The Roy Moore Scandal: Someone’s Lying But No One Is Suing [UPDATED]

Judge_Roy_MooreLast week on this blog and in television interviews, I noted that in scandals like the one surrounding Roy Moore I often wait to see who sues for defamation first.  What is clear in that someone is lying. It is either numerous women who were tracked down by the Washington Post or Roy Moore himself.  Moore has called the women liars and “evil” while they have described a man with alleged pedophilic tendencies.  As I mentioned on Friday, Moore’s responses are suspiciously labored and narrow for someone accused of deeply disturbing allegations.  While I did not agree that Moore should simply withdrawal solely because someone made an accusation, the record is getting worse by the day.  If he is innocent, I can understand a refusal to be chased from the race but there are new accounts that are making the situation untenable for Moore to remain in the race.  Notably, Moore has been calling these women liars but he has not sued for defamation or announcing his intention to do so.  That would put all parties under the bright light of discovery.

Update:  Moore has announced that he will sue for defamation. However, he did not mention suing over the allegations of dating young girls but only “being with” a 15-year-old girl.  He also mentioned only suing the Washington Post and not the various women who spoke on the record or his former colleague who spoke on the record.  As noted below, the lawsuit against the Post would likely face the greatest challenge for Moore to prevail.

As I mentioned on Special Report, I was surprised by Moore’s interview with Sean Hannity where he not only denied the allegation but said that he did not date young girls as alleged.  Here is the core of the exchange:

HANNITY: At that time in your life…Let me ask you this you do remember these girls would it be unusual for you as a 32 year old guy to have dated a woman as young as 17? That would be a 15 year difference or a girl 18. Do you remember dating girls that young at that time?

MOORE: Not generally, no. If did, you know, I’m not going to dispute anything but I don’t remember anything like that.

HANNITY: But you don’t specifically remember having any girlfriend that was in her late teens even at that time?

MOORE: I don’t remember that and I don’t remember ever dating any girl without the permission of her mother. And I think in her statement she said that her mother actually encouraged her to go out with me.

As with his statement that hitting on young girls was “out of my customary behavior,” the statement that “I’m not going to dispute anything but I don’t remember anything like that” is remarkably couched and qualified on such a disgraceful allegation.  Most of us would not only have a clear memory but a strong denial to such an allegation.

Other aspects of the allegations can to the credibility of the allegations.  First, even Breitbart confirmed that these women came forward reluctantly and were found out by the Washington Post.  Second, others have come forward to contradict Moore but to say that he was notorious for dating young girls.  A former colleague of Moore from the District Attorney’s office said that it was “common knowledge” that the Alabama Republican dated high school girls when he worked in the Etowah County District Attorney’s Office in the 1980s.  Teresa Jones (who worked with Moore from 1982-1985) told CNN

“It was common knowledge that Roy Moore dated high school girls, everyone we knew thought it was weird. We wondered why someone his age would hang out at high school football games and the mall … but you really wouldn’t say anything to someone like that.”

Once again, I still believe that Moore is entitled to a presumption of innocence like all citizens but that does not shield him from the public record . . . or his public duties as a candidate for the U.S. Senate.  If Moore did pursue young girls aged 14-16 as a man in his 30s, he is not only a disgusting human being but (given his denials and attacks on these women) a truly evil human being.

Moore could sue the Washington Post, though with multiple witnesses the newspaper would be able to show that it did not act with reckless disregard or knowing falsehood (the standard under the New York Times v. Sullivan for public figures). That would leave the women themselves.

So, again, that leaves us with the curiosity that no one, particularly Moore, have announced a lawsuit for defamation.  For a man alleging a broad conspiracy of lying women, reporters and colleagues, he has remained conspicuously passive in the face of a growing scandal.

243 thoughts on “The Roy Moore Scandal: Someone’s Lying But No One Is Suing [UPDATED]

  1. It is difficult more likely impossible to take anything at face value from a group who has made lying a standard policy. Then add the left’s love affair with the bleat for bucks bimbo brigade and their utter denial and portrayal of certain groups chief among them women. The only excuse they seem to have is blaming their own right wing aka RINOs. These are not the kind of decent people who built and still maintain our representative Constitutional Republic.

    As an objectivist I look for facts, facts submitted in evidence, and facts that are supported. At best politics is a hard place to find any of that starting with elected officials that live up to their oath of office or have any real familiiarty with our Constitution

  2. Put aside allegations about teen girls, and you still have a candidate that has been removed from the bench twice from the state houses of Alabama. That alone should disqualify him from state and federal elected jobs. What would make him suddenly obey the constitution of the USA when he could not and would not follow Alabama laws?

