It turns out that the Republican Party has lower standards than the average prison gang.
Fair enough. It’s some way from establishing a ‘pattern of behaviour’ though, since the issue with the 14 y/o (if it happened) seems to be the only instance where he actually broke the law.
So as long as its only one instance of breaking the law regarding sexual contact with a 14 year old, then all good and clear sailing to the US Senate? However if another 14 year old comes forward then that’s over the line?
I mean, there are different possible patterns. But the fact that he solicited other teenagers who lived with their parents when he was thirty makes it a little harder to dismiss this teenager’s claims. I suppose it’s possible that in his thirties he solicited only teenagers who lived with their parents and who were over the age of consent, and that this teenager who lived with her parents and was under the age of consent is making the whole thing up–but that doesn’t seem super likely.
Hmmm. Minor input to a previous scenario: Moore wins, McConnell refuses to seat him, Governor appoints, etc. Bannon wins. He whips the knuckle walkers into a frenzy of rage. He gains more ground in his struggle to take the Republican Party from minority to marginal.
(By the way, put the kibosh on a rumor. It is not true that the image of Bannon will cause a nursing mother’s milk to curdle. Not even in high-def is that possible. The victim must be in his actual presence for the rattlesnake vibes to affect, no further than fifty yards.)
What kind of parent would let it happen? Perhaps the kind of parent who has reason to fear an Asst. D.A.?
No, it wasn’t. Refusing to comply with the order of an Alabama high court was illegal. Refusing to comply with the ruling of the US Supreme Court was illegal. Violating IRS laws governing charitable organizations for his personal benefit was illegal. Convening a grand jury under false pretenses and engaging in “suspect conduct” was illegal. Making completely asinine rulings as judge against a mother that he disliked may not have been illegal, but was enough to have him forcibly removed from the case and rises to the same level of moral malfeasance, in my view. He is far from legally or morally blameless, even if one agrees with his lunatic politics.
Because people lie. People I know lie to me. I have been guilty of lying in the past. Strangers would certainly lie to me.
If I find five people who say that Barack Obama told them that all white people were inferior, would you believe them? Why would or should you?
Having a society where the allegations of one person will have consequences for another person with no corroboration almost puts us in a Salem Witch Trial type of system. There is no defense to forty year old allegations.
Would there be more of a defense 38 years ago to a two year old allegation?
The women say it happened. He says it didn’t. 40 days or 40 years later, there isn’t likely to be much “corroboration.”
How about the allegations of four different people, none of whom know each other, plus the statements of 26 other people partially corroborating said allegations? None of these 30 people have any known connections to Moore’s political rivals.
The problem of victims being attacked for coming forward, and not being believed, is nigh-infinitely greater than the problem of false allegations about sexual misconduct.
Yes, it’s fair to consider that it’s much more likely that these women are not lying than they are. There’s some non-zero possibility that these allegations are not true, as it goes with any allegations. But that doesn’t mean it’s ever okay to attack or publicly question someone for coming forward – it’s not (barring real evidence that they’re lying).
They are grasping at ANYthing that will help them justify supporting a kiddie-diddler. If not this, then the next will be “Those women were all paid off by George Soros from his underground bunker under the pizza parlor”.
There is no bottom for the Republican Party now. No depth they will not go to. None. They even use the bible to justify child rape now.
I agree: people can lie. One person or even two or three, maybe it’s just jilted ex-friends or lovers out to get him. But it’s less likely as the number of people who continue to say essentially the same thing come forward. People who engage in sexually predatory behavior tend to repeat the same patterns. It’s like when Cosby’s accusers came forward: Yeah, maybe a few had a grudge – but 50?!
Time will tell with Roy Moore. Yes, people do lie, and if their accounts had been whispered and bounced around on some viral Facebook post, I’d be disinclined to take them seriously. But this is a story that was researched and vetted by trained journalists at a pretty credible newspaper. Moore’s accusers, friends, and family members could all be telling lies, and maybe the Washington Post’s reporters and editorial board are a bunch of sloppy reporters and saps who don’t do their homework. Possible…but not very likely.
