Honestly. MeToo is a global story. Journalistic standards aren't us specific. How many times do I have to say it?

I don't all of a sudden think a MeToo story is unimportant because the accused is a politician I don't personally support.

How many times do I have to say it?

I'm reluctant to put a number on it, but I'm guessing it's probably....a lot more times. Over and over again.

That's a damning indictment of this place

Fred

xp It would be if it had anything to do with the issue. It doesn't. It's about your posting.

Earlier today we had this exchange:

it's a fair point but Fred, again...what is up with this insistance on these things? You're like a full month out ahead on this story, making these claims like you have a serious personal stake in the fate of Joe Biden

it's just...weird

― Yanni Xenakis (Hadrian VIII), 27. marts 2020 14:46 (yesterday) bookmarkflaglink

@Hadrian: I'm more invested in MeToo. When I'm 'making claims' on the Woody Allen thread, it's not because I hate Annie Hall. But I'm invested in these stories being told and having an impact. I have friends trying to do this, I see people in positions of power who shouldn't be there because of investigations I know that have failed.

― Frederik B, 27. marts 2020 15:04 (yesterday) bookmarkflaglink

You ask, I answer, you ask the same fucking question, I give the same fucking answer.

https://66.media.tumblr.com/22e65c39a534a53b639beef716a6a4a8/tumblr_oiyt7ggbXp1vbbcoto3_540.gifv

ok ilx liberals you have successfully defended Joe Biden's honour for the day. give yourself a pat on the back

― COVID and the Gang (jim in vancouver), Friday, March 27, 2020 10:59 PM (sixteen minutes ago)

sure beats bragging about how you haven't bothered to look into this story but still jumping in to make a couple of worthless comments about it

there are multiple forms of bad posting itt

Frederik B at 12:44 28 Mar 20

She said at first that she told the story that matched what Lucy Flores said, because that was what was most believable. That's not what she says anymore

Yes, I know that very basic thing. i don't for a second believe that is what happened in this case.

Is there any possible way a story could be discredited for you if that story happened to hurt Joe Biden? Serious question. What would give you pause for concern?

Fred sometimes I feel bad when people kneejerk pile on you but ffs flip the logic of that post

Like this feeble, gropey misogynist right wing cunt is the ILX hill you want to die on?

Ffs that does not work at all! Because this specific story has red flags all over. About everything! Which has nothing to do with Biden, and also I'm not a Biden supporter.

The hill here is not Biden, it's that this story isn't true!!!

How the fuck can that be so hard to comprehend? There could be a story about Trump that didn't add up, and I would say so, and if people here began claiming that no, the story just had to make sense, then we would have a clusterfuck as well, and that would not make me a Trump supporter.

"isn't true" has a level of certitude that feels misplaced

Apart from when Jacob Wohl has been involved, it has never been less misplaced than here.

On these kinds of accusations, that is.

It's easy to write in haste when you're being piled on from all sides, so picking out one phrase as insufficiently qualified seems like a bad read. His last ten posts do not reflect such certitude and should be taken as modifying the "isn't true" to "has red flags".

https://technospiritualist.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/energizer-bunny.jpg

I've made it halfway through the Biden CNN town hall--need to get out for a walk. Generally, he's been pretty good, by which I mean pretty lucid. At one point he did that thing where he stops himself mid-sentence if he thinks he's gone on too long; sort of makes sense in a debate, tonight he's not being timed, so that was weird. I honestly don't know what to think. You see those clips where he seems lost, tonight he seems better.

I take it that Fred fears that this story contains poisoned bait and if it is widely circulated as true and enthusiastically swallowed by those it was designed to attract, the credibility and success of #MeToo movement will be harmed by association. I haven't evaluated it, yet, so I have no idea whether I'd see the same red flags or not, but by Fred's own testimony for him this isn't about whether it harms Biden, but whether it harms #MeToo. The fact that no one is noticing this is driving him up a wall.

This specific story that Tara Reade told to The Hill? That story isn't true. I'm 100% certain of that. Because it's changed - yet again - from the story she told Katie Halper, and you could clearly see her in the interview realize she made a mistake, look down at her notes, then carry on. There's just no reason to believe this version is the truth.

Hypothetically, there could be a core of truth and she and Halper and the Hill are messing this up massively. But there's honestly no reason to believe that either.

I'm not sure it will harm MeToo. It should not have any impact what so ever on whether or not we believe the next story. That one will be a fight no matter what, unfortunately. But the journalistic work here has been a fucking disgrace, and seeing people go 'we can never know' is a slap in the face of every journalist out there working there ass off to corroborate a story.

there are multiple forms of bad posting itt

― brimstead, Friday, March 27, 2020 7:23 PM bookmarkflaglink

there are multiple forms of bad posting itt

― brimstead, Friday, March 27, 2020 7:23 PM bookmarkflaglink

― Doctor Casino, Friday, March 27, 2020 9:11 PM (one hour ago) bookmarkflaglink

ok I'm all caught up, you can continue

ok ilx liberals you have successfully defended Joe Biden's honour for the day. give yourself a pat on the back

― COVID and the Gang (jim in vancouver), Friday, March 27, 2020 10:59 PM (sixteen minutes ago)

sure beats bragging about how you haven't bothered to look into this story but still jumping in to make a couple of worthless comments about it

― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Friday, March 27, 2020 4:16 PM (six hours ago) bookmarkflaglink

I stand by my point and your post was still gross

You posted "this alleged victim of sexual assault is lying because her story was inconsistent" which is, no matter what the context, a harmful thing to post

It's not necessary to have an opinion on Reade or her allegation to find the fervor and eagerness some posters are dismissing her and the allegation with to be fucking gross and pathetic and obvious that if it wasn't aimed at the presumptive Democratic nominee it would be taken more seriously by those posters.

That's an incredibly vile personal attack, and how the fuck to defend against it if you aren't willing to look at the case? Seriously, that's 99% of the 'fervor and eagerness', it's because I try to defend myself from incredibly serious allegations against me, that people just fling around without in anyway checking if it's deserved.

Fucking catch-22

It can certainly be irksome when what you say is misrepresented

i first saw the assault allegation on yahoo news and they've since removed the story.

my impression is that fred b is the real victim here

i first saw the assault allegation on yahoo news and they've since removed the story.

― akm, Saturday, 28 March 2020 bookmarkflaglink

Yahoo.com are trying to uphold the highest level of journalistic standards let's be cool and sweep this under the carpet so that Fred B is happy.

In 1982, when Reagan’s press secretary was asked if the president was tracking the spread of “the gay plague”, the room erupted in laughter as he replied: “I don’t have it, do you?”

The journalist pressed on: “Does the president – in other words, the White House – look on this as a great joke?”

The press secretary repeatedly shrugged him off, saying: ” No, I don’t know anything about it, Lester.”

Even though AIDS was first identified in 1981, Reagan remained deadly silent on the issue for years, and didn’t even say the word until a 1985, the year of the first high-profile death from the disease.

Many believe his apathy caused thousands to get infected and die, in part because it delayed research critical to understanding and treating the virus.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uw2W82HE99Q

Reagan's AIDs response and Trump's coronavirus response (meant for another thread?) are--with the obvious difference that Trump can't completely ignore coronavirus (I'm sure he wishes he could)--extremely comparable.