Secretary of Senate declines to disclose information on Tara Reade complaint against Biden

  
Via:  sister-mary-agnes-ample-bottom  •  3 weeks ago  •  23 comments

By:   Alexander Bolton (MSN)

Secretary of Senate declines to disclose information on Tara Reade complaint against Biden
The Secretary of the Senate has informed Vice President Joe Biden that it has "no discretion to disclose" the existence of former aide Tara Reade's complaint of sexual harassment against the senator in 1993.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T



The Secretary of the Senate has informed Vice President Joe Biden that it has "no discretion to disclose" the existence of former aide Tara Reade's complaint of sexual harassment against the senator in 1993.

Biden gave his first media interview Friday denying Reade's allegation that he pushed her against a wall and sexually assaulted her in 1993 when she worked for him.

On Friday he wrote to the Secretary of the Senate Julie Adams asking "that you take or direct whatever steps are necessary to establish the location of the records of this Office, and once they have been located, to direct a search for the alleged complaint and to make public the results of this search."

The office in a statement provided to The Hill said the Senate Legal Counsel has advised the "Secretary has no discretion to disclose any such information as requested in Vice President Biden's letter of May 1."

Reade said she filed a complaint with the Senate 27 years ago alleging sexual harassment and raising concerns about possible retaliation but admitted over the weekend that she's not sure what precise language she used.

The Senate's legal office reviewed the records of the Office of Senate Fair Employment Practices, the Government Employee Rights Act of 1991 and the Civil Rights Act of 1991.

The office determined that any complaint filed against Biden could not be made public "based on the law's strict confidentiality requirements (Section 313) and the Senate's own direction that disclosure of Senate Records is not authorized if prohibited by law."


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
[]
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
1  seeder  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom    3 weeks ago

Biden has welcomed an investigation, and now he can't even obtain a key document that could throw more doubt on Miss Reade's account.  For the Senate Secretary to refuse the request makes Miss Reade's current account more...problematic.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
2  Sean Treacy    3 weeks ago

Imagine a guy who's been in the Senate since it began not knowing that.   It's almost like he wanted to create the appearance of doing an investigation without doing one.

  The complaint should however be in his professional papers located at the University of Delaware. He sent his staff to look through those docs in March. He could always make his own records public, but as he said, they contain things that could be used against him. Can't have that.

 
 
 
JohnRussell
3  JohnRussell    3 weeks ago

More likely the papers in the Senate archive dont show anything corroborating Reade's story and that is why they are not being released.

 
 
 
squiggy
3.1  squiggy  replied to  JohnRussell @3    3 weeks ago

They can’t be released because of rules Biden could be reasonably expected to have known - when he was blowing smoke at the camera.

 
 
 
MrFrost
4  MrFrost    3 weeks ago

256

 
 
 
Perrie Halpern R.A.
4.1  Perrie Halpern R.A.  replied to  MrFrost @4    3 weeks ago

Exactly.

 
 
 
MrFrost
4.1.1  MrFrost  replied to  Perrie Halpern R.A. @4.1    3 weeks ago

This supposedly happened 27 years ago... And at the time, she didn't raise so much as a red flag? And since that time, she has gone to bat for Biden on twitter MANY times. Why stick up for someone that assaulted you? Very atypical behavior. 

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
4.1.2  Sean Treacy  replied to  MrFrost @4.1.1    3 weeks ago

the irony here is off the charts...

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
4.1.3  seeder  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.1.2    3 weeks ago
the irony here is off the charts..

Not really, Sean.  Kavanaugh's accuser never wavered on details.  Ms. Ford wanted to remain anonymous because she was embarrassed and humiliated by what happened all those years ago. It was clear that she had no personal agenda.  Kavanaugh never once said, "Please investigate!  I welcome any measures that would clear my name!"  BTW:  Where is Mr. "A 'devil's triangle' is a drinking game" now?  Oh yeah, that's right, he's sitting on the Supreme Court of the United States, still wagging his dick in the faces of every woman he has assaulted over the years.    

Miss Reade's story lacked traction right up until the moment she added the penetrating fingers part.  Joe Biden has not only publicly welcomed an investigation, he is cooperating in every way possible.  Blocking the release of a key document that could certainly throw doubt on Miss Reade's story, sounds a lot like...forcing witnesses to ignore subpoenas, blocking the release of financial statements, etc.  Trump is an idiot, but one thing he understands is the power of the appearance of impropriety.  It's all he has left in his re-election arsenal. 

    

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
4.1.4  Sean Treacy  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @4.1.3    3 weeks ago
avanaugh's accuser never wavered on details. 

You might want to go back and look at that.  Her story was constantly evolving.

The attack, at various times, was alleged to have happened in the early 80s, the mid 80s and late 80s, depending on when she told the story. The number of people present varied. Sometimes 4 guys. Sometimes 3 guys and a girl. She didn't settle on a final version until she talked to lawyers. All of the people who she claimed were present, of course, deny being present at the party. And her friend Leylend Keyser said she was pressured to lie to support Forde's version.

Not to mention the lies she told about flying, putting escape rooms in her house etc.

She didn't tell anyone for decades. Witnesses say Reade told them at the time. Her mother went on Larry King in 1993.  Reade has more corroboration that Forde does. There's not even any corroborating evidence from anyone that Forde actually met Kavanaugh. 

But the irony is watching the champions of Avenetti dispute this claim, or any allegation. It's like they don't remember the craziness they were spewing in 2018.  

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
4.1.5  seeder  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  Sean Treacy @4.1.4    3 weeks ago
All of the people who she claimed were present, of course, deny being present at the party.

Sean, they didn't deny being present, they said that they didn't remember that particular gathering. 

