Image 01 Image 03

If Roy Moore wins, thank Gloria Allred and Al Franken

If Roy Moore wins, thank Gloria Allred and Al Franken

Unless more comes out, it’s likely Moore will outlast the accusations.

Based on the present state of affairs, and assuming there are no further revelations, it looks like Roy Moore will outlast the outrage over the accusations, which he denies, that he molested a 14-year-old girl and assaulted a 16-year-old girl almost 40 years ago. Those serious accusations of criminality have been conflated in the media with non-criminal accusations that Moore dated teenage girls of legal age.

I say “assuming there are no further revelations” because I would not be shocked if more comes out. Moore’s wife complained that the Washington Post is calling everyone the two of them have known for the past several decades, and certainly other major media are conducting similar searches. So what follows assumes there are no new accusers, and no additional evidence to support the current accusations.

If there was a turning point in Roy Moore’s political fortunes, it was the press conference Gloria Allred held with accuser Beverly Nelson, who emotionally described what she said was a sexual assault behind a diner at which she worked.

That press conference gave Moore two things he needed politically: a chance to make Allred an issue in the campaign, and a piece of physical evidence to attack, the handwriting in the yearbook.

That handwriting, which Allred and Nelson said was Moore’s, is disputed by the Moore campaign, and at least superficially it raises questions. As I noted even before the Moore campaign raised the issue, a proper forensic examination of the document requires examination of the original. The Moore campaign has requested an immediate independent examination. That’s the argument Moore’s attorney’s made a day later.

But Allred has refused so far to subject the yearbook to an independent examination, unless done at a Senate hearing, which isn’t going to happen. Allred also refused to declare the signature authentic. Perhaps Allred secretly is having the yearbook examined and will hold a press conference with a qualified document examiner to declare authenticity, but that doesn’t look likely at the moment.

All Moore needs to do politically is to call the accusations into question, to raise doubts, to turn it into a 40-year-old he said/she said dispute. The yearbook that was declared by the media to be proof of Moore’s guilt now has become that cloud obscuring possible guilt.

Given the questions about the yearbook handwriting, it’s not surprising that Moore’s team has focused it’s attacks on the Nelson story. News5 reports, Roy Moore Campaign Attempts To Debunk Accuser’s Claims:

After nearly two weeks of sexual assault allegations from several women, Republican U.S. Senate Candidate Roy Moore attempted to debunk claims from one of his accusers Beverly Young-Nelson.

Moore’s campaign sent the following in a press release:

GADSDEN, Ala. – On Monday evening, the Moore Campaign unveiled statements from key witnesses that completely bust the story of Beverly Nelson and Gloria Allred and further reveal an unconscionable bias on the part of state and national press to hide the truth from Alabama voters who will undoubtedly see through the “fake news” and elect Judge Moore for the man that they have always known him to be.

  • According to a former waitress, Olde Hickory House required employees to be 16 years old. Nelson claims she was 15 when she started.
  • According to two former employees, the dumpsters were on the side of the building. Nelson claimed that they were in the back.
  • Olde Hickory House sat right off of the four-lane highway and had a wrap-around porch with lights all around it. Nelson claimed that the surroundings were “dark and isolated.” 
    Rhonda Ledbetter, who worked at Olde Hickory House for almost 3 years, states that the earliest it closed was at 11 p.m. but she believes it was open until midnight. She is certain it did not close at 10:00 because Goodyear was next door, and employees came to eat when their shift ended at 10 p.m. Nelson claims her story occurred after the restaurant closed at 10 p.m.
  • It is unlikely that there was an entrance from the back of the parking lot, which Nelson claimed existed. Multiple sources have claimed that everyone parked on the sides of the building because there wasn’t much room behind the restaurant, according to Rhonda not enough room to turn around. Renee Schivera stated that a neighborhood backed up to the parking lot and it was adjacent to the backyards of people’s houses, so she did not see how there would have been a back entrance as it would have gone through someone’s yard.
  • Nelson claimed that Judge Roy Moore came in almost every night and sat at the counter, but former employees state that customers at the counter were served by the bartender or short order cook – not served by the waitresses and had no reason to interact with the wait staff. Additionally, two former waitresses and two former patrons state they never saw Judge Moore come into the restaurant.
  • These witnesses have shared their testimony with multiple news outlets. The outlets have failed to report.

