Current Events > Krystal Ball: NYT CAUGHT covering up Joe Biden #MeToo allegation!

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jTyYrJl5IiU

Krystal Ball slams The New York Times' coverage of Tara Reade's sexual assault allegation against Joe Biden.

Meanwhile, the NY Times ADMITS they took 19 days to finally report of Tara Reade's accusation of Joe Biden!

On March 25, Tara Reade, a former Senate aide for Joseph R. Biden Jr., alleged in an interview on a podcast that Mr. Biden, the presumptive Democratic presidential nominee, had sexually assaulted her in 1993.

The New York Times did not immediately report the allegation.

More than two weeks later, on April 12, The Times published an article by Lisa Lerer and Sydney Ember that included an interview with Ms. Reade detailing her claims. The article reported that a friend said that Ms. Reade had recounted the details of the alleged assault to her at the time, and that former Senate colleagues of Ms. Reade said they did not recall any talk of the episode. In the course of their reporting, the authors said, The Times found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Mr. Biden.

The timing of the article has been questioned by critics who say that a delay was a way to play down allegations against Mr. Biden in the midst of a race for the Democratic presidential nomination. Mr. Bidens allies, who strenuously deny Ms. Reades accusation, believe her allegation is not supported strongly enough to publish at all.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/13/business/media/joe-biden-tara-reade-new-york-times.html

Krystal Ball of The Hill points out the fact that The Times took TWO DAYS to cover Kavanaugh's accuser! Do you think the NYT successfully demonstrated a clear difference between the handling of both cases? Are they justified in doing so?

What do you think? Leave your comments and concerns below.
---

Can't wait to hear the political rhetoric if we find out both candidates are rapists.

---

It's the classic double standard. They don't believe the same standards apply to Democrats. Rules for thee but not for me.

Biden's will forever be credibly accused.

Joe Biden: Believe all women, chief.
*Tara Reade accuses Joe Biden of sexually assaulting her*
Joe Biden *nose buried in 12-year old girl's hair*: Err...not that woman jack. Umm...text JOIN to 3...3...0..3...3...3...0?

They conveniently release this story when Bernie drops out of the race

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ssnw2GA657s

---

I read this as Kristen Bell and was legitimately scared

---

Krystal Ball sounds like a great porn name.
---

Imagine taking time to fact-check before publishing an allegation (which is not proof of anything of course).

Obviously this is all a plot against Bernie, though.

Trump supporters don't care if this is true or not either, they are gladly using it against Biden.
---

Damn_Underscore posted...

Imagine taking time to fact-check before publishing an allegation (which is not proof of anything of course).

Obviously this is all a plot against Bernie, though.

Trump supporters don't care if this is true or not either, they are gladly using it against Biden.

But how come they took 2 days to report on Kavanaugh?
---

645AR posted...

But how come they took 2 days to report on Kavanaugh?

Biden's accuser has reason to be doubted - https://medium.com/@eddiekrassenstein/evidence-casts-doubt-on-tara-reades-sexual-assault-allegations-of-joe-biden-e4cb3ee38460

I don't know if Kavanaugh's accusers did. Still doesn't mean he is guilty though, especially as nothing ever happened with those allegations as far as I know.
---

Damn_Underscore posted...

eddiekrassenstein

Lmao
---

hockeybub89 posted...

Can't wait to hear the political rhetoric if we find out both candidates are rapists.

"find out"

Questionmarktarius posted...

"find out"

Fair point

---

Ok, if you don't like that article how about this one. Its conclusion is that her story is credible but also has a few red flags.

https://www.salon.com/2020/03/31/a-woman-accuses-joe-biden-of-sexual-assault-and-all-hell-breaks-loose-online-heres-what-we-know/

First thing it covers is the mainstream media supposedly covering up the story.
---

hockeybub89 posted...

Can't wait to hear the political rhetoric if we find out both candidates are rapists.

My rapist can beat up your rapist

---

Damn_Underscore posted...

Ok, if you don't like that article how about this one. Its conclusion is that her story is credible but also has a few red flags.

https://www.salon.com/2020/03/31/a-woman-accuses-joe-biden-of-sexual-assault-and-all-hell-breaks-loose-online-heres-what-we-know/

First thing it covers is the mainstream media supposedly covering up the story.

adblocker detected

save me the trouble what were those "red flags" ?
---

The article dismisses any connection to Russia, but says the fact that her story over time plus the fact that her escalation of allegations and her increased support of Bernie happened at the same time was enough for mainstream media sources to fact-check the story before publishing it.

From here, I'm not sure how it would be possible to prove the allegations true or false. Basically you want them to be true or you don't. And of course the legal and social statute of innocent until proven guilty exists for good reason.
---

NYT Executive Editor Appears To Admit Edit On Biden Sexual Assault Allegation Came After Pressure From Biden Campaign
https://dailycaller.com/2020/04/13/new-york-times-dean-baquet-joe-biden-tara-reade-sexual-assault-article-edit/

Dean Baquet, executive editor of the New York Times, appeared to admit Monday that the publication was pressured by former Vice President Joe Bidens campaign after editing a story about sexual assault allegations against him.

