Biden tells women they 'probably shouldn't vote for me' if they believe Tara Reade

Former Vice [no pun intended] President Joe Biden and presumptive Democratic nominee for the 2020 presidential election claims he doesn't remember Tara Reade, his former Senate staffer and barely remembers being a senator. Reade claims that Biden sexually assaulted her in 1993 and he said that those who believe her should not vote for him.

Biden did not say that those who believe he should release his Senate records that are being held in the University of Delaware to prove his innocence in this matter while he refuses to do so should not vote for him.

He also did not say that people who have seen visual proof that he touches women and girls inappropriately should not vote for him.

Nor did he mention that he has never once been correct on foreign policy when he served under Obama.

And he forgot to mention that people who believe that his obvious mental decline disqualifies him for president should not vote for him, but then again, his mental decline may be the reason he did not mention that little problem.

During an interview with MSNBC's Communist, Lawrence O'Donnell, "Gropey Joe" was asked whether he remembered Tara Reade being on his staff, a question he previously dodged earlier this month when asked by "Morning Joe" co-host Mika Brzezinski.

"Do you remember Tara Reade who worked there for about a year in 1992-1993?" Comrade O'Donnell asked.

"Well, to be honest with you, I don't," Biden, for the first time in memory said honestly. "But let me get something clear, when a woman makes a claim that she has been harassed or abused, and this claim has changed... she should be taken seriously. She should come forward, share her story, she should be taken seriously and it should be thoroughly vetted. And in every case, what matters is the truth. The truth is what matters. And the truth of the case is nothing like this ever, ever happened... I give you my word. It never, ever happened."

Biden's word is less valuable than a pile of used toilet paper.

In his failed 1988 run for president, he lifted parts of a speech given by a UK Labour MP and Margaret Thatcher challenger, Neil Kinnock. He even used portions of Kinnock's speech during an event at the Iowa State Fair and would
later acknowledge the plagiarism.

Also, according to a 1987 article in The Times, Biden admitted plagiarizing a law review journal for a paper during law school, and begged the school administration not to be expelled. Rather than totally owning up to the plagiarism, he said he made a mistake in the citation process. He also lied about graduating in the top third of his class in law school and that he was a professor at the University of Pennsylvania.

Then there's the little lies about visiting Afghanistan to honor a Naval officer who Biden claimed rappelled down a ravine under fire to retrieve the body of a fellow soldier. He claimed this was true, "My word as a Biden." [Remember the used toilet paper mentioned above.] The Washington Post investigated Biden's story and wrote:

… almost every detail in the story appears to be incorrect … it appears as though the former vice president has jumbled elements of at least three actual events into one story of bravery, compassion and regret that never happened … The upshot: In the space of three minutes, Biden got the time period, the location, the heroic act, the type of medal, the military branch and the rank of the recipient wrong, as well as his own role in the ceremony.

Biden claimed several times that he had been “arrested” in the 1970s while “trying to see” Nelson Mandela in prison, another claim apparently entirely made up. He also claimed to have co-sponsored the Endangered Species Act, which he didn’t.

And now he wants us to believe him when he claims that he didn't sexually assault Tara Reade and doesn't even remember her.

Back to the interview:

O'Donnell then pointed to an op-ed published in The New York Times, a former newspaper, titled "I Believe Tara Reade. I'm Voting for Joe Biden Anyway." He asked Biden what he would tell women who were "ready" to vote for him but the allegations give them "serious pause" and who believe Reade's allegations.

"Well, I think they should vote their heart and if they believe Tara Reade, they probably shouldn't vote for me. I wouldn't vote for me if I believed Tara Reade," Biden told O'Donnell. "The fact is that look at Tara Reade's story. It changes considerably. And I don't want to question her motive, I don't want to question anything other than to say the truth matters. This is being vetted, it's been vetted, [he lied] and people scores of my employees over my whole career. This is just totally, thoroughly, completely out of character. And the idea that in a public place, in a hallway I would assault a woman? I mean, it's just- I- anyway, I promise you. It never happened."

Biden reiterated before continuing the interview, "there is no truth" to Reade's claims.

