• Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
  • We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.

kittenbreath

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
657
I hear O'Donnell is saying it might have been in 2007.
twitter.com

andrew kaczynski🤔 on Twitter

“Christine O'Donnell says this might have occurred another year now, says specifically 2007. Though it's unclear to me if Biden attended this year either. His calendar on his campaign website on the Web Archive and it indicate he was in Iowa this whole day. https://t.co/XyzrP7Hl7T”
Biden was in Iowa the whole day on May 5th, 2007 lol

Biden being able to clear himself because he was at an ice cream parlor at the time is the detail the elevates this story to unintentional hilarity
 

less

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,838
I hear O'Donnell is saying it might have been in 2007.
twitter.com

andrew kaczynski🤔 on Twitter

“Christine O'Donnell says this might have occurred another year now, says specifically 2007. Though it's unclear to me if Biden attended this year either. His calendar on his campaign website on the Web Archive and it indicate he was in Iowa this whole day. https://t.co/XyzrP7Hl7T”
Biden was in Iowa the whole day on May 5th, 2007 lol

Okay. I'm going to revise my statement to say that this story is deader than the Smilodon.
 

B.O.O.M.

Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,762
I hear O'Donnell is saying it might have been in 2007.
twitter.com

andrew kaczynski🤔 on Twitter

“Christine O'Donnell says this might have occurred another year now, says specifically 2007. Though it's unclear to me if Biden attended this year either. His calendar on his campaign website on the Web Archive and it indicate he was in Iowa this whole day. https://t.co/XyzrP7Hl7T”
Biden was in Iowa the whole day on May 5th, 2007 lol

haha sorry but this is fucking hilarious

"oh wait it might have been the 1990s now that I think about it"
 

Euphoria

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,527
Earth
So about that quote. It involves her age specifically being mentioned in it and not just by Biden but also by Murry and repeated by O'Donnell as a first hand witness.

If it's from 2007 then the quote doesn't line up. Negating the fact too that he was in Iowa that night apparently.
 

Vennt

Member
Oct 27, 2017
647
Yeah, the quotes were very specific on the topic of age, no way you spin that quickly to being the year previous, and that's before you get to the fact that he had a town hall event in Iowa at 7pm on May 5th, 2007.

Oh what a tangled web we weave...
 

Deleted member 60295

User requested account closure
Banned
Sep 28, 2019
1,489
I am also very doubtful, based on the evidence found so far.

But using charged terms like 'fabricated' does no-one any good, not actual victims, or the unfairly accused.

In smaller terms, you risk setting off forum fights, attracting trolls, or inviting unfavorable moderation actions.

Sigh... I suppose you're right. Mostly, I'm just mad at myself. I believed a story that I'm now fairly convinced was at least partially false, because it fed into my internal narrative about Biden being a pedophile. (Which I still think is very plausible. It's just that this particular story almost certainly isn't proof of that, IMO.)
 

SJurgenson

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
1,239
Okay. I'm going to revise my statement to say that this story is deader than the Smilodon.
haha sorry but this is fucking hilarious

"oh wait it might have been the 1990s now that I think about it"

Please, let's be more moderate and considerate in this thread. It's important we steer clear of anything that could be construed as victim blaming, or could set off fights.

There could still be a story here, even with how very unlikely it appears at the moment.
 

SJurgenson

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
1,239
Sigh... I suppose you're right. Mostly, I'm just mad at myself. I believed a story that I'm now fairly convinced was at least partially false, because it fed into my internal narrative about Biden being a pedophile. (Which I still think is very plausible. It's just that this particular story almost certainly isn't proof of that, IMO.)

It's important to be aware of your internal beliefs and biases, and to admit them.

We all make mistakes, and we all can jump to conclusions if we don't actively fight against the urge to do so.
 

infamous5445

Member
Dec 3, 2019
951
Please, let's be more moderate and considerate in this thread. It's important we steer clear of anything that could be construed as victim blaming, or could set off fights.

There could still be a story here, even with how very unlikely it appears at the moment.
I'd say she doesn't get the benefit of the doubt after she literally got caught lying about when it happened twice.
 

