Is the dam breaking on the Joe Biden sexual assault case? On Thursday morning, ABC finally gave in and covered the latest. On Wednesday night, liberal host Chris Hayes featured the story in depth for over eight minutes. Keep in mind that, as of Tuesday morning, the whole MSNBC network only had accumulated 4 minutes and 39 seconds.
Hayes admitted that during #MeToo there have been moments “when we have heard about accusations against someone that we find ourselves desperately wanting not to believe.” Like, presumably, the Tara Reade case. The host struggled and stammered in parts of the segment, but he admitted that the credibility of Reade is “rising”:
One of the things that happened in #MeToo, and a piece of evidence that has risen in how I evaluate these stories is a somewhat contemporaneous disclosure to a trusted person who then tells a reporter about it. That is what has happened here. And to me, that has been, in terms of what the evidentiary record is, has raised it a bit in terms of my own view of this.
Guest Rebecca Traister of New York magazine agreed, saying, “I feel the same way.” This comes as Reade’s brother has corroborated her story, as has a neighbor and audio apparently of Reade’s mother surfaced showing her calling into Larry King Live in 1993. (The footage was first unearthed by the MRC.)
Hayes began the segment by essentially admitting that liberals are struggling in how this brewing controversy impacts their “side”:
Throughout the entire #metoo era there have been moments I think for many of us, all of us, when we have heard about accusations against someone that we find ourselves desperately wanting not to believe, whether that is because we have some personal admiration for the individual or their work, or political admiration, someone on our quote, unquote "side."
He added, “Part of the difficult lesson of the #metoo era is not that every accusation is true, and everything should be believed on its face, but that you do have to fight yourself when you feel that impulse. And that is the case with the accusations by a woman named Tara Reade against Joe Biden.”
Hayes, at one point, suggested “And this on the record reporting, from a neighbor, roughly contemporaneous, relaying of the story, has rightly occasioned a new round of scrutiny, while also creating some serious tension within the progressive coalition about how the Biden camp should or is responding.”
New wave of scrutiny? It took the latest updates for CNN to cover it AT ALL. NBC News STILL hasn’t highlighted the accusations. But if you hoped journalists would shift from political calculations to just straight coverage of the claims, don’t get excited. Traister reminded viewers that, when discussing Reade, topics like abortion and the Supreme Court must be considered:
There is also Donald Trump’s record of, and promises around governance. He is going to be in a position, if he is re-elected, to appoint people to the Supreme Court. He already has -- that is a generation’s worth of law making in this country that is going to, if Donald Trump makes those appointments going to be terrible for women, and especially women, particularly in vulnerable communities.
Hayes didn't do himself any favors with fellow liberals by covering the story. #FireChrisHayes is now trending on Twitter.
A transcript of the segment is below. Click “expand” to read more:
All In With Chris Hayes
4/29/2020
8:51:50 to 9:00:00 PM ET
CHRIS HAYES: Throughout the entire #metoo era there have been moments I think for many of us, all of us, when we have heard about accusations against someone that we find ourselves desperately wanting not to believe, whether that is because we have some personal admiration for the individual or their work, or political admiration, someone on our quote, unquote side, part of the difficult lesson of the #metoo era is not that every accusation is true, and everything should be believed on its face, but that you do have to fight yourself when you feel that impulse. You have to do that in order to take seriously what is being alleged and what the evidence is, and to evaluate it. And that is the case with the accusations by a woman named Tara Reade against Joe Biden. Reade briefly worked as a Senate aide in Biden’s office in the early 90s. Last year, she told a California newspaper that in 1993 Joe Biden, quote, "touched her several times making her feel uncomfortable."
Now at that time, Reade was one of several women who came forward around that moment with accusations against the former vice president of inappropriate sort of over-physicalness -- touching, kissing or hugging -- that they say made them feel uncomfortable. Then last month, she made a much more serious allegation, telling first a podcast and later The New York Times that in 1993, Joe Biden pinned her to a wall in the Senate building, reached under the clothing and penetrated her with his fingers. And Reade told The Times that she filed a complaint with the Senate that same year about what happened with Biden, quote, "She said she did not have a copy of it, and such paperwork has not been located." Now Reade also said she complained to Biden’s executive assistant as well as to two top aides about harassment by Mr. Biden not mentioning the alleged assault. All three of those people who were interviewed by the Times deny having memory of a complaint. A spokeswoman for Joe Biden says the allegation is false. And they have strongly denied it. This week, there was also a new development in the story, and that is that Tara Reade’s former neighbor at the time went on the record, with her name, telling Business Insider, that in 1995, or 1996, a few years after this, that Reade, told her she had been assaulted by Biden. NBC News reached out to Reade’s neighbor who later confirmed by text message the story. And this, on the record reporting, from a neighbor, roughly contemporaneous, relaying of the story, has rightly occasioned a new round of scrutiny, while also creating some serious tension within the progressive coalition about how the Biden camp should or is responding. For more on that, I’m joined by Rebecca Traister, writer at-large from the New York magazine who just published this piece about the allegations titled the Biden trap. Rebecca, first maybe take me through how you have tracked this story over its development, and your sort of evaluation of it.