Perhaps Biden is finally telling the truth, but he still refuses to release records that might exonerate him in this case. The guy has a shaky relationship with the truth and all he needs to do is make his senate records public.

But even if Reade is lying, the one good thing that comes out of this situation is the exposure of the blatant hypocrisy of the left.

Now the left is calling for the rule of law. What a laugh.

Please consider following this blog, and remember, every time you click on an ad, an angel gets its wings and a dead terrorist gets his virgins.

Tweet

Another woman claims Trump raped her but only for 3 minutes

Claims Trump raped her decades ago for 3 minutes

E. Jean Carroll, an Elle magazine advice columnist, finally came out and told her "story" about how President Donald Trump allegedly raped her in the mid-1990s for three minutes, give or take. She said that she would not press charges because the publicity for her book on the subject is good enough and added that it would be "disrespectful" to illegal alien women victimized by rape by the drug cartels that covertly transport them across the border in chicken trucks or whatever wheels are available.

"After all, the rape only lasted three minutes and it is worse for women raped by coyotes," she said, referring to cartel members driving chicken trucks hiding illegal alien women under the floor panels.

Carroll's book, "What Do We Need Men For? A Modest Proposal," goes into detail about her accusation against the president, which he strongly denies.

“I would find it disrespectful to the women who are down on the border who are being raped around the clock down there without any protection,” Carroll told MSNBC host Comrade Lawrence O'Donnell when asked why she wouldn’t press charges.

“They’re young women, they tried to come into the county. As you know, they’re here by the thousands.”

And this makes sense . . . how?

"Mine was three minutes,” the alleged rape victim claimed of the alleged encounter. “I’m a mature woman, I can handle it, I can keep going, my life has gone on, I'm a happy woman.”

“But for the women down there, around the world … it just seems disrespectful,” she stammered, “it doesn't make sense to me."

So by her logic, it would be disrespectful of her to have reported the rape that took place when it happened because she has a crystal ball and knew that illegal alien women were going to be raped by coyotes in the 21st Century. Sure, makes perfect sense . . . if you're schizophrenic.

In her book, Carroll claims Trump raped her in a Bergdorf Goodman dressing room in midtown Manhattan when she was 52 years old. Trump allegedly recognized Carroll and asked her to help him pick out lingerie for another woman; the duo then headed to the dressing room, which also makes perfect sense, since it was Trump who was going to try the lingerie on. Or perhaps Carroll was while Trump watched. 

Whatever.

"As we head to the dressing rooms, I’m laughing aloud and saying in my mind: I’m gonna make him put this thing on over his pants!" she claims, adding that “[t]he moment the dressing-room door is closed, he lunges at me, pushes me against the wall, hitting my head quite badly, and puts his mouth against my lips.”

I am really doubtful this woman is telling the truth and is willing now to disrespect rape victims at the border. I still think it might just have a wee bit to do with her book and the fact that the 2020 election is just down the road apiece.

“I am so shocked I shove him back and start laughing again,” the accusation continues. “He seizes both my arms and pushes me up against the wall a second time, and, as I become aware of how large he is, he holds me against the wall with his shoulder and jams his hand under my coat dress and pulls down my tights.”

Did you see the this in your mind? Are your eyes throwing up yet?

Carroll then explains that she kept “laughing,” which she says “astonished” her as Trump tickled her fancy.

“The next moment, still wearing correct business attire, shirt, tie, suit jacket, overcoat, he opens the overcoat, unzips his pants, and, forcing his fingers around my private area, thrusts his penis halfway — or completely, I’m not certain — inside me. It turns into a colossal struggle,” she alleges. “I am wearing a pair of sturdy black patent-leather four-inch Barneys high heels, which puts my height around six-one, and I try to stomp his foot. I try to push him off with my one free hand — for some reason, I keep holding my purse with the other — and I finally get a knee up high enough to push him out and off and I turn, open the door, and run out of the dressing room.”

Her memory of the event, at least in my estimation, is too vivid, too detailed. She even remembered the color of the bodysuit Trump allegedly chose--lilac. 