Honestly I can’t blame them on that part. If the shoe were on the other foot and I was forced to make the decision, I would absolutely rather send a predatory pedophile to Congress than a Republican. The pedophile can only devastate the lives of the people he comes into personal contact with, which will be in the hundreds rather than the hundreds of millions.
But I certainly wouldn’t be defending the scumbag, questioning the motives of his accusers, or comparing him to Biblical saints. I would be doing this:
It seems like their only reason for not doing this is the fear that Moore will run as an independent and draw enough support to split the vote. If I was running a party where I had to worry about Humbert Humbert drawing a significant portion of my base away, I would seriously reconsider my life decisions.
Do you deny that you have argued in this thread that it was too long ago to worry about and we don’t have actual proof? Or are you saying these aren’t excuses for those who continue to support Moore?
Here, I’ll refresh your memory. (bolding mine)
Yes, but probably only in Alabama. The knuckle walkers in the rest of the country don’t pay enough attention to special races to even notice it happened.
I’ve long thought they’re not nearly as big a factor in the next election as they were in 2016. They are a minority. We just need the majority – made up of fired-up Dems, disgusted moderate Republicans and independents – to show up and vote. Races across the country on November 7th tell us that they will, if we can keep momentum going.
I think far more people will be outraged if Republicans fail to address Moore if he makes it to the Senate than will be outraged if they refuse to let him sit as a Senator. And that’s the beauty of the Republican scheme: They can do exactly what they wish to, and look like they’re being the “good guys” doing it. It’s kind of brilliant, really.
Lest you think I’m going full wack-a-doodle with this notion, consider how quick, uniform and in-lockstep was their message yesterday: “If true, Roy Moore should do the right thing and step aside.” There’s no statute of limitations on allegations of sexual abuse against a minor in the State of Alabama, so Moore may actually face charges for his conduct at some point – but it won’t be before December 12th. If Republicans really wanted to do the right thing, they didn’t have to add the, “if true,” language and they don’t have to wait for a legal adjudication of Moore’s guilt or innocence to employ a standard of decency. Notice that Mitt Romney and John McCain had no such compunctions. I think Senate Republicans want to control who takes that seat. And I think they want it to go back to Jeff Sessions.
I would dispute this. I’m not a mother, let alone a nursing one… and my milk curdles every single time I see his revolting visage. And I’m grateful to have never been in his actual presence.
Sure, people lie. We all know this. But facts is facts.
You’re an attorney, I believe: If Moore is charged, and on the People’s side come to testify are the victim, her mother and two friends who were contemporaneously told about the incident, and on the Defendant’s side is Moore’s attorney saying, “This just didn’t happen,” which way do you think the case is going to go?
What motives can the childhood friends possibly have to lie?
And what do you think is the reasonable interpretation, based on the evidence?
The Republican Senate Fundraising committee pull out of a joint fundraising agreement with Moore.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/national-republican-senatorial-committee-ends-joint-fundraising-agreement-with-roy-moore-campaign/2017/11/10/f393278c-c62e-11e7-84bc-5e285c7f4512_story.htmlhttps://www.washingtonpost.com/powerpost/national-republican-senatorial-committee-ends-joint-fundraising-agreement-with-roy-moore-campaign/2017/11/10/f393278c-c62e-11e7-84bc-5e285c7f4512_story.html
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Luci,, you never fail to bring a grin to my face. 
I might have missed it, but I don’t think the judge’s denials have been mentioned here.
Oh, shit, that’s because he is not denying them:
This wasn’t even a non-denial denial.
https://twitter.com/MooreSenate/status/928771064406167552
Link to the last tweet as it contains a longer, but similar, message from Ped Moore, er, Roy Moore. In the longer statement, some will take refuge in his use of the “it was 40 years ago, and why didn’t they come out until now?” argument.
The guy himself isn’t bothering to deny this happened.
So… what’s the point, again?