Biden Offers Limited Release From The Archives While Refusing To Open His Delaware Records

220px-Biden_2013The long-awaited response by former Vice President Joe Biden to the allegation of sexual assault by former staff member Tara Reade occurred this morning on MSNBC Morning Joe.  Biden likely viewed this as a most favorable possible forum but host Mika Brzezinski did an excellent job in questioning Biden who, shortly before the interview, publicly called for the release of any complaint by Reade.  Biden’s release was artificially narrow and, while he started strong, he quickly disassembled under questioning as to why he would not allow the release of material from the University of Delaware, which we discussed yesterday.  The refusal drew objections from advocates for victims of sexual assault. Biden also had missteps like calling the allegation “irrelevant.” The one thing that I will again raise is that this controversy should spark a debate over the privatization or control over what should be public documents by politicians.

Let’s unpack this by starting with the correct answer. Biden should have simply declared that he will request the release of any material anywhere that concerns allegations by anyone of sexual misconduct by him.  Period.  That level of transparency would put him in sharp contrast with President Donald Trump.  I have been critical of Trump for years due to his failure to release such material including his taxes. I was also critical of Hillary Clinton in refusing to release Wall Street speeches.  She used Trump’s position to justify her own refusal.  It served her purposes to avoid disclosure of her past comments to Wall Street but it destroyed any high ground in criticizing Trump.

When Biden announced that he would be releasing material, I was hopeful.  Then the clearly abridged language and narrow release became apparent. In fairness his full statement is below. However, this is the key language:

“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.”

There is less than meets the eye in this waiver.  First, the National Archives is not the only place that relevant information would be housed.  The University of Delaware has cut off access to Biden’s official papers which clearly could contain such information.

Second, the Biden waiver only asks for the release of a Reade “complaint” and not any material related to that or other allegations of sexual misconduct.  Why?  All of this is “relevant” and Biden’s action reflected his acknowledgment that there should be public access.  Biden agreed that any complaints could be released but he refused to go further.

Mika correctly pressed on the obvious disconnect and asked why he would not release material on this or other allegations at Delaware.  Biden gave a clearly evasive argument that such material may be used as a “fodder” in the campaign because he addressed his relations with other leaders. Mika pointed out that sexual misconduct material would not present such problems.  Biden however steadfastly refused and became more defiant.  I really do not get the political calculation here.  If you want to be transparent, be transparent. Biden could have carried the day with a total pledge for access for any and all claims found in any archive or library. Instead, the benefit of his waiver was quickly lost by his defiance.

It was the type of moment that lawyers long for in a trial as a well-prepared witness suddenly is thrown off by a probing question.  Both lawyers and police are suspicious when a suspect is highly effusive but artificially narrow in such statements.  It is like a suspect encouraging police to search his farm but becoming irate when asked if they could search his house.  What we need is sunlight not a flashlight point only to a confined area of search.

I am not sure why Biden disassembled.  I found him strong at the outset and commendable in his initial release.  I also do not accept the allegation of rape against him without further proof.  Indeed, the weight of the evidence is clearly favoring Biden given the denial of some many of his staff members of any knowledge of the complaint. However, his dogmatic refusal to open up the Delaware records needs to be addressed quickly.

Finally, as I stated earlier, there is an important issue in all of this controversy that should be addressed about who should control such material. This has been a long-standing issue.  In 2002, I addressed the issue in terms of presidential record: United States House of Representatives, Committee on Government Reform, Subcommittee on Government Management, Information, and Technology, “H.R. 4187: The Presidential Records Act Amendments of 2002,” April 24, 2002. I also wrote a law review article on this subject:  Presidential Records and Popular Government: The Convergence of Constitutional and Property Theory in Claims of Control and Ownership of Presidential Records 88 Cornell Law Review 651-732 (2003).

There is no reason why presidents and senators should treat official documents filed in their offices as their personal property.  The Presidential Records Act, for example, allows a president to not only conceal material but appoint his own loyalists to make critical decisions on whether and when material can be reviewed.  Presidents can unilaterally declare matter as privileged and nonpublic to protect themselves from embarrassment and the judgment of history.

This is wrong.  Those personnel records from Biden’s public service are public records, not his.  By giving the papers to the University of Delaware, Biden selected a university with a Board packed with Biden loyalists.  However, in fairness to Biden, he is doing what politicians have been doing for decades under rules that they designed precisely for this purpose. It is time to end this absurd privatization of public records for presidents and members of Congress alike.