Whether these defenses are persuasive were this case to go to trial is not the standard. Moore politically only needs to raise doubts.

Moore’s absolute denials combined with the cloud his team has created gave enough cover that Trump gave a non-endorsement almost-endorsement today:

A second turning point was the accusations, with photo proof, against Democrat Senator Al Franken.

The Franken scandal took the wind out of the attacks on Moore. Now with John Conyers in the spotlight for settling sexual harassment claims, it’s “a pox on all their houses” atmosphere. That only helps Moore.

The polling initially swung to the Democrat Doug Jones in the days after the accusations were aired, but now the polls have swung back. reports on the latest polls released today:

Three weeks before election day, two Alabama Senate polls released Tuesday illustrated different pictures of the race between Democrat Doug Jones and Republican Roy Moore.

One poll commissioned by Raycom News Network in Alabama had the race in a statistical tie with Moore holding a 2-point lead while a poll released by Moore-friendly Breitbart News showed him with a 6-point lead.

Moore held an 11-point lead in a Raycom poll released the day before The Washington Post published allegations by women who said that, when they were teens, Moore made unwanted sexual and romantic overtures.

Moore has repeatedly denied the allegations.

The Raycom poll had Moore with 47 percent of the vote, Jones with 45 percent, 5 percent undecided and 3 percent planning to cast write-in votes. Raycom said 3,000 likely voters were surveyed by Mobile-based Strategy Research and that the poll has a margin of error of 2 percent. The Raycom story did not say when the poll was conducted.

When asked “what do you think about the allegations made against Roy Moore,” 45% believe all or some of the allegations; 34% do not believe the allegations; and 21% believe some or all of the allegations, but say it has not changed their vote, according to Raycom.

Assuming nothing more comes out, it’s likely Roy Moore will win the Alabama Senate special election. And you will have Gloria Allred and Al Franken to thank, or blame.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


No photos.

No proof.

No legal charges.

No trial.

Just 1 accusation, from someone not of legal age 40 years ago, made a month before the election.

So….what does this make Judge Roy Moore BEFORE THE LAW? Guilty, or Innocent?

    notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital in reply to audax. | November 21, 2017 at 10:16 pm

    Everyone of us can manufacture outright lies non-stop from now to Dooms Day as are pushed by the MSM………..

    MSM and GOPe-Democrat-Uni-Party lies with dogs…………..

    This sleaze, this antiAmerican sh-t is staight off the desk of that filthy rat mcconell.

    Alred is just a lying whore. McConnell is a backstabbing lying whore.

    Both these odious creatures need to be forced out of public life, and shunned into oblivion.

    Edward in reply to audax. | November 22, 2017 at 10:22 am

    The MSM is doing their best to “expand” the charges. Yesterday I heard a report that Moore “has been accused of sexual impropriety with six underage girls.” I guess they are depending on people not remembering that four of the original five girls were both of legal age and stated that they experienced no impropriety on Moore’s part.

    persecutor in reply to audax. | November 22, 2017 at 3:21 pm

    Gloria Allred needs to find another line of work….her credibility in these scams lost its shelf-life back in October of 2016.
    Funny how all of the victims seem to find their way to her side with these claims…I guess the DNC has frequent flier arrangements with the airlines to get their “Victims” out to Cali to hook up with Gloria.

    Rick the Curmudgeon in reply to audax. | November 22, 2017 at 7:30 pm

    “But we’ve GOT proof! It’s right here in this high-school yearbook! No, you CANNOT see it or have it examined by a third party!”

WAPO busted for fake news

Its getting better. Breitbart just poked a bunch of holes in the WAPO story based on court documents.

This would mean that from the court hearing on February 21, 1979, until Corfman was ordered to move to her father’s house, Moore would only have had 12 days, including the day of the court hearing, to have repeatedly called Corfman at her mother’s Gadsden house, arrange two meetings, and attempt another. Moore has strenuously denied the accusations.

Boy, the dirty tricks are really showing by both the democrats and republicans.

Geez, must be time to open a can of cat food.

“I say “assuming there are no further revelations” because I would not be shocked if more comes out. Moore’s wife complained that the Washington Post is calling everyone the two of them have known for the past several decades, and certainly other major media are conducting similar searches.”

Sounds like a good stalking case to me.

They need to file a court order against WAPO, NYT, the DNC and the National Republican Committee tomorrow.