REBECCA TRAISTER, NEW YORK MAGAZINE: Well, I’ve been watching it and reading about it with, I mean obviously intense interest. It had sort of a reverse course from some of the #metoo reporting that broke through in the fall of 2017, the reporting done by Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey and Ronan Farrow, on Harvey Weinstein, in that it didn’t start out as a massive investigative report. It actually, Tara Reade first made the full accusation of assault in a podcast interview with Katie Halper.
So initially, it didn’t have the sort of full, we’ve talked to 100 people. We’ve gone through these documents, and that sort happened in reverse in this case. And so I have been reading with great interest as sort of different portions of the story have either been denied, or seemingly confirmed. And I it’s one of those cases where there’s going to be more reporting and we’re going to learn more about what we think of these claims with every story that’s done. And I bet there are a lot of reporters -- I know there are a lot of reporters out there working on it right now.
HAYES: In terms of the sort of, you know, I think one of the things that happened in the #metoo era was thinking about how to evaluate claims like this, and what evidence is sort of corroborative and what’s dispositive. And the fact that in almost all cases it is extremely difficult to arrive at some definitive accounting, in the sort of evidentiary record.
I will say that in following, this one of the things that happened in #metoo, and a piece of evidence that has risen in how I evaluate these stories is a somewhat contemporaneous disclosure to a trusted person who then tells a reporter about it. That is what has happened here. And to me, that has been, in terms of what the evidentiary record is, has raised it a bit in terms of my own view of this.
TRAISTER: I feel the same way. I actually thought that the Times reporting, which was very inconclusive on the assault claim, made -- corroborated for me something, which was her claim that she had claimed, that she had complained about harassment, and then suffered a professional consequence while working in Biden’s office. The New York Times on this story actually backed that up for me, a couple of weeks ago, because it found a couple of interns who she had supervised, who remembered her suddenly being taken off of -- you know, having suddenly and without explanation no longer supervising them. That was pretty persuasive for me on that count. The assault claim -- you know, obviously, I’m waiting for more reporting on it. But as reporters, and as readers, this is what we look for, you know, for a journalistic corroboration, as you say, a contemporaneous -- somebody who is willing to go on the record. The other thing about the neighbor, Lynda LaCasse, who was Reade’s former neighbor, is that she says she is a Biden supporter and she makes -- and that she still intends to vote for Joe Biden.
HAYES: Yes.
TRAISTER: So that sort of addresses the question of, is there a political motivation here, for her, making, for her recalling this. And yes, I think it’s a very strong piece of corroborating evidence. And you know, it was persuasive for me, too.
HAYES: This point about, obviously, what hangs over this, is that Joe Biden appears to be presumptively the nominee for the Democratic Party, that he will be running against a president who has been -- who has bragged about sexual assault, who has been accused of sexual assault by a dozen and a half women. He is -- right now there is a woman, E. Jean Carroll, who has accused him on the record of raping her in Bergdorf Goodman, and has two people on the record contemporaneously saying she told them the story at the time, one urged her to go to the police.
She’s currently suing him, because he dismissed the story. And of course, that is not exculpatory for whatever the facts may be with Joe Biden, but in the political context of how progressive and feminist and liberals think about this, it is inescapable and also sort of impossible. Your thoughts, Rebecca?
TRAISTER: And in addition to the claims made against Donald Trump, the person, there is also Donald Trump’s record of, and promises around governance. He is going to be in a position, if he is re-elected, to appoint people to the Supreme Court. He already has -- that is a generation’s worth of law making in this country that is going to, if Donald Trump makes those appointments going to be terrible for women, and especially women, particularly in vulnerable communities.
What he is -- you know, his record on the environment, enfranchisement, you know, the democracy is imperiled and women, and particularly vulnerable women, are especially imperiled. So progressive feminist women have every reason to support his opponent; however, what this is creating is a kind of a perfect storm where the women who are being asked to support his opponent are now being asked to answer for these charges, in part because of the vacuum created by Joe Biden who is not yet really directly answering these questions. And certainly not doing what I wish he would, which is to say, please direct your questions about these allegations to me, and not the women that are out there offering their support to my candidacy.
HAYES: Yeah, the man in question, the nominee, the former vice president, is going to have to address them, and not have Stacey Abrams or anyone else, or Kirsten Gillibrand be the ones to do that.
Rebecca Traister, your piece was fantastic. And thank you so much for making some time tonight.
TRAISTER: Thanks so much.