Here is Biden’s statement:

“April was Sexual Assault Awareness Month. Every year, at this time, we talk about awareness, prevention, and the importance of women feeling they can step forward, say something, and be heard. That belief – that women should be heard – was the underpinning of a law I wrote over 25 years ago. To this day, I am most proud of the Violence Against Women Act. So, each April we are reminded not only of how far we have come in dealing with sexual assault in this country – but how far we still have to go.

When I wrote the bill, few wanted to talk about the issue. It was considered a private matter, a personal matter, a family matter. I didn’t see it that way. To me, freedom from fear, harm, and violence for women was a legal right, a civil right, and a human right. And I knew we had to change not only the law, but the culture.

So, we held hours of hearings and heard from the most incredibly brave women – and we opened the eyes of the Senate and the nation – and passed the law.

In the years that followed, I fought to continually strengthen the law. So, when we took office and President Obama asked me what I wanted, I told him I wanted oversight of the critical appointments in the Office on Violence Against Women at the Department of Justice and I wanted a senior White House Advisor appointing directly to me on the issue. Both of those things happened.

As Vice President, we started the “It’s on Us” campaign on college campuses to send the message loud and clear that dating violence is violence – and against the law.

We had to get men involved. They had to be part of the solution. That’s why I made a point of telling young men this was their problem too – they couldn’t turn a blind eye to what was happening around them – they had a responsibility to speak out. Silence is complicity.

In the 26 years since the law passed, the culture and perceptions have changed but we’re not done yet.

It’s on us, and it’s on me as someone who wants to lead this country. 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. 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.

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.

Responsible news organizations should examine and evaluate the full and growing record of inconsistencies in her story, which has changed repeatedly in both small and big ways.

But this much bears emphasizing.

She has said she raised some of these issues with her supervisor and senior staffers from my office at the time. They – both men and a woman – have said, unequivocally, that she never came to them and complained or raised issues. 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.

There is a clear, critical part of this story that can be verified. The former staffer has said she filed a complaint back in 1993. But she does not have a record of this alleged complaint. The papers from my Senate years that I donated to the University of Delaware do not contain personnel files. It is the practice of Senators to establish a library of personal papers that document their public record: speeches, policy proposals, positions taken, and the writing of bills.

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.

As a Presidential candidate, I’m accountable to the American people. 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.

I have spent my career learning from women the ways in which we as individuals and as policy makers need to step up to make their hard jobs easier, with equal pay, equal opportunity, and workplaces and homes free from violence and harassment. I know how critical women’s health issues and basic women’s rights are. That has been a constant through my career, and as President, that work will continue. And I will continue to learn from women, to listen to women, to support women, and yes, to make sure women’s voices are heard.

We have a lot of work to do. From confronting online harassment, abuse, and stalking, to ending the rape kit backlog, to addressing the deadly combination of guns and domestic violence.

We need to protect and empower the most marginalized communities, including immigrant and indigenous women, trans women, and women of color.

We need to make putting an end to gender-based violence in both the United States and around the world a top priority.

I started my work over 25 years ago with the passage of the Violence Against Women Act. As president, I’m committed to finishing the job.”

 

109 thoughts on “Biden Offers Limited Release From The Archives While Refusing To Open His Delaware Records”

  1. Biden’s VP search chief tied to China money scandal, Harvey Weinstein and women allegations
    ‘I never received an apology from Chris Dodd,’ says Carla Gaviglio, who alleges she was assaulted in a ‘shocking and vulgar’ 1985 restaurant episode involving the former Connecticut senator.

    By John Solomon and Christine Dolan

    April 30, 2020 – 10:58pm

    Joe Biden, already facing allegations of sexual assault at home and nepotism in China, has chosen a former U.S. senator with his own political baggage on China, ethics, and women to run the search for a vice presidential nominee.

    Christopher Dodd, who retired from the Senate a decade ago, was a central figure in the 1990s China fundraising scandal, having served as the General Chairman of the Democratic Party at a time it and Bill Clinton’s campaign accepted illegal foreign donations and turned the Lincoln bedroom into a donor perk.

    The retired Connecticut Democrat also has long boasted a friendship with the convicted Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein, whose sexual misconduct gave rise to the #MeToo movement. Dodd was also one of the top beneficiaries of Weinstein’s political largesse. In fact, Dodd was listed in 2017 as the second largest career recipient of Weinstein’s political donations, behind Barack Obama, according to campaign finance records.

