"Tends to dissemble," Times says: Yesterday, under cover of mayhem, the New York Times ran a lengthy front-page report concerning Tara Reade.
In the understatement of the century, three Times reporters say this:
RUTENBERG, SAUL AND LERER (6/1/20): In many ways, The Times’s findings comport with the autobiography Ms. Reade, now 56, has rendered in cinematic detail across blog posts, online essays and court statements. But in the dramatic retelling of her life story she has also shown a tendency to embellish—a role as a movie extra is presented as a break; her title of “staff assistant” with clerical responsibilities in Mr. Biden’s office becomes “legislative assistant” when his shepherding of the Violence Against Women Act is an asset for her expert-witness testimony in court.At this point, saying that Reade has displayed "a tendency to embellish" is akin to saying that swordfish have a tendency to be found at various spots in the ocean.
In our view, people who "have [fairly obvious] problems" shouldn't be trashed for that fact. But the Times records examples of Reade's "embellishing" which go on and on and on and on, as have other news orgs which have explored the outlines of her life.
By now, you'd have to be crazy to think of Reade as someone whose word a person can trust. Having said that, where does someone like Biden go to get his reputation back? And when will Professors Mann and Hirshman be asked to explain what they think of their latest truth-teller now?
The answer to that last question is simple. The professors will never be asked, and they'll never be criticized or critiqued for their knee-jerk insistence that Reade's claim about Biden should be believed. At this point, the higher-end liberal world will simply sidle away from Reade, and everyone will agree to forget how deeply unwise our highest-end academic elites have once again turned out to be.
The Times report goes on and on with accounts from the three million people Reade has duped in the past. Along the way, the three reporters engage in some classic examples of journalistic bad judgment.
Please don't make us discuss them. But by the way, make no mistake:
The next time an accuser comes along to insert herself into a White House campaign, the usual suspects will once again stand in line to insist that we have to believe her.
(If it's plain that she's seeking a massive pay day, we'll dub her a "feminist icon!")
Our tribe is skilled at spotting the lunacy which takes place in the other tribe. We refuse to see our own foolishness, and our own tribe's foolishness is viral, virile and vast.
We're dumb as rocks, and at the same time we're convinced of our tribe's sacred narratives. Nothing will ever cure us of that, and the others can see this about us.
Way back when, Emily Bazelon warned the well-behaved boys with whom she spoke that Reade might turn out to be be a "liar" or that she might "have problems." We're disinclined to savage people who have problems, but the problems of people like Mann and Hirshman will never be going away.
The true beliefs of our truest believers have caused the deaths of people all over the world. They helped elect Bush, then they helped elect Trump. But they are never going to stop, and we dummies will never rebuke them.
Go ahead—read the report. It goes on for quite a long time.
How do you like your blue-eyed [accuser] now? The Post's Paul Farhi asked Ryan Grim. You can read all about it here.
"Go ahead—read the report. It goes on for quite a long time."
ReplyDeleteDear Bob, why would anyone want to read a bunch of smears produced by your zombie cult to rehabilitate Rapist Joe, your cult's VIP?
Unless, of course, you're a dembot in need of the latest zombie cult's talking points.
“But the Times records examples of Reade's "embellishing" which go on and on and on and on, as have other news orgs which have explored the outlines of her life.”
ReplyDeleteIn his post, Somerby shows yet another example of solid background reporting on Reade. Thus, journalists doing good journalism. Even the anti-press narrative doesn’t apply here.
Then he drags out his same two (2) professorial punching bags, Manne and Hirshman, in order to say this:
“We're dumb as rocks, and at the same time we're convinced of our tribe's sacred narratives.”
And he cites literally only TWO “liberals” who claimed they believed Reade, ignoring the many liberal voices who did not believe her.
Is it any wonder why Somerby is viewed essentially as an asshole?
where can Somerby go to get his reputation back?
DeleteYou need to have had one to get it back.
DeleteI want to share a testimony of how Dr OSAGIE herbal mixture cream saved me from shame and disgrace, my penis was a big problem to me as the size was really so embarrassing ,and i was also having weak erection problem i had so many relationship called off because of my situation,m i have used so many product which i found online but none could offer me the help i searched for Which was very painful and then i saw some few testimonies about this herbal specialist called Dr OSAGIE and decided to email him on so I gave his herbal product a try. i emailed him and he got back to me and we discussed, he gave me some comforting words and encouraged me also ans then gave me his herbal pills and cream for Penis Enlargement Within 1 week of it, i began to feel the enlargement of my penis, " and now it just 2 weeks of using his products my penis is about 9.7 inches longer and am so happy contact Dr OSAGIE via drosagiesolutionhome5 @ gmail. com Via whatapp +2348034778129.
