Talk:Joe Biden sexual assault allegation

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Update[edit]

Today, Tara Reade officially defected to Russia, is seeking Russian citizenship, and is working with Kremlin allies to fast-track her citizenship process. I kid you not.

https://sputnikglobe.com/amp/20230530/biden-accuser-tara-reade-my-two-choices-in-us-were-to-walk-into-cage-or-be-killed-1110800326.html

https://www.thedailybeast.com/joe-biden-accuser-tara-reade-claims-she-defected-to-russia-after-sexual-assault-allegations?ref=scroll

This also comes after at least five years of promoting an endless stream of pro-Putin, pro-Kremlin propaganda, and being literally on the payroll of Russian state media outlet RT.

Are we not going to mention this? It is a well-known fact that Vladimir Putin and the Russian government have, ever since Donald Trump launched his 2016 campaign, engaged in influence operations in order to influence United States politics in favor of the Republican Party. Having Joe Biden’s accuser turn out to be a Russian agent takes a pretty big dip into her own credibility—or, really, lack thereof—and I think it very much ought to be mentioned, at least a tad bit.

EDIT: I redact my allegation that Reade is a Russian “agent”. I redact nothing else, though. Mcleanm302 (talk) 20:34, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Mcleanm302, please redact your allegation that she is an "agent", and be mindful about that in the future. That's a serious allegation that has not been demonstrated. The other things you said about her Russophilia are valid. It does seem to me that defecting is a significant "further development". – Muboshgu (talk) 22:35, 30 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oh my, how the turntables. If we prefer more reputable sources, there are the NY Times and the Sydney Morning Herald. Zaathras (talk) 04:26, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"ever since Donald Trump launched his 2016 campaign, engaged in influence operations in order to influence United States politics in favor of the Republican Party." Wait a minute, there was no Russian influence in the 2012 United States presidential election? I find that hard to believe. Dimadick (talk) 04:53, 31 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

REQUEST FOR REDACTION. Reade did not "defect". According to Reade's interview with Megyn Kelly she was in Moscow working on the translation of her book into Russian and book-PR matters, when she was notified by someone with intelligence contacts that she was on an Interpol Red Notice list, and could be expected to be detained on the way home to the U.S. or in the U.S. on-return. She could have requested asylum on grounds of political persecution, instead, she asked for expedited citizenship. The Webster definition of "defection" is "when a person leaves their home country in a way the home country claims to be illegal. To the first country, they can be seen as traitors. It is a political label used by authoritarian countries. More broadly, it involves abandoning a person, cause, or doctrine to which one is bound by some tie.". There's no U.S. claim of illegal departure by Reade. Hence no defection. She's notably NOT renouncing her U.S. citizenship.

According to Reade, there's a sealed indictment about her, in the hands of the USDOJ. She feels politically persecuted, on grounds that she criticized the sitting President/former Senator.

Reade did not flee justice. Hence no defection. BlueSapphires (talk) 09:15, 15 June 2023‎ (UTC)[reply]

