81 Comments

Alexandra McCabe or Tara or whatever her name is.... This lady is practically famous in Pacific Grove for using her victim stories to take advantage of good people who lost thousands of dollars to her schemes.

Look up her eviction record. Ask the grocery store people how many thousands she tricked them out of. This lady has major issues and probably does not even know when she is lying.

Expand full comment

You should contact Amanda Marcotte @AmandaMarcotte (twitter) of Salon to share your story of Tara's fraud in Pacific Grove. This is very critical information. Amanda is a very fair and careful reporter, neither left nor right politically. Here is a link to an article she has written about Tara. https://www.salon.com/2020/03/31/a-woman-accuses-joe-biden-of-sexual-assault-and-all-hell-breaks-loose-online-heres-what-we-know/

Also contact Lynn Hummer at @mare_rescue (twitter) who has a horse resue charity. She was ripped off by Tara who stole $1,400 from her rescue. Victims of her fraud should band together.

A very good reporter involved in trying to find witnesses to her fraud and pattern of running away from debts is Joan Walsh who writes for The Nation and CNN. @joanwalsh (twitter). Tara threatened her with a lawsuit. Here is her article https://www.thenation.com/article/politics/tara-reade-joe-biden-democrats/

Tara filed for bankruptcy owing $400,000 to banks, landlords and universities. She has been sued many times and she has sued others many times.

Reade skipped town on hundreds of thousands of $$ of loans, rent, bills & taxes. Grove Market in Pacific Grove got stuck with her $2000+ tab. Landlord stuck with $12,000 in unpaid rent. All amounting to over $400,000!

Help expose this story! The country needs you.

Expand full comment

Do you have a cite for those bits about money owed. Would love to share it.

Expand full comment

Here are some links to people much smarter than me, doing amazing  sleuthing. 

@FliedGaff ( twitter ) started looking into the Tara saga March 25th. They show documentation  for lawsuits, bankruptcy and all her blog and twitter posts. It will take days to sift through all their threads. 

https://mobile.twitter.com/FliedGaff/status/1243616620733296641

https://mobile.twitter.com/FliedGaff/status/1242997833818488833

https://twitter.com/FliedGaff/status/1249546801079709696

https://mobile.twitter.com/FliedGaff/status/1252255158072799232

Expand full comment

This smelled like a Hail Mary from the jump, given the usual suspects who ran (off a cliff) with the story.

Expand full comment

Let's see.... Ryan Grim of the Intercept broke the Tara Reade story. It took the corporate media 19 days to report it, after Bernie Sanders dropped out of the primary race.

You know which other sexual assault case was broken by Ryan Grim of the Intercept? Christine DeBlasey Ford's. Funny how the NYTimes jumped on it and put out a fuzzy piece on her 2 days later before her case had been investigated or corroborated. Huh.

Interesting how none of this was mentioned in this piece, eh? 🙄

Expand full comment

DeBlassey Ford was very hesitant to come forward with her story. Reade was all too eager to spew her accusations coming after Sanders bowed out of the race.

This is just a temper tantrum you far left children are throwing.

Expand full comment

The far left now has a scorched earth policy. They are as bad as Trump's cult members.

Expand full comment

If you’ll recall, DeBlasey Ford was “outed” by someone close to Pelosi. She only wanted someone to investigate. There is a qualitative difference in the two stories, though I agree in both cases the passage of time makes corroboration difficult.

Expand full comment

How much did the traitor Trump team pay her for these lies? We already know how the white house crooks, liars and thieves like to destroy reputations, spread lies, pay people off to get what they want! They did the same thing with Clinton with the email lies BUT this time Trump, his pussys and Russia are NOT fooling anyone. Lets talk about the hookers TRUMP paid off and the 13year old girl he RAPED!!

Expand full comment

I don't believe her sorry. She is simpily trying to get fifteen minutes of fame cuz he's the nominee. Disgusting.

Expand full comment

My jaw dropped open when I saw this lady's face on the news. To this day, I have no idea what was touch and what was fiction from her mouth. Alexandra, why don't you repay some of your debts and apologize for conning good people in "PG"?