Nerokis

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,567
The truth doesn't serve her narrative, therefore should be ignored and moved past without comment it seems.

You know that study showing that lies have a tendency to spread 6x faster than truth on social media? Well, people signal boosting anything that confirms their bias and then refusing to account for contrary information explains at least a small amount of that differential.

For instance, someone I like a lot posted this on Twitter:



Apparently that's a "key point," right? Not so key, though, that it's worth clarifying things upon being told the issue in question has already been addressed. (Biden sent a letter asking the Secretary of the Senate to look into the Senate Archives.)

I suspect part of the problem is that the people with the loudest voices disproportionately view themselves as using social media to fight for this or that cause, and that lends itself to a mutually reinforcing relationship with that whole "lies spread faster than truth" thing.
 

Kinthey

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
22,328
I hear O'Donnell is saying it might have been in 2007.
twitter.com

andrew kaczynski🤔 on Twitter

“Christine O'Donnell says this might have occurred another year now, says specifically 2007. Though it's unclear to me if Biden attended this year either. His calendar on his campaign website on the Web Archive and it indicate he was in Iowa this whole day. https://t.co/XyzrP7Hl7T”
Biden was in Iowa the whole day on May 5th, 2007 lol
"Yes it could have been another year. So What?"

Really not a good response.

Considering she told this story to her family right after my guess is that something happened but the person who did it wasn't Biden
 

N.Domixis

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
9,208
I hear O'Donnell is saying it might have been in 2007.
twitter.com

andrew kaczynski🤔 on Twitter

“Christine O'Donnell says this might have occurred another year now, says specifically 2007. Though it's unclear to me if Biden attended this year either. His calendar on his campaign website on the Web Archive and it indicate he was in Iowa this whole day. https://t.co/XyzrP7Hl7T”
Biden was in Iowa the whole day on May 5th, 2007 lol
this story seems like it's done. So much contradicting info. What if it wasn't Biden but some other man?
 

Halbrand

Member
Oct 27, 2017
19,616
Sigh... I suppose you're right. Mostly, I'm just mad at myself. I believed a story that I'm now fairly convinced was at least partially false, because it fed into my internal narrative about Biden being a pedophile. (Which I still think is very plausible. It's just that this particular story almost certainly isn't proof of that, IMO.)
Appreciate the honesty
 

SJurgenson

Banned
Oct 28, 2017
1,239
I'd say she doesn't get the benefit of the doubt after she literally got caught lying about when it happened twice.

Sure, but you still need to be open to the possibility of evidence emerging that may change your mind.

If nothing else, such caviller statements encourage trolls, and further calcify the biases certain people have. If you want to convince people their internal narratives and biases exist, are potentially wrong, and should be fought against -- then harsh declarative comments like that only make them put their defenses up stronger.
 

Deleted member 60295

User requested account closure
Banned
Sep 28, 2019
1,489
It's important to be aware of your internal beliefs and biases, and to admit them.

We all make mistakes, and we all can jump to conclusions if we don't actively fight against the urge to do so.

Yes, especially because the right-wing is unfortunately also aware of a lot of these biases, and is using this knowledge to pit decent people against each other. And if they succeed, nobody who deserves justice will get it.

Appreciate the honesty

Thanks. I'm fairly new to progressivism, so I've made a fair amount of mistakes and will continue to as I learn how to be a decent person myself. So I figure the most important thing I can do is be honest and admit my shortcomings.
 
Last edited:
Oct 26, 2017
17,383
Well whatever happened to this women, it seems that Biden was not involved. If this isn't just a completely fabricated allegation, I hope she is able to identify the creep who talked to her in this way.
 

meowdi gras

Member
Feb 24, 2018
12,659
For me, it's actually the inverse. I and my family need Biden to carry water for us. We are not politically powerful enough to pull this country back from the teetering edge Trump had put us on.