    Continued https://justthenews.com/accountability/political-ethics/bidens-vp-search-chief-tied-china-money-scandal-harvey-weinstein?utm_source=daily-newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter

  2. I love watching lefties twist themselves into knots while trying to explain that they don’t have two standards…one for themselves and their gang and the other for everybody else. They feel “put upon” even having to explain the differences between their reaction to the Kavanaugh and Biden accusers. The “skepticism” they express regarding Tara Reade’s accusation was nowhere to be found when it came to Kavanaugh.

  3. Off topic. If you live in a nursing home then pull out now like your father should have.

  4. Michael J. Stern, Opinion columnist for USA today and former state and federal prosecutor, wrote an op ed piece dated today. Some highlights, which includes material by Sheila Kennedy:

    “The alleged assault occurred in 1993. As the prosecutor notes, the 27-year delay itself is not reason to disbelieve her. But the story she tells has changed significantly since she first came forward.

    As a lawyer and victims’ rights advocate, Reade was better equipped than most to appreciate that dramatic changes in sexual assault allegations severely undercut an accuser’s credibility — especially when the change is from an uncomfortable shoulder touch to vaginal penetration.

    Reade said she complained at the time to Biden’s executive assistant, and to two top aides– all three adamantly deny that she ever approached them. (They didn’t simply have “no recollection.” They strongly refuted the claim). She also says she filed a written complaint with the Senate personnel office, but reporters could not find any record of such a complaint there, and when the Times asked her for a copy, she said she didn’t have it. Yet she had kept and provided a copy of her 1993 Senate employment records.

    She has told wildly inconsistent stories about why she left Biden’s employ, and in the years following her stint on his staff, she has been highly complimentary of him. Evidently, it wasn’t until she had become a fervid Sanders supporter that the accusation of assault changed from “rubbed her shoulders” to digital penetration.

    There’s much, much more detail in the linked article, and most of it suggests someone emotionally unstable rather than intentionally vindictive–but none of it enhances her credibility. Quite the contrary.

    And as the writer notes, most men who assault women are serial abusers.

    Last year, several women claimed that Biden made them uncomfortable with things like a shoulder touch or a hug… The Times and Post found no allegation of sexual assault against Biden except Reade’s.

    It is possible that in his 77 years, Biden committed one sexual assault and it was against Reade. But in my experience, men who commit a sexual assault are accused more than once … like Donald Trump, who has had more than a dozen allegations of sexual assault leveled against him and who was recorded bragging about grabbing women’s genitalia.

    I particularly agree with the final paragraph.

    We can support the #MeToo movement and not support allegations of sexual assault that do not ring true. If these two positions cannot coexist, the movement is no more than a hit squad. That’s not how I see the #MeToo movement. It’s too important, for too many victims of sexual assault and their allies, to be no more than that.”

    The piece is entitled: “Why I’m skeptical about Reade’s sexual assault claim against Biden: Ex-prosecutor”, dated April 30, 2020.

    Other details: last year Reade was interviewed by a reporter for the NYT and claimed that Biden touched her shoulder, but neglected to state he forcibly penetrated her with his fingers.

    Reade conveniently cannot recall the date, time or place of the alleged assault, which prevents Biden from proving he was someplace else at the time.

    She lied about the reason she lost her job, telling a reporter from The Union last April that Biden asked her to serve drinks at an event, and she was fired for refusing. She changed her story a year later by claiming that she was fired in retaliation for filing the sexual harassment complaint with the Senate Personnel Office.

    Until she became a Sanders supporter, Reade praised Biden for his work combatting sexual harassment, and even said that “My old boss speaks the truth”. (citation in article).

    She has an infatuation with Russia and Putin, calling him a “genius”, calling his “athletic prowess”…”intoxicating to American women”.. She has since denied praising Putin.

    Reade didn’t make the claim that Biden tried to digitally penetrate her for 27 years, until early 2020 after Sanders started losing in the primaries.

    .She claims her mother anonymously called Larry King Live in 1993, complaining about a Senator, but said nothing about a sexual assault. Since she was anonymous, why not give details about the assault at least?

    There is much more in the piece. Bottom line: it all stinks too much.

    1. And:
      Nolte: Tara Reade Is Joe Biden’s Eighth Accuser

      John Nolte1 May 20205,720
      4:53

      Tara Reade is Joe Biden’s eighth accuser, not his first, not his only. The fake news media want you to believe Reade is Biden’s only accuser, and that’s because there is no lie the media will not tell to protect the presumptive Democrat nominee.