Expand full comment

*truth

Expand full comment

Reade told contradicting stories about how and why she left the Biden office and later Washington. In April 2019, she stated that Biden's behavior towards her (improper touching) had not been in a 'sexualizing' manner (as also reported by others). That would have been the time to tell THIS story. She has tried to erase stuff that she had written and posted. She claimed to have spoken repeatedly to Biden staffers complaining about his conduct. Those staffers deny that and said that they would remember such complaints. No other staffers backed up her claims about the atmosphere in that office. No other women have ever made such a drastic claim as this against Biden. If the staffers are telling the truth when they deny that she spoke with them, then the only two possibilities are that she is deluded or is lying. If she is telling the truth, then those 3 are lying. Maybe Biden made a pass at her but did not do what she is saying now. Who knows but them? There is no way to prove or disprove such an accusation from 1993 and with no witnesses. What one can prove is that Tara Reade, like the woman who accused Al Franken, when about recently to weaponize her accusation -- true, false, or exaggerated -- against Biden for the purpose of taking out a candidate on behalf of her 'cause'. Blaisey Ford was not attempting to weaponize her experience with Kavanaugh, nor had she ever made statements that kavanaugh had not 'sexualized' her. Nor had she claimed to have reported to 3 people of authority who then deny that she had done that.

Expand full comment

Yeah, it's not like publicly accusing powerful men of sexual assault is DIFFICULT or anything.

And yes, all of DeBlasey Ford's "witnesses" didn't confirm her story, and they said they didn't remember the party she talked about.

Reade's witnesses have confirmed she told them in the 90s.

You're full of shit.

Expand full comment

Aside from your unnecessarily using Invective, your post here misses several things. I never said that it is easy to raise such accusations. That is not true. But that does not mean that they are always true. Ford did not intend to use her accusation against Kavanaugh. I believe that Ryan Grim, who is also involved here, had a hand in that. Ford also did not claim to have filed a complaint, spoken with 3 adults in positions of authority, only to later have no record of a complaint and have those same 3 people deny having ever heard any complaint from her. Clearly, either Reade or else those 3 people are lying-- can we agree on that? Reade was an adult at the time of the alleged misdeed, Ford was not. Reade had a chance, a year ago to make her claim. but instead she stated that Biden's behavior, while not proper, was not sexualized. Later, while considering Biden and others to be too anti-Putin and while supporting Sanders, she 'weaponized' her story, whether true or false, clearly with the intention of preventing his nomination and, with the help of Grim, the Intercept, etc. getting it to Sanders. Can we agree on that? There is no way to disprove or prove her claim. If someone raised such a claim with these circumstances against Sanders, Warren, or any candidate and there were no similar complaints, I (and likely you, in Sanders case, I guess) would not consider it further. So let us take the hypothetical case that your father or mother (a teacher, mayor, whatever) were accused of such a misdeed in 1993, with the same problems, contradictions, denials by 3 people, and motivations as here. Would you just assume the accusation to be truthful? I doubt it.

Expand full comment

Reade told some people something.

No one has confirmed WHAT she told them contemporaneously. They remember “something” happened.

I had a truly queasy-making interaction with my BIL when I was about 30 years old. (Similar time frame — maybe 1995?) I told only a few people the details, but I would bet you each one of them would remember the really queasy-making details, because I was *specific*. I didn’t file a police report as I didn’t want to humiliate my sister any further. (They did divorce, eventually.)

Expand full comment

Reade's story has roughly the same level of evidence behind it as Blaisey Ford's accusation against Kavanaugh: baseline plausibility, personal recollection, and people corroborating that they were told about it at the time. Nearly all of your criticism is attacks on her for not being a perfect victim, such as her views on russia, the fact she didn't tell everyone all details about the event at once, or the sources that reported her story first. Bad, bad stuff.

Expand full comment

No, that is absolutely not what I am criticizing her for. I have no interest whatsoever in her views on Russia. What is interesting however, is the rapid transformation of her politics from anti Russia, to militantly pro Russia, to anti Russia again in the space of 18 months. It is completely bizarre, particularly when you track it with her transformation on Joe Biden. She went from being pro Biden, to accusing him of inappropriate behavior, to accusing him of sexual assault during the same time frame. Furthermore, her brother's story changed and Biden's staff resolutely deny speaking to her about Biden's alleged harassment. There are far, far too many inconsistencies to take her allegations seriously. Dr. Blaisey Ford has no such history, and is a far more reliable witness. So the cases are not similar.

