Amidst the ongoing trickle of new information regarding Tara Reade’s allegations against Joe Biden, Laura McGann’s article on Vox really captured my attention. On the whole, McGann’s take is incredibly sympathetic—perhaps even generous—to Reade. It lays out McGann’s painstaking efforts to corroborate Reade’s allegations against Biden—both the allegations of unwanted she made in April of last year, and the allegations of sexual assault (specifically, digital rape) that she made in March of this year. The distinction between those two sets of allegations are key.
My takeaway from reading McGann‘s article is that despite her best efforts, she utterly failed to find any corroborating evidence for Reade’s allegations of sexual assault. In fact, the article completely shreds any attempt to argue that Reade has provided any "corroboration" for her sexual assault allegations against Biden. While McGann refers to people who say Reade told them about various aspects of her allegations against Biden as “corroborating witnesses,” even a bit of scrutiny shows that none of the witnesses actually provide any corroboration.
Quick aside: The word “corroboration” is not even the right word to describe these witnesses even if what they say Reade told them matches up with some or all of what Reade is alleging. That’s because none of the other people have any personal knowledge of the events Reade alleges other than what Reade herself told them. Just think about a criminal defendant who tries to give an alibi—“corroboration” of that alibi would have to consist of another witness saying that they saw the defendant somewhere else on the night of the crime. No one would consider it corroboration if all the witness knew was that the defendant told them he was somewhere else on the night of the crime.
To start with, remember that Reade said she only ever told 3 people about her sexual assault: (1) her mother, (2) her brother, and (3) one friend:
KATIE:
And of course it’s possible that there are other people like you and they …didn’t [talk about it], I mean, you only shared it with him and your mom and your friend. Right?
TARA:
And my brother, yeah, my family. Yeah, my immediate family. But…that incident I never shared [except to immediate family and a friend]. I was horrified. I was trying to share with my supervisor…but I couldn’t, so I found my outlet through the arts or through horseback riding and stuff like that. And I would just try to be in denial…I really am a peace-loving person,…a vegan hippie kind of person. I just want everybody to be happy. I want people to be in a better space. I don’t want to bring darkness. I kind of felt like talking about it was harmful.
To emphasize: she said that these were the ONLY three people she told and that she NEVER told anyone else. Let’s take those three people one at a time.
Reade’s Mother
Reade’s mother died more than a decade ago and there is no record of anyone identifying herself as Reade's mother speaking to the press about anything relating to Reade’s allegations. Reade says her mom called into Larry King to talk about the allegations. And, in fact, someone dug up an old Larry King clip that shows an unidentified woman talking about “problems” that her daughter had with “a prominent Senator.” Reade says the caller's voice is her mom's.
Even assuming that's the case, the topic of the Larry King episode she called into was NOT sexual harassment or sexual assault. It was “the cutthroat nature of Washington, DC, politics and media.” Also, the caller never mentioned sexual harassment or assault.
So what we have is a woman who called into a show where the topic wasn't sexual harassment or assault, and who never mentions sexual harassment or assault. Unless there's some other context (like the calls before or after hers somehow being about sexual harassment/assault), that's not evidence that Reade's mother (assuming that's who it really was) was talking about sexual assault. It only “corroborates” Reade’s story of sexual assault if you start by assuming that Reade had told her mother that Biden had sexually assaulted her. Take away that assumption, and this supposed “corroboration” adds nothing.
Reade’s Brother
Reade’s brother, Collin Moulton, initially told the Washington Post only that Reade had touched her neck and shoulders--in other words, that Reade only told him about the Lucy Flores-type stuff that Reade had described a year ago, and NOT the assault.
Moulton changed his story after being coached by Nathan Robinson. And I’m sorry, “coaching” is the only way to describe it, even assuming Robinson is being completely forthright about what he says he told Moulton.
Even ignoring the fact that there’s no indication in the WaPo article that Moulton said anything about “the incident with the gym bag,” Robinson had to “remind” him that Reade told him that Biden touched her “under her clothes.” Seems like a rather important detail to forget.
Also, remember—Moulton had only described Biden touching Reade's “neck and shoulders.” It's hard to see how simply adding "under her clothes" to that statement squares with Reade's allegation that Biden digitally raped her. After all (and I can't believe I'm writing this), the vagina is not near a woman's neck or shoulders, regardless of whether you look under her clothes. So if "under her clothes" is all Moulton added, this still isn't even evidence that Reade told him about the supposed digital assault.
