Keep Factually independent
Whether you agree or disagree with our analysis, these conversations matter for democracy. We don't take money from political groups - even a $5 donation helps us keep it that way.
Were any investigations launched into Tara Reade's claims against Biden?
Executive summary
Investigations were opened at different times into aspects of Tara Reade’s allegations and related conduct: a D.C. police report she filed in April 2020 was at one point described as an “active investigation” before being moved to inactive status [1], and Monterey County prosecutors examined whether she lied under oath while serving as an expert witness — a probe reported in multiple outlets [2] [3]. Media outlets including The New York Times, PBS and AP publicly reviewed her claims and records; those news investigations found inconsistent corroboration and questioned aspects of her academic and employment history [4] [5] [6].
1. Where official investigations actually were opened — police and prosecutors
Reporting shows at least two official lines of inquiry: a police report Reade filed in Washington, D.C., in April 2020 about being a sexual‑assault victim led the police department to describe an “active investigation” before later moving the case to “inactive” status [1]. Separately, Monterey County, California, officials investigated whether Reade gave false testimony under oath when she had served as an expert witness on domestic violence, and prosecutors considered subpoenaing her academic records as part of that review [3] [2].
2. What federal agencies and subpoenas have been reported
News reporting documents additional federal activity around Reade’s social‑media presence and complaints she later filed: outlets reported the Department of Justice issued a subpoena to Twitter seeking information about her accounts following the renewed allegations in 2020 [2]. Some of Reade’s own lawsuits and public statements later asked DOJ and the FBI inspector general to look into how she was treated, alleging improper targeting by federal investigators [7] [2].
3. Media investigations vs. criminal findings: different standards and outcomes
Major news organizations — including The New York Times, PBS and the AP — conducted investigations into Reade’s account, interviewing acquaintances and former staffers; those outlets reported limited corroboration of the sexual‑assault allegation and highlighted inconsistencies in Reade’s statements and background [4] [5] [6]. Journalistic findings are distinct from criminal prosecutions: reporting raised questions that informed public judgment but did not equate to criminal convictions or formal charges against Biden or definitive criminal findings about Reade [4] [5].
4. What happened to the D.C. police matter and why reporting varies
PolitiFact summarized the timeline: Reade filed a police report on April 9, 2020, saying she was a victim in 1993 but did not name Biden in that filing; the D.C. police initially described the matter as under active investigation and later said the case was moved to inactive status [1]. Differences in phrasing across outlets — “active,” “inactive,” or “moved to inactive status” — contribute to confusion about the ultimate procedural closure of that specific complaint [1].
5. The Monterey County inquiry and its triggering issues
Local prosecutors in Monterey County pursued whether Reade had lied under oath in earlier court work as an expert witness on domestic violence; reporting said defense lawyers in cases where she testified pushed the district attorney’s office to subpoena her academic records to evaluate possible perjury or fabrication of credentials [3] [2]. Those accounts portray the investigation as focused on her testimony and qualifications rather than on the original assault allegation against Biden [3] [2].
6. Conflicting narratives and political context to keep in mind
Some outlets and opinion pieces framed Reade as a credible survivor deserving scrutiny and transparency [8], while others described her as inconsistent or questioned her motives and background [6] [9]. Reade herself later filed civil complaints alleging government “weaponization” and sought inquiries into FBI and DOJ conduct — claims covered by Newsweek and RT reporting about her litigation and asylum status in Russia [7] [10]. These competing narratives reflect partisan and editorial differences in how outlets interpreted the evidence [8] [6].
7. Limits of available reporting and open questions
Available sources do not mention any criminal charges against Joe Biden arising from Reade’s allegation; instead, reporting documents internal news inquiries, a D.C. police report moved to inactive, a California prosecutor’s review of her past testimony, and later civil complaints and subpoenas related to her online accounts or claims about federal targeting [1] [3] [2] [7]. Readers should note the distinction between journalistic scrutiny, local prosecutorial inquiries into Reade’s conduct, and the absence in these sources of any successful criminal prosecution tied directly to the assault allegation [4] [5] [1].
Bottom line: the record in reporting shows at least a D.C. police inquiry that became inactive and a Monterey County probe into Reade’s past courtroom testimony, plus media and DOJ/Twitter-related inquiries about her accounts — but not criminal charges against Biden reported in these sources [1] [3] [2] [4].