Expand full comment

Ok, but you just said you have no interest in her views on russia, and then said a whole lot more about her views on Russia. Maybe she's just a politically active person who changes her views a lot? This angle is very clearly a character attack against her, which has nothing to do with whether or not she was assaulted.

Expand full comment

I don't care what her particular views on Russia are (whether she loves or hates the country). I do care that a highly educated, politically minded woman in her mid 50's, developed a bizarre fixation with Russia and Vladimir Putin, then did a complete about turn after she supposedly found out about Russia's domestic abuse issues (that she already knew about because she tweeted about them two years previously). It's just flat out strange and an important insight into her character. When someone exhibits this sort of behavior, it becomes extremely difficult to take them seriously. As I stated in the piece, I have no idea whether she is telling the truth about Biden. All I know is that she has made a string of provably false statements, displayed extremely bizarre behavior, and key witnesses refute vital aspects of her story. On that basis, I can't take her seriously.

Expand full comment

Ben, you wrote a very fair and balanced article. I disagree with people saying she's lying because she waited 27 years to come forward. There is no time table for the decision to go public with such a traumatic event. Many victims take a life time to come forward, so that reasoning is not helpful. It is her head spinning contradictions that you need a spread sheet to keep straight, that call her newest allegation into question.

One of the contradictions that stands out the most is her shifting reason for why she left Washington and Biden's office. She has written many blogs and has been interviewed in the past by local papers and here is a list of her reasons for why she left.

 1. Her boyfriend got a new job and kept her up all night BEGGING her to move with him. She was very decriptive in her writing and it was a very personal blog. Why would she lye?

2. Washington was too anti Russian and trying to bring Russia to it's knees.

3. She left to persue an acting and modeling career.

4. She was asked to serve drinks at an event because someone told her Biden liked her legs, she refused and was side lined, put in a windowless office, then was forced to resign. Although in another article she said she was fine with serving drinks and being complemented  because she was a model and used to that kind of attention.😕

5. She said that Biden touched her shoulder, which made her uncomfortable. She made an official complaint,  then was fired. 

6. She said the issue had nothing to do with Biden, it was about him not overseeing his staff and seeing that she was being bullied? She also said the problem was about corruption.

I'm so confused, my head hurts.

One part of this story you haven't written about is her extensive history of fraud. 

You have a reply from your April 26 post from "PG Tara Victim" saying they know Tara and she is infamous in Pacific Grove California for tricking people, telling them sob stories and then ripping them off. She apparently left a trail of destruction and financial ruin. The poster says to contact Grove Market grocery and they'd have a story to tell.

Reade skipped town on hundreds of thousands of $$ of loans, rent, bills & taxes. Grove Market in Pacific Grove got stuck with her $2000+ tab. Landlord stuck with $12,000 in unpaid rent. 

Tara filed for bankruptcy, owing $400,000. She has been sued many times (a university and a bank) and she has sued others many times. She even sued a non profit shelter that she worked for, for discrimination against her for "being too white" LOL

Lynn Hummer at @mare_rescue (twitter) runs a horse rescue charity. She was ripped off by Tara who defrauded her for $1,400. She even asked Lynn if she could hide her car on her property so it wouldn't be repossessed. Lynn refused.

Here are some links to people much smarter than me, doing amazing  sleuthing. 

