Connect with us

U.S.

Former Biden Staffer’s New Sexual-Assault Claims Spell Trouble for Time’s Up

Published

on

  • Tara Reade, who worked for Joe Biden’s Senate office in 1993, accused the former vice president of sexually assaulting her while she was employed by him.
  • Reade made the remarks while speaking with podcaster Katie Halper last week, bringing the new accusations to the public for the first time.
  • Reade had previously come forward last year with several other women who alleged that Biden touched or kissed them in ways that made them uncomfortable.
  • In an article published the day before, The Intercept’s Ryan Grim reported that Time’s Up, which helps accusers get their stories out, had refused to assist Reade.

New Allegations

Tara Reade first gained media attention in April of last year, when she became one of several women to publicly accuse former Vice President Joe Biden of innappropriate touching and kissing.

Reade, who worked in Biden’s Senate office in 1993, told The Union that Biden touched her several times in ways that made her feel uncomfortable. She also alleged that her responsibilities in Biden’s office were cut back after other staffers told her he wanted her to serve drinks at an event because he liked her legs and she refused.

Following Reade’s decision to come forward, a now-deleted Medium post surfaced where she wrote favorably about Russian leader Vladimir Putin, prompting accusations that she was a Russian asset and questions about her credibility.

After that, she largely went quiet. Then, last Tuesday, her story resurfaced when The Intercept’s Ryan Grim reported that the organization Time’s Up, which was founded at the beginning of the #MeToo movement to help accusers get their stories out, had refused to help Reade.

According to Grim, Reade “decided that she wanted to continue telling her story and push back against what she saw as online defamation.”

To do so, Reade went to get help from the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund, a nonprofit housed within the National Women’s Law Center. She spoke to a program director in January who referred her to some attorneys.

Grim said Reade was encouraged by the conversation and that Time’s Up was not worried about the fact that she was a vocal supporter of Biden’s rival presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-VT).

Then in February, Reade was told Time’s Up could not help her because Biden was a candidate for federal office, and they could risk losing their nonprofit status if they went forward with her case, Grim reported.

“The public relations firm that works on behalf of the Time’s Up Legal Defense Fund is SKDKnickerbocker, whose managing director, Anita Dunn, is the top adviser to Biden’s presidential campaign,” Grim added at the end of his story.

Accusations on Podcast

The day after Grim published his article, podcaster Katie Halper shared a clip from her upcoming episode of The Katie Halper Show where she interviewed Reade.

Reade spoke to Halper in detail about an alleged sexual assault by Biden in 1993 separate from the harrassment claims, bringing the new accusations to the public for the first time. Reade said the backlash she recieved from coming forward with the harassment claims last year was so severe, she felt silenced. 

She said that she had gone to give Biden his gym bag, but when she got to him, Biden pushed her up against the wall and began ouching her with his hands.

“He went down my skirt but then up inside it and he penetrated me,” Reade said, adding that he did so with his fingers.

She said that after a while she pulled away from him. He seemed frustrated, and told Reade he thought she liked him.

“It’s like he implied that I had done this,” she added. “And for me, it was like everything shattered.” 

“I looked up to him. He was like my father’s age. He was this champion of women’s rights in my eyes and I couldn’t believe it was happening, she continued. “It seemed surreal.” 

Reade claimed that after it was over, Biden told her she was “nothing” to him and that she was going to be fine before walking away. 

Reade said she told three people after this happened: her mother, her brother, and a friend. Her mother, who has since passed on, encouraged her to contact the police. Her brother, however, says he told her to just let it go.

Halper and other reporters, including Grim, spoke with Reade’s brother and the anonymous friend to verify that they had been told this account in 1993, and they confirmed that they had. 

Times Up Inconsistencies

Biden’s team denied the allegations in a statement Friday.

“Women have a right to tell their story, and reporters have an obligation to rigorously vet those claims,” Biden’s deputy campaign manager Kate Bedingfield said. “We encourage them to do so, because these accusations are false.”

But others, citing Grim’s article, felt as though there was something more nefarious going on behind the scenes.

One Twitter user alleged that the Reade’s story “was quashed because Times Up Legal Defense Fund’s PR firm managing director Anita Dunn is a major @joebiden campaign advisor.”

