Roy Moore's Accuser Count is now up to 9

  • Thread starter Thread starter JoshuaIsLord
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
petra22 said:
SOME cases allegations are allegations and sometimes they are guilt.
Click to expand...
Not all allegations are alike. Allegations come in various degrees of plausibility.
You might have that the WaPo did not consider certain phony allegations against Moore as plausible and did not them.

You asked about how people could vote for Clinton with the allegations against him. You fail to recognize that many of the allegations were not made until after Clinton was elected and re-elected. You also fail to take into account that some of the allegations are undercut by lack of substantiation and compromising ulterior political and pecuniary motives. If you take all of the facts into account, the answer is simple.
 
dvdjs said:
You asked about how people could vote for Clinton with the allegations against him. You fail to recognize that many of the allegations were not made until after Clinton was elected and re-elected. You also fail to take into account that some of the allegations are undercut by lack of substantiation and compromising ulterior political and pecuniary motives. If you take all of the facts into account, the answer is simple.
Click to expand...
Which of these could not be applied to Roy Moore? I also don’t have a horse in the race…and what I really said about Bill Clinton was that I couldn’t believe how out of touch I was with the rest of my fellow persons…
 
Last edited:
petra22 said:
how come my links are crackpot and yours are stellar?
Click to expand...
Well, the link you posted above is kind of nuts. Poke around that website, you’ll see.

As to my “stellar” links, what are you talking about? I don’t think I’ve posted any links in this thread.
 
petra22 said:
Which of these could not be applied to Roy Moore?
Click to expand...
One big point of difference is that whether or not the allegations were made before the elections.
Broaddrick’s charge is very serious. As serious or more than molesting a 14 year old.
No one voted for Clinton after Broaddrick made her allegation, NO ONE.
Ditto Wellstone.
Etc.

Will the same be said of Moore?

Is that not clear to you?

Another major difference is whether or not allegations were made without a pecuniary motive. Do the women accusing Moore have a pending lawsuit (Jones)? Are they seeking cask for their story (Flowers)?

Is this difference not clear to you?
 
Last edited:
“Pattern Of Behavior” is the key ingredient here. Although it is objected to in Court if it is trying to be used a character determination, but for other uses it will be overruled when objected to.

BUT in the matter of public opinion and when voting, we can utilize “Pattern of Behavior” to access the probability that the accusations are true.

We know for a fact that Moore has complete Disregard for the Law where he thinks he can get away with it as demonstrated below:
  1. Placing the Ten Commandments monument in the Rotunda of the Judicial Building in clear violation of the 1st Amendment.
  2. Failure to remove said monument when Lawfully Ordered to do so ( resulted in being removed from office)
  3. Ordered subordinate Judges to Not issue Marriage Licenses to Same Sex People in clear violation of SCOTUS ruling
Click to expand...
  1. Then we have Moore’s own admittance of dating Teenagers when he was in his Thirties. But only with their Mother’s permission. There is no mention of the Father’s permission. This raises innate suspicion that he was intentionally targeting “Single Mothers” to some degree. This by itself is a serious DISTURBING "Pattern Of Behavior"
With these 4 “Patterns Of Behavior” the accusations become evermore believable.

With these 4 “Patterns Of Behavior” one has to wonder what other unlawful things he may have done that he thought he could get away with.

If I was a family member or a person that he actually prosecuted, I would be inclined to have all the Prosecutions he won investigated.
 