@FliedGaff ( twitter ) started looking into the Tara saga March 25th. They show documentation  for lawsuits, bankruptcy and all her blog and twitter posts. It will take days to sift through all their threads. 

https://mobile.twitter.com/FliedGaff/status/1243616620733296641

https://mobile.twitter.com/FliedGaff/status/1242997833818488833

https://twitter.com/FliedGaff/status/1249546801079709696

https://mobile.twitter.com/FliedGaff/status/1252255158072799232

Some people have speculated that Tara has bipolar disorder or anti-social personality disorder, which is a possibility. She loves to play the victim, blames everybody else for her problems, seems to have an intense desire for revenge, appears to be  a pathological liar and has an overblown sense of her own importance. Wow, I think I have just described Trump! Tara is a younger, female version of Trump. We're doomed. 😢

Expand full comment

Ben,

I have tried to read up on as much as I can about this case, primarily because I like to know what I am voting for. Like you, I have seen inconsistencies in Tara's story, that are troubling for her credibility, but there are two factors that may seem to lend to Tara's credibility that are concerning to me, and make me have concerns about voting for Biden, though if he is the ultimate democratic nominee, I will vote for him, because he has lesser sexual assault allegations than Trump, and fewer felons, as well. But, one factor that is lending to Tara's credibility for me, is the fact that her mother made the call anonymously into Larry King show asking for advice on making a sexual harassment claim, against a prominent US Senator. The call which has been authenticated, and the transcript has been located, was made at the end of the month that Tara parted working for Biden, be that fired, or left on her own device, and was made from Tara' mother's place of residence, San Luis Ebispo, Ca. So that is a record that the incidence was concerning enough to Tara, that she told her mother, at the time, and second that the incidence was concerning enough to her mother, to call in to the Larry King show, to ask advice on pursuing a sexual harassment claim of a US Senator. King asked the mother why the victim wouldn't just go forth to the media and tell the story. And, the mother's answer was that the victim wasn't wanting the story to be drug into the mud, by the media. This was striking to me, at first. I mean, why wouldn't someone want their story to be known in the media, but then there had been the Lewinsky case that had played out expressly harshly in the media, so that could be understandable. But, mainly, what is important to note, here, is that Tara had told her mother, and her mother felt strongly enough about it at the time, that she was seeking advice on how to pursue making issue on it, which could also speak to the difficulty coming forward against a high profile male, at the time.

The second credibility lending factor for Tara, now, is the neighbor going on record this week, giving her name, in the NPR article.

While the inconsistencies are concerning, in this harassment case, the verifiable factors, can't be dismissed either, and actually probably indicate the likelihood that some form of violation did occur. It is hard to know what that would've been exactly, when only two parties were actually present when it occurred.

Expand full comment

John, I have attached the call transcript from Larry King Live for you to read, along with what Tara Reade claimed her mom had said in the call. It's mind boggling how the Berners have managed to get such traction out of a call that actually proves Tara to be a liar. The sleazey "journalist" hid the crucial part behind a paywall, knowing most people would not be able to read it

Her mom never says anything about assault or harassment, she doesn't even name Biden. 

- What Tara claimed her mom said:

"I remember it being an anonymous call and her saying my daughter was sexually harassed and retaliated against and fired, where can she go for help? I was mortified," Reade told me.

What her mom actually said:

KING: San Luis Obispo, California, hello.

CALLER: Yes, hello. I’m wondering what a staffer would do besides go to the press in Washington? My daughter has just left there, after working for a prominent senator, and could not get through with her problems at all, and the only thing she could have done was go to the press, and she chose not to do it out of respect for him.

KING: In other words, she had a story to tell but, out of respect for the person she worked for, she didn’t tell it?

CALLER: That’s true.

See, no mention of assault. She doesn't even say the "problem" had to do with the Senator, it could have been problems with staffers

Also about the neighbor's corroberation. It's bean discovered that the friend didn't recall being told, but then Tara called her and according to the friend "walked her through" what she had told her. Then she suddenly remembered! Her brother also was coached by Nathan Robinson, a left wing hack. The brother first told a newspaper reporter he only remembered Tara telling him Biden had touched her neck and made her feel uncomfortable. Robinson admits he convinced her brother to text the newspaper a correction claiming he suddenly remembered Tara telling him about Biden putting hands under clothes.

Both corroberators were compromised.

She's a liar and a fraud and harming victims everywhere.

