Connect with us

Politics

Joe Biden Denies Tara Reade’s Sexual Assault Allegation

Published

on

  • Joe Biden, the presumptive 2020 Democratic presidential nominee, has denied the sexual assault allegation made against him by a former Senate aide, Tara Reade.
  • In a Medium post and appearance on MSNBC Friday, Biden said the alleged 1993 assault “never happened.”
  • Though he said women should be heard, he argued that their claims should then be subject to “appropriate inquiry and scrutiny.
  • He also called for the National Archives to release any documents related to Reade’s alleged complaint, arguing that no personnel files would be found in his Senate papers at the University of Delaware. 


Biden Denies Claim in Medium Post 

Former Vice President Joe Biden released a statement Friday denying the accusations of sexual assault made against him by a former Senate aide, Tara Reade. 

“I recognize my responsibility to be a voice, an advocate, and a leader for the change in culture that has begun but is nowhere near finished,” Biden wrote in a Medium post after laying out his history of supporting women and work for the Violence Against Women’s Act.

“So I want to address allegations by a former staffer that I engaged in misconduct 27 years ago. They aren’t true. This never happened.”

The statement marks Biden’s first public response to the accusation that has muddied his presidential campaign. Reade accused Biden of sexually assaulting her in 1993 when he was a senator from Delaware. More specifically, she said he pushed her against a wall and penetrated her with his fingers. 

She first made her allegation public in a March 25 interview with podcast host Katie Halper. Reade’s brother and two anonymous friends have all confirmed to media outlets that she previously spoke to them about the alleged assault. But in recent days, new details have emerged surrounding the allegation, like an account from Reade’s former neighbor Lynda LaCasse. 

LaCasse said that in 1995 or 1996, Reade confided in her about the assault. The Intercept also located a tape of a woman who appears to be Reade’s mother calling CNN’s Larry King Live in 1993 to say that her daughter had experienced “problems” with the senator.

With this information, activists have been pushing even harder for Biden to issue a response.  

“While the details of these allegations of sexual harassment and sexual assault are complicated, two things are not complicated. One is that women deserve to be treated with dignity and respect, and when they step forward they should be heard, not silenced. The second is that their stories should be subject to appropriate inquiry and scrutiny,” he continued in his statement. 

Former VP calls on National Archives to Release Documents 

Biden, the presumptive Democratic nominee, pointed to what he called “a growing record of inconsistencies in her story” and said responsible news outlets should examine and evaluate that. Specifically, he pointed to Reade’s claim that said raised her complaint with her supervisor and senior staffers at the time.

The New York Times, The Washington Post, and NBC News all released expensive reports after looking into the allegations. In them, they also noted that multiple Biden staffers said they had never seen or heard of the complaint Reade said she filed. 

“News organizations that have talked with literally dozens of former staffers have not found one — not one — who corroborated her allegations in any way. Indeed, many of them spoke to the culture of an office that would not have tolerated harassment in any way — as indeed I would not have,” Biden wrote. 

But as the scrutiny around Biden grows, so have calls for him to release his Senate papers, which are held at the University of Deleware and were sealed until after he leaves public life. 

Reade has suggested that record of her complaint and documents related to her allegation might be there. However, in his statement, Biden said those papers “do no contain personnel files.”

Instead, he said, “There is only one place a complaint of this kind could be — the National Archives.

“The National Archives is where the records are kept at what was then called the Office of Fair Employment Practices. I am requesting that the Secretary of the Senate ask the Archives to identify any record of the complaint she alleges she filed and make available to the press any such document. If there was ever any such complaint, the record will be there.”

Biden Appears on MSNBC 

Shortly after publishing his written statement, Biden also appeared on MSNBC’s Morning Joe where he again denied Reade’s claim.

“No, it is not true. I’m saying unequivocally it never, never happened,” he said to speak to the show’s co-host Mika Brzezinski. 

He again added that women have a right to be heard when they come forward with allegations, then facts need to be examined. However, Biden remained firm when shutting down the claims. “I assure you it did not happen. Period. Period.”

Brzezinski repeatedly pressed Biden about why he wouldn’t allow for a search of any documents related to Reade at the University of Delaware. He responded several times by saying that no such files would be there, claiming again that no personnel files were housed at the university.

After Reade first came forward, Biden’s campaign argued that her claim was false, but Biden himself has remained quiet on the matter until now. 

Despite his silence and the fact that several people have corroborated part of Reade’s claims, saying they remember her sharing elements of the story years ago, Democrats have sided with Biden. This includes the likes of Senators Amy Klobuchar and Kamala Harris, as well as former Georgia House minority leader Stacey Abrams. 

Speaker Nancy Pelosi also threw her support behind the former vice president Thursday, telling reporters, “I want to remove all doubt in anyone’s mind: I have a great comfort level with the situation as I see it, with all due respect in the world for any woman who comes forward, with all the highest regard for Joe Biden.” 

