Roy Moore the Pedophile

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:McConnell knows there are more under-aged girls who were molested by Moore. Why do you think they pushed for Luther Strange so hard?

The GOP isn't dumb. They have plenty of money and opposition researchers to vet candidates.

I have heard this also from a friend on the Hill - that the GOP knows more about this issue than is publicly known.

They pushed for Luther Strange because he's an establishment candidate they can control.

Listen...I honestly have no dog in this fight. A GOP insurrection is music to my ears. But if I am an "establishment" GOPer or any sort of GOPer, Moore has too much baggage. If the people of Alabama want to elect him based on principle or any other reason, that is their right. I cannot see him getting much done as a Senator. Very few people are going to work with him or even be associated with him and that was true even before these allegations hit.

That's the point of the GOP hit. They want someone they can work with and saw him as someone who would support the Trump agenda. Establishment GOP does NOT want that. They are up to their eyeballs in corruption. Look at those that shout he loudest about Trump, and you'll find the dirtiest.

I hear you..but if I am a voter, I am not sure that I would vote for someone that I KNOW going in will have a hard time being an effective legislator. I am not saying that is right or wrong, it just is what it is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
That's the point of the GOP hit. They want someone they can work with and saw him as someone who would support the Trump agenda. Establishment GOP does NOT want that. They are up to their eyeballs in corruption. Look at those that shout he loudest about Trump, and you'll find the dirtiest.

As if there were a "trump agenda"

There is nothing but a billionaire laden cabinet, regulation changes beloved of the GOP establishment, tax cuts beloved of the GOP establishment, plus a bunch of nasty tweets and rants. They don't like the latter, but that's not an "agenda". Unless you mean locking up Hillary Clinton (one of the joys of the Moore thing is watching the Bannonites get so holy about innocent till proven guilty) and censoring the "lugenpresse".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:McConnell knows there are more under-aged girls who were molested by Moore. Why do you think they pushed for Luther Strange so hard?

The GOP isn't dumb. They have plenty of money and opposition researchers to vet candidates.

I have heard this also from a friend on the Hill - that the GOP knows more about this issue than is publicly known.

They pushed for Luther Strange because he's an establishment candidate they can control.

Listen...I honestly have no dog in this fight. A GOP insurrection is music to my ears. But if I am an "establishment" GOPer or any sort of GOPer, Moore has too much baggage. If the people of Alabama want to elect him based on principle or any other reason, that is their right. I cannot see him getting much done as a Senator. Very few people are going to work with him or even be associated with him and that was true even before these allegations hit.

That's the point of the GOP hit. They want someone they can work with and saw him as someone who would support the Trump agenda. Establishment GOP does NOT want that. They are up to their eyeballs in corruption. Look at those that shout he loudest about Trump, and you'll find the dirtiest.

I hear you..but if I am a voter, I am not sure that I would vote for someone that I KNOW going in will have a hard time being an effective legislator. I am not saying that is right or wrong, it just is what it is.

And that would be your choice. The establishment Rs are attempting to remove that choice and putting in what they consider to be a better choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:McConnell knows there are more under-aged girls who were molested by Moore. Why do you think they pushed for Luther Strange so hard?

The GOP isn't dumb. They have plenty of money and opposition researchers to vet candidates.

I have heard this also from a friend on the Hill - that the GOP knows more about this issue than is publicly known.

I doubt it stops at molestation.

I suspect there's a reason he abruptly decamped for Australia in the early 80's.

It’s not typical to graduate law school, work as a prosecutor, sue your employer for a raise, run for election as a judge, pickup and leave town to become a professional kickboxer and then fly off to wander about the Outback.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They have had that for a while. They are meeting their matches and will have to escalate their game to the point where people will see through it, both D and R. I can guarantee you there are some Democrats out there also questioning the timing, etc. of this story ESPECIALLY now that Allred found another supposed victim who just happens to have been underage.

In fact, Twitter and other social media was alight with the fact that Moore had always chosen girls of legal age AND even went as far as to ask the mother first. And never did anything more than kiss those girls. Just ONE girl claimed she was 14. In addition, both she and another accuser did not bother to scrub their Facebook pages - one is an Dem activist and the supposed 14 year old has a history of making other accusations against religious men. Oops!