    • Fish, I’ve been saying the same thing about Clinton. She used a private server for emails and then when requested by Congress to hand over the hard drive she destroyed it. What makes you think she would follow federal law and legally deal with the balance of power.

      I was thinking the same thing about Alcee Hastings “Hastings was impeached for bribery and perjury by a vote of 413–3. He was then convicted in 1989 by the United States Senate, becoming the sixth federal judge in the history of the United States to be removed from office by the Senate.” and he is in Congress today.

      He is a traditional Democrat.

    • “What would make him suddenly obey the constitution of the USA when he could not and would not follow Alabama laws?”

      LOL! Who do you think your kidding? The only time anyone of the progressive ilk invokes defending the constitution is when it’s politically expedient.

      • That’s not right and you know it. Politically expedient, maybe you should look up Bush vs Gore. The Supreme Court made a rule for one man only, to be used only for that man.

        • That’s not right and you know it.

          You cannot be that naive. This massive bureaucratic state was not created by actual constitutionalists. It was created by progressive Democrats and progressive Republicans pretending to be constitutionalists.

    • Back up your statements with something more than cheap hyperbole and panderng propaganda, For starters prove your a human, a citizen and something more than just a machine part.

    • “Moore announced he is suing the Washington Post last night”

      Turley said “So, again, that leaves us with the curiosity that no one, particularly Moore, has announced a lawsuit for defamation. For a man alleging a broad conspiracy of lying women, reporters and colleagues, he has remained conspicuously passive in the face of a growing scandal.”

      That seemed to be a major consideration for Turley to believe in Moore’s guilt. I guess now that he is suing the WP Turley might find that he is innocent.

        • Try reading a little deeper anonymous or is that too difficult for you? I don’t claim Moore is guilty or innocent. I did make a comment about Turley’s remarks which I thought were a bit foolish considering the fact that he is an accomplished lawyer. He was professing a partial determination of innocence or guilt based upon whether or not Moore sued. He should know better.

          Your article has nothing to do with my comment. That is your problem. You don’t think or read before you post and you have very little capacity to analyze.

          • It’s not likely that he’s innocent, just as it’s not likely that Moore will sue.

            It’s not personal, Allen, but as I’ve said on a number of occasions: I don’t care what you think.

              • They are separate items. I will wait for the sworn statements by any of the accusers in writing with all the details.

                I can only imagine what you were saying about the boys on the lacrosse team at Duke. Their lives were ruined by claims made by a liar. In this case, the claim is being made weeks before a hotly contested election where political tempers are high. Like we have seen before many of the people making claims are doing so anonymously and the women (including one mother) that have made direct claims haven’t produced full statements that include time and place with all the details. You like to convict without evidence based on your whimsical preferences. A lot of women would have been burned at the stake if your voice counted.

                Once they make full statements that are sworn to they can be charged with libel if what they said isn’t true. That can incur a financial penalty though I doubt any have significant assets.

            • “I’ve said on a number of occasions: I don’t care what you think.”

              I wouldn’t think otherwise. Your not an individual that thinks too much about anything.

              • Yes — not surprisingly — Allan wrote: “Your not…”

                It’s not that hard.

                Example: You + are = You’re

                Let’s try it in a sentence: You’re a lying blowhard whose opinion is irrelevant to me.

                • You’re right on the spelling. Very good anonymous. You can read the written word and you can spell. But, can you think? That is your downfall.

          • Amen on the simplistic legal sue-not sue nonsense. As I pointed out somewhere on this thread, how does Moore or anyone meet their legal burden to prove that the Defendant lied about something that happened 40 years ago, where there is no concrete evidence one way or the other.

            I am not sure Prof. Turley wrote this one. If you go into a lawyer’s office and you want to sue over something like this, the first question the lawyer asks is, what evidence do you have. When the answer is “my testimony”, which is the same quantum as the other has, any good lawyer is going to say, just get over it.

            Gloria Allred, OTOH, is not an ethical lawyer, and only wishes to play politics.

            Squeeky Fromm
            Girl Reporter

            • Let’s take politics out of the equation and instead look at Roy Moore as someone’s father/grandfather/uncle, what have you. If justice were truly blind, what is the case? We have a man who is alleged to have done things that may or may not be illegal by women that have presented no evidence. What is the justice system supposed to do with these allegations? If there is no evidence of a crime and only the sworn testimony of multiple women, is that proof of a crime? What would the charge be without physical evidence? Maybe he’s done everything they allege he did, is he to be found guilty without physical evidence?

              What is this all about? It’s not about a crime. It’s about a candidate for the U.S. Senate, his character and his party affiliation. And given the fact actual crimes don’t matter much to the political class, given the fact actual character doesn’t matter to the political class, then what remains: politics. If that’s what remains, then the only thing that matters is what the voters in the state of Alabama decide. And the political class will do everything they can to influence public opinion. Has anyone checked to see if Fusion GPS is involved?