Alabama prohibits stalking anyone. The four criminal stalking laws are:

Stalking in the First Degree – Intentionally and repeatedly following or harassing another person, and making an expressed or implied threat to put that person in reasonable fear of death or serious physical harm

Stalking in the Second Degree – Intentionally and repeatedly following, harassing, or verbally or electronically communicating with another person or that person’s family or friends with an improper purpose, causing mental or emotional harm to the victim or putting him or her in reasonable fear that his or her career is threatened, and the defendant was previously told to stop

Aggravated Stalking in the First Degree – Stalking in the first degree which is also a violation of any court order or injunction, such as a protection order

Aggravated Stalking in the Second Degree – Stalking in the second degree which also constitutes a court order or injunction violation

A third option could be is that since we are now subject to DAILY accusations, I wonder if many Alabama voters as well as many Americans have become jaded with this issue that there is no shock value as to who has been creepy, disgusting, perverted or nasty in conducting themselves with very inappropriate behaviors.

“Whether these defenses are persuasive were this case to go to trial is not the standard. Moore politically only needs to raise doubts.”

Please, Prof. These defenses, if accurate, are enough to keep this case from ever being CHARGED, let alone GOING to trial.

So far, the documentary evidence is a total bust and is beginning to look more and more likely to be fraudulent. The most credible witnesses in this case are the ones rebutting parts of Nelson’s story.

Then you have the rest of the “accusers”. With the exception of Corfman, the other women were all self identified as being 17-18 years old. This is hardly pedophilia. And, all have said that Moore took them to public places and did not accost them. They are actually better character witnesses for Moore than they are against him. Corfman is a special case, but now that she has been forced to publicly defend her claims and explain herself, she is undermining her credibility. She is actually creating more questions than she is answering. Her apparent credibility is dropping fast.

These unsubstantiated, and unsubstantiable, accusations were designed to place Moore in a very unfavorable light and cause his lead in the polls to evaporate. However, timing is everything and those running this operation moved too soon. Had they waited and released these accusations ten days, of less, before the election, it would have been far less possible to undermine the accusations due to the glaring lack of evidence that they might be true. Now, Moore and others have had time to point out the flaws in the stories woven by Corfman and Nelson. Unless some actual evidence, that Moore is guilty of these accusations, surfaces, a real possibility exists that backlash from voters, who feel that Moore’s opponents were attempting to dupe them into abandoning him, will catapult him way over the top.

    tom_swift in reply to Mac45. | November 21, 2017 at 11:14 pm

    Unless some actual evidence, that Moore is guilty of these accusations, surface

    It’s probably far too late for that. At this point, everybody’s already dug-in, huddled in their bombshell-proof bunkers, with their opinions safely bundled up with them; it would take a hell of a lot to blast them out, far more than it would a week ago. New video of Moore shape-shifting into a gelatinous alien blob which eats kittens at midnight probably wouldn’t be enough to affect the vote. And video of him doing that forty years ago would be even less effective.

    No, the Dems bungled the tactical details of this attack, and won’t be able to recover.

      neanderthal in reply to tom_swift. | November 22, 2017 at 2:28 pm

      Opinions are locked in a lot harder than they were a week ago, but that’s inevitable.

      But that could change on a dime, if any one of the actual criminal accusations were to get corroborated. The key right now is that every one of the criminal accusations is unverified, and pretty much he-said-she-said. As long as that remains the same, Moore may survive the accusations. But if even one is verified true, then every other one immediately sounds more plausible.

      That’s probably why WaPo and others are desperately searching for something they can make stick.

        Well, that is the problem with this whole mess. Not only are none of the accusations being supported by reputable evidence, they are actually collapsing as more information comes to light. But, these unsupported accusations HAVE hurt Moore. And, that is the problem. The MSM has become so corrupt and slipshod, that it makes the National Enquirer of the 1970s and 80s look like the NYTimes. And, this type of unsupported character assassination can happen to anyone, now-a-days.

“Perhaps Allred secretly is having the yearbook examined and will hold a press conference with a qualified document examiner to declare authenticity, but that doesn’t look likely at the moment.”

Bingo. She doesn’t need a ‘qualified’ document examiner, just somebody with enough fluffy titles and pseudo-elite attitude to make *one* pass over the document, record a statement to be released two days before the election, and vanish off the face of the earth for a week.