Last edited:
PolitiFacts Score Card on Jones and Moore:

Moore
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Jones
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)

Here is why the one Statement is false:
Donald Trump claims Doug Jones is ‘weak on the border.’ Here’s what we found

Doug Jones opposes Trump’s border wall, but there’s no indication that he is against other border security measures.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
This is the crux of the matter here.
And I’m not a huge fan of Roy Moore.
But the timing of this is suspect, at least.
This could all have come our during the primary as well between Moore and Luther Strange, giving Alabama voters more of a choice.
But it didn’t. They sat on it until he won, because they figured they could easily get rid of him this way. And Doug Jones would be the winner.
And Statutory rape existed at the time Moore supposedly did these thing(although I’m not sure about Alabama)
 
Vanny said:
But it didn’t. They sat on it until he won
Click to expand...
They sat on it until the Harvey Weinstein story officially broke and women realized people might take their experiences seriously instead of believing they were lying. If you hadn’t noticed there are a whole lot of people coming forward with allegations of sexual assault and harassment against powerful people right now, the vast majority of whom are not involved in an election. This is inconvenient for Moore but them’s the breaks when you preyed on teenage girls and the Weinstein/#MeToo wave starts breaking during your campaign.
 
lmachine said:
They sat on it until the Harvey Weinstein story officially broke and women realized people might take their experiences seriously instead of believing they were lying. If you hadn’t noticed there are a whole lot of people coming forward with allegations of sexual assault and harassment against powerful people right now, the vast majority of whom are not involved in an election. This is inconvenient for Moore but them’s the breaks when you preyed on teenage girls and the Weinstein/#MeToo wave starts breaking during your campaign.
Click to expand...
Yep, this didn’t just happen in a vacuum. There was a very direct reason why these allegations came out now and it had nothing to do with politics.
 
Jig_Saw said:
Yep, this didn’t just happen in a vacuum. There was a very direct reason why these allegations came out now and it had nothing to do with politics.
Click to expand...
And as Scott Hahn would say: “Anything else would be a denial of the Evidence” Just read that in his book last night…
 
niceatheist said:
Sometimes I wish the Trump in the Oval Office was Ivanka. I’m not keen on Kushner, but Ivanka actually seems like a reasonable intelligent and thoughtful human being, with much better political instincts than her father.
Click to expand...
Yes, she would be a better Rep in the Oval Office.
 
At this point I’d prefer one of Trump’s empty chairs than him as president.
 
Vanny said:
This is the crux of the matter here.
And I’m not a huge fan of Roy Moore.
But the timing of this is suspect, at least.
This could all have come our during the primary as well between Moore and Luther Strange, giving Alabama voters more of a choice.
But it didn’t. They sat on it until he won, because they figured they could easily get rid of him this way. And Doug Jones would be the winner.
And Statutory rape existed at the time Moore supposedly did these thing(although I’m not sure about Alabama)
Click to expand...
Even if the timing is suspicious, what of it? If you have skeletons in your closet, you can hardly complain when they’re leaked at an inappropriate time.

This is how high stakes politics work. Your opponents store up treasure trove of questionable or outright scandalous facts or allegations about you, and then when you make your run for office, suddenly those allegations are released.
 
It’s a very nasty tactic evidently used by both sides… since the Clintons, at least. Save the most incriminating rumors until just before the election… no time to check facts, no time to change ballots, smear… and with today’s internet rumors fly like lightning… SAD!
 
petra22 said:
It’s a very nasty tactic evidently used by both sides… since the Clintons, at least. Save the most incriminating rumors until just before the election… no time to check facts, no time to change ballots, smear… and with today’s internet rumors fly like lightning… SAD!
Click to expand...
There’s been a lot of factchecking going on. That’s why you didn’t hear about the woman who falsely claimed a sexual relationship with Moore because the Washington Post factchecks. Except you did hear about it when it came out that James O’Keefe was behind it.
 
petra22 said:
It’s a very nasty tactic evidently used by both sides… since the Clintons, at least. Save the most incriminating rumors until just before the election… no time to check facts, no time to change ballots, smear… and with today’s internet rumors fly like lightning… SAD!
Click to expand...
Let’s say that what you’re asserting is true (I don’t believe it is, but just for the sake of argument).

As I said above, his amply-demonstrated contempt for the rule of law and the Constitution should have disqualified him long ago (in fact, it did get him removed from the bench).

Conservatives are supposed to be very much in favor of adherence to the Constitution. How do you explain their support (or at least the support of some of them) in view of the fact that Moore apparently doesn’t give a rat’s behind about what the Constitution says?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top