              • You are right and though it could be tongue in cheek who knows who is involved.

                Update from the NYTimes 3 minutes ago “Attorney General Jeff Sessions asked officials to look into whether a special prosecutor is needed to investigate the Clinton Foundation”

                I worry if he will just send it down the ladder to Rosenstein if a prosecutor is found necessary.

  3. “The passenger door was still open as he burned rubber pulling away leaving me laying there on the cold concrete in the dark.”

    He’s done.

      • I should have been clear that my comment was sarcasm. There was a ‘burning’ need for this latest accuser to come forward now, one month before an election, with her dramatic story of how he ‘burned rubber’ in his getaway car leaving her bruised and shaken all alone on the cold hard pavement and no one reported anything to the police? And she didn’t remember this attempted rape until Moore was in the news recently? But now she recalls him “burning rubber” and such vivid detail? It’s a tad dramatic, no?

  4. This may have already been brought up, but false accusations leading up to an election have some real world consequences for victims of those accusations: Never forget Nakoula Basseley Nakoula and then of course the woefully misinformed electorate willing to believe anything that protects their favored candidate.

  5. I have not heard all of the evidence against Moore. The last I heard were that there were only accusations, and no evidence, and that may have changed.

    There are several possible scenarios. Moore could have had sexual relations and/or harassment of a child/children under the age of 16. That makes him a pedophile. Moore could have had relations with teenagers over the age of 16, which is the age of consent. That would be legal, but I would still view it as wrong. Moore could have had relations with teenagers over the age of consent, and his accuser could have lied to him about her age. By her own admission, she has reliability issues that cloud the case. She had boyfriends, used drugs, campaigned for Moore’s opponent, and was all over Social Media attacking Moore. Her mother is on record claiming that WaPo pressured her into coming forward. There are conflicts ranging from drugs to partisan politics. Or Moore might never have dated anyone under 18. I do not know at this time.

    If they have proven that her mother had a case in his court, then the date would confirm her age. It would be very difficult, 38 years after the fact, to prove what happened between them. In Bill Clinton, Bill Cosby, and Harvey Weinstein, there was a long documented trail of similar stories and varying levels of evidence.

    I also disagree with the age of consent of 16 in Alabama. I think it should be 18, with a caveat that there are exceptions for people 2 years of age apart. That would avoid an 18 year old for being prosecuted for remaining with his slightly younger girlfriend after he turned 18. If Moore fraternized with anyone over the age of 16 (or whatever the age of consent was in Alabama 38 years ago), but under 18, then that might have been legal, but I would still find it morally and ethically wrong.

    Older men often marry much younger women. That doesn’t seem like a good bet for marital longevity, and I can’t see the appeal in the man constantly being mistaken for his wife’s father/grandfather. So his fraternizing with 18 year olds would be embarrassing to him, but not illegal. If he did have relations with anyone under the age of consent, then that brings up a whole different legal and moral territory.

    The difficulty is that this is too close to the election to really feel good about it either way. If he turns out to be wrongfully accused, and the accusation alone makes him lose, then no court can make him whole. If he sues the women for defamation, then he will be pilloried for attacking victims. If he wins the election, and it turns out that he is a pedophile, then his opponent similarly lost his opportunity. Many of us have become jaded at political dishonesty – both from deliberately false accusations and cover ups.

    There is no time.

    I hope they can come to a definitive answer on what happened before the election. It would be unsatisfying if all we ever have to go on would be an accusation and rebuttal. That’s the problem with waiting nearly 40 years to speak up. It’s difficult to prove your case or defend his, and becomes he said she said.

    • Yeah, Jerry is on record saying he didn’t do anything improper, but you bet he did in the beginning, when she was 17.

      That said, there is a difference, ethically if not legally in states where the age of consent is 18, between a 17 year old and a 14 year old. In New York, statutory rape laws are only applied when the younger party is under the age of 17. In New York, a 16 year old may give legal consent only with a partner with an age difference not greater than 4 years. Otherwise, the age is 18. So, again, this would have been wrong, in my opinion, but not prosecutable for Jerry and Shoshana.

      This does illustrate the glaring doubt standard.

  6. Almost 40 years is a long time. That is why there is a statute of limitations. Memories grow dim and many times those memories are replaced by things that didn’t actually happen. The human mind can redirect events to serve the needs of the individual. Here we have a mother who has pushed her daughter into recalling something that may never have happened and might have more to do with family dynamics than inappropriate behavior by Judge Moore. We also have to take note that almost 40 years have passed and that these revelations have occurred right before an election where many people have been playing a lot of dirty games.