If it was true, I believe Carroll wouldn't have taken note nor remembered so much detail. An article in the Scientific American by Jim Hopper, an expert in the field of trauma, agrees that gaps in memory are quite common. He made this assertion in defense of Christine Blasey Ford's spotty testimony against Brett Kavanaugh, and now in this current case his words come back to bite the left and support the President.

Trump responded to the news of the accusation in a statement released on Friday. “I’ve never met this person in my life,” he said of Carroll. “She is trying to sell a new book — that should indicate her motivation. It should be sold in the fiction section.”

“False accusations diminish the severity of real assault,” the president added. “All should condemn false accusations and any actual assault in the strongest possible terms.”



Please consider following Brain Flushings and also visit the ads on the pages. Follow me on Parler.com, my handle is @Heyrobo, or on Twitter--my handle there is: @RobHoey
Thanks






Tweet

NY Times bans reporters from far-Left TV

The New York Times has finally decided to try harder at being "journalistic" and have banned its "reporters" from several TV shows that are obviously partisan: MSNBC's Rachel Maddow and Lawrence O'Donnell, and Don Lemon of CNN [aka: the Compromised News Network]. 

MSNBC, whose ratings are lower than whale poop, is upset about the new policy, according to anonymous sources at Vanity Fair. This was discovered after a Times reporter cancelled a scheduled appearance on Rachel Maddow's show. Her producer was informed that New York Times reporters are asked not to appear on partisan shows to discuss politics. The ban supposedly extends to Comrade O’Donnell and "The Lemon," as well as Fox news hosts Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity [where the chances of them appearing in the first place is as likely as spotting Bigfoot dancing with Richard Simmons.]

The Times explained to Vanity Fair of a policy in their ethics handbook that says reporters should “avoid strident, theatrical forums that emphasize punditry and reckless opinion-mongering.” New York Times reporters have appeared on Maddow’s show for years, but leadership at the former newspaper finally woke up to the fact that some of these shows have gone off the rails in recent months.

Times Executive Editor Dean Baquet and others at the canary cage liner don’t want their so-called "unbiased" reporters to be associated with the increasingly obvious bias of people like Maddow.  “Their view is that, intentionally or not, it affiliates the Times reporter with a bias,” an anonymous source said.

It’s not clear exactly where The Times is drawing the line for shows that are and are not permissible to bloviate on. Some of their reporters, including hard-left-leaning White House correspondent Maggie Haberman, are paid contributors at the networks and have the same blatant bias as the hosts of the shows they appear on. This does not bode well for The Times.

The guidelines are “inconsistent, incoherent and poorly conceived,” an unnamed source at one of the networks told Vanity Fair, which suggests the guidelines were written by the staff at the former newspaper.

Please consider following Brain Flushings and don't be shy about visiting the ads on these pages. Follow me on Parler.com, my handle is @Heyrobo, or on Twitter--my handle there is: @RobHoey 
Thanks.

Tweet

MSNBC getting 'too white Conservative'

Self-loathing white progressives and progressives of color are extremely angry with MSNBC's recent programming changes. In fact, they came up with a petition of 175,000 signatures threatening a "backlash" if the network doesn't do things their way.

The network has apparently shifted to hiring center right staff and a few diehard libtards are petitioning that the network go back to the progressive reporting that's in their safe zone.

The recent petition, hosted on Cretin Credo Action, urges network executives to "Stop the white conservative hiring spree at MSNBC." [Because they're afraid of hearing any opposing point of view].

The petition/warning goes like this: "NBC had troubling ties to Trump during the presidential campaign and gave the racist sexual predator a national platform. Now MSNBC, too, is tilting to the right. We need to let NBC executives know that there will be a sharp backlash if MSNBC becomes another platform for right-wing hate."

The petition's author expressed frustration with "progressive shows . . . skyrocketing" in ratings, conservatives, or those with a history on right-leaning networks such as Fox News,  George Will, Hugh Hewitt, and Greta Van Susteren. 

Obviously, the petition's author is intolerant of different points of view and believes that he can make million dollar business decisions for a network whose ratings had gone into the toilet until recently.

Last month, a protest was scheduled to march on NBC headquarters after reports that Lawrence "Comrade" O'Donnell's contract might not be extended. 