Another described the interaction as a “catch and kill operation.”

However, in an article published in Salon on Tuesday, writer Amanda Marcotte appread to provide a bit more context.

Marcotte said Reade told Salon she was not interested in suing Biden and that she was trying to find a lawyer to stop the smears about her being a Russian asset. At least one law firm Marcotte spoke to confirmed that it did not take Reade’s case and another indicated they made the same decision.

“Reade indicated that she was less interested in legal action and more in public relations representation,” Marcotte wrote. “But Time’s Up is primarily a legal organization, and is not in the business of running PR for accusers who aren’t going through the court system.”

That remark, however, received pushback from Grim as well as political pundit Krystal Ball.

In a tweet, Grim said that Marcotte’s statement was false, and shared a screenshot from the Time’s Up website that said they would help fund “media and storytelling.”

“This seems completely invented by Marcotte,” Ball responded. “Unless I’m wrong, Time’s Up didn’t even offer that as the reason.”

But Marcotte responded to Grim’s tweet, pointing out that her article explicitly said that Time’s Up only offered PR to people with legal cases and “no lawyer would take Reade on as a client.”

She also provided a screenshot and link to the website for Time’s Up legal defense fund, where it clearly states that in order for an accuser to get PR work from SKDKnickerbocker, “You must have an attorney to complete the evaluation and qualify for assistance.”

That, however, did not stop Ball from making the same accusations on Wednesday during her show Rising with Krystal & Saagar.

“Marcotte argues that Time’s Up doesn’t assist victims with PR efforts, something which the organization itself never argued,” Ball said. “And which is a fact belied by the mission statement which is posted on their website.”

See what others are saying: (The Intercept) (Salon) (Jezebel)

U.S.

Kathy Griffin, Ethan Klein, More Suspended From Twitter Over Elon Musk Impersonations

Published

on

Many have pretended to be Musk in an attempt to highlight the potential issues paid-for verifications could cause on the platform.


Musk Takes on Impersonations

Comedian Kathy Griffin and internet personality Ethan Klein are among the many Twitter users that have been permanently suspended for impersonating the platform’s new CEO, Elon Musk.

Impersonation has long been against Twitter’s rules, but on Sunday, the billionaire took the policy a step further by announcing that “any Twitter handles engaging in impersonation without clearly specifying ‘parody’ will be permanently suspended.”

“Previously, we issued a warning before suspension, but now that we are rolling out widespread verification, there will be no warning,” Musk explained. “This will be clearly identified as a condition for signing up to Twitter Blue.”

Musk also said that any user who changes their name will temporarily lose their verification check mark. 

The announcement came as many verified users began mocking Musk by changing their name and photo to match his, then tweeting jokes that were either absurd or out of character for the business mogul. Many did this to protest Musk’s plan to charge an $8 monthly subscription fee that would allow any Twitter user to become verified. 

Klein was one of many who changed his name to “Elon Musk” and made a photo of the CEO his profile image. The podcast host sent out several jokes, including one referencing the increased use of the N-word on the platform since Musk’s takeover, and another referencing Jeffrey Epstein.

“Even though Jeffrey Epstein committed horrible crimes, I do still miss him on nights like this for his warmth and camaraderie. Rest In Peace old Friend,” he wrote. 

His account was quickly banned, but Klein defended himself on TikTok, arguing that both his cover photo and bio labeled his account as “parody” and therefore should be acceptable under Musk’s guidelines. 

“What more do you want from me?” he asked. “Comedy is dead. And Elon Musk dug the grave.” 

Protests of Musk’s Twitter Control

For her part, Griffin likewise tweeted while masquerading as Musk, writing that after “spirited discussion with the females in my life, I’ve decided that voting blue for their choice is only right.”

Musk joked that she was actually “suspended for impersonating a comedian” and added that she can have her account back if she pays for the $8 subscription. Griffin, however, found another way around the ban.

The comedian logged into her late mother’s Twitter account and began using the hashtag #FreeKathy while calling out Musk. 

“Mad Men” actor Rich Sommer and podcaster Griffin Newman have also had their accounts suspended for tweeting as Musk. Other celebrities, including TV producer Shonda Rhimes, musician Sara Bareilles, and model Gigi Hadid have protested Musk’s Twitter reign by leaving the platform altogether.

