and this is not nit-pick at her..... there are probably at least 50-100 allegations against her, if not more ..... apparently, her lying is going to give a bunch of convicts a good reason to appeal their convictions. think about that.

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/0...ntances-260771

http://ascammersnightmareisjustice.b...-part-one.html

that part 1 is so large and so bad......... and there are 2 more parts to come.

just a history of constant lying and scamming.

the other specific allegation against biden,............. OOOOPS

On May 1st, the web site Law & Crime reported that a New Jersey woman, Eva Murry, had come forward on Facebook with a story of being sexually harassed by Biden in 2008 as a 14-year-old. Murry said that she met Biden while attending the First State Gridiron Dinner & Show—an annual Delaware event for politicians, journalists, and business figures—with her aunt Christine O’Donnell, a conservative Republican who’d made a quixotic run against Biden that year. According to Murry, the senator asked how old she was and then remarked that she was very “well-endowed” for her age. Law & Crime also reported that Murry’s sister and five friends had confirmed she told them about the incident soon after it happened.


And then the story imploded when it was just a few hours old. The dinner organizers unequivocally stated that Biden did not attend the event that year, but had sent a video instead. Moreover, news stories from that period showed he had just undergone surgery for a deviated septum and was still in recovery when the dinner took place. O’Donnell tried to salvage the story by claiming the incident might have happened in 2007 or 2009, even though Murry’s original Facebook post was quite specific about the date. (It turned out that Biden also had a rock-solid alibi for 2007 and likely wasn’t at the 2009 event, when he was already vice president.)

Did Murry lie to her friends years ago in an attempt to smear her aunt’s opponent, or did she invent the story this year? Did her friends lie to back her up? Did their conversations nudge them toward recalling something that didn’t happen? It’s impossible to tell. But this brief episode should serve as a disturbing reminder that false accusations do happen—and that contemporaneous statements to other people should not necessarily be treated as corroboration.

* * *
https://quillette.com/2020/05/14/tar...-believewomen/

reade claims her ex-husband was deemed a "person of interest" in 2 "disappearance of women" cases by the FBI based on DNA testing.

the FBI would be sharing this info with Reade.... they'd be testing his DNA based on his case with Reade. his only exposure to the criminal system

Why isn't this dog **** locked by the conservative are stupid is?

Reades mom called Larry King right after it happened.

Now do kavanaugh

wHy DoNt MoAr WoMeN cOmE fOrWaRd?

She called in to report "problems" in the office she left, which we later found out she was fired from for throwing away mail.

Bear in mind she's just been fired for throwing away and not being able to sort mail. Are we to believe the "problems" are sexual assault, and if so why would you do anything out of "respect" for your rapist?

It's amazing how the much people just throw common sense out the window when politics are concerned. She got fired, made up an excuse to her mother about being harassed or bullied (something she doesn't countless times in her life), and her mom calls into Larry King. I don't doubt that she talked about Harassment to her mom, but I seriously, seriously doubt assault was mentioned just by the words and tone of her mom's voice. You'd be outraged if that happened, and wouldn't be refusing to go to the press out of respect for your rapist.

His main accuser passed a polygraph. He was asked repeatedly if he would do the same but dodged the question.

He's guilty.

Looks like she could be doing calendar time soon.

So she takes money as an expert witness, then lied her butt off under oath. As a result several attorneys are looking to get cases where she testified overturned.

She also lied about working with Biden on the Violence Against Women Act (she worked in the mail room):

LOL, How to Pass a Polygraph Test., Christine Blasey Fords Ex-Boyfriend Says She Cooached a Friend on How to Pass a Polygraph, Polygraphs

Quote:

Effectiveness[edit]
Although there is some debate in the scientific community regarding the efficacy of polygraphs, assessments of polygraphy by scientific and government bodies generally suggest that polygraphs are inaccurate, may be defeated by countermeasures, and are an imperfect or invalid means of assessing truthfulness.[6][7][8] Despite claims of 90% validity by polygraph advocates, the National Research Council has found no evidence of effectiveness.[7][18] In particular, studies have indicated that the relevant–irrelevant questioning technique is not ideal, as many innocent subjects exert a heightened physiological reaction to the crime-relevant questions.[2] The American Psychological Association states "Most psychologists agree that there is little evidence that polygraph tests can accurately detect lies."[10]

In 1991, two thirds of the scientific community who have the requisite background to evaluate polygraph procedures considered polygraphy to be pseudoscience.[19] In 2002, a review by the National Research Council found that, in populations "untrained in countermeasures, specific-incident polygraph tests can discriminate lying from truth telling at rates well above chance, though well below perfection". The review also warns against generalization from these findings to justify the use of polygraphs—"polygraph accuracy for screening purposes is almost certainly lower than what can be achieved by specific-incident polygraph tests in the field"—and notes some examinees may be able to take countermeasures to produce deceptive results.[20]

In the 1998 US Supreme Court case United States v. Scheffer, the majority stated that "There is simply no consensus that polygraph evidence is reliable" and "Unlike other expert witnesses who testify about factual matters outside the jurors' knowledge, such as the analysis of fingerprints, ballistics, or DNA found at a crime scene, a polygraph expert can supply the jury only with another opinion." The Supreme Court summarized their findings by stating that the use of polygraph was "little better than could be obtained by the toss of a coin."[21] In 2005, the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals stated that "polygraphy did not enjoy general acceptance from the scientific community".[22] In 2001, William Iacono, Professor of Psychology and Neuroscience at the University of Minnesota, concluded that:

Look, calling Biden a sex offender based on this is absurd. He has a presumption of innocence. So does Kavanaugh.

The #MeToo is about believing women in meeting a standard below “beyond a reasonable doubt.” If you are relying on polygraph testing as the standard I think you need to rethink that. But we know what your standard is though, Democrats support Biden so Reade is a fraud. Republicans support Kavanaugh so Blasey Ford is truthful. **** your standard.

Except what is the point of a large scale disinformation operation to discredit Kavanaugh? If he doesn't get appointed, Trump nominates someone just as bad or worse, new guy gets appointed. I fail to see the pay-off. Not the same thing at all as discrediting a presidential candidate.

Also, Blasey Ford testified under oath in congress. I thought right wingers were big on how Kavanaugh wasn't lying because he was under oath - does the same not apply to her?

I know none of you fake lefties here, or the other place, have any actual principles or beliefs and like to weaponize stories like the Tara Reade one. Even when the story was changing on a weekly basis. Now that her story is falling apart and real vetting of it has begun, where are you at?

https://apnews.com/cdedc73ba8bf31dcf1c8193ce479a8de

It's mighty brave of you and the others to jeopardize the #metoo movement because you had no vested interest in it and don't want anybody but Bernie. Even after Tara Reade or Alexandra McCabe's story was showing signs of having holes in it (changing it from "touching" on April 3rd to sexual assault in March), you and other fake people continued to roll in the mud with it.

Lets face it. You have no real values, and you're white.

Victoar still believes Tara, due to corroborating witnesses.

Abovethelaw article about how the left media botched everything related to this story.

Halper/Grim/Robinson are not journalists, and the folks like Brie Joy and any of the Young Turks who trying to signal-boost this should be ashamed of themselves.