“There is a lot of excitement around the idea that women will be heard and be listened to,” she said, expressing “complete respect” for the #MeToo movement. “There is also due process, and the fact that Joe Biden is Joe Biden.”

Meanwhile, Republicans have hit both Biden and his fellow Democrats with sharp criticism over the allegations, suggesting that their behavior is hypocritical since they put much heavier pressure of now-Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh when he was accused of sexual assault. 

President Donald Trump also chimed in on the issue Thursday, saying, “I think he should respond,” but also adding, “It could be false accusations.”

Trump himself has faced allegations of sexual assault and harassment by more than 20 women and was even caught on a recording bragging about inappropriately grabbing a woman without consent. 

In his statement, Biden tried to draw a clear distinction between himself and the president, writing, “We have lived long enough with a president who doesn’t think he is accountable to anyone, and takes responsibility for nothing.”

That’s not me. I believe being accountable means having the difficult conversations, even when they are uncomfortable. People need to hear the truth.”

See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (Vox) (Fox News)

Politics

Pelosi Reverses Course, Signals Openness to Stock Trading Ban for Congress

Published

on

The move comes as public and bipartisan support for legislation banning Congress members from stock trading has grown in recent weeks.


Pelosi Backtracks on Member Trading

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Ca.) on Thursday signaled openness to legislation that would ban members of Congress from trading stocks, reversing her previous position on the matter.

“I do come down always in favor of trusting our members,” Pelosi said at a press conference. “If the impression that is given by some that somebody is doing insider trading, that’s a Justice Department issue and that has no place in any of this.”

“To give a blanket attitude of ‘We can’t do this and we can’t do,’ because we can’t be trusted, I just don’t buy into that. But if members want to do that, I’m okay with that,” she continued.

The speaker’s remarks come as she has faced mounting backlash for voicing opposition to such a ban. 

“We are a free market economy,” she told reporters when asked about the matter last month. “They should be able to participate in that.”

While Pelosi herself does not trade, her husband has invested millions in stocks. Those trades have been made public under the 2012 STOCK Act, which has required Congress members and their spouses to disclose when they buy and sell stocks for the last decade.

But the law has a mixed track record. A recent investigation by Insider found that “dozens of lawmakers and 182 senior congressional staff” have violated the law.

The act also came under intense scrutiny after financial disclosures filed by lawmakers exposed that members of both parties made trades in 2020 that benefited their portfolios after receiving early briefings on the seriousness of the pandemic. 

The Justice Department reviewed some of the cases, but it ultimately did not bring any charges. 

Momentum Grows for Congressional Ban

In recent weeks, pressure to reform the STOCK Act has been growing both among the public and in Congress.

Proponents argue that Congress members should be banned from trading stocks altogether to ensure they do not have conflicts of interest or use their access to classified briefings to make money.

According to a new poll from the progressive firm Data for Progress, 67% of voters support a ban. That number rose to 74% when the respondents were given arguments both for and against the idea.

In Congress, there is widespread bipartisan support for legislation to impose stricter regulations, including among top leadership.

House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Ca.) has reportedly said he is considering banning members from trading if Republicans win control of the House and select him as Speaker in 2022.

“I cannot imagine being a Speaker of the House with the power of what can come before committee, you name them and what can come to the floor and trading millions of dollars worth of options,” he told NPR earlier this month. “I just don’t think the American people think that’s right.”

Members of both parties have already put forth proposals. Last week, Sens. Jon Ossoff (D-Ga.) and Mark Kelly (D-Az.) introduced legislation that would effectively ban lawmakers, as well as their spouses and dependents, from buying and selling stocks.

The same day, Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) rolled out a very similar bill, though his version would not include dependents.

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

Continue Reading

Politics

Supreme Court Allows Release of Jan. 6 Documents in Major Loss for Trump

Published

on

The high court’s decision initiates the release of White House documents that the former president had attempted to block the Jan. 6 investigation committee from viewing.


SCOTUS Ruling

The Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected former President Donald Trump’s efforts to block the White House from handing over records to the House committee investigating the Jan. 6 insurrection.

Trump filed a lawsuit against the panel and the National Archives to prevent the committee from seeing key documents, testimonies, and other evidence lawmakers had requested.

In the suit, he argued that the records were protected by executive privilege, which he said still applied to him even though he’s not president anymore, and despite the fact that President Joe Biden decided not to exercise his executive privilege over the documents.

Trump also claimed that the information has “no reasonable connection to the events of that day” or “any conceivable legislative purpose.”

In an 8-1 decision with Justice Clarence Thomas dissenting, the Supreme Court rejected the effort to block the records from the committee until the issue is resolved by the courts — a process that could take months if not years.

In their ruling, the justices wrote that there are “serious and substantial concerns” regarding whether a former president can obtain a court order to prevent the disclosure of records, especially when the incumbent president waived their right to exercise executive privilege over said documents.