We write what RS say. -- Valjean (talk) (PING me) 14:43, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If a news source libelled her, you think it's ok to repeat what they wrote?
I get-it that people don't like her because she accused the sitting President of sexual assault. But that's not ok. BlueSapphires (talk) 12:04, 29 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
One WP:RS source used in this article (incorrectly) says Reade "defected". The other one makes a point of saying that what she did currently falls short of defection. So "defected" should be removed even if you think our sources are so good that we can rely on them not just for statements of fact but also definitions of words. Connor Behan (talk) 02:17, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Many reliable sources describe it as a defection. Even Reade herself does so. So no, we will not be removing it. Zaathras (talk) 03:39, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
I changed "defected" to "fled" per the USA Today, which, as you say, contradicts with the claim that Reade defected: "She stopped short of saying she was formally defecting and renouncing her U.S. citizenship." Politrukki (talk) 12:34, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Reade may not describe it as a defection, but reliable sources do. So abundantly that I don't think it's fair to describe using the term as a BLP violation. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:56, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Misrepresenting sources is a BLP violation. I did a quick random sampling of reliable sources with a search "marina butina tara reade" and chose six sources that looked reliable: AFP, NPR, CBS News, Time, The Hill, and The Week. Note that I didn't cherry-pick these sources based on their content. Only The Hill uses the word "defected", attributing the claim (that is contradicted by USA Today) to Reade: "she shared publicly that she was defecting to the country".
Can you provide evidence that sources predominantly say "defected"? If not, we're having a major NPOV problem, which is also a BLP problem because all material about living persons must strictly adhere to neutral point of view.
If the defection claim is treated as an allegation, as it probably should, we should also include Reade's denial per PUBLICFIGURE. Politrukki (talk) 14:42, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Despite your intenetion, the results are biased from the way you used the search engine. SPECIFICO talk 16:21, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"evidence that sources predominantly say "defected" " is not the right framing here. There's no disagreement between sources that say "fled" and sources that say "defected". There are also many sources that say neither. We can talk about the best word to use, but it doesn't need to be the one sources use the most. I would be fine with including a denial, if it can be sourced, but the USA Today source wouldn't cut it. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:24, 1 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

poor understanding of the meaning of sexual harassment[edit]

'Reade told the Associated Press that her complaint to the Senate personnel office was about "retaliation" and "him wanting me to serve drinks because he liked my legs and thought I was pretty and it made me uncomfortable", with no explicit mention of sexual assault or sexual harassment.' is blatantly incorrect. Not only do we not have the senate complaint, but her claims about the comment regarding her legs absolutely constitutes sexual harassment assuming they are true. Lets not go making claims about the contents of a document we haven't seen now. 2601:2C4:4600:B4D0:B5FD:5008:CD8C:90FC (talk) 14:55, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please make a specific suggestion for the article text, with cited sources of reference for your proposal. Otherwise, this section may be deleted per WP:NOTFORUM. SPECIFICO talk 15:36, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
If their comment is seeking to improve article content, it's not NOTFORUM. The first paragraph of the source used there says Tara Reade, the former Senate staffer who alleges Joe Biden sexually assaulted her 27 years ago, says she filed a limited report with a congressional personnel office that did not explicitly accuse him of sexual assault or harassment. We go by what WP:RS say. Is there a better way for us to word it? – Muboshgu (talk) 15:49, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
That's why the comment has not been deleted, but so far the allegation of "poor understanding" etc is OR without verification for the statement made in the complaint. Let's see what sources and text are suggested. SPECIFICO talk 16:44, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Title & Content Change: Biden Sexual Assault Allegations[edit]

It seems odd this article only focuses so much attention on the Tara Reade allegations, when there are 7 credible accusations against Biden.

Summary of allegations so far:

1) Lucy Flores https://www.politico.com/story/2019/03/29/lucy-flores-joe-biden-1244361 (forced kissing)

2) D. J. Hill https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/02/us/politics/joe-biden-women-me-too.html (hand sliding down back)

3) Caitlyn Caruso https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/02/us/politics/joe-biden-women-me-too.html (unwanted grabbing thigh)

4) Ally Coll https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-says-hell-adjust-his-physical-behavior-as-three-more-women-come-forward/2019/04/03/94a2ed2c-5622-11e9-8ef3-fbd41a2ce4d5_story.html (uncomfortable workplace touching)

5) Sofie Krasek https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-says-hell-adjust-his-physical-behavior-as-three-more-women-come-forward/2019/04/03/94a2ed2c-5622-11e9-8ef3-fbd41a2ce4d5_story.html (uncomfortable workplace touching)

6) Vail Kohnert-Yount https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/biden-says-hell-adjust-his-physical-behavior-as-three-more-women-come-forward/2019/04/03/94a2ed2c-5622-11e9-8ef3-fbd41a2ce4d5_story.html (inappropriate workplace holding faces together; calling 'pretty girl')


It seems like there's only 1 line in the main page devoted to all of these, and of course this page only deals with Reade allegations.

I propose updating this page to include all 7.