This is why it's important that all claims be appropriately investigated before drastic measures (I.E. Ejecting the candidate) are taken. If Reade's complaint is found and lines up with her recounting of the situation, taking action is appropriate. But not before then.
I can sympathize with that. But Biden hasn't been rejected over this accusation. Or even Reade's, which is immensely stronger. The Biden campaign seems to be doing just fine (have you seen the latest poll numbers?). So you can put your anxieties at ease about that.

In any event, Biden's arguably the most popular man in America right now. He's very wealthy, has the DNC and nearly every other Dem candidate firmly behind him, not to mention a huge portion of Congress. Shit, he was even able to get his campaign manager to demand the New York Times alter the wording of an article reporting on their investigation of him. As the saying goes, he's sitting in the catbird seat.

Now Reade--she the recipient of death threats--on the other hand, needs all the help she can get.
 

XMonkey

Member
Oct 26, 2017
6,827
Sigh... I suppose you're right. Mostly, I'm just mad at myself. I believed a story that I'm now fairly convinced was at least partially false, because it fed into my internal narrative about Biden being a pedophile. (Which I still think is very plausible. It's just that this particular story almost certainly isn't proof of that, IMO.)
It's refreshing and appreciated to see a post like this, thank you.
 

Chaos Legion

The Wise Ones
Member
Oct 30, 2017
16,923
I hear O'Donnell is saying it might have been in 2007.
twitter.com

andrew kaczynski🤔 on Twitter

“Christine O'Donnell says this might have occurred another year now, says specifically 2007. Though it's unclear to me if Biden attended this year either. His calendar on his campaign website on the Web Archive and it indicate he was in Iowa this whole day. https://t.co/XyzrP7Hl7T”
Biden was in Iowa the whole day on May 5th, 2007 lol
Oh no.
 

Nerokis

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,567
Sure, but you still need to be open to the possibility of evidence emerging that may change your mind.

If nothing else, such caviller statements encourage trolls, and further calcify the biases certain people have. If you want to convince people their internal narratives and biases exist, are potentially wrong, and should be fought against -- then harsh declarative comments like that only make them put their defenses up stronger.

agreed 100%

in general, if you'd like to see less wildly biased accounts of events, not overreacting to every single development in a story seems like a solid thing to do
 

Juna

Member
Nov 26, 2017
235
Honestly I don't blame her. Either she will admit she made it up, or said it happened but another event. Neither will satisfy everyone, so I think for her, staying quiet until it blows over might be the best option.
She already made a statement, doubling down on that event. It's the people around her suggesting other dates.
 

SamAlbro

Member
Oct 25, 2017
7,352
Never thought Christine "I'm not a witch" O'Donnell would ever be a newsworthy name again ...
 

Kinthey

Avenger
Oct 27, 2017
22,328
Did the friends say they were told in 2008 or did they not specify the year?
In the original article it says that a friend and her sister were told right after the event but they didn't elaborate on the specific year.

The article has also been updated with this statement from her sister:
The new revelations cast doubt on a significant piece of a story originally reported here based on seven original sources; six of whom agreed to go on the record and one of whom did not. Despite the evidence from the Biden campaign, Murry and several of her original corroborating sources maintain that she is telling the truth (others we were not able to contact again by the time of publication).

"I don't think Eva would have gotten the person wrong," Murry's older sister Jenna Murphy told Law&Crime when asked if her sister had a case of mistaken identity at the dinner that year. "She named him really specifically at the time and saw him several times after and recognized him as the person who made the comment. If anything, maybe she could have confused the date, but I really don't think she could have gotten the person wrong."

The elder Murry insisted that her sister wasn't mistaken.

"To provide context for my certainty, my aunt Chris got our whole family involved in her work, so both my grandparents, my aunt Jenny, Jenny's wife, and even on one notable occasion our entire extended family, went to campaign events with her from well before 2008 up through 2010," she continued. "All of those people were aware of the story of the Biden comment told by both my aunt and sister so a case of mistaken identity doesn't seem likely."
 

julian

Member
Oct 27, 2017
16,786
Do you think Kavanaugh being put on the supreme court despite the allegations against him was the correct decision? Whether yes or no, why?