Delete"where does someone like Biden go to get his reputation back?"
ReplyDeleteA reputation isn't solely based on what others say about you. It is based on your own behavior, the actions other people see that contradict false statements about you. Your reputation is based on your behavior, your choices, over a lifetime.
You can try to discredit another person's claims about you, but if others have firsthand experience with you, your discrediting remarks will have less weight (or more weight if your behavior has been inconsistent with reports about you).
So, Biden has contributed to his reputation by being excessively handsy and occasioning complaints about his touching. That lends credence to Reade, above and beyond her own reputation for truthfulness (or dissembling). Just as Trump's obvious public behavior toward women undermines any claim he might have to be respectful toward women.
This is why anyone who has observed Hillary Clinton's behavior over the years knows that it is vanishingly unlikely that she was a secret pedophile or murdered Vince Jordan, or even hung dildos from her White House Christmas tree.
Somerby, however, thinks you have to stomp all over these claims made by women who were either troubled or paid off or both, in case someone might believe them. Who believes stuff like this? People who already have a reason to dislike a candidate. In other words, Hillary haters, Biden detractors, and all conservatives and Republicans, for obvious reasons.
Your reputation is based on your behavior, your choices, over a lifetime.
DeleteIf that were ever true, it certainly isn’t true today. Reputations are often based on claims made in cyberspace. Google “worst aunt ever story” or listen to the Contrapoints YouTube channel.
So, Biden has contributed to his reputation by being excessively handsy and occasioning complaints about his touching. That lends credence to Reade,….
Thanks for making my point for me, professor. For reasonable people,nothing that Biden has ever done in public to invade people’s personal space lends credence to Reade’s claim that he raped her.
And you don’t have to “observe” Clinton’s behavior to dismiss obviously absurd claims that she ran a pedophile ring or killed anyone.
By the way, who’s Vince Jordan? Do you mean Vernon Jordan, the Clinton’s friend and advisor? Because he’s not dead. Do you mean Vince Foster, who served as Clinton’s Deputy White House Counsel? Your ignorance has no bottom.
Somerby, however, thinks you have to stomp all over these claims made by women who were either troubled or paid off or both, in case someone might believe them.
Serious, evidence-free charges made by anybody who’s troubled or grifting should be treated with suspicion, dontchathink professor?
“when will Professors Mann and Hirshman be asked to explain what they think of their latest truth-teller now?”
ReplyDeleteIt must be a mark of pride that Somerby is said not to read his reader comments.
I posted this a while back, from Manne’s twitter:
“In a piece for The Nation a few weeks ago, I wrote that "Reade’s testimony is evidence that the sexual assault occurred, though there remains room to disagree on its strength or probative value." There's also room to change one's mind when new evidence comes to light.
In light of recent evidence that raises serious doubts about Reade's credibility, I no longer feel sure of what/whom to believe. And though I'm sure nobody is awaiting my revised credence with baited breath, and it will anger many people, I wanted to be forthcoming about this
I stand by my original claim that Joe Biden has behaved in seriously creepy, disturbing ways toward women, and my dismay that he's the presumptive Democratic Party nominee. But I no longer think he should step aside, and apologize for having said he ought to in print.
But it would be disingenuous for me not to publicly acknowledge that there are far more serious problems with Reade's word than is typically the case with victims--who of course do not have to be perfect, but do have to be credible.”
https://twitter.com/kate_manne/status/1264006448821960710
By the way, Somerby could ask Manne and Hirshman himself to explain themselves, if he were to be active on Twitter.
And I believe I commented on your post a while back.
DeleteManne shouted an accusation in a national publication and now whispers in a tweet that she might be mistaken. Color me unimpressed about how “forthcoming” she is, especially as she’s only apologizing for demanding that Biden step aside.
Somerby wondered what Manne thought about her “truth-teller” now. Manne’s tweet informs him (and us) about that. But he of course ignored it.
DeleteWhether you find her tweet unimpressive isn’t the issue. The issue is honesty (Somerby’s).
What’s “at issue” is your case of Corby syndrome, the inability to read for comprehension.
