In a piece for The Nation a few weeks ago, I wrote that "Reade’s testimony is evidence that the sexual assault occurred, though there remains room to disagree on its strength or probative value." There's also room to change one's mind when new evidence comes to light.

In light of recent evidence that raises serious doubts about Reade's credibility, I no longer feel sure of what/whom to believe. And though I'm sure nobody is awaiting my revised credence with baited breath, and it will anger many people, I wanted to be forthcoming about this

I stand by my original assessment of the evidence, given the facts to hand at the time, and the strong moral and epistemic presumption in favor of believing women.

I stand by my original claim that Joe Biden has behaved in seriously creepy, disturbing ways toward women, and my dismay that he's the presumptive Democratic Party nominee. But I no longer think he should step aside, and apologize for having said he ought to in print.

Many people I respect have come down on numerous sides of this pointy issue. I don't plan on saying anything further about it for now, and urge you not to participate in the culture of blaming and shaming sexual assault victims, and holding them up for unfair scrutiny.

But it would be disingenuous for me not to publicly acknowledge that there are far more serious problems with Reade's word than is typically the case with victims--who of course do not have to be perfect, but do have to be credible.

So: in short, I've changed my mind, and I apologize. And I've said what I currently have to say, so please don't @ me.