Roy Moore's open letter denying allegations

AirPo · Nov 16, 2017

wing2000 said:
Yes, my naive eyes were opened to the selective morality of the right when Anita Hill testified to a committee of men who summarily dismissed her humiliating accounts of sexual harassment.

Almost there said:
psssst... Anita hill was lying. There is a reason she didn't want it pursued.

He said, she said, NEVER cuts it, especially when there is so much motivation to come up with ANYTHING to smear a candidate for a high level position.

QED

TLK Valentine · Nov 16, 2017

Almost there said:
Well, he won't be called a RINO because, by definition, he is not a RINO (Republican in name only) like McCain.

Of course -- a RINO is someone who opposes The Party... or opposes The Party's heroes.

And it's not that the right doesn't care about sexual assault. It's a history thing. We care about credible claims and, best, trial results. We've learned to ignore "he-said, she-said" eleventh hour claims.

We also learned a lot from the Duke Lacrosse team case.

That doesn't explain the people who have said that they'd support Moore even if the allegations were true... my theory does.

TLK Valentine · Nov 16, 2017

NightHawkeye said:
That escalated quickly.

Sexual predators tend to do that. We'll have to see if any new accusers step forward who say he didn't take no for an answer.

No one has come close to accusing Moore of rape. In fact, even his harshest accuser stated that when she said "No", he stopped.

His harshest accuser thus far... is that the one who got phone calls from him while she was in school, or one of the others? I'm losing track.

Speaking of losing track, let's not forget that when dealing with 30something-year-old men cruising the malls looking for teenage girls, it shouldn't get anywhere near that point in the first place.

But Moore's a conservative -- no harm, no foul.

DaisyDay · Nov 16, 2017

Almost there said:
Good point. However, based on the history of the members of the US congress, I don't think the job requires ANY of your records be clean. Heck, guys have won election from prison.

Depends on the record.

WaPo said:
With the glaring exception of Trump, McConnell has had a zero-tolerance policy for allegations of sexual misconduct in his party. And if Moore becomes a senator, you can bet every single one of his Republican colleagues on the ballot next year will get asked about why they are serving alongside someone who has been accused of sexual misconduct. The attack ads write themselves.

Analysis | The six likeliest ways this whole Roy Moore saga could end, ranked

cow451 · Nov 16, 2017

Ken Rank said:
Still... he has a point. If he really did what has her so emotional today... and he was the judge 18 years ago... there would be something said, an allegation, something... but there was nothing.

I am amazed at how many Christians have already determined him to be guilty without sitting down and weighing out all evidence. I guess that is the culture we now live in.

And I’m amazed at how many Christians are willing to excuse sexual assault.

Ken Rank · Nov 16, 2017

cow451 said:
And I’m amazed at how many Christians are willing to excuse sexual assault.

There is no evidence to suggest that Moore did this... and as I have said 20 or 30 times now... the evidence by both sides needs to be laid out and the truth will be revealed, whatever it is.

Almost there · Nov 16, 2017

cow451 said:
And I’m amazed at how many Christians are willing to excuse sexual assault.

I don't think they are excusing sexual assault. Rather, they've just learned from cases like Clarence Thomas and the Duke Lacrosse team that their bar for taking allegations seriously is higher than "she said, he said". And when we're dealing with high profile candidates for high office, the temptation to Bork people is very strong.

Eleventh hour allegations like these need to be ignored unless they carry some amount of proof beyond claims. Would you not expect the same from your constituents if you were running for political office?

Almost there · Nov 16, 2017

Interestinger and interestinger...

More about The Year Book, and Conclusive Proof It Is Forged

cow451 · Nov 16, 2017

Ken Rank said:
There is no evidence to suggest that Moore did this... and as I have said 20 or 30 times now... the evidence by both sides needs to be laid out and the truth will be revealed, whatever it is.

Corroborating statements are evidence as to circumstances surrounding the allegations. Gloria Allred has called for a Senate hearing which put all parties under oath. The yearbook is then available for independent review. How would that work for you?

There’s a tendency to conflate the court of public opinion with criminal and civil courts.

Kenny'sID · Nov 16, 2017

ThatRobGuy said:
Why is he bothering to deny it?

Clearly his peeps are cool with it and prepared to do the required mental gymnastics in order to give him their full support even if the allegations end up being true.

LOL

It appears you're no stranger to the gym.

cow451 · Nov 16, 2017

Almost there said:
Interestinger and interestinger...

More about The Year Book, and Conclusive Proof It Is Forged

Or not.

Almost there · Nov 16, 2017

cow451 said:
Corroborating statements are evidence as to circumstances surrounding the allegations. Gloria Allred has called for a Senate hearing which put all parties under oath. The yearbook is then available for independent review. How would that work for you?

There’s a tendency to conflate the court of public opinion with criminal and civil courts.

Why a senate hearing? Why not a grand jury? I mean, if he is being accused of a crime, let's get that evidence before a grand jury or court of law. If not, what are we really talking about?

