With the controversy over sexual assault allegations against Joe Biden now fully out in the open, many on the Left are circling the wagons to protect the presumptive 2020 Democratic nominee -- totally and shamelessly abandoning their previous standards over such allegations. I've written and said that Biden deserves the presumption of innocence. Tara Reade has some significant contemporaneous evidence boosting the credibility of her claims, but there are also some inconsistencies and red flags that cast doubt on the situation.
As members of the political media, Democratic politicians and lefty activists rediscover the value of evidence, skepticism and fairness, they'd enhance their own credibility by apologizing en masse to Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh, against whom they abandoned many of the standards they're suddenly embracing again, out of political necessity. Kavanaugh had far less evidence against him than Biden has, so their mental gymnastics and intellectual contortions have been a sight to behold. I've been following the spin rather closely. Here are some useful responses...
(1) On the "but Biden was vetted" talking point:
When Kavanaugh’s intense vetting and multiple previous FBI background checks were raised by conservatives, that defense was outright rejected by virtually everyone making this point today: https://t.co/zJVlpXIr0S— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) May 3, 2020
(2) On the inconsistencies in Reade's story:
Hi Alyssa,— (((AG))) (@AGHamilton29) May 3, 2020
You remember when some of us pointed out that Blasey Ford changed details in her story repeatedly (such as how many people were there) and not one of the material facts she provided checked out, but people like you attacked us for not just believing her? https://t.co/a3iDFGb0mg
Hillary compromised top secret material on a bootleg server, in flagrant violation of the rules, permanently destroyed work-related emails after getting caught, and lied about it endlessly. Biden is accused of sexual assault by a woman with at least some contemporaneous evidence. https://t.co/hq8zv5pfR3— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) May 2, 2020
(4) On the "conservative smear campaign" talking point:
And the accuser is a Democrat, backed by up Democrats she told https://t.co/6VTYTifI4e— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) May 1, 2020
(5) On the "insufficient evidence" talking point:
You were fanatical on Kavanaugh, based on far less evidence. You used the hashtag #IBelieveChristineBlaseyFord & tweeted “voting for Kavanaugh... means that the GOP men are saying Dr Blasey Ford is lying. Remember this, voters.” https://t.co/73JiFcWiuF— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) May 1, 2020
Just stop embarrassing yourselves and admit that you wanted to believe the allegations against Kavanaugh because you didn't want him on the Supreme Court and therefore applied a ridiculous standard to him that you would never want applied to anyone you like or care about.— (((AG))) (@AGHamilton29) May 1, 2020
There was no pattern with Kavanaugh and far less evidence. In fact, when people pointed out that women around BK said he had always treated them with respect, it was dismissed by many on the left as irrelevant. https://t.co/xFeF5AfM3p— (((AG))) (@AGHamilton29) May 3, 2020
(6) On the truly wild "there is no double standard" talking point:
The double standard is so obvious that no amount of gaslighting will work. Kavanaugh did a nationally televised interview and endured hours of sworn public testimony. And the FBI conducted follow-up interviews that uncovered witness tampering by Ford allies. https://t.co/FR0o8nlXEj— Guy Benson (@guypbenson) May 1, 2020
And here's a fun coda to Powers' ridiculous assertion (content warning):
This is some dishonest bullshit right here. Kirsten Powers sanitized her Twitter account of all her Kavanaugh confirmation hearing tweets pic.twitter.com/RDwgHiUU3S— Fusilli Spock (@awstar11) May 3, 2020
Her explanation, if one can call it that, is here. Feeling regret over the tone of past tweets is one thing, but it's not a great look to simultaneously argue that a clear double standard is a figment of your opponents' imagination while deleting your own contributions to that very double standard. In case you missed it, you'd need a heart of stone not to laugh at The New York Times editorial board's suggestion that the Democratic Party investigate the Biden accusation, rather than the press (the Times ran hundreds of stories on Kavanaugh) or other authorities. Byron York calls the editorial "truly beyond parody." Be sure to read Andrew Sullivan discussing how Joe Biden's politically-motivated hostility toward the rights of the accused is coming back to bite him, as well as this line from Maureen Dowd's latest column -- which is far more intellectually honest than the risible drivel from the editorial board:
Anita Hill and Blasey Ford were "making charges against conservative Supreme Court nominees whom Democrats and feminists were eager to derail. So it became a pre-emptory matter of, all women must be believed — when it’s convenient for my side."https://t.co/7STvNqiOUP?— Josh Kraushaar (@HotlineJosh) May 3, 2020
I believe you, Tara Reade.— Lisa Bloom (@LisaBloom) May 1, 2020
You have people who remember you told them about this decades ago.
We know he is "handsy."
You're not asking for $.
You've obviously struggled mightily with this.
I still have to fight Trump, so I will still support Joe.
But I believe you. And I'm sorry https://t.co/eMUBrkkVFE
Sure, Handsy Joe did it, but we must stop Trump.