November 22nd, 2017

How about looking at some backup evidence in the Moore allegations?

Since the allegations against Roy Moore came out, I’ve been patiently waiting (without much expectation) for some more detailed discussions of the evidence against him.

Waiting for employees of the Old Hickory House at the time to come forward. Waiting for photographs of the place. Waiting for a timeline of the allegations related to Moore’s movements and the accusers’ movements, and whether they dovetail with the timeline of the accusations. And so on and so forth.

Nothing on the subject seem to be forthcoming from the computers of the esteemed journalists who broke the stories. Nothing from Gloria Allred.

So now we have some offerings on the subject from Roy Moore’s camp. So far I don’t see that they’ve been successfully challenged, for the most part, although that may be coming soon. If you’re interested in taking a look, as I very much was, please see this as well as this.

I realize that the court of public opinion is not the court of law. But if we want to make decisions about guilt or innocence, truth or falsehood, can we not have some basic fact-checking? It’s pretty clear to me that—at least so far—the Moore-accuser camp (and Allred in particular, as well as the MSM) thinks it has time on its side, and has been playing out the clock.

I still don’t know whether the allegations of Beverly Nelson and Leigh Corfman (the two accusers with the very serious allegations) are true or false (in addition to the already-mentioned problems with the yearbook signing’s authentication or lack thereof). I don’t even know whether the Moore camp’s informants are telling the truth or not in their criticisms of Nelson and Corfman. I have an open mind about all of it. But the whole thing has been a rumor mill so far, from beginning to end.

66 Responses to “How about looking at some backup evidence in the Moore allegations?”

  1. groundhog Says:

    I only read WP when it’s free. I did see a some brief intro addressing the lawyer statements, but am paywalled out.

  2. Gringo Says:

    The timing of the accusations was suspicious to me.

  3. kevino Says:

    I don’t like Judge Moore, and I can’t see myself voting for him. That having been said.

    Beverly Nelson’s stepson has a video in which he calls he a liar. I don’t know that his credibility is all that great: he appears to have bad feelings toward her.

    There are rumors circulating that Moore was banned from a local mall because he was “chatting up” young girls. The local TV station interviewed the manager (“Boyle”). He said that they had such a list (of course), but that he didn’t think that Moore was on it. There are no records going back that far.

    An ex police officer can forward, saying that she was told to keep Moore away from cheerleaders at HS games. She also repeated the “mall ban” story. But she can’t name a single complaint, much less an arrest.

    Neither accuser has a lot of credibility IMHO. I find it very odd that none of this came out years ago, especially as the judge moved up in stature. I also find it “odd” that it didn’t come up as he was seeking the nomination. If it was important to these people that Moore must be stopped, they would have said something a long time ago. No, they waited until he had the nomination, and they dropped the bombs on him weeks before the election.

  4. neo-neocon Says:

    Kevino:

    It’s also odd that it didn’t come up at the outset, when Moore was Deputy DA.

  5. CBI Says:

    I found the following from PowerLine to be informative. Court Documents Raise Questions About Corfman’s Account. I’m tending towards believing Moore, at least for the most part.

    I don’t understand the general “dating younger women” problem. That used to be extremely common–almost recommended. Prince Charles met Diana Spencer when she was 16, and started dating her seriously when she was 18 and he was 30; they were married at ages 20 and 32, respectively. I don’t think that’s really a problem.

  6. OldTexan Says:

    I don’t care for Moore at all and I think he was a poor choice for a group of conservatives to back however, I don’t see any criminal behavior or workplace harassment in the allegations.

    I was bothered by the school yearbook and the fact that Moore and his attorney have not been able to inspect the yearbook that was shared with the press. I know a whole lot about pens and ink and if the yearbook signing was recent, within the last few months and a ballpoint pen had been used the ink would smear. A tiny scraping of the ink would also be interesting because the ink formulas have improved a lot in the past 40 years.

    Some of my reading about the physical layout of the resturant at the time Moore’s alleged behavior was said to occur indicate that part of the story is also kind of muddled. So I am kind of backing up on my negative judgement of the judge.

  7. Griffin Says:

    This was never about facts or proving anything it was about smearing a Republican close to a general election. The truth is entirely beside the point.

  8. neo-neocon Says:

    Griffin:

    Nevertheless, most receivers of the information, even many on the right, seem to swallow it whole without caring to know more before they decide.

  9. Geoffrey Britain Says:

    “I still don’t know whether the allegations of Beverly Nelson and Leigh Corfman (the two accusers with the very serious allegations) are true or false (in addition to the already-mentioned problems with the yearbook signing’s authentication or lack thereof).” neo

    There have been numerous facts and testimony emerging that cast real doubt upon the veracity of Nelson’s claim:

    On Monday, CNN published photos of the signature showing two different inks.

    The signature says “To a sweeter more beautiful girl I could not say, ‘Merry Christmas.’ Love, Roy Moore DA, 12-22-77, Olde Hickory House.”

    Strangely, “To a sweeter more beautiful girl I could not say, ‘Merry Christmas.’ Love, Roy,” is written in black ink, while “Moore DA, 12-22-77, Olde Hickory House,” is in blue ink.”

    The second contradiction is that Moore was NOT the DA in 1977. He was the Deputy District Attorney.

    Third, the Old Hickory House never spelled its name as “Olde”.

    “1.) The Olde* Hickory House required employees to be at least 16. Beverly Nelson claims she was 15 when she started.

    2.) The restaurant’s dumpsters were on the side of the building and not in back as Nelson claimed.

    3.) A former employee says the restaurant NEVER closed at 11 PM as Nelson claimed and at midnight on most nights.

    4.) Customers at the counter were served by the bartender or cook and not by any waitress.

    5.) The witnesses claim they have shared this information with several news outlets but they have refused to report the truth!

    More… Rhonda Ledbetter, who worked at the restaurant at the time, hesitated to come forward but she said, “As a moral and ethical person,” she had to come forward. Rhonda said she never remembered ANYONE coming into the restaurant in a suit and that Roy Moore NEVER came into the restaurant.”

    * here even Moore’s people get the name wrong.
    http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017/11/boom-witness-drops-bomb-proves-gloria-allred-accuser-nelson-lying-says-media-not-talk/

    So too with Corfman, “Court Documents Raise Significant Questions About Leigh Corfman’s Accusations Against Roy Moore”

    Her mother has testified that she never had a personal phone in her room. Giving Moore the house phone’s # would have risked her Mother realizing that Moore was calling for her 14 yr old daughter and, since Corfman supposedly had to sneak out of the house… clearly she felt that her Mother would not be agreeable to it. Plus, she risked her Mother discovering her absence. IMO, this does not pass the smell test.

    But there’s more. Now, court documents dispute Corfman’s claim that her encounters with Moore led her into a downward path.

    “The Post reported:

    After talking to her friends, Corfman says, she began to feel that she had done something wrong and kept it a secret for years.

    “I felt responsible,” she says. “I felt like I had done something bad. And it kind of set the course for me doing other things that were bad.”

    She says that her teenage life became increasingly reckless with drinking, drugs, boyfriends, and a suicide attempt when she was 16.”

    “The Post failed to mention that the very reason for the February 21, 1979, court hearing where Moore allegedly met Corfman was because, according to the court documents, Corfman had exhibited “certain disciplinary and behavioral problems.” In other words, Corfman evidence behavioral problems prior to the alleged encounters with Moore.