Are you just purposefully ignoring how creepy he is gotten with children on camera before or have you just managed to not see any of that somehow? Cause yes he absolutely has done shit of a similar nature to this before
No, but it wasn't because there was simply an accusation. It was that the accusation was vetted. She got to have her say and most importantly, Kavanaugh's reaction to the accusation was disqualifying in and of itself no matter if it happened or not. Why should we have a Justice who literally shouts and promises vengeance on his opponents when he should be treating the accusation seriously and respectfully?
If you think the mere accusation was enough to sink his nomination, then you do you, but don't go assuming that's why everybody thought he should be disqualified. I however think this notion of disqualifying people the moment they're accused is disgusting and stupid.
It's shameful and absolutely disgusting to see the damage those on both the right and left are doing to sexual assault victims by weaponizing it for political gain.

This is expected from the right. Those on the left who don't actually give a fuck about sexual assault victims and will selfishly use anything in the hope of destroying a candidate they despise are no better and are part of the problem.

Sad to say that there is a lot of the latter on Era.
This was obvious when Biden said we should search the archives. Posters were suddenly jumping onto some nonsense about needing to see papers in the University of Delaware or saying the report meant nothing anyways, despite Reade herself asking for the archives to be searched. It was abundantly clear they didn't give two shits about what the presumed victim was actually asking for, and therefore didn't care about her but just using her for their own agenda of getting rid of Biden.

This whole thing is so fucking infuriating.
 

less

Member
Oct 25, 2017
10,838
Please, let's be more moderate and considerate in this thread. It's important we steer clear of anything that could be construed as victim blaming, or could set off fights.

There could still be a story here, even with how very unlikely it appears at the moment.

You are right in that there can still be a story here in that Biden could definitely have made those comments to her. It is well within the realm of possibility. My comments are less so on the validity of the allegation and more so on how the general public will see this story. From the beginning I've been of the belief that this wasn't going to sway most people because people in general aren't as good as I wish they were. Now that the original allegation could not be true because Biden wasn't at the event those people were even less likely to give a fuck. A second possible year being offered as a possible time it took place now turns out to reveal that Biden was elsewhere...the general public isn't going to even bat an eyelash at any future revisions/allegations from Murry even if they may be true. That's what I mean by the story being dead. Unless of course we get video of Biden saying that to her. That would change things drastically but but otherwise I'm struggling to see what could make the public care now.
 
Oct 27, 2017
45,240
Seattle
I hear O'Donnell is saying it might have been in 2007.
twitter.com

andrew kaczynski🤔 on Twitter

“Christine O'Donnell says this might have occurred another year now, says specifically 2007. Though it's unclear to me if Biden attended this year either. His calendar on his campaign website on the Web Archive and it indicate he was in Iowa this whole day. https://t.co/XyzrP7Hl7T”
Biden was in Iowa the whole day on May 5th, 2007 lol

This is turning into a circus, if it isn't already one.
 

Kyra

The Eggplant Queen
Member
Oct 25, 2017
12,254
New York City
I hear O'Donnell is saying it might have been in 2007.
twitter.com

andrew kaczynski🤔 on Twitter

“Christine O'Donnell says this might have occurred another year now, says specifically 2007. Though it's unclear to me if Biden attended this year either. His calendar on his campaign website on the Web Archive and it indicate he was in Iowa this whole day. https://t.co/XyzrP7Hl7T”
Biden was in Iowa the whole day on May 5th, 2007 lol
Just keep changing it til it sticks. This isn't damaging to actual victims at all.
 

Nerokis

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,567
This is turning into a circus, if it isn't already one.

Christine O'Donnell inserting herself into the story to the extent she has isn't really helping anything

if this really is a case of getting the date wrong, that's probably something that could be figured out in a more productive fashion, as opposed to O'Donnell just throwing out random ass dates every time she's asked

edit: although, now that i think about it, it isn't actually so random

she specifically says it happened while she was running for office against him, so are 2007 and 2008 the only options?
 