      But seven other women — seven! — none of them Republicans, have accused Joe Biden of everything from sexual assault to unwanted kissing to inappropriate touching.

      https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2020/05/01/nolte-tara-reade-is-joe-bidens-eighth-accuser/
      ————-
      There is a list at the link.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

      1. ROTFLMAO! I saw this comment at the Breitbart Link:

        Hillary’s master plan:

        1. Become VP nominee
        2. Spray crornavirus in little girl’s hair.
        3. Place near Biden and let nature take its course.

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

        1. Squeeky, the comments alone on many sites make visiting them worth it.

          Washing Compost and NYTimes are some of the more angry ones while the UK Daily Mail and Breitbart news sites are down right funny.

      2. Hey Squeeky: NO ONE BELIEVES ANYTHING PUBLISHED BY BREITBART.

        1. You sound like you need to add this word to your vocabulary:

          Solipsism (/ˈsɒlɪpsɪzəm/ (About this soundlisten); from Latin solus, meaning ‘alone’, and ipse, meaning ‘self’)[1] is the philosophical idea that only one’s mind is sure to exist. As an epistemological position, solipsism holds that knowledge of anything outside one’s own mind is unsure; the external world and other minds cannot be known and might not exist outside the mind.

          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

          1. You know it’s really sad that in this country people like you are so drawn to such a defective lying narcissist that they believe themselves superior to people who are better educated and who rely on facts rather than discipleship in expressing contrary opinions. You are a true believer and display the depth and extent of your ignorance and delusion that you are bright and witty every time you publish the stupid ignoramus things you write.

            Most Americans are sick to death of Trump, his lying, his lack of leadership, and the endless pettiness, vindictiveness, name-calling and now, failure to handle this crisis that is resulting in death and destruction to the booming economy Trump inherited from Obama. Look at the polls. You true believers are deeply in the minority, and no facts can shake you because you are a disciple, not a logical or educated person.

  5. Didn’t uncle Joe use to go skinny dipping in front of the female secret service agents who were supposed to be there protecting him. What could be worse? Oh yah, protecting Hilary Clinton.

  6. Behold the guy at the country club denying his twenty-something trophy wife is cheating with the assistant club pro as the duo go rocketing by laughing in a golf cart:

  7. “RICH McHUGH: From speaking to the National Archives, they say, no, they would not have that report, that it would not be within the National Archives.” – DemocracyNow! interview, today

    Jonathan Turley is correct:

    “Biden should have simply declared that he will request the release of any material anywhere that concerns allegations by anyone of sexual misconduct by him. Period.”

  8. From the DemocracyNow! interview that aired today:

    “JOE BIDEN: Well, this is — look, Mika, she said she filed a report. She has her employment records still. She said she filed a report with the only office that would have a report in the United States Senate at the time. If the report was ever filed, it was filed there, period.

    AMY GOODMAN: Rich McHugh, your quick comment?

    RICH McHUGH: From speaking to the National Archives, they say, no, they would not have that report, that it would not be within the National Archives.”

  9. “Tara Reade’s Ex-Neighbor on Biden Sexual Assault Allegation: I Believed Her Then & I Believe Her Now”

  10. More fluff and stuff. The University of Delaware made clear that Biden’s papers have not been organized or categorized yet. They’re not going to let people rummage through boxes of materials that haven’t been organized, and, besides, if there was a complaint filed by Reade, it would be in the National Archives, which Biden said should be released.

    OK, now we start in on Trump and the allegations against him. I say we start with demanding release of the backstage tapes from “The Apprentice”.

    But before that, I want to see the contents of the President Daily Briefings, starting in January. They can redact anything not COVID-19 related, but I want to see the specific contents showing what Trump was told when he did nothing.

  11. Comparing the allegations against Trump and those against Biden are like comparing an elephant to a dog – they were two entirely different species. Trump was not in government and none of the allegations against him are by employees. Ms. Reade worked for Biden and her complaint would fall under the category of sexual harassment as defined by Federal regulation. It is also an allegation of sexual battery, Incidentally, the late Alexander Cockburn wrote in an article from the early 90s that he and others at COUNTERPUNCH had been hearing allegations against Biden for years, including an incident that is very much like Ms. Reades that took place shortly after Biden’s first wife was killed in an automobile accident.