    Indeed, those stated “disciplinary and behavioral problems” were cited in the joint petition to change custody as the cause for both Wells and Corfman’s father agreeing that Corfman would be better served living with her father. The parents signed a “consent decree” going along with the change in custody.

    In yet another detail called into question at today’s press conference, DuPre referred to the exact spot mentioned in the Post story as the alleged meeting place for Corfman’s claimed encounters with Moore.

    The Post cited Corfman as saying that Moore, according to the newspaper’s characterization, “picked her up around the corner from her house in Gadsden.”

    The Post mentions the specific intersection where Corfman says that Moore picked her up around the corner from her mother’s house. The Post reports, “She says she talked to Moore on her phone in her bedroom, and they made plans for him to pick her up at Alcott Road and Riley Street, around the corner from her house.”

    DuPre said that intersection was almost a mile away from her mother’s house at the time and would have been across a major thoroughfare.” Aaron Klien

    So she lied about having her own phone.

    She lied about what precipitated her “downward spiral”.

    She lied about where she met Moore and where it was in relation to her house.

    Too many “untruths” not to be willful lies.

  10. Griffin Says:

    Neo,

    Agreed. But the goal here is just to peel off enough support from the target to insure victory for the left. If Moore loses this story will disappear before you can blink. Mission accomplished. If he wins on the other hand it will be on to the next level of attacks. They never quit. Ever.

  11. Gringo Says:

    “On Monday, CNN published photos of the signature showing two different inks.The signature says “To a sweeter more beautiful girl I could not say, ‘Merry Christmas.’ Love, Roy Moore DA, 12-22-77, Olde Hickory House.”

    I have not seen any comparison of this signature to another sample of Moore’s handwriting.

  12. neo-neocon Says:

    Geoffrey Brittain:

    Yes, i’ve been well aware of the information tending to discredit the accusers. I have followed the Moore case quite carefully. Much of that info was contained in links within this post.

    But the counterclaims may be flawed, as well. They have not been verified by authorities, either. In many cases we don’t even know the names of those making the counterclaims. It’s multiple he-said/she-said, writ large. Even the court documents, which definitely cast doubt on at least part of her story (the later effects of the alleged assault attempt)—have we actually seen copies of those documents? Have they been released, or are we relying on statements from the Moore camp?

    I think there is plenty of reason to distrust the accuser or accusers. But the facts are WAY too murky right now for me to be confident of the truth or falsehood of the charges and countercharges.

  13. blert Says:

    His enemies define him: the GOPe and the Democrat-Progressives.

  14. BrianE Says:

    The fact that the 14 year old was involved in a court approved custody transfer from her mother to her father is significant, IMO, and points to a rebellious, out of control teenager.

    According to a report I read, from the time of the custody hearing until she moved to her Dad’s house, in another town 30 miles away, was 12 days.

    Since there was only one telephone, and not in the girl’s room, for Moore to have made contact with the girl, without her mother’s knowledge and arrange several trysts during that time is fantastic.

    I speculate that her mother was trying to get her daughter away from the influence of a person, possibly a boyfriend– but that person wasn’t Roy Moore.

    The tryst Corfman describes probably happened, but not with Moore.

    The fact that after some time Corfman returned to living with her mother reinforces the idea that it was an individual relationship the parent’s were trying to break.

    The fact that her rebellion didn’t end there and led to more problems over the next several years, including a suicide attempt, doesn’t fit the pattern of Moore dating younger women, very likely a potential mate– since the other young women describe their relationships as respectful.

  15. BrianE Says:

    The second, serious allegation of sexual assault outside The Old Hickory Restaurant seems to be falling apart, based on recollections by other women that worked at the restaurant, and the refusal to let experts examine the yearbook.

  16. neo-neocon Says:

    BrianE:

    I would bet most people haven’t heard, or don’t believe, the statements discrediting the accusers. If you did a survey, i bet most people would say that they believe he’s guilty.

  17. Geoffrey Britain Says:

    neo,

    The accusations are being made against Moore, for those accusations to be given credence, it is incumbent upon them to present a case consistent with the basic facts. Corfman’s story does not standup on multiple points. Nor does Nelson’s.

    And, we do know the name of at least one witness whose testimony calls into question the veracity of Nelson’s story ; “Rhonda Ledbetter, who worked at the restaurant at the time, hesitated to come forward but she said, “As a moral and ethical person,” she had to come forward. Rhonda said she never remembered ANYONE coming into the restaurant in a suit and that Roy Moore NEVER came into the restaurant.”

    There are just too many factors where the women’s story does not fit emerging facts. Perhaps Moore is guilty but at this point, reasonable doubt has been easily established. Party ideology aside, what other consideration should an Alabama voter, inclined toward conservatism consider?

  18. neo-neocon Says:

    Geoffrey Brittain:

    Only problem is most people don’t think, react, or make decisions that way. And most people haven’t even read the later information, so the original stories have primacy.

    I am in complete agreement that there’s plenty of reasonable doubt about the accusers’ stories. But in this post I’m pointing out how little rebuttal has come from the accusers, because they think they’ve already won the propaganda game.

  19. Brian E Says:

    It only matters if the voters of Alabama are paying attention.

  20. Kyndyll G Says:

    We live in a time when half the population of the country, and somewhere north of four of five people under 30, consider feelz more important than facts and assume, as a given, that all people right of center are evil, stupid, sexist racists. All it takes is for someone to point a finger and accuse a conservative of something that evil, stupid, sexist racists do. It never mattered whether these charges were true; making them was all that mattered.

  21. Ann Says:

    Leigh Corfman was on the Today show a couple of days ago. She comes across as believable to me. It would be interesting to know how the women in Alabama who saw it have reacted.

  22. MollyNH Says:

    Dems trot out that crone Allred whenever they need a hit woman, remember Herman Cain & Romney no facts just accusations. BTW Allredwould be in judicial hot water if the year book were forged, against the law for a lawyer to provide false evidence.
    The revelations on Rose are sopping up plenty of mud, latest e female came to deliver something and he offered her a seat to watch a dirty movie with him asking her what she thought of that, so hopefully Moore will just be part of the current damage burst

  23. Brian E Says:

    I watched the Today interview Ann linked to.

    So he picked her up at her hearing to transfer custody to her Father due to behavioral problems?

    Then took her out twice, the second meet where he is accused of fondling her.

    All this happened in the 12 days between her custody hearing and the time she moved to her Dad’s house.

    What were the behavioral problems that prompted her parents to transfer custody and move her to another town, out of her school and away from her friends?

    “It took away a lot of the specialness of interactions with men,” Corfman said. “It took some trust away. It allowed me to delve into some things that I wouldn’t have otherwise. It took years for me to regain a sense of confidence in myself, and I felt guilty. I felt like I was the one that was to blame. And it was decades before I was able to let that go.”

    Except something had already happened before she was supposed to have met Moore that caused her parents to transfer custody to her father. That’s a pretty significant event and none of these behavioral problems can be laid at Moore’s feet, since they hadn’t met.

    I’m having trouble, given these facts, believing that this encounter with Moore, during which there was fondling, but there was no sex– if she was a virgin when she went to Moore’s house, she was still a virgin when she left– I’m having trouble accepting the level of guilt she says she felt, because something else had already occurred or was occurring that prompted the custody switch.

    I also can’t wrap my head around the idea the DA, even a wet behind the ears Deputy District Attorney would pick up a 14 year old girl at the courthouse during a custody hearing.

    That seems awfully bizarre.