Expand full comment

But, that is not how the article reads, that I read by The Intercept. The article says, that Tara had told her mother at the time regarding that sexual harassment, or assault had happened with her former boss, US Senator Joe Biden. It doesn't matter that the transcript doesn't specifically reference that by her mother. We all know, that her mother wouldn't be calling in to just ask advice on any personal problem, as it said at the top of the article that her mother had been it was sexual assault/harassment, so even though the transcript of the call is edited, and so is the subject matter of the LK show that night for that matter, but the mother knew the story was about sexual harassment, and really what problem besides a sexual harassment, by a prominent US Senator would a mother be calling about? Come on, really? She called at the end of the month that her daughter and Biden had seperated, they verified it is her mother, that the call was made from her mother's address at the time. That is still, confirming circumstantial evidence, no matter what Ginsu knife, you want to run it under and dice it to serve on a platter. That is your proof that something happened at the time. Tara's mom wouldn't have been calling LK about it, if she wasn't trying to figure out how to hold Biden, accountable, at the time. I don't want to see our democratic candidate fail in this 2020 election, I want him to win. But, I don't want a sexual assaulter/harasser winning, as we have now. Trump shouldn't be in office either. You don't get 25 (Trump) sexual harassment/assault/rape claims, and 8 (Biden) of sexual harassment/assault, just by looking at a lady. And, these women aren't coming forth because they love the media scrutiny, either. I believe Biden who has plagiarism issues early on in his political career, as well, as evidenced, here: https://youtu.be/fmuAB5MqP0Y

should cede the election to a stronger unscathed morally, candidate, like the democrat governor of NY, LA, or CA, who have been handling the Covid virus, swimmingly, and who anyone of, could wipe Trump with the floor in a debate. Biden wasn't even winning on his own device, 4 months ago. A lot of people, made concessions, for Biden to be securing the nomination. The representative from SC implored people to vote for Biden, Buttigieg dropped out of the race to make way for Biden and was asked to endorse Biden, when he was leading Biden, Klobuchar the same, and then Yang was asked to endorse Biden, as well, all three orchestrated, by former President Obama. So a lot of concessions were made to get Biden to the top, to begin with, which I think is unfair of itself. Now, with all that he is beseiged with, it will likely be very hard for Biden to defeat Trump. We need a younger more decisive, able to demonstrate being powerful to defeat Trump, candidate, who isn't struggling to prove his morality, and who could actually win on his own device. I mean, even those touchy-feely senate picks of Biden stroking women's shoulders, and smelling their hair, does not bode well for Biden. What married Senator, should be touching a colleague's wive's shoulders, or stroking her hair? He should've only shook their hand, thanked them, and went home to his wife.

Expand full comment

FYI the phone call to Larry King never mentioned sexual harassment. It mentioned that her daughter had “personnel” issues.

Expand full comment

Blaisey Ford's accusation was far more believable because Kavanaugh's behavior was not a one-off and was also exhibited in his yearbook catch-phrases. And they roughly hung out in the same crowd...AND it occurred in a bedroom! Reade couldn't name the place or time (how convenient) but said it occurred in a corridor, a hallway - semi-private. That means the public did not have access to it but staff and legislators did. To slam her against a cold war and perpetuate his attack was not only out of character for Biden (he is a very gentle man) but it would be extremely foolish because anyone could have seen them there. What I suspect happened is Reade was fired, probably because she failed to focus on the work, instead made everything about her, preening etc. (Having worked in a busy senate office, no one's looking at your legs, no matter how glamorous you might think you are.) AND once fired, she had to come up with a reason why to family and friends. Reade prides herself as an actress and writer...very creative lady. She's someone who can tell a good story...and voila. Look at how it's paid off...ehge whole world is focused on her. If I were Biden, I'd be furious. He has more important things to focus on...like saving the free world from itself. GCFraser

Expand full comment

John, I have concerns about the allegations too, but please note that the Monica Lewinsky scandal wasn’t revealed to the public until 1998, well after this alleged incident took place (1993 according to Reade).

Expand full comment

Based on this standard, how would e.g. a person with a history of bipolar disorder ever expect to be taken seriously if they were assaulted? Or an addict? Sex workers? In your own words: "When someone exhibits this sort of behavior, it becomes extremely difficult to take them seriously." Strange, imperfect, and mentally ill people get assaulted all the time. By your standard none of these people would ever be taken seriously.