    I am not saying the events didn’t happen, but it seems there is no way to know at such a distant date. If as Jonathan Turley has done anyone draws any conclusions of guilt under these circumstances then I am afraid of how juries decide between innocence and guilt. I think we are forced to believe that the statute of limitations has a reason to exist. If not why don’t we repeal it?

    Jonathan Turley should reconsider what he wrote and then think of what our legal system would look like if we took his position.

        • You’re one to talk! I remember in 2008 when you lived in Texas. You and I met at a Hillary campaign event. You seemed like a nice lady and told me you had a daughter who looked a lot like me. When you asked me to meet you in the bar later for drinks, I looked forward to it. Then, when I had to go powder my nose, you followed me into the bathroom and locked the door. You checked the stalls to make sure nobody was there, then you grabbed me and told me that you had never been with a woman before but you said there was just something about me.

          You were wearing a long sleeve cotton floral, and you pulled down one of the straps, and exposed your left breast to me. You grabbed my hair and pulled me toward you, and said you wanted me to kiss you there. I asked you to stop, but you just put your other hand between my legs and began to rub me. I am not very big, and it took me a few seconds to break away from you. I remember how you laughed and said I needed to grow up. I tried to get out but you stood in front of the door knob, and you said not until I kissed you.

          I told you to move or I would start screaming. You called me a sore loser, and moved out of the way. I went back to the table, and gulped my drink down, and left crying.

          Sooo, don’t get on your high horse about Moore, or anybody else. You are just as bad.

          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

          PS: Of course this didn’t happen, but see how easy it is to make stuff up? If you were famous, and in the papers, I could have been much more descriptive and made the story much more believable. That is the problem with 40 year old allegations. Anybody can make up anything.

            • Swarth, did you actually have that sexual encounter with Squeeky or perhaps another young girl? It sounds like you did because you are accusing her of being psychotic. You must feel guilt for it is obvious that Squeeky is not psychotic based on everything she wrote. Your response is inappropriate.

              What is hiding in your closet?

                • Same problem, Swarth.

                  But why should I believe anything you are posting? Your replies to Squeeky indicated some inappropriateness and defensiveness. One has to wonder about your past.

                  Could Squeeky have hit a raw nerve? If you were actually running for office as a Republican you might find the media and others jumping on the bandwagon and if you supported Trump then McConnell would probably side against you.

                  Of course, your innocence wouldn’t matter to those people against you any more than your guilt.

          • I was an Obama delegate as was my spouse. We never attended any Hillary events so would be impossible to even make up a half way believable story.

            • Now you are even trying to disprove the claim never made. You say you were never at a Hillary event, but can you prove that to be true? Being an Obama delegate doesn’t prove you never attended a Hillary event. You are very defensive and according to some, defensive people who have inappropriate responses are generally guilty.

              • One would have to sign in and make a donation at a Clinton event so there would be a record. You guys are not the brightest of bulbs but then again you are spending your time defending Roy Moore.

                • Swarth, More defensiveness. It was in a bar that your “meeting” with Squeeky occurred. We aren’t defending Roy Moore. You are making unproven allegations against him 40 years old and the “allegations” against you are much more recent. The noose is tightening around your neck as more information is learned about you. You have something in common with Obama “If you like your doctor you can keep your doctor” and you don’t think. That is perfect for an Obama delegate.

            • You are missing the point. If you were a famous person, then more information would be available about you. Since I now know you were an Obama delegate, let me redo my story!

              You’re one to talk! I remember in 2008 when you lived in Texas. You and I met at a Hillary campaign event. I was in Austin for a Hillary campaign event, and I ran into you at a hotel bar. You said you were a Democrat, but that you were for Obama.. You seemed like a nice lady and told me you had a daughter who looked a lot like me. When you asked me to meet you in the bar later for drinks, I looked forward to it. I figured I could talk you out of supporting Obama. We had a few drinks.

              Then, when I had to go powder my nose, you followed me into the bathroom and locked the door. You checked the stalls to make sure nobody was there, then you grabbed me and told me that you had never been with a woman before but you said there was just something about me.

              You were wearing a long sleeve cotton floral, and you pulled down one of the straps, and exposed your left breast to me. You grabbed my hair and pulled me toward you, and said you wanted me to kiss you there. I asked you to stop, but you just put your other hand between my legs and began to rub me. I am not very big, and it took me a few seconds to break away from you. I remember how you laughed and said I needed to grow up.I tried to get out but you stood in front of the door knob, and you said not until I kissed you.

              I told you to move or I would start screaming. You called me a sore loser, and moved out of the way. You said if I ever said anything about this, you would beat me the same way Obama was going to beat Hillary. I went back to the table, and gulped my drink down, and left crying.