  24. The Other Chuck Says:

    Ann:

    Back during the Clinton impeachment period I followed the allegations very closely. It was during that time that the internet came into full force, Drudge became a household name, and Lucianne Goldberg was posting on freerepublic under the moniker Trixie. The accusations and conspiracy theories ran wild. If you got caught up in it you believed that Vince Foster was murdered, Juanita Broaddrick was raped, and that the Mena Airport in Arkansas was the center of a CIA drug smuggling operation run from the White House. Simply because it was on the internet it was believed. The accusations were given further credence because the House voted to impeach. Never mind that the charges were for lying, it was assumed that a deep, dark conspiracy of evil was afoot in the land. Any and all accusations became the truth.

    That is what is going on now.

  25. Dave Says:

    I have been trying to make the same point across and you provided a perfect example with prince Charles and Diana. The only suitable mates available for bachelors in their 30s or 40s were pre 25 young girls in those days before the age of internet, especially in the south as conservative women there married early.

    The woman Allred represents and her yearbook are fake, msm will never exonerate Roy Moore in public as a lack of exoneration can still fool some idiots as confirmation of guilt but anyone who has been following should have come to the same conclusion long ago that the yearbook was forged, most likely with Moore’s last name, the location and date added later on an existing inscription possibly written by her friend or admirer. The handwriting of the inscription aside from Moore signature has not been compared to Moore handwriting on other documents. That explains why the inks appear in different colour in different angles. The inks are in the the same colour when looking straight on, but appear in different colour in some angles and certain light exposure conditions due to being different in brands and written in different time.

  26. Dave Says:

    Ann thought that woman with the yearbook was truthful and sincere too and look how it turned out.

    As long as someone can put together a story that could bring down a trump guy then they would accept it as truth no matter how ridiculous, lacking logic and common sense and inconsistent the story might be.

    Is it really justice that you are willing to ruin a decent and honest man’s life and reputation just to hurt trump, how much further are you willing to go, kill all trump supporters, then what makes you better than them?

  27. Ann Says:

    I don’t believe all the many women and others who have come forward re Roy Moore are all liars. I also think that what Peggy Noonan talks about in her latest column, “Alabama Women, Say No to Roy Moore,” is the worst aspect of it all:

    There is another reason Republican and conservative women should rise up. It has to do with the victims Moore chose.

    Who were the girls he targeted? Interestingly, this tribune of the common folk and their earnest, believing ways allegedly preyed mostly on the unprotected. He chose young women he could push around. Some came to him at his law office, bringing with them all the problems of broken America—child-custody fights, violent divorces, bounced checks. They worked at Red Lobster, at a mill, on the night shift at Sears.

    A thing about predators, from the men of the Catholic Church sex scandals to the man cruising the mall, is that they never prey on the protected. They don’t prey on the daughter of the biggest family in town, the child of the man who owns the factory or the local newspaper. They tend to prey on kids with no father in the home.

    Tina Johnson “was 28 years old, in a difficult marriage headed toward divorce, and unemployed,” AL.com reported of the latest accuser, Wednesday. “She was at the office to sign over custody of her 12-year-old son to her mother.”

    As they left the office, she said, Mr. Moore molested her. She told no one, not even her mother.

    That is a tell, that she didn’t tell her mother. They almost never tell the mother. She’s got enough going on. Maybe she can’t handle more. Maybe she’s not interested in handling more.

    Often the victims had had brushes with the law. Predators can smell that: It means no one will believe them if they talk.

    Roy Moore targeted the deplorables. They were people with no sway, no pull. Some of them, in the presidential election, voted for Donald Trump.

    You can get the Noonan article for free off a link on Drudge’s homepage.

  28. Brian E Says:

    “I don’t believe all the many women and others who have come forward re Roy Moore are all liars.”- Ann

    Neither do I. Just the ones that are alleging criminal conduct.

  29. Brian E Says:

    The majority of the accusations against Judge Moore are from young women who were between the ages of 16 and 22 and with the exception of one 18 year old who claims his “forceful” kiss left her either scarred or scared– depending on the news story, he treated the women respectfully.
    He is accused of asking them out, some multiple times. That’s his crime. I’m sure if there are more women, we’ll here about them.
    I think it was 11 with Trump, so we still have a few to go.

    Personal note.

    My sister dated a man 8 years older than her while she was in high school, much to the consternation of her parents (well they were my parents also). She graduated from high school, turned 18 and married the guy. They were married for 60 years, until he passed away this spring.
    Both my daughters married men who were 10 years older than them– though they did marry them after graduating from college.
    It seems that some women just prefer more mature men.

  30. The Other Chuck Says:

    I was a child when my father died. My mother was particularly affected because she witnessed a sudden, unexpected, and excruciatingly painful death caused by a traumatic aortic rupture. My father was then in his 60s, overweight, a 2 pack a day Pall Mall unfiltered smoker, and generally out of shape. He was also a doctor.

    It was the 4th of July and that morning there had been a thunderstorm that knocked tree limbs down. After the rain stopped, my father went outside to pull a black walnut limb out of the street. It must have been very heavy and awkward to move. I remember watching him from the front window struggle with it. After he managed to get it to the curb, he came back inside and stood motionless in the archway leading into the living room. That’s when he grabbed his stomach and chest, screamed, and collapsed in front of me. That’s how I remember it.

    My mother was there of course, as well as my older brother. The next thing I remember was laying on my bed and hearing the coroner and medics console my distraught mother. After that it is pretty much a blank.

    Years later when I was retelling this story at a family event and in front of my brother, he disputed me. He told me that I was never in the living room, didn’t witness our father in the street, nor did I see him die. He said that I’d been in my bedroom and when I came out after hearing the scream, I was told to go back to bed and stay there, which I did. Yet I’d been telling that story for as long as I could remember and believed it. I could even see the event as it took place. It was every bit a vivid, real memory to me.

    What had happened is that my mother had told that story in front of me so many times while growing up that it had become my memory. To this day I can see the event as vividly as if I was there. Yet I know that I wasn’t there and didn’t actually see it occur. If you gave me a lie detector test I’d probably pass it. It is that locked into my consciousness.

  31. Dave Says:

    It is not say no to Roy Moore, it’s say no to republican. If Roy Moore did it, even after Roy was elected he can still be impeached, so why not just for for a republican, and let the man has his due process. Why the insistence of conveincing conservatives to betray their beliefs to vote for a socialist or sit out completely.

    Republicans should tell conservatives the following:
    “Don’t think for a second you are voting for Roy Moore, don’t think if you vote for Roy Moore and he is later found truly guilty you condone sexual assault. No, you are voting for conservative values and due process. If Roy moore is elected he will receive a fair trial and a chance to pledge his case, but don’t let some unsubstantiated claims that may or may not be true to change a fact, you are voting for conservative values, not Roy Moore the man, and you cannot let liberals win to do more harm to America just because what Roy Moore may or may not have done 40 years ago, vote for the future, not the past. If Roy Moore is a monster, he will be convicted in a legal and fair environment and eventually be impeached, and conservatives will have another chance to elect a conservative like sessions again. However, if you Let a Democrat win, based on some claims by some women full of holes and fabricated evidence, Jeff Sessions seat will be occupied by a socialist for 6 years and there will be nothing you can change that even later Roy Moore is completely exonerated, think about that.”

  32. Dave Says:

    Besides, Roy Moore winning is the only way we will get to the bottom of the truth. If Roy Moore loses, the msm will completely forget about the whole thing and leave the potential victims without ever having their day in court. Only way that the women will be able to present their case in a legal setting is in senate expulsion hearing, and that can only happen if Moore wins. So if you truly want the truth and true justice for both he women and Roy Moore and not letting the left exploiting this for their selfish gains you should hope Roy Moore wins.

