News
Featured Image

WARNING: This report contains a graphic sexual description 

April 30, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – The left-wing Washington Post took the unexpected step Wednesday of calling for the release of sealed records that could shed light on sexual assault allegations against former Vice President and current Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden. 

Former US Senate staffer Tara Reade alleges that in 1993, then-Senator Biden assaulted her in a “semi-private” stairwell on Capitol Hill. “He had me against the wall,” she says. “And then his hands were down my skirt and up my skirt. And I was wearing – I wasn’t wearing anything underneath. And then, with his hand, he went from there and entered me – with his hand – and as he was trying to kiss me, and saying things to me.”

Reade, who has a history of criticizing Biden and championing socialist Sen. Bernie Sanders on social media, added that she “was in a very difficult position because he was my boss and he was like my dad’s age at the time,” and that beforehand she admired Biden as “this champion of women’s rights in my eyes and I couldn’t believe it was happening. It didn’t seem – it seemed surreal. I just – I knew – I just felt sick.”

The Biden campaign has responded by declaring the claim is “untrue” and “absolutely did not happen.” Reade has called on Biden to unseal the University of Delaware’s records of his time in the Senate, which she says may still contain a copy of the complaint she filed with his office.

Biden has so far refused to do so, but Reade’s call received the backing of the Washington Post editorial board this week, in an op-ed arguing that while there may never be “clear conclusions,” there is “no excuse for not searching.”

“There are 1,875 boxes and 415 gigabytes of electronic content, largely uncatalogued,” the Post notes. “Searching won’t be as easy as some might assume. But an inventory conducted with an eye toward releasing only relevant material could at least ascertain whether personnel records are part of this archive at all […] The narrower question is whether the public ought to have as much information as possible about an assault accusation against a presidential contender, and the answer is yes.”

Though what little evidence exists in the case is far from conclusive, details supporting Reade’s include the fact that she has filed a police report (opening herself up to legal consequences if she’s found to be lying), the fact that a handful of former Reade associates say she told them about the incident in the 1990s, and the discovery of a 1993 clip of Reade’s mother calling Larry King’s CNN show to discuss her daughter’s “problem” with a “prominent senator.”

Regardless, much of the media has shown far less interest, as have the same abortion lobbying groups that aggressively promoted unsubstantiated rape claims against Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh and sexual harassment claims against President Donald Trump.

The Daily Beast reports that it “contacted 10 top national pro-women organizations for this story, including Emily’s List, Planned Parenthood Action Fund, NARAL Pro-Choice America, and the National Organization for Women. Most organizations did not respond to a detailed request for comment,” while “others replied and did not provide a statement. 

One unspecified “prominent” group among the list cited scheduling conflicts on two consecutive days, while asking to be kept “in mind for other opportunities.”

The ardently pro-abortion Biden is the presumptive Democrat presidential nominee, though lingering concerns about the 77-year-old candidate’s mental sharpness have prompted speculation that Democrats may attempt to replace him at the party convention with a younger candidate, such as New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.