Expand full comment

Reade told contradicting stories about how and why she left the Biden office and later Washington. In April 2019, she stated that Biden's behavior towards her (improper touching) had not been in a 'sexualizing' manner (as also reported by others). That would have been the time to tell THIS story. She has tried to erase stuff that she had written and posted. She claimed to have spoken repeatedly to Biden staffers complaining about his conduct. Those staffers deny that and said that they would remember such complaints. No other staffers backed up her claims about the atmosphere in that office. No other women have ever made such a drastic claim as this against Biden. If the staffers are telling the truth when they deny that she spoke with them, then the only two possibilities are that she is deluded or is lying. If she is telling the truth, then those 3 are lying. Maybe Biden made a pass at her but did not do what she is saying now. Who knows but them? There is no way to prove or disprove such an accusation from 1993 and with no witnesses. What one can prove is that Tara Reade, like the woman who accused Al Franken, when about recently to weaponize her accusation -- true, false, or exaggerated -- against Biden for the purpose of taking out a candidate on behalf of her 'cause'.

Expand full comment

>Reade told contradicting stories about how and why she left the Biden office and later Washington.

This is to be expected. Victims often don't tell the whole story all at once, or deny altogether that they were assaulted.

Expand full comment

Blaisey Ford's accusation was far more believable because Kavanaugh's behavior was not a one-off and was also exhibited in his yearbook catch-phrases. And they roughly hung out in the same crowd...AND it occurred in a bedroom! Reade could name the place or time (how convenient) but said it occurred in a corridor, a hallway - semi-private. That means the public did not have access to it but staff and legislators did. To slam her against a cold war and perpetuate his attack was not only out of character for Biden (he is a very gentle man) but it would be extremely foolish because anyone could have seen them there. What I suspect happened is Reade was fired, probably because she failed to focus on the work, instead made everything about her, preening etc. (Having worked in a busy senate office, no one's looking at your legs, no matter how glamorous you might think you are.) AND once fired, she had to come up with a reason why to family and friends. Reade prides herself as an actress and writer...very creative lady. She's someone who can tell a good story...and voila. Look at how it's paid off...ehge whole world is focused on her. If I were Biden, I'd be furious. He has more important things to focus on...like saving the free world from itself. GCFraser

Expand full comment

Also, remarks about Biden putting his hand, or hands?, under her clothing are vague. If it happened, it could be more consistent with the other things TR is saying if it would be clothing around her neck. In addition to the meeting anecdote, what hypothetically happened in that hallway would have made it necessary for a perpetrator to get TR's pantyhose (which she was probably wearing) down, requiring that he reach up to find the top of the hosiery at her waist and maybe even under a waist-band or belt. Were that to have happened, it seems unlikely that a victim would have failed to mention it sometime later somehow, unless it might raise questions about how she could have gotten away.

Expand full comment

She actually addresses that and says it was a hot day so she wasn’t wearing panty hose. I think by the 1990s there were women who didn’t wear panty hose — not sure if it would have been unusual for a Hill staffer to not wear panty hose in 1993.

Expand full comment

CORRECTION: Reade couldn't..name the place...etc.

Expand full comment

Here is what a media bias reporting site has to say about The Banter " They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information" That perfectly sums up my immediate feeling upon reading this article, when I was simply looking for more information. It's so utterly annoying. Where have all the journalists gone?

Expand full comment

My god, is this what passes for journalism these days? It is complete propaganda, full of inflamatory words and phrases, and no substance whatsoever. Absolutely lazy and lacking in integrity.

Expand full comment

And here we are today, with Tara Read exposed as the pathological liar that she is! Proving Ben is right and you all are a bunch of sucky babies that don;t want to hear the truth!

Sucks being you losers, don't it?

Expand full comment

Why, oh why, did this other (anonymous) accuser wait until all of the other candidates had dropped out of the race to go public?

I do understand her reticence at coming forward. I don’t understand waiting until there are no other options. (And don’t tell me to vote third party.)

Expand full comment

Reade claims he pushed her against the cold wall of the hallway. She also refers to it as a corridor....semi-private, mind you. What she references is the corridor that staffers and legislators use. It's a way of avoiding the public and going about their business. For Biden to pick such a spot to assault her is beyond belief. Anyone could have walked by. Crazy.