Does anyone disagree and think instead the main page should include a longer section about the multiple allegations? ScottDNelson (talk) 03:59, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The question you would need to resolve is not whether anyone diagrees, it is rather whether anyone agrees with your view. I do not. SPECIFICO talk 14:31, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@SPECIFICO Can you please elaborate to make this a productive discussion: you do not what? Agree that this article should be updated to cover all sexual misconduct allegations against Biden? Think that it should instead be covered in Biden's main page?
Or something else? ScottDNelson (talk) 19:07, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"do not disagree", presumably. I think you've included a lot of people that did not make allegations of sexual assault against Biden. I would say that's the main barrier to inclusion here. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:59, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@Firefangledfeathers I think it's hard to know the exact line where sexual assault vs sexual misconduct begins, but I hear your point.
I'll add for reference that according to Rainn: "Fondling or unwanted sexual touching " is one of the examples they give here https://www.rainn.org/articles/sexual-assault
I was in fact thinking about this today and perhaps "sexual misconduct allegations" would be more appropriate in that case, of which of course the sexual assault allegation would be included. ScottDNelson (talk) 00:29, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Have a look at Talk:Joe Biden sexual assault allegation/Archive 8#Requested move 7 May 2020. Regards, AzureCitizen (talk) 01:32, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
thanks for highlighting @AzureCitizen - after reviewing it seems the participants were not aware of the other 7 allegations w.r.t Joe Biden. Otherwise I agree with a lot of sentiments expressed in those threads, and think it's good to use the common definitions we have in there in terms of how we express rape vs assault vs misconduct etc. The Clinton & Trump misconduct pages referenced can be used as guides for precdent. ScottDNelson (talk) 23:55, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Revert Discussion: Tara Reade Death Threats[edit]

Saw that my edit covering Reade's claim of receiving death threats had been reverted due to "weakly sourced"; I'm posting here to propose adding additional sources to make it undoubtedly clear that it was Reade said:

https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/31/politics/tara-reade-defects-russia-biden-intl/index.html#:~:text=Reade%20said%20she%20decided%20to,oath%20in%20Congress%20if%20asked.%E2%80%9D "Reade said she decided to come to Russia following death threats she received this year after she reiterated her accusations"

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/biden-accuser-tara-reade-posts-cryptic-message-about-death-before-testifying-congress

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/12/us/politics/joe-biden-tara-reade-sexual-assault-complaint.html "Ms. Reade said she faced a wave of criticism and death threats"

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ive-had-death-threats-claims-joe-biden-assault-victim-tara-reade-nqd5j7vlv

These are obviously well respected news organizations.

@SPECIFICO FYI as you made the revert, wanted to give you time to review the above before I re-edit the article ScottDNelson (talk) 19:41, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The body of the article already mentions Reade's death threat claims. Since this article is not primarily about her defection, the short mention in the lead is enough, and we don't need to go into detail about her stated reasons. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:47, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm I think a number of articles I've come across include a condensed version of information that is later expanded on in later sections. I think as long as the addition adds value for the reader without completely copying what's below, it adds value - which is what this proposed edit does. ScottDNelson (talk) 00:33, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
My objection is unchanged, please see my edit summary. SPECIFICO talk 17:13, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@SPECIFICO - I'd like to request elaboration on your part, I read your edit summary which is why I made this topic.
In your summary, "weakly sourced" was the phrase you used - please again see above the 4 reputable sources. Also we need to be clear: it is not that we're claiming we know for sure what happened exactly, but it clear based on the reporting that she made the claim of death threats.
" There are many other ways to protect onesself" This is not up to you or me to decide frankly. And if you're insinuating you dont believe certain aspects of her story that's up to you, but that's not what's being discussed here. ScottDNelson (talk) 23:58, 2 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Please have a careful look at our WP:NPOV policy page. I am saying this is UNDUE, weakly (not widely) sourced, and inconsequential and irrelevant to the allegations she made. Thousands of people get such threats nowadays. SPECIFICO talk 00:06, 3 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Joe_Biden_sexual_assault_allegation&oldid=1204724926"