OMG, what a lie.
I linked to the collaborating evidence. It isn't a lie.
No. The problem is that you misunderstand what you link. You linked to an opinion post that implies there are otherwise inadmissable hearsay statements that could be used to rebut an argument that Blasey-Ford made up her claim about Kavanaugh expressly to derail his SC confirmation. I never made that charge, and I think most people that listened to her believed her that something had happened to her, they just didn't find it convincing that it was Kavanaugh.
Her "corroboration" begins nearly 2 decades after the supposed event (to her husband), and doesn't mention Kavanaugh for 30 years after the event - and even then only her husband says he heard it - it's 35 years after the event before you get "corroboration" indirectly, that it was a Federal Judge.
Again, this pattern, of massive delay (and no real time corroboration) that becomes more specific is consistent with creating a memory. And, you may want to consider if you told your husband in 2012 that you were assaulted by Kavanaugh, and he was pressuring you to come forward after the SC nomination, you'd not be able to backdown without marital consequences even if you were less than 100% sure (or for that matter had made it up - she may have written the letter to satisfy him and asked for anonymity to ensure she didn't have to testify, would certainly explain her "reluctant" position on flying).
As for actual corroboration, she claimed 5 people were at the party, the other four of which (including her friend) deny ever having been at such a party. The number of people and the description of the party is inconsistent with the description of her earliest recounting of the events to her therapist. That actually is a big undermining of it's credibility.
In effect, such corroboration would be admissible to prove she didn't recently make up the story, but does nothing to help prove she didn't start making it up in 2002, and didn't add Kavanaugh until, at the earliest, 2012 (which her husband claimed she said in therapy, but apparently is not corroborated by the therapists actual notes). There's nothing there corroborating that the events occurred in the 80's or who they involved.
For the Biden situation there are accounts she told friends at the time that something had happened, and repeated the same over the course of years. That's real time corroboration, as opposed to something from over 30 years later - those are the kind of hearsay statements that get admitted as evidence the events occurred (and not just as rebuttal evidence). You also have a proven record of interaction - which didn't exist in the Blasey-Ford situation. Now there is no question that Reade's public account has become more detailed and more graphic and it would be interesting to hear why, but your media is already on explain away and bury detail.
There is in fact contemporaneous evidence that Reade told people, and multiple people she's told it to sense.
Not that I'm aware of. The only evidence we have of her telling people is during the campaign. Prior to the campaign we don't have anyone willing to collaborate that she told anyone.
Heck, even the NY Times cited to the Reade's friend saying she was told at the time (i.e., 1993) and her brother has been told repeatedly over the years.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/12/us/politics/joe-biden-tara-reade-sexual-assault-complaint.html?searchResultPosition=1 This article, by the way, was made "famous" when it got caught with a post publication edit - it originally said they found no evidence of sexual misconduct by Biden, except for history of touching women inappropriately. They edited it to remove the caveat.
It's a political white wash intend to clear Biden without an investigation - it's amazing how many things Biden has been "cleared" of without looking into them.
In any event, Reade also says she filed - at the time - a complaint with the senate. You remember those "ultra top secret" complaints that protect Congress members and pay off assault victims which are among the most iron clad of NDAs on earth.
She told people many many years before Kavanaugh becoming politically relevant, even if it was 'years after the event'.
Actually that's false. In 2002 - when she first mentioned her assault, Kavanaugh was already politically active and very involved in the Bush administration, and he was nominated in 2003 to sit on the DC Circuit Court and had what - at the time - was a very partisan appointment battle.
He'd been on the bench almost a decade, on one of the most prominent circuit courts in the country, with a well publicized record as a leading thinker, when she apparently first added him to her story in 2012 where another person could hear it (if you accept her husband's account).
The collaborating evidence is for her belief that the event occurred, not that she accurately remembers the event (Ie she could be mistaken that it was Kavanaugh, but there is strong evidence she believed that Kavanaugh attempted to rape her long before he was involved in politics).
Again, the corroboration related to these statements is solely for rebutting an accusation that she made up the event after the SC nomination. That's not a claim that anyone seriously made. It does nothing to help whether she became convinced of his involvement in 2012 rather than remembering it all along. In 2012 he would have been one of the most prominent former members of that class from the school and it would have been easy to decide retroactively that he must fit into a vague or undefined memory. One only has to look at Deborah Rameriez's claim to understand how that happens, where she needed hours of discussions with lawyers and former classmates to decide her story was about him.
Well you've completely misread what I wrote. To date, there isn't as far as I'm aware, any collaborating evidence from individuals willing to go on record for Reade, and the claims of a personnel complaint and complaints to staff have been refuted rather than verified. That was not the case with Blasey-Ford.
They have not been refuted, they have been denied by the head of Biden's summer program. Not aware definitely why she would have known. I'd like to know from the records of the Senate what complaints were recorded against Biden over that summer.
In any event, unlike Blasey-Ford who the State of Maryland informed they would be happy to investigate her claims if she were to file now, notwithstanding the statute of limitations problems, Reade has filed a police report. The NY Times response? Was to threaten that filing a false police report is punishable by jail. Not to even remotely consider that she's willing to go on official record.