              See how the believability factor goes up the more info you have about a person. If you were on TV all the time, think how much better my story could have been. Think of all the little details I could have added. I might even have gotten Gloria Allred to represent me!

              Squeeky Fromm
              Girl Reporter

                • I don’t know what is true. Lies and smear attacks have that effect. To illustrate, somebody who has known you for a long time said that it is well known that you like to play “Mommy” to younger attractive girls. (I was only 24 in 2008, btw.)

                  What if you were famous and a few more girls came out and started saying things similar to what I said about you?

                  Where would you be then??? In the same place as Roy Moore, and nobody would know whether to believe you, or me and the other girls you sexually assaulted. And the more who came out, the guiltier you would look.

                  Paging Gloria Allred! Paging Lisa Bloom!

                  Squeeky Fromm
                  Girl Reporter

                  • . You really do work for the Gateway Pundit as the Pizzagate stuff seems up your alley. Comet Pizza is still open and awaiting your appearance. You fellas play dirty when one of you own Roy Moore is attacked.

                    • Swarth, No one is saying whether Moore is guilty or innocent. The statute of limitations tells us what to think. You are the one attacking him based on a he said she said event and there is no proof one way or the other. You are the one playing dirty and others are just pointing out the dirt you have on your hands.

              • McConnell has agreed with lies that have been proven to be lies. I don’t hold his opinion in high regard. In fact, I don’t hold the opinion of most of Congress in high regard.

                You are using a double standard again.

              • Gloria Allred has more business than she can handle these days. One day she will be nominated to serve as the first head of the newly formed government agency: The Department of Sexual Affairs.

            • And he ‘burned rubber’ in his getaway car. Holy hell. Roy Moore should now check himself into the same rehab place that Harvey Weinstein checked himself into because Harvey was out in a week – so it must be a really good one. 😉

      • Swarth, ever hear of false allegations of child abuse by parents? You really need to be more careful about what you believe.

        These allegations should have been made decades ago or at least before a Senate political race. That makes the allegations very suspicious and it wouldn’t be the first time that such claims were made where the claims weren’t true. The fact that others pile on isn’t that meaningful considering the time line.

        I don’t know the facts and therefore can’t draw a conclusion one way or the other. Have we heard any recent claims? Not to my knowledge. I’ll accept that the law has meaning and there is a reason for the statute of limitations. I’m not going to hang a man just because I don’t like him, his race or his color.

  7. OK, sooo say Moore sues for defamation. How does he,or anybody else in his position, prove by a preponderance of evidence that she is lying??? The damned allegations are 40+ years old, and there are no witnesses outside of the two parties.

    Sooo, a trial is basically he said and she said, and if he can’t prevail, what would the headlines be??? Moore Loses Child Sex Case!, right? But that would not really be what happened, he just could not carry his legal burden. The jury could have come in with 9 believing him, and 3 not, and he would still lose, and the headlines would be the same.

    So, I think it is very dumb legally to expect him to sue for defamation.

    Meanwhile, the chick is in the same place as him, and she probably could not carry her burden either. In her case, the headlines should be Moore Innocent of Child Sex Charges!, but the mainstream media would probably spin it as, “Child Sex Victim Loses in Court!

    I think the overall thrust of this article is legally simplistic.

    Squeeky Fromm
    Girl Reporter

  8. Someone is confused by who is lying? You’re kidding me!! Anyone with a brain (omits most of the white supremacists that post here daily) believes it is the pedophile moore that is the sick, twisted habitual liar here. And like the prevaricator trump threats of lawsuits are just the whinny rantings of weak pathological liars.

    Would anyone here let their young daughter near this pile of garbage? Certainly hope not.

    • Bill W., I understand you had sex with a 6-year-old 40 years ago. Prove you didn’t.

      Should “anyone here let their young daughter near ” your type of ….?

      You can protest all you want that you didn’t have sex with a 6-year-old and I will believe you because there is a lack of evidence just like in the Judge Moore case. We just don’t know if we should believe you or the woman and her mother who confirm the story. After all, you support Hillary Clinton and all her illegal actions along with those of her husband who was impeached after lying about having sex with an intern.

      This is a very dangerous game you are playing even if you don’t understand the ramifications.

      • there are weak arguments…..lame arguments….arguments with disdain for the truth, etc…….. And then there is your argument.which incorporates all. If your statements were true then the pedophile Moore would sue the accusers. But much like the liar trump, those are just threats and then cowardly weakness.

        fyi – I don’t support Hillary (or any politician) – but if I do support Clinton……. then I guess you support Hitler. Right? isn’t that the way substitution goes when one just won’t man up and admit their hero and is pedophile garbage.

        dangerous games are being played. On that we agree. But it is the habitual, pathological liars that will do the worst damage to this country – btw did the liar trump really say that tax reform would be bad for him? how stupid, or conservative, would one have to be to believe that?