  33. Dave Says:

    Why are we playing along with the liberals and make this election a referendum of if we believe Moore is guilty or not? Why are we rushing into making a decision if Roy Moore is guilty with so little time and complete lack of evidence. The decision should be easy, vote for Moore and let compulsion committee decide if he is guilty, if after due process he is found guilty then he will be impeached and another special election will be held and people can vote for another conservative, I don’t see any reasons to let this socialist win based on some biased reporting from Washington Post. Everything else is legal, there are only two true accusers, one has pretty much been completely exposed as a liar, and the other one has a history of accusing men of sexual assault, why are we even entertaining letting a socialist take sessions seat for 6 years based on some couldn’t be more shaky accusations?

  34. Dave Says:

    To boost their credibility the Washington Post and make their accusations against Moore more credible they had to sacrifice one of their own Charlie rose to do so, don’t let these people win, if these people are truly honest they would have release the story before the deadline and let conservatives pick another candidate, they forced Roy Moore onto the conservatives by holding up the story. even if Roy Moore is truly a creep the left is just as dirty and evil, don’t let them win, voting for Roy Moore and letting him get expelled is better than letting democrats win, the party of perverts like al Franken and Conyers.

  35. AesopFan Says:

    neo-neocon Says:
    November 22nd, 2017 at 6:12 pm

    I think there is plenty of reason to distrust the accuser or accusers. But the facts are WAY too murky right now for me to be confident of the truth or falsehood of the charges and countercharges.
    * * *
    Much of today’s post references some of what I commented on earlier (http://neoneocon.com/2017/11/21/on-the-sexual-charges-du-jour/), but to repeat one item and add a new one:

    (repeat) The security guard at the mall who seemed to know the most said that a man who was banned from the mall about that time was not Moore, and was now deceased, so he wouldn’t give the name, but Moore had never been banned; that post also remarked on the failure of the MSM to run any of Moore’s rebuttal evidences.

    (new) A website linked by a commenter at AccordingToHoyt (Sarah Hoyt, SF writer) brought up the psychological point that men who had a “thing” about younger girls (early pubescence ages 11-14) did not (could not) change their habits and start hitting on older women, especially 28-year-old mothers with 3 kids.
    Now, Moore might still be a handsy jerk, if Noonan is correct, but not one with a fetish for high-schoolers.
    (Dave is most likely correct about Moore’s dating habits, if any of the relationships did in fact occur, and he has admitted that some of them probably did — none of those being anything more than, um, dating.)

    I append a comment from the LI piece linked above by Neo:
    inspectorudy | November 22, 2017 at 11:39 pm
    “Here’s my final thought on this mess until the election. If I were McConnell I would ask all the networks and media to gather for a short declaration from the Republican party. I would then announce that to stop this kind of backstabbing dirty tricks where there is no alternative in a race because of time limitations, that in the future we are going to elect whoever our candidate is no matter what is published about them. Not only that but we will back them with every resource we have. This is the only way to stop this kind of politics which the clinton’s have perfected and passed on to the DNC. This is a matter of principle and there can be no compromise.”

  36. AesopFan Says:

    Dave Says:
    November 23rd, 2017 at 1:02 am
    It is not say no to Roy Moore, it’s say no to republican. If Roy Moore did it, even after Roy was elected he can still be impeached, so why not just for for a republican, and let the man has his due process. Why the insistence of conveincing conservatives to betray their beliefs to vote for a socialist or sit out completely.
    * *
    This is the analog to the argument that the Democrats are making about keeping Franken in the Senate: it’s more important to get one of our guys in the seat than to worry about his character. I quoted this on an earlier thread, referring to Michelle Goldberg, but the double-standard has another defender according to this post:

    https://nypost.com/2017/11/21/sex-lies-excuses-partisan-madness-on-predators/

    “Moore’s alleged conduct was felonious and morally depraved. Franken appears to have acted like a repellent creep, which is bad but misdemeanor-bad. It seems important at a moment when a national narrative is galloping along at Secretariat speed to be able to separate the two.

    But this isn’t the distinction drawn by two shocking feminist enabler/defenders of Franken. The Washington Post’s Kate Harding, author of a book on “rape culture,” and New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg both acknowledge that their feminist ideologies should lead them to want Franken to be ousted from his seat.

    But they both insist that the rules should be different from the very rules they would impose on everyone else in America — because, well, Franken is a Democrat and America needs to be saved from Republicans.”

  37. AesopFan Says:

    PS the rest of Podhoretz’s post proclaims a pox on both their houses. That might be the higher way, but I think Goldberg has the more pragmatic view, which is what keeps Dems in office long after they should be in jail.
    It’s long been demonstrated that political excuses are seldom intellectual or moral.

    However, his argument depends ENTIRELY on the assumption that Moore is in fact guilty as charged by Corfman and Nelson, which I am beginning to seriously doubt.

    And the arguments for electing Moore are not about handing him “enormous political power” (or any power at all) because they INCLUDE continued investigation and removal if the allegations are confirmed, which is not the case with Franken because his actions have already been verified.

    (quoting Podhoretz)
    “Goldberg spends an entire column concerned about seeming like a hypocrite. She says there’s just no good choice for a poor feminist such as herself in this case. But she basically argues that to support Franken’s removal from office would be a case of Democratic “unilateral disarmament” against the anything-goes Republicans who nominated and helped elect Donald Trump.

    And this is what Roy Moore’s defenders say — but in reverse. “We don’t need a liberal person in there, a Democrat,” Trump declared today. Even if Moore’s guilty, so the thinking goes, he’s necessary for the nation’s future to deny Democrats another Senate seat. And that is necessary for the passage of the tax reform bill.

    Oh, and to help restore America’s moral code in the long run. Yes, you heard that right. Basically, they say, we need an ephebophile to purify this country.

    These responses reveal the poisonous extent to which nakedly political and partisan concerns are corrupting every aspect of American civic culture.

    If you believe Franken is an example of toxic masculinity and that toxic masculinity is an evil that must be extirpated, no intellectual or moral excuse for supporting his continued presence in American politics. Even the effort to make such an argument reveals the way in which the virus of naked partisanship has overcome you.

    Similarly, if you believe America has rotted away morally, the idea you’d hand enormous political power to a morally rotted person like Roy Moore reveals your own spiritual and moral rot.”

  38. AesopFan Says:

    BTW, a little short of a month ago, Podhoretz was all for presuming “innocent until proven guilty” about the Trump/Russia situation, but suddenly Roy Moore is “guilty so he has to go” on even more tenuous “evidence” because, … well, I’m not really sure why.

    https://nypost.com/2017/10/31/partisan-passions-push-presumption-of-innocence-out-the-window/

  39. Ymar Sakar Says:

    The Left is evil, not rational nor a political alliance.

    Thus when people adopt Alinsky and talk about fighting fire with fire, poison with poison, they become as evil and as tainted as the Leftist alliance.

    “Winning” becomes meaningless then. It doesn’t matter if you can surround the Left’s black pieces with white, since in the end your white pieces will turn and become black.

    Many Demoncrats jumping on the Trum ship, bought into the propaganda the Left used about the Tea Party. Why are the Left winning? The more important question is why are people who backed the Left, suddenly complaining that Republicans didn’t fight the Left. Did these Demoncrats fight the Left by backing the Tea Party?