From Leylend Keyser's attorney:  

"However, as my client has already made clear, she does not know Judge Kavanaugh and has no recollection of ever being at a party or gathering where he was present, with, or without, Dr. Ford," the letter from Howard Walsh, Keyser's attorney, said. It continued that Keyser "does not refute Dr. Ford's account, and she has already told the press that she believes Dr. Ford's account."  (emphasis mine)

Christine Blasey Ford has never waivered from the details of what happened when she was attacked.  A woman doesn't forget something so heinous.  She might try to bury it down deep, but it is always with her.  

Also, did you hear the recording of Reade's mother on CNN?  I did.  When asked why her daughter didn't go to the authorities about the claim, she said that her daughter had too much respect for Joe Biden to take her claim any further.  Pardon me, but no real sexual assault victim would have even the smallest bit of respect for the one who assaulted them.

And perhaps I'm having a senior moment, but what does Michael Avenetti have to do with Tara Reade?  I'm pretty sure he is still in prison.

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
4.1.6  Sean Treacy  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @4.1.5    3 weeks ago
t deny being present, they said that they didn't remember that particular gathering.

That's word salad. No one, including her friend, rembers the party described by Ford.  So of course they deny being present at the events descibed by Ford.

Keyser, under penalty of felony, said she doesn't recall ever seeing Kavanaugh at  a party and told the New York Times that Forde's story doesn't make any sense.

No comment on Ford's friends trying to force Keyser to lie, and call her an addict if she didn't tell lies in support of Ford? 

hristine Blasey Ford has never waivered from the details o

Yes, she has. I've detailed some of her changes. The opposite is true. She's changed essentially all the detiails. 

n doesn't forget something so heinous.  She might try to bury it down deep, but it is always with her

Unless she's accusing a Democrat.  Then's she lying, right?

, but no real sexual assault victim would have even the smallest bit of respect for the one who assaulted them.

Really? That's not what experts say. Trauma does strange things to people. Remember all the victims who continued to work with and praise Harvey Weinstein? 

 but what does Michael Avenetti have to do with Tara Reade?  

Again, I was pointing out the same people who unquestioningly championed his claims about Kavanaugh's rape gang are now talking about due process and weighing evidence. 

 
 
 
Ender
5  Ender    3 weeks ago

I had read it is just going around in circles. The national archive says the senate has it, the senate says the general service administration and the general service administration says the national archives.

I would think at least if there was/is a complaint against Biden, he would be able to see it. One would think if one is accused of something, they would be able to see the complaint against them.

 
 
 
Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom
6.1  seeder  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom  replied to  MrFrost @6    3 weeks ago

Holy shit!  I'm not even half-way through reading, and I have both eyeballs spinning in one socket!  Whether it is all true or not remains to be seen, but Holy Shit! nonetheless. 

 
 
 
Ender
6.1.1  Ender  replied to  Sister Mary Agnes Ample Bottom @6.1    3 weeks ago

Same here. I am only about half way through and I think she is nuts.

 
 
 
Ender
6.2  Ender  replied to  MrFrost @6    3 weeks ago

Starting to come together.

An actress that loved mother Russia.

 
 
 
MrFrost
6.2.1  MrFrost  replied to  Ender @6.2    3 weeks ago

An actress that loved mother Russia.

I wasn't going to bring that up but yea, looks like she has a "fondness" for Russia and Putin. 

 
 
 
Ender
6.2.2  Ender  replied to  MrFrost @6.2.1    3 weeks ago

I thought this was very telling...

512

 
 
 
Raven Wing
6.2.3  Raven Wing  replied to  Ender @6.2.2    3 weeks ago

Yeah...as if she knew well ahead that there was something in the works coming up. It has all been well planned and timed for effect.

However, as she seems to be talking in circles about what she said then and such, it will likely blow back in her face. If what she says actually happened, she would be able to remember every tiny detail of what happened when, where, how and by who without any hesitation at all.

So I know that if what she is trying to say really happened, there would be no question of what she does and does not remember. The only thing that leaves room for forgetfulness of those kind of happenings.....is a lie.

 
 
 
igknorantzrulz
6.2.4  igknorantzrulz  replied to  MrFrost @6.2.1    3 weeks ago

I wasn't going to bring that up but yea, looks like she has a "fondness" for Russia and Putin. 

Say it is not so,

there could not be any sort of connection to Trumpp, woman, Biden their time and a Russian Country woman, from another country, screwin around for Trump, and probably being paid more than his $130,000 usual payment to for his Porno for pyrotechnicalities & insurmountable wall mounts, pausing ,playmates, and lawyers that count on accountants to back their no credibility ability , for Dis ability Trumps Dat ability to divide along the lines of credibility as it is in credible that we are discussing this yet once again, as just another, amongst a few thousand, FRCKN  Coincidents that are probably just more coincidenses that are probably,

just coincidentally,

was another coincidence ,

but,

i'm pretty sure, 

just a coincidence. 

 
 
 
squiggy
7  squiggy    3 weeks ago

Say, “University of Delaware” and watch him wiggle.

 
 
 
Split Personality
7.1  Split Personality  replied to  squiggy @7    3 weeks ago
The complaint should however be in his professional papers located at the University of Delaware

If you donated your "professional" crap to a University and expected graduate students to organize and catalog it for future use, why, oh why, would you include something potentially embarrassing or criminal ?

It makes no sense.

If he did this, the evidence would have disappeared 30 years ago.

I have it on good authority that Lyndsey Graham will vouch for Joe Biden no matter what, along with several other Senators and long time House members.

Even Newt Gingrich demurs from Biden criticism other than dementia, lol.

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online


Eat The Press Do Not Read It
Kathleen
evilgenius


49 visitors