Reade’s story to ABC similarly evolved after coaching from Robinson, and doesn’t provide any indication that Reade told Moulton about any incident with a gym bag or anything resembling the digital rape Reade now alleges. At first, Moulton told ABC only that “Reade had mentioned experiencing ‘harassment at work’ from Biden during her brief stint in his office.” Later the same day (perhaps also after Robinson’s admitted coaching), he “clarified” that Reade said Biden had put his hand “up her clothes” (to ABC)
Moulton’s statements are not reliable corroboration because he somehow managed to forget the most important detail—the one that differentiates her 2020 allegations from her 2019 allegations—not once but twice. And in the case of the Washington Post statements, it’s hard to see how it corroborates the nature of what Reade is now alleging. So Moulton also fails to corroborate anything other than what Reade alleged a year ago.
Reade’s Friend
That leaves the friend—and McGann's article blows up her "corroboration" as well. Last year, the friend told McGann:
“On the scale of other things we heard, and I feel ashamed, but it wasn’t that bad. [Biden] never tried to kiss her directly. He never went for one of those touches. It was one of those, ‘sorry you took it that way.’ I know that is very hard to explain,” the friend told [McGann]. She went on: “What was creepy was that it was always in front of people.”
In other words, a year ago, the friend told McCann (1) that Biden never tried to kiss Reade, (2) that the touches were always in public, and (3) he never went for "one of those touches"—which, in context of her "on the scale of other things we've heard," clearly means no sexual assault. Now, the friend has reversed herself on all three of those things. The friend thus didn't merely add to what she told McGann last year. She completely contradicted herself.
***********
To recap, the ONLY three people Reade said she told either: explicitly denied the key details of Reade's allegations (her friend), were coached into saying something that still didn't quite match Reade's assault allegations (her brother), or didn't reveal any details to anyone at all (her mother).
You might say “but what about the people who have stepped forward since then? Don’t they add anything.” No, because Reade took pains to deny that any other such witnesses existed. Look at the relevant portion of Reade's interview again:
KATIE:
And of course it’s possible that there are other people like you and they …didn’t [talk about it], I mean, you only shared it with him and your mom and your friend. Right?
TARA:
And my brother, yeah, my family. Yeah, my immediate family. But…that incident I never shared [except to immediate family and a friend]. I was horrified. I was trying to share with my supervisor…but I couldn’t, so I found my outlet through the arts or through horseback riding and stuff like that. And I would just try to be in denial…I really am a peace-loving person,…a vegan hippie kind of person. I just want everybody to be happy. I want people to be in a better space. I don’t want to bring darkness. I kind of felt like talking about it was harmful.
Reade was explaining why it took her so long to come forward and why it was so hard. The reason? She was "in denial" and didn't want to talk about it—as demonstrated by the fact she supposedly only told two close family members and one friend. Reade was using the "fact" that she only told those three people to try to explain away some of the biggest reasons people doubt her story. This wasn't a misstatement—the fact that she didn’t tell a soul other than those three people was a key part of her explanation as to why she only came public with her story this year.
So Reade’s supposed "corroborating witnesses" fall into 4 categories:
- Her mother, who died without ever telling anyone else what Reade told her about her time in Biden’s office or what she was referencing when she called into a Larry King show where the topic was neither sexual assault nor sexual harassment (and that is, again, assuming that the woman who placed the call really was Reade’s mother);
- Her brother, who initially didn't mention any assault and only changed his story after being coached—and even then, his statements to WaPo only seemed to suggest that Biden touched her neck and shoulders under her clothes.
- Her friend, whose original statements to the press in April 2019 explicitly ruled out every single important aspect of the new allegations that Reade made in March 2020; and
- Other supposed corroborators--who Reade herself stressed, when that narrative suited her, didn't even exist.
And again, these people are not even really "corroborators" in the sense that they have any independent knowledge of the events in question. They are merely repeating what they say Reade told them.
This may add up to evidence that Reade told other people stories about Biden consistent with what she told the press last year. But there is not one piece of evidence that withstands three seconds’ scrutiny that counts as meaningful “corroboration” of her sexual assault allegations.
So let's please stop pretending that anyone has "corroborated" Reade's sexual assault allegations. And push back against the use of that word.