  40. Ymar Sakar Says:

    People may decide to back M, but not out of principles. They will do so because they fear Hussein, or HRC, or the Deep State, or the Demoncrats.

    This mirrors the Left’s defense of Ted Kennedy. Defend Ted, because he is fighting Republican warmongering evil and anti feminism!

    They defend Franken for the same reason and Polanski. These are their boys, their heroes, their killers and rapists. They are not for “you” to judge or exile.

    People may do the right thing for the wrong reasons on M. Which brings them one step closer to the Left and Ted Kennedy.

  41. Ymar Sakar Says:

    It’s also odd that it didn’t come up at the outset, when Moore was Deputy DA.

    The Deep State or the Leftist alliance had not cut the orders for this operation yet.

    The evil have a hierarchy,a unified front, even if they hate each other. They follow the same tune, the same melody, and obey the same orders.

    It is far greater a hydra than people wanted to imagine.

  42. F Says:

    I have a friend, strong Republican and lawyer, who opposes Moore (we don’t live in Alabama so it doesn’t much matter) for two things:

    He broke the law when he lost his case on the Ten Commandments issue, insisting to post the sign anyway,

    and he is surrounded by “ambulance chasing lawyers.”

    I have to concede that Moore is not an attractive candidate, but then I don’t know Alabama politics so will acknowledge that perhaps he IS attractive to the voters who will decide his future.

    It is clear to me the Post managed to put a safe Republican Senate seat in jeopardy with their article, and I believe that was their intention.

    As is the case with Neo, I don’t trust the people who have decades-old memories of Moore being a sleaze bag.

    So I don’t much care for him as a Senator, but I’d prefer to see him win. I think what we’re learning is that the US Senate is not the “world’s most exclusive debating society,” but rather the world’s sleaziest bunch of miscreants. Moore should fit right in.

  43. DonKeyhoti Says:

    So are we to apply the same logic to question the credibility of the accusers of Franken, Conyers, Weinstein, Spacey and Rose? What about President Trump’s accusers? Or Clinton’s? If you carefully read the accusations made by most all of these women and some men, they follow the same pattern and depth. Political preferences are driving the “believability meters” of many of my fellow conservatives.

  44. Mike K Says:

    most receivers of the information, even many on the right, seem to swallow it whole without caring to know more before they decide.

    I am not beyond considering this a gambit by McConnell to show Steve Bannon that he cannot vet primary opponents of GOPe incumbents. I’m not quite ready to say he was behind it from the start but he has had a hand in it.

  45. Artfldgr Says:

    Geoffrey Britain Says: After talking to her friends, Corfman says, she began to feel that she had done something wrong and kept it a secret for years.

    1) In the UK women are more often prosecuted by law for false offenses (than in the US)
    2) the victim in this case has little to fear even if they discover she lied
    3) worst for her she can claim false memories or some bs, and be treated very unequally
    4) nothing to lose, no criminal time, nothing, nada…
    5) can gain sympathy on tap, womens marches with her name on it, ego boosting love bombing on tap
    6) can gain money for interviews, book deals, etc.. (even if she lied)
    7) may become a hero to the socialists she may side with (or not)

    So there is very little downside now that women are treated unequally by the law for equal outcomes.

    one of the reasons for starting MGTOW was this power imbalance, and the ease and willingness ot use it
    safest play for a decent honest good person who doesnt do that crap, is to stay away…

    However as i noted, the only evidence she needs is hearsay with other women – and you may find a lot of any evidence that will disparage her, or make her look bad, including evidence of her lying to the court – will mostly be ignored.. (or in the words of my feminist judge – “you have no rights”)

    This changed as part of other law changes in domestic and family court where women dominated changing law, and swiched from the reasonable person concept to the more honestly described aggrieved nut job with a pudenda standard… which is why whatever the ladies on the left can think of sticks… a reasonable person cant see microagressions, but we dont use that standards, so, voila, there are microagressions cause THEY feel it and its THAT standard.

    so.. everything to gain, low risk… thats catnip to a bad woman.. (of which none actually exist I’m tol

  46. expat Says:

    Moore didn’t deny dating teenage girls. That’s what bothers me. Why? Was it sexual attraction; was it because he wanted someone he could rule over? I don’t buy the shortage of unmarried women in the South. During his time at West Point and his time in the military, he must have met older girls who were friends of fellow cadets and other military guys. He must have met older women while he was in law school outside his home town.I met all kinds of guys in college and after college. I learned a lot from sharing experiences when I dated them or just talked to them at parties. Although I later returned home town ( a bit smaller than Moores’), it never occurred to me that I must choose a husband from a narrow segment of the residents there.

    There is something about this that when combined with the reasons for his two firings that makes me think he is a very close-minded person who only sees things one way.

    I have no idea about the sexual assault charges. There is plenty of fishy stuff in the accusations and their timing. But I do have trouble with someone who seems to have used his time away from home only to confirm his pre-conceived notions. A senator should have a broader world view and be able to walk in the shoes of others.

    Of course, his opponent is no better. I’m glad I don’t live in Alabama.

  47. Irv Says:

    Even if I assume that the charges against Moore are true (which I do not), if he has lived the last more than 30 years of his life without further straying then it appears to me that he must have changed his ways.

    I’m a big believer that people can come to the realization that their life is going in the wrong direction and change it for the better. I’ve knows too many people that had wild and rebellious youths that lasted until marriage and family and then changed completely and became upstanding citizens.

    I remember being told in synagogue that the time to repent is one minute before you die and since no one knows when they’re going to die then the time is now.

    If a person repented and lived a good life for more than 30 years should he now be punished for indiscretions before? That’s what a statute of limitations is for. The more important the violation the longer the statute of limitations. For murder there is no limitation but for lesser crimes there is.

    If Moore’s alleged actions are so heinous that there should be no statute of limitations then why have such heinous crimes not been brought up until now?

    For so many reasons these charges just don’t pass the smell test! In court you’d need guilt beyond a reasonable doubt but what we have here does not even meet the lesser standard of a preponderance of the evidence. It’s certainly not enough to destroy the life he has lived for so long.

  48. neo-neocon Says:

    expat:

    Why would it matter that he might have dated some girls who were past the age of majority but still in their teens when he was thirty or 31 or32? If you take away the two more serious (and more suspect) allegations, you are left with some dates with legal-age late-teens and some kissing. Forty years ago, from a man who then married a woman who was NOT a teenager and against whom no other allegations of later inappropriate conduct have been made.

    Are we now going to go into the 40 or 50 year old dating history of all older men running for office, and interview each girl they dated back then and do the math to decide if the age gap was too big for our delicate sensibilities? I always thought that’s what the age of consent being codified was for. Past that (and short of incest), I really don’t give a hoot who dated who forty years ago.

  49. Brian E Says:

    “A thing about predators, from the men of the Catholic Church sex scandals to the man cruising the mall, is that they never prey on the protected.”
    -Peggy Noonan

    This is the biggest pile of hooey that Noonan may have ever written.

    Noonan went full Democrat, foregoing facts with innuendo– the only charge she didn’t level of pedophile, which is now their favorite word, but I suspect predator will soon be added. They should send a check to Noonan.

    The majority of women who have made accusations– some of whom never dated Moore in spite of his supposed pestering, while the others either claim he was a gentlemen, or a bad kisser, the one instance of a “forceful kiss” (whatever that is– did he press his lips on hers too hard?)

    All were of the age of consent and the majority of this majority were 18 or older. I think most rational people would grant 18 year olds, or 19 year olds or 22 year olds the maturity to choose their dates.

    Hardly the stuff the predators prey on.

    Now Noonan passes on recounting the sordid tales of the two actual alleged crimes to spend precious copy talking about the 28 year old groping, or in the words of Noonan the “molesting”.

    And she attempts to stave off the obvious question– what does the mother think of all this “flirting”, the asking of suggestive questions, the compliments?

    Because the mother of this 28 year old was present during all this sordidity. The mother wasn’t informed of the butt fondle because “she couldn’t handle it”, the pressures of life being too great to take in this horrible event.

    How far Noonan has fallen.

  50. neo-neocon Says:

    DonKeyhoti:

    Yes, the same standards should apply. Each case should be evaluated on its own merits and according to its own characteristics and evidence for it.

    See this for guidance.

  51. Artfldgr Says:

    Geoffrey Britain Says:

    The accusations are being made against Moore, for those accusations to be given credence, it is incumbent upon them to present a case consistent with the basic facts. Corfman’s story does not standup on multiple points. Nor does Nelson’s.

    “Women, if the soul of the nation is to be saved, I believe that you must become its soul.” — Coretta Scott King

    In any place feminism dominates law or teachings of matter in it, that has changed a long time ago. Anyone attempting to point it out were attacked in this way among others, and their points marginalized. in effect, creating no means of nipping crazy in the bud till crazy has enough precident, crazy is normal…

    NOW its time for crazy normal established carefully by many points on the fronts of the cause, to be known commonly as that is what people think law is for the most part… establishment of common sense, but that is what it USED to be more like..

    1) women have to be believed even if lying / women never lie
    2) if a woman is caught lying, see rule one (or else!) – or things will be worse for women
    3) the offenses against women are many and ephemeral and only THEY understand it
    (so you cant really participate and know and understand unless your one of them)

    Most important
    4) anything that hurts men is ok, and they can learn from it regardless

    and if all else fails backup:
    5) the patriarchy/oppression makes them do it (especially if white male)
    etc..

    EVERY POINT above has a corrolary to solid teachings in feminist thought, theory, and practice by its leaders and key people (not necessarily its followers or exploiters), and many require you to agree with to get a grade in college… even if its in mechanics…

    Its why all these people spout the same ideas in a dozen plus countries and if they are famous and doing interviews.

    Ninety-five percent of women’s experiences are about being a victim. Or about being an underdog, or having to survive… women didn’t go to Vietnam and blow things up. They are not Rambo. Jodie Foster, quoted in The New York Times Magazine

    The more famous and powerful I get the more power I have to hurt men. Sharon Stone

    a but for the list above:

    for rule 1

    Every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported. Hillary Clinton

    “There is a special place in hell for women who don’t help other women.” — Madeleine Albright

    for Rule 2
    If anyone is prosecuted for filing a false report, then victims of real attacks will be less likely to report them. David Angier

    for rule 3 you can quote Supreme Court Sotomayor, and dozens and dozens…
    I believe that women have a capacity for understanding and compassion which man structurally does not have, does not have it because he cannot have it. He’s just incapable of it. Barbara Jordan, former Congresswoman

    “I am too intelligent, too demanding, and too resourceful for anyone to be able to take charge of me entirely. No one knows me or loves me completely. I have only myself.”
    — Simone de Beauvoir

    for Rule 4
    Men who are unjustly accused of rape can sometimes gain from the experience. Catherine Comins

    I do want to be able to explain to a 9-year-old boy in terms he will understand why I think it’s OK for girls to wear shirts that revel in their superiority over boys. Treena Shapiro

    rule 5
    We are taught, encouraged, moulded by and lulled into accepting a range of false notions about the family. As a source of some of our most profound experiences, it continues to be such an integral part of our emotional lives that it appears beyond criticism. Yet hiding from the truth of family life leaves women and children vulnerable. Canadian Panel on Violence Against Women

    “Women are always at the front of revolutions.” Buthayna Kamel

    Bonus Link:
    Men Just Don’t Trust Women — And It’s A Huge Problem
    https://www.huffingtonpost.com/damon-young/men-just-dont-trust-women_b_6714280.html

  52. Dave Says:

    Roy Moore met his wife when she was 16 and married her when she was 24 and he was 38. If you have a problem with him dating young girls back when he wasin his 30s, why didn’t you have any problem with him marrying a young girl and stayed married for the last 30 years? The whole thing is absurd, a pure political persecution, try picking something in a man’s past painting something appropriate as inappropriate to disqualify a candidate. If dating late teen and early 20 something girls as an adult is impeachable, shouldn’t marrying a even more serious crime that should’ve ruin his career long ago before this election, why raise the question now when no one has ever have a problem marrying a young girl before, which was mot a secret at all? If Roy Moore is pervert for dating young girls then so was prince Charles

    If dating young girls is problematic , then what about dating old women at a young age? Isn’t both types of affection abnormal? Why the double standards? why are liberals praising macron as a hero for dating and married his teacher who is 30 year his senior but have a problem with Roy Moore dating someone was only 16 years younger and legal?

  53. blert Says:

    It must be plain that Moore wanted to marry a VIRGIN — not just an unmarried young gal.

    These days — even back then — that pretty much means dating high school aged gals.

    The hotties, the desirable babes are — by definition — the first to lose their virginity.

    Moore plainly wanted to date virgins that were obvious wife material.

    Statistically, it’s a fact that gals that have lots of lovers before marriage — are at extreme risk for divorce. ( ~80% divorce rates )

    These will be divorces initiated by her because she’s become bored with her beta-husband.

    Moore has beta traits all over his history, BTW.

    &&&

    Alabama culture is NOT NYC or LA culture.

    Nothing Moore has done — that stands up — is outside the bounds of ordinary Southern behavior.

    &&&

    Young gals feel icky about guys they don’t want. ( beta schulbs )

    The very same moves performed by a guy they want — would have them gushing with delight.

    I’ve seen this repeatedly.

    Her feelings about a man totally dictate how ‘inappropriate’ his behavior is.

    I’ve had gals flay me alive — because I DIDN’T come on to them. And she was 18 when I was 30.

    Another accused me of rape. I was 40 she was 22. She was furious that I was not interested in her.

    THAT’S reality.

    &&&

    The GLOBAL average for marriage is 16 for women.

    That’s because in most societies — even today — marriages are arranged by the parents — and grandparents.

    It is the West that has this weird idea of delaying marriage — and of permitting girls to decide their loves.

    Usually such outcomes result in Romeo and Juliette endings.

    You will remember that Juliette turns down Paris, a man twice her age to marry a total flake with a sweet tongue.

    So you have a 14-year old gal, Juliette, defying her parents to marry an 18-year old boy, Romeo, who is absolutely no position to support her. And who would trigger ejection from his own house — and the $$$ that goes with it.

    &&&

    In all of nature, females mate with males that are ( typ ) old enough to be their fathers. (mammals)

    Marrying a fella her own age is NOVEL, Western.

    In all traditional societies, the husband has to have established himself before he’s deemed worthy of a wife. This can take the form of owning land, being of noble blood, or being a journey-man, etc.

    In traditional societies it’s common for guys to never marry — because they didn’t get lucky in the economic sense.

    You can see this within the ranks of the migrant invaders from Africa into Europe. They are UNMARRIED guys who are slated for bachelorhood for life in their own homelands. That’s their motivation.

    They don’t quite comprehend that there can never be a wife for them waiting in Europe… prostitutes, yes.

  54. Annie Says:

    Peoples dont apply sames standards a problem all ready. Peoples makes themselfs believes whats they want. In election peoples with no facts only claims can only decide whose real more. Roy Moore good. Roy Moore bad. Before womens claims lots informations says Roy Moore bad all ready. Easy google! His character bad. His characater can with belief does this womens claims. 100% Democrats wins when GOPs voters no use sames standards.

  55. Artfldgr Says:

    The woman Allred represents and her yearbook are fake, msm will never exonerate Roy Moore in public as a lack of exoneration can still fool some idiots as confirmation of guilt but anyone who has been following should have come to the same conclusion long ago that the yearbook was forged, most likely with Moore’s last name, the location and date added later on an existing inscription possibly written by her friend or admirer.

    they got away with a horrid digitally screwed with birth cert (valid or not!)… they saw that the public was ready to say three fingers when the leaders of certain sides hold up 4…

    they see what the party tells them to see and do not even know that is what they do as to them, its cosmopolitan, smart, erudite, socially i tune, etc… all of which is more important and why cultures have always devolved (in the absence of enmity and women’s ascensions in safety) to failure and usually taken over before the longer end. [note that is why Elizabeth was and is so great… SHE breaks that mold and love her or hate her you have to respect the life and monarchy she maintained regardless of its changes over historical time (and a very long time she participated in!!)]

    It was always easier to buy a ticket and be with friends at circus maximums than think about it and decide that was wrong (if that was even possible given powers of politics and having to be “seen”).

    same with slavery, human sacrifice, sucking blood from circumcision (maybe circumcision itself), body mutilation, petty wars of the past (no not modern which were very unlike those), religious cults, salem witch trials, heresy like flagilists and spanish inquisitions (yes, heresy!! they took a branch and tried to make it the whole tree beating the rest into submission – heresy), faddish movements (cabala, yoga, psychic stones and mystics movements, Nazism, Stalinism, Communism, Maoism, and most isms (that try to make a perfect world by perfecting man, who their opposition in western thought claims is never perfect)… [so what makes you think feminism, modernism, post modernism, etc… is any better because its defining its track record.. founders never talked about things like Americanism, which was not a design but a label for what they had and not made]

    and i can go on… (of course)

    but where in your modern books does it describe the kind of concerted social effort.. are there precedents to bands of women using powers j’accuse?

  56. Artfldgr Says:

    are there precedents to bands of women using powers j’accuse?

    Elizabeth Hubbard was around 17 years old…and with Elizabeth Parris, Abby Williams and Anne Putnam, Elizabeth started the accusations with claims / The reasons behind the start of the accusations are somewhat unclear. There are many theories of why the young girls accused people / [was it] the social and economic set up of the of the time / Carol Karlsen researched some of the accusing girls and suggests that they may have behaved as they did due to the fact that many of them felt that their future was uncertain. / Most of the girls had no monetary or emotional support from direct family members. / Karlsen goes on to suggest the afflicted were able to use their dramatic possession performances to “focus the communities’ concern on their difficulties”. This was the one situation in which Elizabeth Hubbard and the others accusing girls had the respect and attention of the community. Karlsen thinks that this was the girls way of dealing with the oppression they felt

    By the end of the trial Elizabeth Hubbard had testified against twenty-nine people, seventeen of whom were arrested, thirteen of those were hanged and two died in jail.

    As a strong force behind the trials, she was able to manipulate both people and the court into believing her. One way she and the other girls did this was through their outrageous fits in the courtroom.

    Nothing is known of what happened to Elizabeth Hubbard after the trials were over.

    Salem Witch Trials…

  57. Artfldgr Says:


    Art. 1: some cases must be treated with special leniency.
    Art. 2: some cases must be treated with special severity.
    Art. 3: this does not apply in all cases.

    Once upon a time, there was a country whose rulers completely succeeded in crushing the people; and yet they still believed that the people were their most dangerous enemy. The rulers issued huge collections of statutes, but none of these volumes could actually be used, because in order to interpret them, one had to refer to a set of instructions that had never been made public. These instructions contained many original definitions. Thus, for instance, “liberation” meant in fact “capital execution”; “government official” meant “friend, relative or servant of an influential politician,” and so on. The rulers also issued codes of laws that were marvelously modern, complex and complete; however, at the beginning of the first volume, there was one blank page; this blank page could be deciphered only by those who knew the instructions—which did not exist. The first three invisible articles of these non-existent instructions read as follows: “Art. 1: some cases must be treated with special leniency. Art. 2: some cases must be treated with special severity. Art. 3: this does not apply in all cases.”

    Lu Xun (1889–1936)

    Without an ability to decipher non-existent inscriptions written in invisible ink on blank pages, no one should ever dream of analyzing the nature and reality of communism.
    -=-=-
    ven the most mendacious propaganda must necessarily entertain some sort of relation with the truth; even as it manipulates and distorts the truth, it still needs originally to feed on it. Therefore, the untwisting of official lies, if skillfully effected, should yield a certain amount of straight facts. Needless to say, such an operation requires a doigté hardly less sophisticated than the chemistry which, in Gulliver’s Travels, enabled the Grand Academicians of Lagado to extract sunbeams from cucumbers and food from excreta. – Simon Leys

    To find one’s way in this maze, ingenuity and astuteness are not enough; one also needs a vast amount of experience. Communist are a lugubrious merry-go-round (as I have pointed out many times already), and in order to appreciate fully the déjà-vu quality of its latest convolutions, you would need to have watched it revolve for half a century. [or more – artfldgr]

    The main problem with many of our politicians and pundits is that their memories are too short, thus forever preventing them from putting events and personalities in a true historical perspective

    -==- OBSERVE but understand its always within possible limits (i changed the language to reflect this -==-

    From that time on, every two or three years, a new “campaign” would be launched, with its usual accompaniment of mass accusations, “struggle meetings,” self-accusations, self-confessions, and public social executions.

    At the beginning of each “campaign,” there were waves of people who quit: many of the people who, during a previous “campaign,” had suffered public humiliation, psychological and social torture at the hands of their own relatives, colleagues, and neighbors, found it easier to leave than stay in their careers rather than to face a repeat of the same ordeal.

    [historically this is what gave the party full power eventually and how they maintained it by removing people. the point is not real law or real facts but real pretense. because a pretense based reality serves best the needs of those in power (or want it)]

    happy thanks giving
    thats my turkey food for thought
    carve it up well..

  58. Artfldgr Says:

    damn bold didnt close..
    sorry

    Besides its cruelty, the Maoist practice of launching political “campaigns” in relentless succession generated a permanent instability, which eventually ruined the moral credit of the Party, destroyed much of society, paralyzed the economy, provoked large-scale famines, and nearly developed into civil war. In 1949, most of the population had been merely hoping for a modicum of order and peace, which the Communists could easily have granted. Had they governed with some moderation and abstained from the needless upheavals of the campaigns, they could have won long-lasting popular support, and ensured steady economic development—but Mao had a groundless fear of inner opposition and revolt; this psychological flaw led him to adopt methods that proved fatally self-destructive.

  59. Frog Says:

    Neo differentiates the Court of Law from the Court of Public Opinion. However, both Courts should adhere to basic principles, as found in our founding documents: All -ALL- are innocent until a guilty verdict from a jury of one’s peers, after a trial with its legalistic rules and a defense attorney, appointed if one cannot be afforded. The Court of Public Opinion has become a stampede of the biased.