        • “there are weak arguments…..lame arguments….arguments with disdain for the truth, etc…….. And then there is your argument.which incorporates all.”

          That is the point. When you wish to judge someone you have to use the same standard no matter the race, color or political party. Take note how much you talk about Trump. You conflate your political opinions with what happened almost 40 years ago.

          You don’t like it when a ‘he said she said’ argument involves you so don’t inflict that lame type of argument on others. I don’t care who you vote for and who you don’t like. I do care about rhetoric that is off balance and requires a double standard.

          “If your statements were true then the pedophile Moore would sue the accusers. ”

          Apparently, he is now suing so does that make my statement true? “I understand you had sex with a 6-year-old 40 years ago. Prove you didn’t.” Of course not, but you will continue to find an excuse to hang the guy without proof. That appears to be your nature.

    • and you of course have proof positive and are willing to state so openly in court and testify as to the factual nature of your charges?

      No?

      didn’t think so.

  9. Let’s split the difference.

    Judge Roy Moore withdraws and

    Hillary, Bill, Obama, Rice, Power, Lynch, Mueller, Farkas, Holder, Lerner et al.

    report for prison.

    • George, even though it’s obvious you are a Fox disciple, you need to get it through your skull that Hillary, Bill, Obama, Rice, Power, Lynch, Farkas, Holder, Lerner, et al aren’t in government any more. All the garbage Fox spouts about them is irrelevant to Chump and Moore. Mueller is just getting started. He’s not violated any laws. It’s the KellyAnne Pivot. See it for what it is.

      • Is it true you were complicit in the acts if of Bill W. Must be I haven’t seen him denying the charges and then used your own experience conduct a shift of targeting. See how easy it is when you are used to dealing with people who will believe anything the programmers told them to believe. After all anyone that would support a…….

      • Nutchacha,

        Fox is far too liberal for my taste.

        You enjoy “Affirmative Action Privilege”

        and the 19th Amendment, right?

        See what I mean?

  10. Gary,

    The allegations aren’t 40 years old. The allegations are about events that occurred 40 years ago. It is true that at least one of the females first told some people about them way back about 40 years ago.

  11. Believing one innocent until proven guilty should not be the only test in determining one’s suitability for public office. The voters in this country are responsible, but not for ignoring the presumption of innocence. It’s for assuming the character of the candidate is unquestionable barring a court ruling. There is no doubt a tiered system of justice in this country, with those among the political class protected the most. Does Roy Moore have a legal claim to be treated as innocent until proven guilty? Absolutely. Does he deserve to be elected to the Senate representing the state of Alabama? Unless disqualified, that will be up to the voters of that state.

  12. Moore doesn’t have to sue to convince hard-core Trumpsters that these allegations are politically-motivated. They’d believe his denials and that he is the victim even in the face of video and DNA evidence. The rest of us know Moore to be someone who, even as a judge, did not respect the law. At minimum, he is a flagrant ignoramus and a disgrace to the office of judge, just based on what he doesn’t deny, like flaunting federal court orders, and dating young, unsophisticated girls when he was too old for them. The law says that someone is innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, but the rest of us aren’t bound by this standard. You have other lawyers saying it was common knowledge that, in his 30’s, as a prosecuting attorney, he “dated” high school girls. You have corroborating evidence from acquaintances of the girls themselves at the time whom they told what he did to them. Then, there’s the sheer number of them. Not just one or two. Yes, I believe the girls, and this is not because I’ve been drinking the Kool-Aid, either.

      • I don’t “hate” this clown. I feel sorry for him, but even more so, his victims. He’s sick, but because he can be used as a tool for wealthy Republicans to push through huge tax breaks for millionaires, which is the real reason for his candidacy, they won’t stand up for what’s right. I don’t believe most of them think what he does is OK, or that he’s a man of integrity who belongs in the U.S. Senate, but that’s irrelevant to their agenda.

        • “At minimum, he is a flagrant ignoramus and a disgrace to the office of judge…”
          Come on now, you hated him long before teenagers entered the picture. There’s nothing wrong with your arguments, but at least to your own self be true.

          • You don’t understand hate and lack of respect, which aren’t synonymous. I happen to think that if a lawyer is elevated to the position of judge, that he or she is supposed to stand for respect for the rule of law, including those that conflict with their personal beliefs, in addition abiding by the oath to uphold the Constitution. Moore flamboyantly disregarded court orders, including the order to remove the Ten Commandments, from government property. That’s not respecting the rule of law or upholding the Constitution–it’s proof if lack of fitness to be a judge. My acknowledging this does not equate to hatred of him. Setting aside the sexual assault allegations, he is not fit to be in the U.S. Senate just based on his conduct as a judge. However, the evangelicals will cajole their congregations to vote for him, despite his lack of fitness, anyway. It’s truly sad. They don’t see the big picture.