A petition posted on Change.org to save comrade O'Donnell's job received 16,000 signatures, about the same number of people that generally sit on the roof of an India train. 

In spite of the petition, the network announced earlier this month that O'Donnell will remain at MSNBC to spout his Communist tripe.

Other rumors about MSNBC president Phil Griffin (no relation to Kathy Airhead Griffin) claimed that he would be getting canned this month, but that information was as reliable as Hillary Clinton's testimony about her email server. Griffin signed a multi-year contract last month, possibly because he is the guy who built up the prime time lineup of the network.

This new petition, however, sets its sights on NBC President Andy Lack, who has supposedly behind the programming changes.

Tamron Hall

The petition reads: " . . . Lack has pushed out Black and Brown talent including Melissa Harris Perry, Alex Wagner, Touré Neblett, Dorian Warren, Michael Eric Dyson, Adam Howard, Jamil Smith, José Diaz-Balart and Tamron Hall. In fact, Lack has a history of replacing Black on-air personalities wherever he goes," the author alleges.

But perhaps the canning of Melissa Harris Perry was justified certainly, News Busters believes she was a loose cannon.

Alex Wagner left MSNBC to join The Atlantic as senior editor, not because she was fired.

Touré was fired because of what he tweeted about Holocaust survivors as noted in an article by Mediaite. MSNBC apparently doesn't suffer racists of any stripe.

Interestingly, Tamron Hall was not fired but left on her own even after she was asked to stay.

Michael Eric Dyson my have gone too far with the network after he compared police to ISIS.

An article by TV Newser reported that Diaz-Balart was a victim of upward mobility. He didn't get fired but left the network to join NBC Nightly News Saturday edition as part of a rotating cast of anchors.

So the "push out" by MSNBC wasn't really a push out at all. 

No company should be forced to retain a person who can injure their reputation. And if a person leaves to enhance their career, the company should be allowed to replace that individual with whom they believe best suits that position, and not base it on the melanin in their skin, or from where they or their family originates. 

Those who so carefully focus on racial issues, who are the racial "bean counters" in all facets of social life, are more likely to be racists than those they accuse of racism.



Tweet

MSNBC may dump O'Donnell and Griffin

According to Heat Street the far left-leaning MSNBC may be getting rid of communist-leaning Lawrence O'Donnell and the President of the company Phil Griffin as their contracts are ending and they haven't been renewed.

The replacement? 

Brian "Even My Chin Leans Right" Williams--the guy who's been shot at, saw dead bodies floating down the street and the buddy of the big cheese, NBC News Chairman Andy Lack.

According to Heat Street, Lack may be looking to rehabilitate his buddy Williams and take credit for MSNBC's recent successes, which are at least partially due to the firing of Bill O'Reilly over at Fox News. 

O'Donnell, not a communist when it comes to his own salary, threw a tantrum on the air Wednesday tweeting á la Trump, "Contract expires June 4," and then said he will "let you know where you can watch me June 6 if it's not MSNBC. I'm sorry this situation has become public." 

If he's sorry, why then did he go public with it?

On Thursday, he confirmed to a fan that he tweeted that he wants to stay at MSNBC with "the best team mates [in this case, comrades] on TV."

If Lack rids the network of leftist O'Donnell, Heat Street says that it'll be the latest move by the elderly executive to "torpedo MSNBC's progressive hosts in favor of conservative or middle-of-the-road programming."

While O'Donnell may not be Lack's fav, many progressive snowflakes are expressing their support for O'Donnell on social media. They even used a petition calling for O'Donnell to keep his job while ridding the country of Trump's. The petition has garnered practically all of the viewership of the network--all 14,000 viewers signed.

Griffin, whose head may also be on the chopping block, has strong support from Rachel Maddow the annoying pseudo intellectual lesbian.

Conservatives ought to be crossing their fingers that Williams gets O'Donnell's slot. People see him as a phony and a self-promoting moron. But beyond that, liberals like that about him.

All we can do now is wait until June and hope for change.


Follow Brain Flushings by clicking the Follow tab in the margin.




Tweet