What's the basis for claiming Biden has something on her that will disprove her statements?
I'm also not defending her accusations. I'm suggesting this story can't be ignored and it will only continue to fester until there's an adequate response.
Look, I think Reade has a credibility issue but it doesn't matter what I think. The Biden campaign has a choice to make.
1) They deny again, with Biden publicly saying it's not true (not just via a statement). Then move on and hope the media moves on as well. But that's not a guarantee. Hell, the campaign has basically ignored it beyond a statement and the issue has only grown with more information coming out that keeps it in the news (Larry King interview, the neighbor who said Tara told her in the mid-90s, etc).
2) Grant an interview where he can deny and answer any rebuttal questions from a specific reporter. This would allow for a vetting of the issue, give Biden an opportunity to explain why it's not true but also risks making it an even bigger story, especially if he can't provide any way to discount what she's said beyond just stating over and over again that he didn't do it. If what is suggested in the initial post is true, and they have something that could discredit her, that would be a perfect opportunity to do so (like releasing info on why she was let go - maybe corroborating stories that she left on her own accord, which would cast doubt on her story). Regardless, there might not be an explanation that placates those who doubt him. So, he could use this moment to speak about who he is and how personal this fight is and all he's done for women who are abused. If it's basically down to he said/she said and they lack any evidence that counters her claim (I wasn't in office with Tara in 1993 because she was in California or Delaware or whatever), the next option would be to sell it that Biden couldn't possibly do these things because it's out of character. Whether you and I believe that is irrelevant. It's the undecided voters who now need the convincing.
3) Say nothing. Refuse to comment. State you already denied it and now are focused on other things. This is risky because it also rests on whether the media largely moves on too. It's possible, after a week or two, they do just that. It's also possible other "evidence" continues to come forward and keeps it in the news.
Right now I don't know what the answer is but it's clear this story has traction. Whatever option Biden chooses is going to be vital as the election could be in the balance (tbh I doubt it will be a major issue but I also thought this was far smaller a month ago than I think it is now, so, without predicting the future, I can't say what this will look like in a month or two - or by November).
= new reply since forum marked as read
