Over the past few days, several more lines of evidence have surfaced to support the rape allegation made by a former Biden staffer against the presumptive Democratic nominee. Tara Reade alleges that, back in 1993, Biden grabbed her, pushed her up against a wall, and assaulted her. Though she waited until now to report the incident to the media and the police, she says she told several people about it when it happened and throughout the intervening years. If true, this wouldn’t conclusively prove the allegations, but it would lend them credibility. After all, it is hard to believe that a woman would invent a rape story about a prominent politician but then wait 27 years to tell the media. You would think that telling the media and ruining his reputation would be the primary point of inventing the story in the first place.

On that note, two people — Reade’s brother and a friend — both corroborated that she told them about the alleged attack many years ago. Now more potential corroboration has emerged, including a clip from a 1993 episode of Larry King Live when a woman purported to be Reade’s mother called to talk about a cryptic “problem” that her daughter had with a “prominent politician.” Reade has confirmed that the woman on the tape is her mother. Then a report was published in Business Insider with more on-the-record corroboration, this time from a former neighbor who says she was told about the rape back in the 90’s. A former co-worker also attests that Reade mentioned “harassment” she’d suffered from a boss in DC.

Add all of this to Biden’s track record of inappropriately groping and touching women, and a persuasive circumstantial case is beginning to come together. None of this proves that Joe Biden is guilty, but it does significantly complicate the argument for his innocence. To believe in Biden’s innocence, one must believe either that Reade made up the rape story decades ago and inexplicably waited 27 years to use it against him (even remaining silent through his 8 year stint at Vice President) or that the various people corroborating Reade’s account are engaged in some sort of conspiracy. Both of those options, or some sort of middle ground, are plausible, but I’m not convinced that they’re more plausible than option C: Joe Biden sexually assaulted Tara Reade.

Wherever you stand on the allegations — and I think agnosticism at this point is still the most rational choice — there is no doubt that every person who believed Christine Ford should believe Tara Reade. If the evidence against Kavanaugh was enough to persuade you, the evidence against Biden should look absolutely overwhelming by comparison. Let’s recall: Christine Ford could not remember the day, month, or year of her alleged assault. She told nobody about it at the time that it supposedly happened. Nobody came forward to corroborate any significant detail of her account. Her own family remained conspicuously silent. Her good friend from high school said she didn’t remember the party where the assault allegedly occurred and she doesn’t believe Ford’s story. The only evidence against Kavanaugh — circumstantial or otherwise — was Ford’s own word. That was it. And that was more than enough to call him a rapist, according to many on the Left and in the media

By contrast, Reade remembers the alleged assault vividly. She can say exactly when and where it happened. She told people about it. Her family and former acquaintances have corroborated and verified whatever aspects they could. And Reade is accusing a man with a reputation for acting inappropriately towards women, while Kavanaugh, aside from the claims dug up during his nomination hearing, has exactly the opposite reputation.

All of that said, in the eyes of the media and many on the Left, the only evidence needed against Kavanaugh was the fact that he was nominated by a Republican. And the only evidence needed to vindicate Biden is the fact that he is the presumptive Democratic nominee for president. All the rest of it — “believe all women,” etc — is a smokescreen. They don’t care about truth and they don’t care about protecting women. That should be obvious now, if it wasn’t already.