DeleteTDH didn’t wonder what Manne thinks about Reade. Paul Farhi (a reporter for the Washington Post) wrote about what Ryan Grim (DC Bureau Chief for the soi disant “news organization” The Intercept) thinks about Reade.
TDH said that Manne won’t be called to account for her egregious misbehavior. And she won’t, her whispered non-apology on twitter notwithstanding.
“Called to account?” By whom? Liberal Central Headquarters? She stated that she finds Reade not credible now. Her initial opinion piece was ill-advised. But she has modified her views and apologized. At this point, what else can she do? But that won’t appease Somerby. He will ignore her updated mea culpa in order to continue promoting his narrative, that tribal reaction will never be modified or disputed.
Delete"egregious misbehavior"
DeleteShe expressed an opinion. She and everyone else has a first amendment right to do so.
Somerby can disagree with Manne but calling her opinion "egregious misbehavior" is undemocratic.
Called to account by others with access to the press.
DeleteActually, I’m the only one here who won’t be appeased by Manne’s “apology.” TDH is complaining that others with a platform won’t call her out.
So expressing a critical opinion of someone else's opinion is "undemocratic"? Please explain that to me, Anonymous Snowflake @9:36P.
DeleteYou called her opinion "misbehavior". That is the undemocratic part. If you called her mistaken that would focus on the content of her opinion and your disagreement with it. But you called her statement "misbehavior" when she has as much right to express herself as anyone else.
DeleteChoose your words more carefully, deadrat. If you don't mean to be saying that she has no right to speak, don't use a word like "misbehavior." Manne did nothing wrong.
I don’t think the words misbehavior and democratic mean what you think they mean.
DeleteYou can do, write, and say harmful things that are perfectly within your right to do, write, and say. I don’t see the problem with classifying those harmful things as misbehavior.
I don’t advocate for either censorship or punishment of expression. Quite the opposite, and no sensible person would jump to the opposite conclusion. Which is why I spelled it out especially for you.
Clear now?
“where does someone like Biden go to get his reputation back?”
ReplyDeleteYou mean, his reputation for being awful, as stated by TDH?
His reputation for not being a rapist.
DeleteBut you knew that, right?
Yeah, deadrat. I knew that.
DeleteA lot of liberals were down on Biden during the primaries. They really wanted someone else. But now that he is the presumptive nominee, they have dropped their bashing of Biden in order to highlight the good things he has said and done lately, because they really want Trump gone.
Somerby continues unabated with his “Biden is awful” line. Excuse me if his defense of Biden against Reade’s charges while at the same time continuing to bash Biden and all liberals rings hollow.
Sorry, I don't see how defending someone against a false charge of rape is somehow inconsistent with thinking that same person is an awful candidate for President. Perhaps you could explain in your usual hilarious manner.
Delete" Having said that, where does someone like Biden go to get his reputation back?"
ReplyDeleteHarvey Weinstein went to Black Cube and the New York Post.
Jeffrey Epstein went to Harvard and MIT.
Joe Biden went to the NY Times.
The more things change the more things stay the same.
"The true beliefs of our truest believers have caused the deaths of people all over the world." This said in defense of the guy who lied about and is still lying about his role in getting us into the Iraq War. The Howler's cynicism is monumental.
Our dear Bob worships the lying, smooth-talking, pretentious kind, a-la Bubba the Demigod Clinton.
DeleteHe feels, for some reason, that the truthful/outspoken ones are insane and dangerous.
Alas, that's Bob's worldview. He's a liberal, after all.
I often follow and read articles every day, it's very helpful to me, and I just want to say thank you very much "Thank you very much".
ReplyDeletemulțumesc pentru actualizare. distribuiți un articol unic. împărtășim toate cele mai târzii subtitrate în română MIREASA
ReplyDelete.
ReplyDeleteAnimeid has been termed as the best content service providers , as this service is one of the common and fundamental required service for almost all Romania tv shows. Get in touch with us for the best services.
We are helping thousands of immigrants to come, live, and study in Canada. Canada is full of opportunities for people all over the globe. We are providing our best services around the globe as well we are based and providing canada immigration services dufferin and all over the Canadian cities, we are committed to providing you with quality service and up to date information you deserve in order to help you immigrate to Canada in the easiest and most efficient manner. If you want to know about me please check this https://immigrationmatters.info/ Have a wonderful time
ReplyDelete