Remember, the Dan Ra(th)er documents were also ‘authenticated’ before released, and they were as fake as… well, CNN.

I vividly remember Clinton issuing absolute denials, too.

He actually did it better. He didn’t demur, dissemble, and throw out ambiguities as Moore has.

They were still lies.

      Ha, none, nada, zero.

      It’s what progs do. Especially the ones claiming character.

      “Sentence first, verdict later.”

      The Great Goad Cheeto is above relevance.

      Ragspierre in reply to Andrew Branca. | November 22, 2017 at 8:49 am

      It’s relevant for two reasons, Andrew:

      1. an “absolute denial” ( is something we’ve commonly seen from a guilty as hell accused, and

      2. Moore’s NOW “absolute denial” comes after his very NONE denial which even Sean Hannity didn’t buy.

        persecutor in reply to Ragspierre. | November 22, 2017 at 5:35 pm

        But we have also seen absolute denials in cases where the absolute denials were absolutely accurate–the Duke lacrosse case and Tawana Brawley’s cases come immediately to mind.

        I heard Moore that first day with Hannity and what I heard was a man trying very hard to defend himself when it would probably have been better for him to do so in a written statement–he violated the old maxim about representing himself–but his indignation was very apparent from the way he presented his defense; he was fighting for his life and I can understand why he did the interview.

        Did he do it? I don’t know and none of us were there, but I do know that Al Franken had no choice but to admit it because the photo was there to call him out. And Franken’s “honorable” demand for an ethics investigation was too shrewd by a half (that is it was until the allegation came out about his butt grab at the Minnesota State Fair when he a Senator which confers investigational jurisdiction on the Ethics Committee). No photo at the moment and I’ll bet you had an absolute denial from the mental midget from Minnesota.

        It’s a pity that the court of public opinion doesn’t require proof beyond a reasonable doubt for conviction, because I can think of more than a few cases where public opinion convicted long before an actual court had a chance to enter a finding of fact. The Baltimore prosecutors office learned that lesson the hard way, but not before ruining the lives of innocent men and women, many of whom were minorities.

        “It’s relevant for two reasons, Andrew:”

        You just can’t make this stuff up. It takes a professional prog to do this:

        Item 1 – An absolute denial is a sign of guilt.
        Item 2 – Moore’s first denial wasn’t absolute enough, so he’s guilty.

        Yep, takes a pro…

    So mr ‘depends on the meaning of is’ Clinton, he who defined sexual relations as not including the oral exam, didn’t couch things in ambiguities? What color is the sky in your world, rags?

    G. de La Hoya in reply to Ragspierre. | November 22, 2017 at 8:25 am

    Ever notice how much Bill Clinton’s bulbous nose started to resemble Ted Kennedy’s?
    Bill Clinton was the quintessential wordsmithy lawyer/politician/actor that had the free defense by the MSM.

    Again, Rasgs standard for truthiness is flexible.

    “I’m actually not at all concerned about innocent men losing their jobs over false sexual assault/harassment allegations.”

So if Moore is smooth, he is a liar like Clinton; if he dissembles, he is clearly lying?

“That press conference gave Moore two things he needed politically: a chance to make Allred an issue in the campaign, and a piece of physical evidence to attack, the handwriting in the yearbook.”

And Professor Jacobson nails it in this one paragraph. Give me an unlikeable target and arguably false evidence, and I’ll (legally speaking) gut you.


    DINORightMarie in reply to Andrew Branca. | November 21, 2017 at 11:46 pm

    Question – should Moore lose, can he do anything legally to the accusers, and to the WaPo for printing allegations with no evidence? Would this allow him to clear his name, at least?

      4th armored div in reply to DINORightMarie. | November 22, 2017 at 12:39 am

      no and ‘where do I go to get my name cleared’.

      unless you can Prove that the reporters had known the article was false AND was done out of Malice – the most you could get is ‘me bad’ private note or printed with the obits.

        As the Palin vs NY Times case has shown – even if you can prove the slander is malicious, and known to be false at the time it was published, the courts will still toss your case.

        If you are a “public figure”, the way our defamation laws actually function is that the press can say absolutely anything they want and you have absolutely no recourse.

      He should fight fire with fire: witness Steve Bannon.

    Rule #1 of case argument – “When the facts are on your
    side, argue the facts. When the law is on your side, argue the law. When neither the facts nor the law are on your side, make an ad hominem attack.”

    As neither the fact nor the law exist for the accusers in this case, there is nothing left, but plan C; unsubstantiated attacks on the character of the accused.

Pro-Choice (i.e. presumption of guilt) is a rite held for unwanted, inconvenient, or profitable babies.

For “persons”, there is a constitutional right to due process, which implies a presumption of innocence.

Reasonable doubt leading to media nullification, then?

The point I’m enjoying? Another poke at McConnell and his machine. The DNC is funneling money they didn’t want to spend on a campaign they have little chance of winning, but they have to take the chance. So millions wasted in Alabama.

The Dems are running a late-term abortion advocate… in Alabama. A lot of normal folks are really PO’d that this is a national issue and it’s gained inordinate national attention. Turn out will be key… and defaming Alabamans .. and defaming Moore, might just get enough otherwise disinterested voters to show up to draw a line in the sand…. because they’ve been forced to care. We’ll see. It will be awkward for McConnell if Moore wins… heh.

    4th armored div in reply to RobM. | November 22, 2017 at 12:45 am

    Moore win McConnell eats crow and retires along with GOPe.

      Bucky Barkingham in reply to 4th armored div. | November 22, 2017 at 7:45 am

      I would love to see Granny McConnell eat crow over this. When Moore wins will Granny follow thru on the threat not to seat him, while also ignoring the charges against Sen. Stuart Smalley (er, Franken)?

        Yurtle the Turtle McConnell can refer Moore to the Ethics Committee but it’ll be a repeat of the Roadrunner/Coyote scenario–Wiley McConnell gets a report from the Acme Ethics Committee Company that blows up in his face because the allegations took place before Moore was a Senator. McConnell couldn’t run a gas station at a profit even if he stole the customers’ cars.

        McConnell is a putz–as those of us in New York would say.

There is not a new claim from a victim but there is a new voice from the past. A black female cop told the news today that she was told to “Watch” Moore at the football games to make sure he didn’t “Harass” the cheerleaders. She also repeated the lie that he was banned from the mall. She has a huge blonde afro and her credibility isn’t very high. IMHO.

    4th armored div in reply to inspectorudy. | November 22, 2017 at 12:56 am

    this afternoon before POTUS left DC,
    the Moore defense team had a presser and showed ‘proof’ about so many of the lies – including about being banned from the Mall.

    The longer the attackers yak, the more I believe that Moore,
    40 (FOURTY) years ago behaved in a caddish fashion and did all of a sudden was a choir boy.

    a stalker remains a stalker and a womanizer remains one –
    just ask the Clinton Crime family, the sainted Kennedy family, Conners (paging Mary Jo), Franken (and throw in McCain as well, who was cheating on his 1st wife with the 2nd one – and probably had girl friends on the side) and McConnell.

      4th armored div in reply to 4th armored div. | November 22, 2017 at 12:57 am

      and If ( a big IF) Moore is guilty then he will fit right in the Swamp. 😉

      Really? You have determined this how, exactly? What evidence do you base this on? Or, as seems likely, are you basing your position on your own preconceptions?

      Personally, I am not fond of the public persona of Roy Moore. He does things which appear ill-thought-out. However, I refuse to decide that a person is guilty of anything, until I actually am presented with reliable evidence of said guilt.

    A maxine waters voter.

Who would YOU vote for? I suggest an LI poll! 🙂

I personally would vote for Moore, because I just don’t believe these accusations. And, as one noted above, timing is EVERYTHING.

That this was done after the interval for him to be replaced had passed, and that there is no proof – and, that Allred won’t let the yearbook “evidence” be examined by a third party……..

Manufactured. I would vote for Moore over any Dem, any day – especially one who advocates for abortions, late-term or otherwise (but I repeat myself).

Why is anything, real or otherwise, in a candidate’s past of any interest? The voters aren’t Saint Peter, examining an entire life to decide if a new suppliant waiting at the Gates is worthy of admission to the Beatific Vision. A campaign is a job interview—that’s all—and, just as in more prosaic job interviews, it’s very rare that the perfect applicant shows up. The job has to be filled, regardless.

So past crimes or even sleazy behavior are of interest mainly as indicators of future actions. Those could be important, but we don’t know what they’ll be; we have to apply inductive logic to the past and make the best guess we can about the future.

Would President Hillary head the most corrupt administration in US history? Based on past recent behavior, I’d say yes, unquestionably.

Is Al Franken going to get his grubby paws all over every woman who approaches within arm’s length? Well, no—not all of them. But enough. Does that disqualify him from a legislative position? That’s a judgment call, though I’d say yes, though it would depend on the other candidate; a reincarnation of Charles Manson, whose evil animating spirit has recently become available, would be worse, so I’d vote for Al if stuck with such a choice.

Is Roy Moore going to sneak out at night and chase after fourteen-year-old girls? Even if the Dem’s accusations are true, it stretches credulity to imagine him doing any such thing now. He’s not Bill Clinton, after all. So, even at worst, it hardly matters.

A retired Alabama police officer told MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell on Tuesday that she had to keep an eye on Alabama Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore in the 1980s at local high school football games because he would regularly harass the team’s teenage cheerleaders.

Under Alabama law:

(a)(1) Harassment.  A person commits the crime of harassment if, with intent to harass, annoy, or alarm another person, he or she either:

a. Strikes, shoves, kicks, or otherwise touches a person or subjects him or her to physical contact.

b. Directs abusive or obscene language or makes an obscene gesture towards another person.

(2) For purposes of this section, harassment shall include a threat, verbal or nonverbal, made with the intent to carry out the threat, that would cause a reasonable person who is the target of the threat to fear for his or her safety.

(3) Harassment is a Class C misdemeanor.

Whenever a person is convicted of a Class C misdemeanor, that person faces a maximum sentence of either hard labor or imprisonment in a county jail for not more than three months and may be fined $500.

So where is the arrest record? I would think that regular monitoring of Roy Moore must have increased police overtime pay significantly if he was never arrested for his alleged uncontrollable obsession with teenage girls.

caseoftheblues | November 22, 2017 at 5:18 am

Gad fly…..not only NO arrest record NO complaints either…not one. Sen Blumenthal D,CT started up with his wife when she was 16 and he was 32…gee I wonder when he starts getting called a pedophile and the media swarm over his life. Btw the Corfman woman is a known on the record serial accuser….3 pastors and several others. The Church Boards of two of the pastors did convene hearings and found her non credible and her stories changed.

Wasn’t that girl who is now President of France being banged when he was 15 and his now if wife was 65 (then)?

    artichoke in reply to mailman. | November 22, 2017 at 9:29 am

    You’re admirably direct and pack a lot of meaning into a few words.

    But now that president of France has turned into a little emperor! And not a bad one either, telling the Africans to reduce birthrate if they want enough food to eat, etc.

The two actual accusations against Moore are falling apart under scrutiny no matter how much the lib press tries to keep breathing life into them. My guess is Moore wins by 1-2% on election day.

    Then he will just slip into his seat like nothing happened? Post election drama? Perhaps.

      artichoke in reply to amwick. | November 22, 2017 at 9:25 am

      “Slip in”, well no I expect it would be more like McConnell will have to swear him in and he’ll walk right in standing upright.

      Most of the other senators have more and worse questions about them than Moore does.

    artichoke in reply to Ghost Rider. | November 22, 2017 at 9:30 am

    I am hoping for a margin of 10% or more in Moore’s favor. My feeling is that it’s turning into a pro-Moore movement now.

I see all this feigned outrage over “sexual harassment” as just another leftist plan to drive a wedge between men and women. Pretty soon it will be illegal for a man to smile at a pretty woman.

MaxWebXperienZ | November 22, 2017 at 8:21 am

The voters are going to stuff that Alred piece of work so far up the DNC’s backside they will need a surgeon to remove it.

That Alice Stewart, supposedly a Republican strategist who used to work for Ted Cruz, is really a piece of work.

A special place in hell for me, because I would vote for Roy Moore if I were in Alabama.

Maybe she’s the hell.

BTW LI, I think the state of the evidence would clearly get Roy Moore exonerated in a criminal case too. As a juror I would vote to acquit. I’ve been on a jury where there were clearly coordinated stories by the (child) accusers. In that case it was clear because they used exactly the same words and had the psychologist, who probably coordinated their stories, right with each one of them while each one testified.

I’m surprised Allred hasn’t trotted out the “fake but accurate” shtick.

I would be happy to send Franken a Thank You card for this.

Denials should matter, and accusations absent additional evidence should invite skepticism. But the upshot here is that alleged miscreants should simply deny rather than admit wrongdoing and apologize.

According to this logic, Bill Clinton deserved the benefit of every doubt until he was finally forced by the evidence to admit (some of) his misdeeds.

Worse, implicit to the White House argument is that on-the-record testimony from victims doesn’t count as evidence, even when corroborated by testimony from confidantes.

But the most dangerous and corrupting force in all of this is not the weaponization of bad behavior, but the weaponization of hypocrisy. The pastor Franklin Graham even argues that the real villains are Moore’s critics, who “are guilty of doing much worse than” what Moore has supposedly done.

This obsession with hypocrisy leads to a repugnant immorality. In an effort to defend members of their team, partisans end up defending the underlying behavior itself. After all, you can be a hypocrite only if you violate some principle you preach.

If you ditch the principle, you can dodge the hypocrisy charge. We’re seeing this happen in real time with some of Moore’s defenders, just as we saw it with Clinton’s in the 1990s.

We’ll sort it all out eventually, but not before it gets even uglier.

Yep. As I’ve said. Again. It’s all tribal. And it’s all amazingly immoral.

    You were on a roll, until you got to the third paragraph.

    You pay lip service to the concept that denial carry as much weight as accusations, sans verifiable evidence of truth. And, Bill Clinton did, in fact, deserve to be believed, every bit as much as his accusers, until such time as sufficient evidence was produced to verify their claims against him. This did, in fact, happen, and the true miscarriage of justice in the Clinton cases was that this evidence was largely ignored. Then you immediately make the assumption that everyone accused is guilty, should accept responsibility for an unproven accusation of behavior and apologize. Incredible.

    In the Moore case, we have the classic strategy of any legal defense to allegations based solely upon testimonial evidence unsupported by empirical facts in evidence; impeachment of the witness and his, or her, testimony. And, in the Moore case, several inconsistencies have already been identified in the accounts of both Corfman and Nelson. Corfman’s “supporting witnesses” have provided little detail to support Corfman’s claims. Moore’s “pattern of behavior”, which you lov to hype, pictures Moore as a man who, while dating women near the age of 18, did so in a public setting and was kind and considerate during their contacts.

    What you are doing is viewing all “evidence” in a manner which is not just the most favorable for your position, but which is so warped as to be unrecognizable.

    Now, in other cases, such as Franken, Conyers, Rangel and others, partisan support immediately exonerates these people from any wrong doing which should be punished in any way even when incontrovertible evidence exists that the behavior charged occurred. It has long been a tactic of the liberal/Progressives that and acknowledgement of the act and an apology are sufficient punishment for liberal offenders. This is not true where more conservative offenders are concerned.

      MarkSmith in reply to Mac45. | November 22, 2017 at 12:53 pm

      The Jacobin cat loving Rags must not of seen the movie Primary Colors. Lets talk about hypocrisy.

      “Primary Colors is a 1998 film based on the novel Primary Colors: A Novel of Politics, a roman à clef about Bill Clinton’s first presidential campaign in 1992”

      I also suggest the War Room

      “The War Room is a 1993 American documentary film about Bill Clinton’s campaign for President of the United States during the 1992 presidential election.”

      After that, we can talk about sleazy campaigning.

      The allegations against Moore are pretty weak. Clinton’s approach was pretty obvious and they even made a movie about it. The liberals actually make fun of the immoral liberals like Clinton and put it in movies then scream about Moore.

      Rags does not have an argument about denial until something strong comes out. Haven’t seen it yet and considering how much power and money the media and liberals have, we would have seen it. Either it is not there or they are too stupid to figure it out.

      I think someone watched American Beauty and decided to use it for a script for this.

      MarkSmith in reply to Mac45. | November 22, 2017 at 12:55 pm

      You forgot to mention Barney Franks, but gay guys get a pass.

    MarkSmith in reply to Ragspierre. | November 22, 2017 at 1:14 pm

    I read the NRO article and it is BS.

    “Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore is credibly accused by nine women of preying on teenagers, one as young as 14.”

    Read more at:

    Credibly accused? Sure, I am still waiting for that!

    NRO lost me several years ago. George Wills is a total bust. After reading this, I rank them right up there with Huffington Post.

    WFB was out of his mind near the end, including pissing out of the back door of moving cars. There are still a few good ones over there like Mark Steyn, Thomas Sowell and Dinesh D’Souza

    Irving Kristol is the father of Neo-Cons which have been hijacked by Globalist. NRO is not true to it founding. Too bad NRO has lost it way from Irving Kristol and early WFB.

    neanderthal in reply to Ragspierre. | November 22, 2017 at 2:45 pm

    Sorry, not buying the Bill Clinton comparison. Clinton was well-known for womanizing, his campaign was on the lookout for the “bimbo eruptions” — how woke of them — they were sure were coming, and he didn’t even get far into the primary before he had to overcome the Genniver Flowers accusations.

    In short, there was plenty of evidence to suggest this kind of behavior was likely. Anyone denying that is just not honest.

    So far, Franken hasn’t been accused of anything criminal. But what he has been accused of is supported by direct evidence. Again, no comparison.

    By contrast, even the criminal accusations against Moore are completely unsupported by any independent evidence or known pattern of behavior. That’s why WaPo tried to manufacture a pattern of behavior by stories about him dating young girls who were barely old enough to be dating him. But there’s a huge difference between dating a girl of legal age, and dating or assaulting a minor of 14. That difference is a felony charge of statutory rape.

    I think they tried to frame the story by painting Roy Moore as a Harvey Weinstein type, but there again, there was overwhelming evidence that Weinstein was guilty of scummy behavior. That evidence is still lacking on Moore.

The worst part of this whole incident for me has been watching formerly esteemed people on the right throw their credibility away with their support for the rule of law.

If they will surrender this easily, they cannot be trusted to represent us against habitual liars.

The yearbook does not need to be examined, thanks to CNN’s helpful tweet of a high resolution closeup of the yearbook message.

Without a doubt it has been tampered with. Here is the tweet in question. Even a 5 year old would notice that the color of the ink is not consistent.

And see here for another analysis of the photo that shows it was tampered with.

    MarkSmith in reply to jl. | November 22, 2017 at 1:34 pm

    Other employees of the restaurant pretty much shot Nelson’s claim down. It has move from the “maybe” to highly unlikely.

Since we are on media credibility – Just reported:

The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal & Reuters ALL published essentially the SAME story on the SAME day. Each took the same prepackaged story from a political comms shop, either #FusionGPS or another firm.

I noticed versions of the same story in the WSJ and WAPO several years ago. WJS is not what it use to be and WAPO is ten times worst.

Must be all this Globalist outsourcing, eh?

This is a straight up hit job by POS Bitch McConnell. I hope Judge Moore prevails.

Actually, I think Allred and Franken are irrelevant to Alabama voters. The Alabama voters are smart enough to recognize a phony smear attempt and vote accordingly!

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.

    You think mcconnell would give up the ONLY tool he has to get anywhere anymore politically?

    Mcconnell is through.

    He’s transparently backstabbing garbage. Too bad he’s not more (no pun intended) transparent, so we wouldn’t have to suffer his grotesque face – a face rivaling mooochelle obama’s for turn-off potential.

As others have pointed out the charges against Moore are falling apart. I will give some credit to Allred for being such an over-enthusiastic accuser that she exposed herself and her client’s story, but Franken has nothing to do with why people in Alabama are starting to doubt the stories and they sure don’t elevate what he did wrong over their own feelings and concerns. Franken has less than zero to do with the vote in Alabama, but it has done a hit job on even people at L.I. about how hard they should hit someone in their own party after watching the Democrats try and weasel on Franken. They know in the conservative media that being tougher on their won is wearing on the base.

Re all these charges about sexual misconduct on both sides of the aisle (with the exception of Franken, who was stupid enough to get himself photographed in the act–although could it all have been an act, tasteless to be sure, and no more?), I am very suspicious and believe things need to be carefully investigated.

By all means, if these pols are actual predators, go after them. But I also recall the charges against the Duke Lacrosse players, which proved false; and the accusations made against Herman Cain, which mysteriously went away after he dropped out of the presidential race. Even where there was a violation of the Seventh Commandment, take a long hard look. Are we looking at a relationship gone sour, and one party wants to take vengeance? In the show business cases, did any of the women and young males, at the time, think they were merely “paying Hollywood dues”, or “thumbing the nose at a repressive upbringing”–or, could it be, both? These are all relevant; especially since the Left was the side that unleashed the relentless assault on traditional sexual mores.

The timing of the accusations and memories of the Duke lacrosse players and Herman Cain make the accusations stink of forty-day-old fish.