“For a long time, but especially with its new leadership, it’s becoming more and more of a cesspool of hate & bigotry, and it’s not a place I want to be a part of,” Hadid wrote on Instagram over the weekend. 

See what others are saying: (NBC News) (Variety) (The Verge)

Continue Reading

U.S.

AOC Says Twitter Notifications “Conveniently” Disabled After Criticizing Musk

Published

on

“What’s good? Doesn’t seem very free speechy to me,” she tweeted at the new CEO.


AOC Vs. Elon Musk

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) said several of her Twitter features are “conveniently not working” after feuding with the platform’s new owner, billionaire Elon Musk.

Ocasio-Cortez has never been shy about her views on Musk. After he officially took charge of Twitter last week, the congresswoman began criticizing his new proposals for the social networking site, specifically his plan to charge an $8 subscription fee for verification. 

“Lmao at a billionaire earnestly trying to sell people on the idea that ‘free speech’ is actually a $8/mo subscription plan,” she wrote on Tuesday.

“Your feedback is appreciated, now pay $8,” Musk replied the following day.

Around an hour later, the business mogul sent another tweet appearing to call Ocasio-Cortez out for selling $58 sweatshirts. 

“Proud of this and always will be,” she shot back. “My workers are union, make a living wage, have full healthcare, and aren’t subject to racist treatment in their workplaces. Items are made in USA. Team AOC honors and respects working people. You should try it sometime instead of union-busting.”

In a follow-up tweet, she noted that proceeds go to community organizing programs, including one that tutors students who are falling behind because of COVID-19.

AOC’s Mentions Not Working

On Wednesday evening, just hours after her back-and-forth with Musk, Ocasio-Cortez told her followers that her “Twitter mentions/notifications conveniently aren’t working tonight.”

“I was informed via text that I seem to have gotten under a certain billionaire’s skin,” she added. “Just a reminder that money will never [buy] your way out of insecurity, folks.” 

The issue seemingly continued into Thursday morning when the Democrat tweeted a screenshot of her notifications page, which loaded no results. 

Why should people pay $8 just for their app to get bricked when they say something you don’t like?” she tweeted at Musk. “This is what my app has looked like ever since my tweet upset you yesterday. What’s good? Doesn’t seem very free speechy to me.”

Musk has repeatedly claimed that one of his primary motives to buy Twitter was to protect free speech. Once taking the reigns as CEO, though, he did say he would start a content moderation council and make decisions jointly with them.

See what others are saying: (The Hill) (Insider)

Continue Reading

U.S.

South Carolina County Votes Against Moving LGBTQ+ Friendly Books Away from Children’s Section

Published

on

Efforts to limit LGBTQ+ content in libraries first began over the summer.


Attempts to Restrict LGBTQ+ Displays

The county council in Greenville County, South Carolina this week voted against discussing a resolution that would move all books “promoting sexuality” to the adult section.

This resolution is the culmination of months of turmoil in Greenville County. In June, libraries in the county removed Pride displays at the direction of library officials. Then in September, the county’s Republican Party executive board passed a resolution to call on the County Council to restrict access to books with LGBTQ+ themes and characters. 

The resolution was proposed by Joe Dill, an outgoing council member, as well as a member of the county’s Republican Party executive board. It proposed the council “officially order that no books or content, including digital copies or online accessible materials, promoting sexuality be allowed in the Children’s Sections of our public libraries.” 

Resolution Rejected

However, the resolution required the council to suspend its regular rules in order to discuss it as it was not submitted to the council via committee. The final vote was 9 to 3 against the suspension of the rules and effectively killed the resolution. 

Those that voted against it viewed the resolution as an overreach.

“We just do not believe that’s our job to get involved in the library’s business,” Council member Ennis Fett said to a local news outlet. “We appoint a board. We can not set a precedent of micromanaging the library board, because if we do that, then, we will be micromanaging all boards and commissions that we appoint.” 

Although the council decided not to get involved, the library still has the final decision to make regarding these books. Their meeting to discuss the matter is scheduled for December 5. 

See what others are saying: (Greenville News) (The Post and Courier) (7 News)

Continue Reading