Really... whatever evidence you have found from a MEDIA that is leftist and against him... is enough for you to determine that he is a lying lowlife? Wow...
The "media" is a red herring, it is not "leftist" but is a wide range of viewpoints, everything from MSNBC to Fox News and the Wall Street Journal. And that isn't counting things like Breitbart or similar. And it is interesting, even Hannity has dropped his support for Moore, though he leaves it to the people of Alabama to decide. Hannity was about the last to support Moore at Fox News, and the Wall Street Journal has dropped support as well -- this isn't just the "leftist media."
Mr. Baptist.... (I don't know your name and am not going to call you cow) you should know better than that. Especially when his chief accuser is only crying NOW, during an election season, 36 years later... and who is almost certainly now a liar herself because of the signature in the yearbook and her own divorce case where nothing was ever said... until now... during an election year in an age of politics of personal destruction. You should know better and to pass judgement as you have? Wow....
There are now something like 9 different accusers of Moore. The timing is because this was the first time the national press investigated Moore. There have been rumors of Moore and teenage girls, per reports, for decades in Gadsden, just that the Alabama press either didn't have the resources and/or didn't care enough to ever investigate -- there is an Alabama reporter on record stating that has been asked a few times to investigate this story, just that he never had the resources (time and money) to be able to do it.
It is not unusual for these stories to come out years later, look at Bill Cosby or Harvey Weinstein -- being abused is very traumatic for women, they tend to blame themselves (even when no fault of their own) and, as we see from those who have accused Moore, they get called a number of names by various people, have personal information published online, with the abuser (or his allies) frequently digging up dirt to try and discredit the victim. After already being abused, why would a woman want to open herself up to more abuse. This is also why it often happens during races, like this, particularly when (like the Washington Post discovered) there are multiple victims and they can all speak out at once.
I don't know the credibility of any Moore accuser. However, lots of corroborating information has been given; particularly the stories of how Moore was banned from the mall and the YMCA, because he was trying to pick up teenage girls. We have someone he worked with saying it was known in the office that he dated teenage girls and they thought it was weird. And then you have Moore, who at first kind of waffled, saying it would have been "out of character" for him to date teenagers but that he always had the mother's permission. Now Moore has changed his tune, that he never dated teenage girls. And for me, a man who at 30-something who was dating high schoolers is enough, for me, that he shouldn't be in office.
As for the divorce, it is extremely likely Ms. Nelson never appeared in his courtroom -- that she didn't even know he presided. Chances are, the divorce was agreed on ahead of time and, if anyone appeared before Moore it was just the lawyers -- though likely not even they did. Instead, Moore merely signed off on the divorce that had already been negotiated.
I do find it interesting, with the yearbook, that in the "evidence" to prove the signature wasn't his they used Moore's current signature and his signature from the late 90s -- and talked how different it was. Which stands to reason, my signature has changed over the decades since I was in my 30s (and I think most people's do as they get older). Interesting that they didn't offer a signature from the 70s, which for someone like Moore should be available with all the legal paperwork he signed as a DA.
It is also interesting to me, that the first late 90s signature Moore released they pointed out "how different" the signatures were yet, just a day or two later, they showed the signature from the divorce decree (again from the late 90s) and how similar it was (as if it was copied from the decree) to the signature in the yearbook. They can't even get that story straight, of if it appears to be his signature or not.
But beyond that, Moore appears to be lying, at this point -- at least about dating teenaged girls -- between the evidence that has come out from multiple sources. Additionally he keeps changing his story as he's become more desperate to defend himself (not to mention he is denying it through written statements, not in person). At this point, Moore's accusers appear to have more credibility, based on the evidence that has come out, than Moore does.