  12. If Trump is a Pathological Liar, What Type of Liar is Biden?

    by BRUCE E. LEVINE

    https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/05/01/if-trump-is-a-pathological-liar-what-type-of-liar-is-biden/

    Excerpt:

    Lyndon Johnson lied constantly to the American people about how the United States was winning the Vietnam War. But once the highly-trusted Walter Cronkite told the American people that the war was unwinnable, Johnson knew that his lying was obvious, and he knew that he had lost credibility and did not run for re-election. Even the consummate liar Richard Nixon sensed that being caught lying was not a good thing. Not Trump.

    This brings us to Joe Biden. Just what kind of liar is he? The following is a sampling of some—certainly not all—of Biden’s lies in a variety of areas.

    Biden’s lies about his policy record are numerous and glaring. One of Biden’s most often repeated lies, widely reported as a lie even by CNN, is how he opposed the 2003 Iraq War from the very moment it began. Of course, not only was Biden instrumental to the launch of this war but supported it long after it began—this all painfully depicted in the Danny Glover narrated short documentary “Worth the Price?”

    The Iraq War lie is certainly not Biden’s only policy record lie. Regarding Social Security, Biden repeatedly lied in recent debates saying, “I didn’t propose a freeze,” when he had repeatedly argued for not only freezes but cuts in Social Security.

    Beyond his lies about his policy record, Biden has repeatedly lied with the intent of making himself appear to be honorable. He has often lied about how “he got involved in the Civil Rights movement” and how “he marched in the Civil Rights movement,” despite videos of him admitting this to be untrue. Also to court African American voters, he has repeatedly lied about getting arrested in South Africa attempting to visit Nelson Mandela in prison, an assertion that he has now admitted is untrue.

    Attempting to make himself appear intelligent, Biden has lied about his academic record and his grades, lying about graduating in the top half of his law school class when in fact he graduated 76th in a class of 85. Then there is his infamous plagiarism that derailed his campaign to win the Democratic nomination for president in 1988. His plagiarizing of then British Labor Party leader Neil Kinnock brought attention to Biden’s previous plagiarism at Syracuse University College of Law.

    One of the lesser-known Biden lies may not be as significant a lie for some journalists, but it is a lie that speaks loudly about Biden’s character—or lack thereof. Perhaps it is just me, but I find it especially pathetic when someone exploits family tragedy for political purposes with a lie that creates personal tragedy for someone else.

    Specifically, it is Biden’s lie about the horrific traffic accident in 1972 that resulted in the tragic death of his first wife and his baby daughter, as well as resulting in severe injuries to his sons. The truth is that Biden’s then wife was hit by a truck after she drove into an intersection in which the truck had the right of way, and the police investigation cleared the truck’s driver from any blame. To gain greater sympathy for himself, Biden repeatedly lied to the public saying that the truck driver, Curtis Dunn, was a man who “drank his lunch instead of eating his lunch.” This falsehood of course deeply hurt Dunn. His family made many attempts to get Biden to correct it, and finally in 2009, after Curtis Dunn was dead, Biden called Dunn’s daughter to apologize.

    When I began researching this piece, I knew that Joe Biden told lies, but my expectation was that I would be able to make a clear distinction between Biden and Trump with respect to the type of liar each is. With the exceptions of the staggering amount of Trump falsehoods, and the fact that Biden has admitted to some of his lies, I can’t find much difference between them. Sorry, Blue Team. -Bruce Levine

    1. ” the highly-trusted Walter Cronkite told the American people that the war was unwinnable, ”

      Though I was highly critical of Johnson, Cronkite and a lot of others on both sides saying the war was unwinnable was probably only true due to press coverage.

      The Tet Offensive destroyed North Vietnam forces so one should read the strategy of the North Vietnamese forces at the time. They were counting on public opinion and the press knowing that through attrition they would eventually lose.

      1. No, it wrecked the Viet Cong as a military force, not the North Viet Nam Army. The North Viet Nam Army conquered South Viet Nam during the first four months of 1975.

        1. “No, it wrecked the Viet Cong as a military force, not the North Viet Nam Army. The North Vietnam Army conquered South Viet Nam during the first four months of 1975”

          DSS, I think you are making distinctions that are confusing you. It is true that the Viet Cong was the predominant military force fighting the war in South Vietnam. The VPA (Vietnam People’s Army) commanded by Giap supported the Viet Cong in many of their battles including the Test Offensive and probably most of the big ones if not all of them. In fact though the Viet Cong frequently functioned as a guerrilla operation Giap was a commander of the Viet Cong as well.

          When the US left Vietnam and North Vietnam didn’t live up to its agreements South Vietnam was in disarray. Giap in control of the VPA and essentially in control of all forces against South Vietnam took over South Vietnam.

          1. Allan, he’s not confused, he just likes nitpicking. He’s going to kick us all in the ankles from time to time. You have to accept this from a partner in dialogue who is as lively as this old coot, Absurd

            the VC and NVA had a unified political and military command. the distinction he made was true but not essential to your point one way or another

            1. I know America was full of pro-commie saboteurs at that time including some in the mass media, but it’s my belief that the war in South Vietnam from the Vietnamese perspective was just a war of national liberation following their wars against the Japs and the French. So they were in it to win it on their own soil. In my thinking, it didn’t really matter in the long run whether hippies were protesting or not.

              There is not a lot we could have done short of Chinggis Khan style methods to “win.” And that was not a proper or useful American objective so we withdrew.

              The genius of of Kissinger and Nixon at the time, was to connect with Chou En Lai and pivot the Middle Kingdom, against the Soviets. It was much more feasible if the US was on the way out of Vietnam.

              There is nothing wrong with reversing a strategy when a better one is at hand

              1. Kurtz, the Domino Theory prevailed at the time and we gradually got involved in Vietnam like a frog being boiled. I think our management in that area was all wrong, but no one could be sure.

                The mistake we made over and over again is that we should never enter a war unless we intend to win. Secondly when other enemies exist in the immediate area we have to be ready to go to war with them as well. Thirdly for us to go to war the opposing party needs to be an existential threat. That doesn’t mean we can’t act short of war. Trump did so with Iran. He also avoided problems on the Turkish border but at the same time strengthened the areas that were important.

            2. “Allan, he’s not confused, he just likes nitpicking. ”

              He is smart but his attempts at preciseness IMO sometimes gets him into trouble. We are on a blog where sometimes 1000 words are said in 50 which leaves plenty of room to get into trouble trying to attack the 950 words left out. I have seen this in smart people with certain types of occupations. I’ve worked with statisticians that have this type of behavior. Nonetheless he is one of the bright spots on the blog.

      2. Not true due to press coverage, but due to the toughness and resolve of the Vietnamese people, as a whole, their cohesive identity, their long willingness to remain organized in opposition to foreigners, be they French, Jap, American or Chinese, and take whatever measure of collective punishment was imposed on them to achieve and maintain their own sense of sovereignty.

        It’s why they still aren’t dominated by the PRC, the massive communist government and people to their north, to this day, because they consider the Chinese as much hated foreigners are were the Americans. Today, they’re probably closer to us strategically, just as a matter of geopolitics, to remain independent from the Chicoms, who are investing capital in Vietnam at a fast pace.

        I am not much a fan of the Vietnamese for anything, except this. In this way they are a very impressive and tough and cohesive people.

        it takes nothing away from America today to recognize this reality. Nobody is mourning the demise of the incompetent and corrupt South Vietnamese government today, not even the Vietnamese people who came here to escape the NVA. They are past it and we should be too. Indeed we should be inspired by the ethnic and national solidarity of the Vietnamese people. that’s my humble view of it at least.

        1. “Not true due to press coverage”

          Kurtz, I will quote what I said: “They were counting on public opinion and the press knowing that through attrition they would eventually lose.”

          Resolve played a big part. The VPA and Viet Cong had a lot of resolve and the US had very little. Ask yourself why. Also read post war accounts of many of those involved in leadership. Do you really believe the US couldn’t have defeated the VPA despite their resolve. The resolve in the south was a lot less.

          “maintain their own sense of sovereignty. It’s why they still aren’t dominated by the PRC”

          That is why at one point they looked towards the US an ocean away while the other parties looked to control. China an enemy for centuries and the Soviet Union that aways wished to extend its empire.

          Do you really believe the resolve of the VPA could have overcome the might of the US at that time without the factors I mentioned?

          By the way if you haven’t travelled in Vietnam you should do so and take note how it almost appears like two countries. The south essentially supporting the north. People smiled in the South, not so much in the North and agents of the North that I encountered hate our guts.

          1. Yes, I do believe they could have outlasted the US. That is all they had to do. Just outlast us. Not win. Just outlast. The hippies were an just an annoyance.

            The same thing is true in Afghanistan. The objective is not to defeat the US it is simply to remain organized and outlast us. Which the Taliban will. Outlast us.

            They may not really care whether we control some places like Kabul or Kandahar in the long run, anyways. In the long run it will be cheaper to bribe them, and that’s probably the plan.

            Alexander sized this all up very fast, and was not going to get too bogged down en route to India. he payed off some warlords, took Roxanne as wife, declared victory, and headed for the Indus valley as fast as he could.

            1. Kurtz, you have just confirmed my statement: ““They were counting on public opinion and the press knowing that through attrition they would eventually lose.”

          2. Allan, I believe what you say about regional differences.

            And I am jealous of your travel, and I would love to go to Vietnam and Cambodia and Thailand, I could give it a month of my life with pleasure, but right now is not a good time, for obvious reasons.

            1. Kurtz, do it while you can. Don’t go on a tour and don’t go as a group. Be as flexible as you can. Book everyone including your own drivers and check out your own hotels with local sources. When it is for pleasure we start with a tour package from the US to learn the ropes and then we call directly using the tour as a metric and adding places. It saves a ton of money, upgrades accomodations and transportation, permits going off the beaten track. Keep hidden American dollars for a bribe in certain countries in case you run into trouble. Always take note of where medical care is located. I got sick in Laos and prepared to fly to Thailand fortunately it wasn’t necessary. Another time my wife got injured and needed surgery. We didn’t want it where we were so we had a private jet fly us to the US with a physician and nurse. It cost a fortune ( the price for gas alone was incredibly high. We filled up the plane in northern Canada so I had an idea of the cost.) Get good travel insurance. In some parts of Asia they love $2 bills so carry lots of them. If you are a collecter plan your trip so that at one point you are near a port that can transport some of your luggage and purchases back home.

              The number one spot for me is Israel where I have gone numerous times. The world comes almost to a point where the Abrahamic religions meet. It’s an incredible journey and not as difficult as some of the other places I have been.

    2. Is anything that you claim Biden lied about have implications for his ability to lead and to unify America from the toxic divisions Trump has caused. How long ago were these alleged “lies” told? The Tara Reade matter was 27 years ago. How about some more-recent matters:

      For instance, did Biden ever call a pandemic a “hoax”? Did he refuse to release his tax returns? Did he claim that there would be a vaccine for a deadly pandemic “very quickly”, or that 15 cases would soon be 0 cases? Did he ever claim that “anyone who wants a test can get a test”? Did he ever cage migrants seeking asylum, steal money from the Pentagon budget earmarked to construct housing and schools for military families to pay for a wall that he promised Mexico would pay to build, or call brown people “murderers, rapists, vermin, breeders, and criminals’? Did Biden ever publicly side with a Russian president over the intelligence community? Did world leaders ever laugh out loud at Biden to his face? Was Biden ever impeached?

      Did Biden cheat to win any elections with the help of a hostile foreign government? Has he filed numerous bankruptcies, or been sued by thousands of people for not paying bills? Did he ever enter into a consent decree admitting to housing discrimination, and then lie and claim that he “won” the lawsuit filed by HUD? Did he ever call White Supremacists who are responsible for killing a protester “fine people”? Has he sided with assault rifle toting losers who stormed Michigan’s state house to try to intimidate the governor into forcing open the state when COVID-19 cases still haven’t peaked, and it isn’t safe? Has he ever bragged about grabbing womens’ genitals?

      Why didn’t Reade go public with her accusations sometime before or during the many years Biden was in office? Sorry. This is solely motivated by the fact that Trump is losing in the polls plus his failure to manage the pandemic and his endless lying. It stinks too much.

      1. How about that not-so-little war in Iraq?

        “One of Biden’s most often repeated lies, widely reported as a lie even by CNN, is how he opposed the 2003 Iraq War from the very moment it began. Of course, not only was Biden instrumental to the launch of this war but supported it long after it began—this all painfully depicted in the Danny Glover narrated short documentary “Worth the Price?”

        “The Iraq War lie is certainly not Biden’s only policy record lie.” -Bruce Levine, counterpunch

  13. I am clairvoyant. I stated this on the blog before. Trump’s wife has been pressuring him to quit at the end of the term and nominate Pence.
    The campaign slogan will be: Mister Pence. Build up that fence.
    Biden can’t beat Pence.

  14. Oh, and another thing. Democrats are quick to criticize Deplorables for our guns, our Bibles, and our Bibles, and pickup trucks, and Confederate flags, and mobile homes whatever.

    But Professor Cooper is pretty representative of the Democratic Base. And when they are not spouting off this kind of nonsense, or black genocide nonsense (which how to you get to 40 million plus people if there is genocide going on???) or “they’re broke because of Institutional Racism! and not because their mom had them out of wedlock with no education and little job skills. That kind of stuff, and going around stomping on black girls, shooting each other for sneakers, raiding stores, and brawling wherever they are – and the white Democrats here don’t say a word about it.

    Strange, huh??? If anybody should ashamed of their base, it should be Democrats.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reprter

        1. That would put you back in Europe and sKKKanKKKy in hell if they’d have them.

      1. You just can’t deal with the truth, can you???

        Look, I know it hurts to admit you have been a schmuck, but now is the easiest time for you to become a new person. Let me help you. Look in a mirror and say this 5 times to yourself:

        I hate Squeeky and I hate what she says, but it is the Truth.
        I hate Squeeky and I hate what she says, but it is the Truth.
        I hate Squeeky and I hate what she says, but it is the Truth.
        I hate Squeeky and I hate what she says, but it is the Truth.
        I hate Squeeky and I hate what she says, but it is the Truth.

        Do that a couple of times today. Tomorrow, look in the mirror and say 5 times:

        I hate what Squeeky says, but it is the Truth.
        I hate what Squeeky says, but it is the Truth.
        I hate what Squeeky says, but it is the Truth.
        I hate what Squeeky says, but it is the Truth.
        I hate what Squeeky says, but it is the Truth.

        Do that a couple of times. Then, on the following day, look in a mirror and say 5 times:

        If what Squeeky says is the Truth, then why do I hate it?
        If what Squeeky says is the Truth, then why do I hate it?
        If what Squeeky says is the Truth, then why do I hate it?
        If what Squeeky says is the Truth, then why do I hate it?
        If what Squeeky says is the Truth, then why do I hate it?

        Now, you will be ready to confront the real truth – it has been your own cognitive dissonance that you hate – your own refusal to face reality.

        Do this, and you can become a new person, one who is able to confront Reality even when it is not pleasant.

        No charge!

        Squeeky Fromm
        Girl Reporter

      2. Let me check. Yep! It’s true.

        The Constitution and Bill of Rights provide Americans the freedom of speech, thought, religion, belief, opinion, discretion, discrimination, assembly, socialization, disassembly, ostracism, segregation, neighborhood, location, location, location and all other conceivable natural and God-given rights and freedoms which do not cause property damage or bodily injury. Americans may darn sure engage in discrimination, opinion, bigotry, sexism and racism.

        People must adapt to the outcomes of freedom. Freedom does not adapt to people, dictatorship does.

        You communists who promote “dictatorship of the proletariat” have no power to modify the Constitution or Bill of Rights no matter your level of righteous indignation and conjured superiority. Your entire socially engineered, means controlled, centrally planned and wealth-redistributed welfare state is antithetical, anti-American and unconstitutional. You have no concept of American freedom.

        You are the enemy. In Great Britain a few short centuries ago, the penalty for your rendition of treason was Drawing and Quartering. You need to ratify an amendment to terminate and abrogate the Constitution and Bill of Rights or move to Cuba, North Korea or China.
        _________________

        Heeeerr’s Jimmy!

        CARTER DEFENDS ALL‐WHITE AREAS

        By Christopher. Lydon Special to The New York Times

        April 7, 1976

        SOUTH BEND, Ind., April 6 — Jimmy Carter said today that the Federal Government should not take the initiative to change the “ethnic purity” of some urban neighborhoods or the economic “homogeneity” of well‐to‐do suburbs.

        ‘If he wins the Presidency, the Georgia Democrat said at a news conference here, “I’m not ‐going to use the Federal Government’s authority deliberately to circumvent the natural inclination of people to live in ethnically homogeneous neighborhoods.”

        Similarly, he said, “To build a high‐rise, very low‐cost housing unit in a suburban neighborhood or other neighborhoods with relatively expensive homes, I think, would not he in the best interest of the people. who live in the high‐rise or the suburbs.
        “Any exclusion of a family because of race or ethnic background I would oppose very strongly and aggressively as President,” he said. “But think it’s good to maintain the homogeneity of neighborhoods if they’ye been established that way.”

    1. ” how to you get to 40 million plus people if there is genocide going on???”

      Some people perhaps correctly claim there is genocide going on but it is from the left not the right. Since 1973 estimates of up to10 million black abortions have been performed. This is not a dispute about abortion. All one has to do is look at the numbers and see who supports those deaths.

  15. Remember when the Kavanaugh vigilantes were demanding that the FBI interview his accusers? AG Barr should direct the FBI to interview Reade and all of her supporting witnesses. Let’s see if they stand by their statements knowing that making a false statement to the FBI could land them in jail.

Comments are closed.