Expand full comment

Any examples of other stories the Sanders supporters have backed that aren't true.You seem to have a defiant bias against us.I for one am only interested in the truth.

Expand full comment

WHERE HER PROOF AND AS WE ALL KNOW A WHOLE BUNCH OF WOMEN SADE THAT ABOUT trumpTOO BUT HE IS A'' HE WHORE''

Expand full comment

"I have learned over the years to immediately distrust journalism coming from ideological outlets on all sides of the spectrum in America."

You don't seem to have learned to distrust journalism coming from neoliberal outlets. Which is understandable--humans, being human, tend to be blind to their own biases.

Expand full comment

Yes, The Nation and Salon are neoliberal outlets dedicated to furthering the agenda of corporate Dems...

Expand full comment

You don't think Jonathan Chait is a neoliberal? He wrote the piece that the author links to which inspired my comment.

Expand full comment

You clearly have no idea what "neoliberal" means. And no, Jonathan Chait is not a neoliberal. It's a slur far left ideologues use to smear people they believe aren't sufficiently militant.

Expand full comment

Neo liberal means "Democrat who didn't support Bernie in the primaries".

Expand full comment

It's a word with a long history that describes the politics of the New Democrats who rejected the politics of the New Deal Democrats.

But sure, pretend it's just a slur.

Expand full comment

I'm referring to the way you and hard left ideologues use the word. The term no longer has meaning since ideologues began using it to smear people they disagree with. That you would label Chait a "neoliberal" is evidence you really have no idea what it means.

Expand full comment

Have you read David Harvey's book on neoliberalism? I recommend it highly.

And did you notice that I gave you a link to a New Republic article on neoliberalism? Chait worked there. The article's worth a read. It mentions Chait by name.

Expand full comment

No one has to pretend. It is intended has a slur, as demonstrated by your self-righteous posts.

Expand full comment

You don't seem to understand journalistic standards.

Expand full comment

It's sounds like you have an agenda. You're attacking a journalist for reporting the facts that you don't like cuz it doesn't fit your biases.

Expand full comment

Because victims of sexual assault want to disbelieve other vicitms. Uh huh.

Expand full comment

So how's it going, now that Tara Read's story has been exposed as the absolute nothingburger that it is, hmmmm?

Expand full comment

Making you Exhibit A of your own comments that have clearly gone over your head.

Expand full comment

Opening with an insult is usually a sign that the speaker is suffering from cognitive dissonance.

Expand full comment

Right, because calling you out on your temper tantrum is a sign of weakness on my part. Thanks for giving us a glimpse into your mindset.

Expand full comment

A temper tantrum? Oh, dear child, your projection is mighty.

I must say you chose an excellent pseudonym.

Expand full comment

You come into in this place and automatically respond to the article by calling it neoliberal. As to insult it.

Don't expect us to treat you seriously as an adult.

Expand full comment

No one expects someone named "the Crab" to treat anyone as an adult, especially given the degree of ignorance shown in assuming neoliberal is only an insult rather than a description of post-New Deal politics.

Expand full comment

What an awful story. Lol The concern trolling, the obvious bias against Greenwald any time you mention the "far left" media, and sourcing the Krassenstein brothers, who have been in trouble with the law for online Ponzi schemes. Just god awful.

This isn't journalism, it's a hit piece.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/feds-seized-a-fortune-from-resistance-icons-accused-of-boosting-online-ponzi-schemes

Expand full comment

It is interesting that you do not cite specific issues with their work or any of the inconsistencies in Reade's story they uncovered. Because you can't.

Expand full comment

Charlotte provided more background on Tara in her Apr 29 letter. Do check it out.

Expand full comment

Thanks

Expand full comment

Exactly, This is not journalism, but its a perfect example of what journalism has become in when news outlets are used to pursue an agenda. This is not a journalist! Funny to hear him dismiss the " far left and right" as not being trustworthy, when he is totally and completely biased and somehow, manages to be completely oblivious to his own biases. I would say he is projecting all of his own faults as a so called journalism onto everyone else but lacks any insight into himself. The words he uses to describe everyone else but himself is laughable.

Expand full comment