Oct 27, 2017
45,240
Seattle
Christine O'Donnell inserting herself into the story to the extent she has isn't really helping anything

if this really is a case of getting the date wrong, that's probably something that could be figured out in a more productive fashion, as opposed to O'Donnell just throwing out random ass dates every time she's asked

edit: although, now that i think about it, it isn't actually so random

she specifically says it happened while she was running for office against him, so are 2007 and 2008 the only options?

I think it's fair to misremember an exact event, the age difference would be harder for me reconcile
 

Deleted member 1476

User requested account closure
Banned
Oct 25, 2017
10,449
It really isn't. The Kavanaugh investigation was clear bullshit that the Republicans signed off on to give themselves cover. The Murry accusation didn't stand up to even a single actual investigation.

No, you missed the point. I recall that there were also false accusations thrown at him, alongside Ford, and it made everything shittier.
 

Euphoria

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,527
Earth
In the original article it says that a friend and her sister were told right after the event but they didn't elaborate on the specific year.

The article has also been updated with this statement from her sister:

Thanks. I wasn't sure if they did.

So if something did happen in 2007, whether it were Biden or not mean what they were saying can still absolutely be true.
 

Hollywood Duo

Member
Oct 25, 2017
41,980
Sigh... I suppose you're right. Mostly, I'm just mad at myself. I believed a story that I'm now fairly convinced was at least partially false, because it fed into my internal narrative about Biden being a pedophile. (Which I still think is very plausible. It's just that this particular story almost certainly isn't proof of that, IMO.)
That's the danger of fake news. We're all susceptible. We have to constantly fight our biases.
 

Euphoria

Member
Oct 25, 2017
9,527
Earth
Yes, her sister was also on record suggesting she might have misremembered the date.

Yeah that's right, her sister did in fact say the same.

The problem however become the specific age mentioned in Murry and O'Donnell's quotes about what Murry said and what Biden's response was.

In that case you can't begin tossing in different years. Seems Murry is aware of this but not her sister or her aunt.
 

fauxtrot

Member
Oct 25, 2017
454
User Banned (3 Months): Inflammatory accusations, history of trolling related infractions
I'm so relieved this exonerates Joe Biden of every other accusation and all previously released video evidence of him being an predatory piece of shit... oh wait, that's just what y'all want and not reality.
 

thefit

Member
Oct 25, 2017
6,243
How is it okay to insinuate Biden as a pedophile despite no proof?

It isn't just like calling him a rapist every chance some posters get in threads unrelated to the topic when there wasn't even an investigation, trial or conviction. The fact that such derogatory language is allowed is outright shameful.
 
OP
OP
Syriel

Syriel

Banned
Dec 13, 2017
11,088
Any argument you've made on behalf of "reasonable formal skepticism" is not what I take issue with. It's your attempt to beg the question by positing some absurd, and frankly insulting counterscenario in which the accusers (women) hold all the power and the accused (men) are automatically punished. That's not going to happen and never could happen. It's a bullshit fantasy, which also happens to overlap quite well with a lot of alt-right and MRA rhetoric. (Not saying you're alt-right or MRA, but a correspondence way too gross for me to ignore.)

As for expending more rhetoric on behalf of victims, this site absolutely could use a lot more of that vs using it as argument fodder. It would behoove all of us to audit the impression we give.

Please don't do this.

For one, absolutes like this are easily disprovable and they do a disservice to victims. All anyone has to do is bring up Duke Lacrosse and they've already countered your claim here.

What you're also doing with claims like this is ignoring the disproportionate impact on PoCs and ignoring inherent racism in the system.

I mean hey, the Central Park Five were really guilty, right? They wouldn't have been punished if they were innocent, right?

That said, someone who is active in the criminal justice space isn't even going to bother with the famous cases. They're just going to point to something like the Innocence Project where 670 of the 2611 exonerations are people who were originally charged with rape and who went to prison.


All claims should be taken seriously, and fully investigated, but that does not automatically mean every claim is truthful. Even if you are of the belief that it is better for someone to go to jail on a false accusation than to have an assailant go free for lack of evidence, you can't correct for the underlying systemic racism. The net result of your bolded stance is more people in prison. More specifically, more PoCs in prison.