Live by the Sword

They're not even bothering to hide it any more. https://t.co/QR4sux4jh2

— Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson) May 8, 2020

My primary complaint with accusations against men by women is that the accusations are presented in the arena of gossip, not of assessment, and any damned thing anyone says is subject to examination under standards that are just a sophisticated version of the school playground.  Guilt by association and parsing every denial for a confession of sin and "sagely" declaring "on the one hand, but on the other hand" as if scales of justice were being balanced, all the while rejecting any true questions of veracity or credibility because "objectivity".  Oh, and of course, how "unfair" is it that someone has to actually provide evidence of their claims.

On the other hand, if that's the arena Tara Reade wants to play in, and the rules are the rules of Calvinball, let's play.

They're not even trying to hide it. https://t.co/9rjmM9kgh7

— Rick Wilson (@TheRickWilson) May 8, 2020

Neither lawyer is representing Reade in filing a civil suit.  Wigdor says he's representing her free of charge because: “ 'We have decided to take this matter on because every survivor has the right to competent counsel,' the firm said in a statement."  "Survivor."  Nothing loaded in that statement.  Still, they are her counsel, why should they be impartial?

But a major supporter of Trump (albeit in 2016) and a former employee of Sputnik.  They really aren't hiding it, are they?  So long as credibility of parties is going to be played out in the arena of appearances and assumptions, this is fair game, too.

Updating:  here is a fine example of what I'm talking about.  Salon published an article by Amanda Marcotte in which "Salon hopes this story will offer clarity about what is and isn't true in the bizarre narratives swirling around Reade and her story. That clarity may also help answer the question of why the mainstream media has largely steered clear of this messy situation."  All well and good; but these are the questions Salon asks, and answers:

1. Is the mainstream media burying Reade's story out of loyalty to Biden and/or hatred of Sanders? That's unlikely. Here's why.

2. Did Time's Up refuse to help Reade as a political favor to Biden? Almost certainly not. 

3. Is Reade a Russian agent? That's also highly doubtful, and here's why.

4. Is Reade that mentally ill woman who was on "Dr. Phil" claiming Putin was going to marry her? Absolutely not.

5. What's the big takeaway here? There are several.

Some of that last category is worth quoting here:

Biden's communications director, Kate Bedingfield, said the allegations are false and issued this terse statement to Salon: "Women have a right to tell their story, and reporters have an obligation to rigorously vet those claims."

Yeah, we're back to "too wordy/not wordy enough" as an indication of what is an acceptable response.  It doesn't get better after that.

The story of Reade's allegations against Biden shows what can happen when the rigorous standards espoused by mainstream publications are sidestepped for a more credulous and politicized approach. The failure to vet this story methodically and to preemptively address its odder elements opened the door to a whirlwind of conspiracy theories and misinformation. 

"Rigorous standards" like the Vox reporter complained about?  Or the rigorous standards of the courtroom?  By comparison to the latter, the former are most certainly "a more credulous and politicized approach."

What can be said is that Reade's story is credible and compelling in some important ways, and also comes with a number of troubling red flags. For a variety of reasons it has not been taken seriously on a national level, but those reasons do not include a mainstream media conspiracy to protect Joe Biden. Rather than becoming the subject of serious investigation, this has instead become an occasion for die-hard supporters on both the Sanders and Biden sides to score points on one another online. Actual facts have been supplanted by reckless conspiracy theories spun by enthusiasts of both candidates. Whatever the facts of this case may be, the #MeToo movement deserves better than to be dragged into the sleaze like this. 

Who dragged MeToo into this?  Gee.....

And I've got to say, in my reading of articles about Reade, I haven't come across anything even making the accusations in those questions.  Maybe that stuff is current somewhere on "social media" (what isn't?), but it has as much to do with the accusations of Reade and the response of Biden as Facebook has to do with being a journalistic enterprise.  Or Salon, for that matter.  "Rigorous standards."  What a joke.