            • I would reference Moby Dick, but this one is much better: “Let no man pull you so low as to hate him.”

              Rise above, Natacha. And all the best to you.

    • Natacha:

      You said, “The rest of us know Moore to be someone who, even as a judge, did not respect the law.

      BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

      WTF are Sanctuary Cities, and Dem Mayors refusing to hold ICE detainees, and Dems shutting down other people’s First Amendment rights with violence? With Hillary breaking numerous laws with her own email server, and then destroying the emails and Dem DOJ officials refusing to prosecute voter fraud. With the Dems stuffing the ballot boxes with illegal immigrant voters.

      Give me a break you rabid twit. You Dems could care less about the law.

      Squeeky Fromm
      Girl Reporter

      • Wow! You really are a Fox News disciple. No point arguing with you. I just hope Alabamans don’t embarrass themselves any more than they already have.

        • Does this mean you really are a member of the Collective spouting the party line? Seig me no heils Comrade we don serve the party and your opinion as a non citizen really means….nothing. .

      • Squeeky,

        With regard to your statement that Dems stuff ballot boxes with votes from illegal immigrants and the current arguments here from you and other readers that accusations are without merit until proven, innocent until proved guilty, etc., would you please cite the cases of legal prosecutions resulting in findings of guilt in the of casting illegal ballots by illegal immigrants? And need I point out, you will not be burdened by a great elapse of time between alleged criminal behavior and legal prosecution and findings of guilt.

        Until then, thanks for your entertaining, but valueless, comments.

        • First, read this as background:

          https://fairus.org/issue/societal-impact/noncitizens-voting-violations-and-us-elections

          Next, see this:

          Today, the Public Interest Legal Foundation released documented proof that in just 138 of Virginia’s counties and cities, voting officials quietly removed 5,556 voters from the rolls for being non-citizens in recent years and that a third of them had cast ballots. Virginia’s sloppy procedures are duplicated in many other states, making a national investigation imperative.

          We can’t rely on state officials to bring these problems to light. In some cases they are actively involved in covering them up. Take Virginia, where Christian Adams, a former Justice Department lawyer who now runs the Public Interest Legal Foundation, has found that election officials routinely fail to alert law enforcement about illegal votes or registrations.

          “At the instruction of Democratic governor Terry McAuliffe, local officials hid critical information that would have improved election integrity, while McAuliffe, a former Clinton political operative, vetoed proposal after proposal to shore up the laws,” Adams told me. The Washington Post reported that McAuliffe appointees to the state’s Board of Elections even wanted to eliminate the requirement that those registering to vote “check boxes to indicate whether they are U.S. citizens or felons whose right to vote has not been restored.”

          Virginia has a history of close elections. McAuliffe himself won by only 56,000 votes out of 2.2 million cast in 2013, and that same year, Democrats won the key office of attorney general by only 907 votes. “In this election year, aliens and felons must not cast illegal ballots, and if they do they must be prosecuted,” Adams told me, referring to the Virginia gubernatorial election coming up this November. “I sincerely hope that Governor McAuliffe’s veto pen did not invite a close election tainted by fraud.”

          Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/448098/virginia-voter-fraud-report-noncitizens-voted-illegally

          The problem is, that voter fraud tends to help the Democrats, sooo they don’t look for it. They do however fight tooth and nail against common sense proposals like Voter ID. And citizenship checks for illegal voters. Why, if they are not benefiting from those votes.

          There are several studies out which indicate the illegal alien vote may be very significant, but once again, the Democrats raise hell about really investigating it. Another fun link, is this one. Just replace xxx with www. You can’t put more than two links in a comment:

          xxxheritage.org/voterfraud

          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

        • First, read this as background:

          https://fairus.org/issue/societal-impact/noncitizens-voting-violations-and-us-elections

          Next, see this:

          Today, the Public Interest Legal Foundation released documented proof that in just 138 of Virginia’s counties and cities, voting officials quietly removed 5,556 voters from the rolls for being non-citizens in recent years and that a third of them had cast ballots. Virginia’s sloppy procedures are duplicated in many other states, making a national investigation imperative.

          We can’t rely on state officials to bring these problems to light. In some cases they are actively involved in covering them up. Take Virginia, where Christian Adams, a former Justice Department lawyer who now runs the Public Interest Legal Foundation, has found that election officials routinely fail to alert law enforcement about illegal votes or registrations.