NightHawkeye · Nov 16, 2017

Almost there said:
Why a senate hearing? Why not a grand jury? I mean, if he is being accused of a crime, let's get that evidence before a grand jury or court of law. If not, what are we really talking about?

The reason for a Senate hearing is political theater ... often a matter independent of facts.

Christie insb · Nov 16, 2017

Ken Rank said:
Still... he has a point. If he really did what has her so emotional today... and he was the judge 18 years ago... there would be something said, an allegation, something... but there was nothing.

I am amazed at how many Christians have already determined him to be guilty without sitting down and weighing out all evidence. I guess that is the culture we now live in.

I am amazed at how many Christians reject the matter without looking at the evidence. For instance, if he were really banned from the mall, that would be evidence that wouldn't be tied to one person. I think it's really sad that Christians are so ready to throw women under the bus just to get this person in office. And by "throwing under the bus," I mean great harm was done.

Almost there · Nov 16, 2017

cow451 said:
Or not.

Grossly misleading statement from that article:
"Nelson was one of several women who have come forward in recent days accusing Moore of sexual misconduct when they were teenagers and he was an adult."

She's one of two. The others said there was no misconduct. And the 14 year old's story is contradicted by her own mother. And Nelson's is using a dubious "signature" as proof of, even if it IS his signature, nothing more than that he knew her.

Jeeze.

ThatRobGuy · Nov 16, 2017

Kenny'sID said:
LOL

It appears you're no stranger to the gym.

...and this is even one of those rare scenarios where there's no creative interpretation for the far-left required (obviously outlets like Mother Jones and Salon like to selectively interpret things to make the target sound as vile as humanly possible), but in this case, leading Alabama republicans are doing their job for them.

David Hall said that the encounter was irrelevant because it happened "40 years ago".

Jerry Pow said that he'd support Roy Moore "even if the candidate had committed a sex crime" because he "wouldn't want to vote for Doug (Jones)."

William Blocker stated that he would still consider voting for Moore even if "hard proof of sexual abuse emerged".

Saying "it's irrelevant because it happened 40 years ago", even if he's just strictly referring to criminal proceedings and statutes of limitations, at best, is an extremely poor choice of words.

Now, as far as the other two...there's no other possible way to interpret what they're saying. They're flat out saying "I'd vote for a predator before a democrat", and "I'd still consider voting for him even if hard proof of abuse emerged". There's really no way to spin those two statements. They're just flat out unethical.

cow451 · Nov 16, 2017

Almost there said:
Grossly misleading statement from that article:
"Nelson was one of several women who have come forward in recent days accusing Moore of sexual misconduct when they were teenagers and he was an adult."

She's one of two. The others said there was no misconduct. And the 14 year old's story is contradicted by her own mother. And Nelson's is using a dubious "signature" as proof of, even if it IS his signature, nothing more than that he knew her.

Jeeze.

The photo of the yearbook was the matter I was addressing. If that wasn’t clear.

cow451 · Nov 16, 2017

Almost there said:
Grossly misleading statement from that article:
"Nelson was one of several women who have come forward in recent days accusing Moore of sexual misconduct when they were teenagers and he was an adult."

She's one of two. The others said there was no misconduct. And the 14 year old's story is contradicted by her own mother. And Nelson's is using a dubious "signature" as proof of, even if it IS his signature, nothing more than that he knew her.

Jeeze.

BTW sexual assaulting another adult is still considered a criminal act.

Almost there · Nov 16, 2017

cow451 said:
The photo of the yearbook was the matter I was addressing. If that wasn’t clear.

Sorry, I have images turned off.

BTW, this just out:
Roy Moore Attorney Questions Authenticity of Accusers Evidence – Press Conference Video…

FWIW, this is the site that absolutely obliterated the case regarding George Zimmerman. It was an amazing thing to watch. There is something rather explosive in the article.

Ken Rank · Nov 16, 2017

Christie insb said:
I am amazed at how many Christians reject the matter without looking at the evidence. For instance, if he were really banned from the mall, that would be evidence that wouldn't be tied to one person. I think it's really sad that Christians are so ready to throw women under the bus just to get this person in office. And by "throwing under the bus," I mean great harm was done.

If you are talking about me, you are barking up the wrong tree. Over and over and over again I have said that the evidence that either side has must be laid out and the facts will be whatever they are. If he is guilty, he deserves more than just the chance at a Senate seat... if not... people like many on this forum owe him an apology. I tend to think he isn't ONLY BECAUSE this is the 11th hour in an election season where he finds himself hated by both the left and the establishment right. We have seen this kind of stuff repeatedly in the past... BUT... that personal opinion aside.... neither you nor I are first hand witnesses to anything related to Moore. Until ALL the evidence... or lack of it... is known... we really should remain quiet.

Roy Moore's open letter denying allegations

with a Touch of Grey

I've already read the books you want burned.

I've already read the books you want burned.

I Did Nothing Wrong!! ~~Team Deep State

Standing with Ukraine.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Standing with Ukraine.

Well-Known Member

Standing with Ukraine.

Well-Known Member

Work-in-progress

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Part of the IT crowd

Standing with Ukraine.

Standing with Ukraine.

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads