In the previous post, I pointed out that Milano’s recent column on Tara Reade’s allegations about Joe Biden was devoid of effective critical thought, as well as soaked with crippling bias. I feel that I should note that many actual pundits are not much better at coherent analysis than the ex-TV starlet turned social media auteur.
Consider, for example, Bill Palmer, the self-described political journalist who writes The Palmer Report, more or less a left-wing equivilent of The Gateway Pundit which is banned on Ethics Alarms.
MSNBC’s Chris Hayes broke ranks this week by mildly suggesting that “personal admiration for the individual or their work, or political admiration, someone on our ‘side'” should not keep the news media from treating allegations like Tara Reade’s against Joe Biden seriously. The Horror. Hayes’ statement was basically an affirmation of what was once known as “journalism,” but the progressive mob immediately demanded that Hayes be fired. The last time an MSNBC host dared to buck the channel’s agenda, Chris Matthews had a Tara Reade of his own suddenly surface, and he was forced into retirement.
What a coincidence!
Enter Palmer, who wrote a blog post every bit as intellectually lame as Milano’s, and more dishonest. Read it here; I don’t want such junk on the blog. But here are some bottom of the barrel scrapings:
- ” She keeps claiming that she told various people about it at the time, but most of them say she’s lying.”
No, they say they don’t remember, or won’t confirm parts of her story. It shouldn’t be too hard to guess why that would be the case. Meanwhile, several individuals have said she did tell them about the incident.
- “To give you an idea of how uniquely non-credible this accusation is, Senator Kirsten Gillibrand – who has a zero tolerance policy when it comes to sexual misconduct and led the charge in taking down Al Franken – says she believes Joe Biden and doesn’t believe his accuser. That tells me all I need to know.”
That fatuous reasoning tells me all we need to know too: Palmer is a master-hack. We shouldn’t believe Reade because an ambitious, self-promoting hypocrite like Gillibrand, who would love to be on the ticket, says she doesn’t believe her? This is the same woman who believed Mattress Girl! Palmer is outing himself: never mind thinking, just pick a partisan you like and assume their position is correct.
- “The New York Times spent weeks digging into the woman’s claims and couldn’t find anything credible about them.”
I covered this Biden camp talking point yesterday, which the Times specifically denied. The paper said that its investigation neither confirmed nor disproved Reade’s claim.
- If Hayes were pursuing an uncomfortable but important and credible story, one could applaud him for being willing to anger and alienate his audience in the name of truth. But this is the opposite of that.”
Reade’s story is certainly “credible” by the generous standards used by Democrats, like Palmer, in assessing Dr. Blasey-Ford’s conveniently-timed attack on Brett Kavanaugh. In fact, it is both more credible and more serious. Reade is alleging sexual harassment and rape by a U.S. Senator. Blasey-Ford said a kid at a party she couldn’t place tried to jump on her.
I have three problems with Reade’s story myself. First, she took so long to make her accusation. Second, as I wrote at the time, it arrived just as Biden was about to clinch the nomination. It looked and felt like a politically-motivated attack. Third, such accusations are always suspect when they are alone.
Biden is a harasser; we have plenty of evidence of that (though Palmer seems to have missed it all) and that evidence alone would disqualify him from leading the “party of women’s” ticket if the Democrats had any integrity, which they do not. However, workplace sexual predators don’t do what Reade alleges only once. I‘m waiting for another accuser to come forward on the record.
None of which means that the the addled logic and intellectually dishonest arguments of Bill Palmer or Alyssa Milano are any better than incompetent.