    That is why the media always places “alleged” in front of “perpetrator” even when there is no doubt as to the perp’s criminality. Jack Ruby was legally “innocent” even though the entire world saw him shoot Oswald. He cheated just law by suicide.

    Which is why I abhor the Court of Public Opinion, and stand with Roy Moore. Allegations are not evidence. Period.

  60. n.n Says:

    The American conservative standard is: No person shall… be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. And contrary to liberal faith, religious/moral philosophy, and jurisprudence, it does not support the revival of abortion rites to deny lives deemed unworthy, inconvenient, or profitable.

    Allegations are not evidence. Period.

    Ah, but a preponderance of evidence creates a “consistent with” model that is wholly compliant with post-normal science. And people who defer to experts (e.g. mortal gods, wise whatever) will accept it as authoritative. Let’s hope that Americans have not suffered that progress.

  61. Dave Says:

    A woman accuse a candidate of one of the most contested senate race in history of sexual assault 1 month before the votes are being cast.

    defense points out that The woman is not creditable due to her troubled history especially habit of accusing men of sexual misconducts, which is a perfectly valid argument, it is perfectly normal to be skeptical of a woman’s motives especially with the suspicious timing and her checkered past.

    The woman with the help of the MSM came up with this defense of her character: “she has gone through so much trouble in her life and had made so much bad decision because she was traumatized from her encounter with Moore”

    The classic “Terrorists kill innocent people because their were oppressed by America and Terrorism is the only way these helpless victims of imperialism can fight back” bulls**t convoluted circular sympathizing the criminals blaming the victim Liberal argument all over again. you must be heavily brainwashed to still buy bullsh*t like that.

    I have a simpler and more logical answer- This woman is a sociopath and she enjoys the attentions and thrill and sympathy coming from pretending to be a victim.

    There used to be stigmatization of sexual assault victims with the “uncleanness” associated with the violation in the past made the accusers much more creditable as there was great sacrifice for a victim to come out to make an accusation. Not anymore, with the left constantly putting potential victims of sexual crimes on the pedestal there are many incentives for a person to lie about it.

    Beside sexual assaults used to be mostly about rape with penetration, which does indeed bring a lot of shame to the victims, and it is a lot harder for someone to lie about something like that. However the new type of sexual assaults the Left pushes are relatively minor verbal or groping without insertion, which to be honest is a lot less shameful and the mental barrier for someone to lie about those type of assaults is much weaker than someone coming out to lie about being raped.

    I am not here to insult women or blame the victims, I am just pointing out the fact that the left’s claim that women never lie about sexual assaults because of the shame it brings is not true anymore given the standard for something to be considered sexual assault has been readjusted to be so low now. I agree lying about being raped or being forced to touch someone’s penis is very tough, but not lying about being forcefully kissed in public, a pet on the butt, being told a sexual jokes and even just a simple inappropriate commendation that the left now categorized as sexual assaults as well.

  62. Dave Says:

    She pretty much came out and admitted that everything the right wing media reported on her was true, she just rationalizes her behaviors and troubles by blaming it on Roy Moore. The question is, if she is proven to be a serial liar, why should we continue to listen to her? So supposed everything she said has been proven to be a lie except when she said Roy Moore molested her, that alone we have to believe her because Roy Moore is a Trump guy and believing her means the other guy win. give me a break, are people that stupid?

  63. AesopFan Says:

    Artfldgr Says:
    November 23rd, 2017 at 1:01 pm

    Art. 1: some cases must be treated with special leniency.
    Art. 2: some cases must be treated with special severity.
    Art. 3: this does not apply in all cases.

    * * *
    Very interesting – thanks.

  64. n.n Says:

    I have a simpler and more logical answer- This woman is a sociopath

    Or, she’s really, really, really, really worried about falling outside the Obamacare-gap. People have committed self-abortion and abortion for less.

  65. Ymar Sakar Says:

    They don’t quite comprehend that there can never be a wife for them waiting in Europe… prostitutes, yes.

    The custom of Islam in Europe is to first earn money, then import in a virgin from Afghanistan, the boonies, the borderlands, or just buy one from the slave markets.

    ISIL’s motivation for conquest is military and theological, but much like Mohammed, most people’s primary motivation was the loot, booty, and virgins.

    They should send a check to Noonan.

    They send her invitations to parties and the food there is better than being on food stamps for her.

    Btw, Art brought up Salem witch trial fits. That is interesting, since fits are evidence of spiritual possession. A spiritual possessed individual charging people for practicing withcraft the way Queen of Heaven wife of the king of Judah did in old hebrew days… how easy humans fall for a con.

  66. Frog Says:

    A word, just a word, of constitutional sense, from Pelosi of all people, and only in defense of one Democrat, Conyers:

    “Earlier in the day, House Democratic Leader Nancy Pelosi urged “due process” before making conclusions about Rep. Conyers, saying the congressman is “an icon” who has worked to protect women.

    “We are strengthened by due process. Just because someone is accused — and was it one accusation? Is it two?” Pelosi asked on “Meet The Press.”

    Source:NBC news

Leave a Reply

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>



About Me

Previously a lifelong Democrat, born in New York and living in New England, surrounded by liberals on all sides, I've found myself slowly but surely leaving the fold and becoming that dread thing: a neocon.
Read More >>






Monthly Archives



Blogroll

Ace (bold)
AmericanDigest (writer’s digest)
AmericanThinker (thought full)
Anchoress (first things first)
AnnAlthouse (more than law)
AtlasShrugs (fearless)
AugeanStables (historian’s task)
Baldilocks (outspoken)
Barcepundit (theBrainInSpain)
Beldar (Texas lawman)
BelmontClub (deep thoughts)
Betsy’sPage (teach)
Bookworm (writingReader)
Breitbart (big)
ChicagoBoyz (boyz will be)
Contentions (CommentaryBlog)
DanielInVenezuela (against tyranny)
DeanEsmay (conservative liberal)
Donklephant (political chimera)
Dr.Helen (rights of man)
Dr.Sanity (thinking shrink)
DreamsToLightening (Asher)
EdDriscoll (market liberal)
Fausta’sBlog (opinionated)
GayPatriot (self-explanatory)
HadEnoughTherapy? (yep)
HotAir (a roomful)
InFromTheCold (once a spook)
InstaPundit (the hub)
JawaReport (the doctor is Rusty)
LegalInsurrection (law prof)
RedState (conservative)
Maggie’sFarm (centrist commune)
MelaniePhillips (formidable)
MerylYourish (centrist)
MichaelTotten (globetrotter)
MichaelYon (War Zones)
Michelle Malkin (clarion pen)
Michelle Obama's Mirror (reflections)
MudvilleGazette (milblog central)
NoPasaran! (behind French facade)
NormanGeras (principled leftist)
OneCosmos (Gagdad Bob’s blog)
PJMedia (comprehensive)
PointOfNoReturn (Jewish refugees)
Powerline (foursight)
ProteinWisdom (wiseguy)
QandO (neolibertarian)
RachelLucas (in Italy)
RogerL.Simon (PJ guy)
SecondDraft (be the judge)
SeekerBlog (inquiring minds)
SisterToldjah (she said)
Sisu (commentary plus cats)
Spengler (Goldman)
TheDoctorIsIn (indeed)
Tigerhawk (eclectic talk)
VictorDavisHanson (prof)
Vodkapundit (drinker-thinker)
Volokh (lawblog)
Zombie (alive)

Regent Badge