However, they still agreed with the determination by an appeals court that Trump’s claim of privilege over the documents would fail “even if he were the incumbent.”

Records Handed Over to Committee

According to reports, within just hours of the ruling, the National Archives began sending the roughly 800 pages of documents to the Jan. 6 committee.

The documents have not been made public, and it remains unclear if and when they will be.

What is known is the nature of the content that the committee has requested, including records detailing all of Trump’s movements and meetings on Jan. 6. 

Notably, the lawmakers also requested information about plans by the administration to undermine Congress’s confirmation of the electoral college vote and Trump’s pressure campaign to overturn the results of the elections.

Also unknown is what the panel will do with the documents if it finds damning evidence. While the committee’s powers are limited in scope, it could make a criminal referral to the Justice Department, which has its own ongoing probe into the insurrection and the events that preceded it.

See what others are saying: (The New York Times) (The Associated Press) (The Washington Post

Continue Reading

Politics

NY Attorney General Says Investigation of Trump Business Found “Significant Evidence” of Fraud

Published

on

The state attorney general’s office accused the former president and his family business of falsely inflating the value of assets and personal worth to lenders, the IRS, and insurance brokers.


New York Attorney General’s Filing

New York Attorney General Letitia James announced late Tuesday she had “significant evidence” that former President Donald Trump and the Trump Organization “falsely and fraudulently” misrepresented the value of assets “to financial institutions for economic benefit.”

The allegations mark the first time James has made specific accusations against Trump and his business. They come as part of a nearly 160-page filing asking a judge to order the former president — along with Ivanka Trump and Donald Trump Jr. — to comply with subpoenas for the investigation after the family sued James to block her from questioning them.

The filing claims that Trump and the company inflated the value of six properties, including several golf courses and Trump’s own penthouse in Trump Tower, on financial statements to obtain favorable loans, tax deductions, and insurance coverage. 

The document adds that many of the financial statements were “generally inflated as part of a pattern to suggest that Mr. Trump’s net worth was higher than it otherwise would have appeared.”

James outlined several specific examples, such as a financial statement where the value of Trump’s Seven Springs estate in Westchester was boosted because it listed seven mansions on the property worth $61 million that did not actually exist.

That resulted in Trump receiving millions of dollars in tax deductions on that property, as well as another in Los Angeles.

In another notable instance, the attorney general’s office said that the $327 million value of Trump’s penthouse in Trump Tower was calculated off a financial statement that falsely reported his home was nearly triple its actual size.

While the statement claimed the apartment was 30,000 square feet, Trump had signed documents stating it was actually 10,996 square feet.

Alleged Direct Involvement

The allegation regarding the apartment is especially significant because it directly ties Trump himself to the accusations of financial wrongdoing. It is also not the only instance where Trump was implicated.

The filing additionally asserts that Trump Organization chief financial officer Allen Weisselberg — who was indicted last summer on multiple criminal charges relating to the business’ tax dealings — implied the former president was involved in finalizing the false valuations. 

According to the documents, Weisselberg “testified that it was ‘certainly possible’ Mr. Trump discussed valuations with him and that it was ‘certainly possible’ Mr. Trump reviewed the Statement of Financial Condition for a particular year before it was finalized.” 

Another top Trump Organization executive also testified that he was under the impression Trump reviewed the statements before they were finalized.

While the filing provides less direct links to Trump’s children, it does detail their involvement. Specifically, it alleges that Ivanka Trump rented an apartment at Trump Park Avenue and was given an option to buy it for $8.5 million, despite the fact that the property was valued at $25 million.

It also connected Donald Trump Jr. to some of the properties flagged by claiming investigators found evidence he “was consulted” on the Statements of Financial Condition.

Response

Citing these connections, James argued in a series of tweets Tuesday that it is necessary for her inquiry to question Trump and his two children on their alleged involvement.

“We are taking legal action to force Donald Trump, Donald Trump, Jr., and Ivanka Trump to comply with our investigation into the Trump Organization’s financial dealings,” she wrote. “No one in this country can pick and choose if and how the law applies to them.”

The former president has not yet addressed the matter, but a Trump Organization attorney representing Donald Trump Jr. and Ivanka Trump responded by arguing the subpoenas violate the constitutional rights of the family and that the filing “never addresses the fundamental contentions of our motion to quash or stay the subpoenas.”

In a statement Wednesday, the Trump Organization denied James’ allegations as “baseless” and accused her of trying to “mislead the public yet again.”

As far as what happens next, James’ office has said it “has not yet reached a final decision regarding whether this evidence merits legal action.”

Because James’s investigation is civil, she can sue Trump, his company, and his children, but she cannot file criminal charges. However, her probe is running parallel to a criminal investigation into the same conduct led by the Manhattan district attorney, who does have that power.

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (The New York Times) (The Wall Street Journal)

Continue Reading