The NYTs Sunday article, titled Examining Tara Reades Sexual Assault Allegation Against Joe Biden, told the story of allegations made by the former Biden staffer. Reade has accused Biden of sexually assaulting her in 1993 while he was the senator for Delaware.

The article originally contained a sentence that was quietly edited out following publication.

No other allegation about sexual assault surfaced in the course of our reporting, nor did any former Biden staff corroborate Reades allegation. We found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Biden, beyond hugs, kisses and touching that women previously said made them uncomfortable, the NYT first reported.

The second half of the sentence was later edited out and the paragraph was changed.

No other allegation about sexual assault surfaced in the course of reporting, nor did any former Biden staff members corroborate any details of Ms. Reades allegation. The Times found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Mr. Biden, the NYT article now reads.

There was no note included about the change.

NYTs media reporter Ben Smith interviewed Baquet about the article Monday. Smiths article about the interview is titled The Times Took 19 Days to Report an Accusation Against Biden. Heres Why.

One of Smiths questions was about the much-noticed edit made to the piece, and Baquet appeared to admit that the NYT was swayed by the Biden campaign to remove it.

Even though a lot of us, including me, had looked at it before the story went into the paper, I think that the campaign thought that the phrasing was awkward and made it look like there were other instances in which he had been accused of sexual misconduct, Baquet said. And thats not what the sentence was intended to say.

her escalation of allegations and her increased support of Bernie happened at the same time was enough for mainstream media sources to fact-check the story before publishing it.

how is a rape accuser's political views relevant to the double standard in which the NYT decides to report for alleged rapists?
---

Is this about the woman who said that when she first met Joe Biden he immediately started finger ****ing her in public?

---

bump
---

---

Top kek

BawdySausage posted...

And thats not what the sentence was intended to say.

---

Regardless of what the sentence was "intended to say", inappropriate kissing, hugging and touching of employees is not something to defend.
---

Smashingpmkns posted...

Regardless of what the sentence was "intended to say", inappropriate kissing, hugging and touching of employees is not something to defend.

The point was those actions were already reported in the article, and they are saying "beyond the things already mentioned, nothing more was found".

People then hopped on it, because out of context it sounds like a damning statement. But that's just a bullshit gotchya.

---

BawdySausage posted...

It's the classic double standard. They don't believe the same standards apply to Democrats. Rules for thee but not for me.

Lmao this is a rich vein of irony

---

COVxy posted...

The point was those actions were already reported in the article, and they are saying "beyond the things already mentioned, nothing more was found".

People then hopped on it, because out of context it sounds like a damning statement. But that's just a bullshit gotchya.

They were originally reported in the article, then taken out.

"No other allegation about sexual assault surfaced in the course of our reporting, nor did any former Biden staff corroborate Reades allegation. We found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Biden, beyond hugs, kisses and touching that women previously said made them uncomfortable, the NYT first reported.

The second half of the sentence was later edited out and the paragraph was changed.

No other allegation about sexual assault surfaced in the course of reporting, nor did any former Biden staff members corroborate any details of Ms. Reades allegation. The Times found no pattern of sexual misconduct by Mr. Biden, the NYT article now reads."

---

Houston posted...

They were originally reported in the article, then taken out

I understand how the article was edited very well.

---

Bernie supporters should realize that Trump supporters are jumping all over this story; they don't care whether it's true or not, it helps Trump's reelection.

Perhaps you should at least care whether it's true or not?
---

To be fair, Kavanaugh's accuser claimed that he had tried to have drunken sex with her in college at a party. That is way more credible an accusation then claiming Biden fingered a woman in broad daylight in the Capitol building that he had never met before on the first time that she ever approached him.

In general every accusation should be thoroughly vetted before running it as a headline story and worrying about the retraction later, but in terms of basic believability the Kavanaugh case at least made way more sense.

---

I feel sorry for that woman blowing the whistle on Biden.

---

CrazyandLazy posted...

I feel sorry for that woman blowing the whistle on Biden.

Donald Trump is a rapist

---

s0nicfan posted...

To be fair, Kavanaugh's accuser claimed that he had tried to have drunken sex with her in college at a party. That is way more credible an accusation then claiming Biden fingered a woman in broad daylight in the Capitol building that he had never met before on the first time that she ever approached him.

In general every accusation should be thoroughly vetted before running it as a headline story and worrying about the retraction later, but in terms of basic believability the Kavanaugh case at least made way more sense.

If I remember correctly, Kavanaugh's accuser named about 4 witnesses to at least corroborate her claim there was a party, but those witnesses could not corroborate her claim that there was such a party.

COVxy posted...

The point was those actions were already reported in the article, and they are saying "beyond the things already mentioned, nothing more was found".

People then hopped on it, because out of context it sounds like a damning statement. But that's just a bullshit gotchya.

This gets pointed out in pretty much every topic on the subject, yet the same posters are found in a topic the next day posting the same bullshit.



---

Krystal Ball
Tara Reade

wtf are these aliases

---