          “At the instruction of Democratic governor Terry McAuliffe, local officials hid critical information that would have improved election integrity, while McAuliffe, a former Clinton political operative, vetoed proposal after proposal to shore up the laws,” Adams told me. The Washington Post reported that McAuliffe appointees to the state’s Board of Elections even wanted to eliminate the requirement that those registering to vote “check boxes to indicate whether they are U.S. citizens or felons whose right to vote has not been restored.”

          Virginia has a history of close elections. McAuliffe himself won by only 56,000 votes out of 2.2 million cast in 2013, and that same year, Democrats won the key office of attorney general by only 907 votes. “In this election year, aliens and felons must not cast illegal ballots, and if they do they must be prosecuted,” Adams told me, referring to the Virginia gubernatorial election coming up this November. “I sincerely hope that Governor McAuliffe’s veto pen did not invite a close election tainted by fraud.”

          Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/article/448098/virginia-voter-fraud-report-noncitizens-voted-illegally

          The problem is, that voter fraud tends to help the Democrats, sooo they don’t look for it. They do however fight tooth and nail against common sense proposals like Voter ID. And citizenship checks for illegal voters. Why, if they are not benefiting from those votes.

          There are several studies out which indicate the illegal alien vote may be very significant, but once again, the Democrats raise hell about really investigating it.

          Squeeky Fromm
          Girl Reporter

  13. I originally wanted to give him a little more than the benefit of the doubt.
    We are talking about of 40 year old allegations, and the quality of evidence that old is rather low.
    But, as the story progresses, and as his denials appears ever so much more nuanced and couched, that and what is reported here that it was common knowledge he liked dating young girls, my defense for him falters.
    But really kicked it out of the ballpark for me, was Moore’s recent position on civil rights, violations therein, and refusing to accept supervisory orders from superior courts.
    Overall it is shaping up like enough smoke to probabilistically prove the fire.
    Although I am still skeptical of using allegations that date back a 1/2 century, there are enough other evidences and indications that show he may not be right for the job.
    I am not strongly supporting his resignation though, because the evidence is weak.

    • In other words you have nothing but a very poor grasp of the art of BS propaganda and thus can be discouonted as just another machine part of the completely destroyed progressively regressive left. I like the part where you believed your own ‘truth’ of the day without any attemt beyond unsupported personal opinion. Now did you do the same thing when Bubba and Hillary were found to have actually victimized a not small group of women and …… Of course not.

  14. “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.”

    How long was Bill Clinton’s lie allowed to persist by the propaganda media?

    How long was John Edwards’ lie allowed to persist by the propaganda media?

    Hillary Clinton’s lies have no bearing on justice. She’s STILL not in prison.

    Obama, Rice, Farkas et al. subverted, “wiretapped” and “unmasked” and they’re still running around free.

    Chelsea Manning still has an Adam’s Apple but the MSM calls him a she.

    Anyone here dated a girl under 18?

    • Key up: “Death March of a Marionette”: OK, now let’s do the the Kellyanne Pivot: Bill Clinton is a liar and bad guy; John Edwards is a bad guy and liar. Hillary Clinton is a liar. Obama is a bad guy who was born in Kenya. Chelsea Manning has male junk, and is not a girl. So, therefore, Moore can’t possibly be guilty, but even if he is, these others were worse. Make sure you are sipping Kool-Aid while listening.

      • Nutchacha,

        Thanks for reading. With the American population in a “death spiral,” it would seem that American women would be fully occupied with their honorable duties. You are American, right? I’m sure you agree, what is more important than existence?

  15. Regardless of Moore, it appears nearly all commenters here have decided he is guilty based on accusations. This isn’t the Jerry Springer show. You damn sheeple are all responsible for the miserable state of our country. This is what happens when you treat political opponents as enemies. But that’s not why you should be ashamed. The Establishment on Capitol Hill want nothing to do with Moore so they have no qualms with destroying him. You should be ashamed for drinking their kool-aid. Because one day you too will be accused. Whether true or not there will be no defense because you helped create this culture. You can either believe in innocence until proven guilty, or not–but you cannot escape the consequences of your choice.

    • Yeah, I lean in the direction you are pointing out, allegations 40 years old, should not be a reason he should simply give up the ship.
      As I posted earlier though there is more; I still would not strongly advocate his stepping out the race, but I don’t feel as outraged as I did before if he is pressured into it.

      • I’m not defending Roy Moore. I’m saying this accusation hysteria violates a basic tenet of our liberty.
        This is no different than when Dems tried to bring down a black judicial conservative with Anita Hill.
        I dare say it’s equivalent to the birther movement, or Dan Rather slandering GWB. We cannot sustain, nor should we expect, community civility when we participate in “win at any cost” political contests. This is not a search for justice; it’s reliving the Salem witch trials. We have to rise above it or be consumed by it. A 100 years from now our posterity will be reading about this episode in history and wonder what the f*** were we thinking.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s