So after the people of Alabama refuse to cave, and Moore refuses to step down, in steps Allred (of all people) with another underage girl. How convenient! And at the same time, the establishment Rs announce they are now thinking about a 'suitable write-in candidate'. Here's McConnell's statement from the L.A. Times, dated today:

http://www.latimes.com/politics/washington/la-na-pol-essential-washington-updates-mitch-mcconnell-says-alabama-senate-1510591844-htmlstory.html

If you are in your thirties and have to ask permission of a parent to date young girl, then you already know you are doing something wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:McConnell knows there are more under-aged girls who were molested by Moore. Why do you think they pushed for Luther Strange so hard?

The GOP isn't dumb. They have plenty of money and opposition researchers to vet candidates.

I have heard this also from a friend on the Hill - that the GOP knows more about this issue than is publicly known.

They pushed for Luther Strange because he's an establishment candidate they can control.

Listen...I honestly have no dog in this fight. A GOP insurrection is music to my ears. But if I am an "establishment" GOPer or any sort of GOPer, Moore has too much baggage. If the people of Alabama want to elect him based on principle or any other reason, that is their right. I cannot see him getting much done as a Senator. Very few people are going to work with him or even be associated with him and that was true even before these allegations hit.

That's the point of the GOP hit. They want someone they can work with and saw him as someone who would support the Trump agenda. Establishment GOP does NOT want that. They are up to their eyeballs in corruption. Look at those that shout he loudest about Trump, and you'll find the dirtiest.

I hear you..but if I am a voter, I am not sure that I would vote for someone that I KNOW going in will have a hard time being an effective legislator. I am not saying that is right or wrong, it just is what it is.

And that would be your choice. The establishment Rs are attempting to remove that choice and putting in what they consider to be a better choice.

You are just lying now.

Roy Moore will be on the ballot. The Alabama Sec of State has already said so. Absentee ballots have already gone out. Even if Moore were to choose to withdraw, his name probably cannot be removed any more. And the national GOP cannot remove the endorsement by the State GOP. ALL they can do is direct national GOP funds to a particular write in. Voters in Alabama can vote for the write in. Or for Moore. Or for Jones.

[Anonymous]

The dreaded “Democrat”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:IF this works, the MSM and DNC have their template for the next few years: SMEAR and CHARACTER ASSASINATION CAMPAIGNS galore against any opponent, truthful or not.

Oh, I forgot to say that the idea of either party hand-choosing a candidate for the people of a state is appalling and should alarm anyone who believes in fairness of our elections.

But this is very similar to what Clinton did to Sanders - what the DNC allowed to happen.

They can't "hand pick" a candidate. If Moore wants to continue running, there is nothing they can do. And they also could not stop multiple would be write in candidates. However right in campaigns tend to be expensive (you need to let everyone know to vote for you, you won't get ANY votes from people seeing your name on the ballot) and they can decide whom, if any, to contribute party funds to.

What reform would prevent a party from deciding what to do with its funds?

Seems McConnell says he can.

Please quote exact wording, with link. All McConnell has said is that Moore "should" step down. And that he is considering supporting a write in campaign. Nothing to indicate he thinks he can hand pick a candidate, beyond deciding who he will support.

Read the link I posted from the L.A. Times please.

it says this

He said Republicans are looking at a write-in option in Alabama.

So nothing about hand picking - just that they get to decide whom to support as a write in. Which of course they do. Have you ever been through a write in campaign? I was a few years ago here in NoVa - anyone with the $ to print up samples with the indication of whom to write in can start a write in campaign.

It is VERY clear what he means in this statement. They are looking for a write in option means they plan to choose that person. They have no desire to leave it to the people of Alabama. You know, those hicks that know nothing about 'how this works'. And I've bolded for you just how they intend to do this per your words. Because you are not the only one that knows how this works. They will provide the cash for the candidate they choose as the write in option.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:McConnell knows there are more under-aged girls who were molested by Moore. Why do you think they pushed for Luther Strange so hard?

The GOP isn't dumb. They have plenty of money and opposition researchers to vet candidates.

I have heard this also from a friend on the Hill - that the GOP knows more about this issue than is publicly known.

They pushed for Luther Strange because he's an establishment candidate they can control.

Listen...I honestly have no dog in this fight. A GOP insurrection is music to my ears. But if I am an "establishment" GOPer or any sort of GOPer, Moore has too much baggage. If the people of Alabama want to elect him based on principle or any other reason, that is their right. I cannot see him getting much done as a Senator. Very few people are going to work with him or even be associated with him and that was true even before these allegations hit.

That's the point of the GOP hit. They want someone they can work with and saw him as someone who would support the Trump agenda. Establishment GOP does NOT want that. They are up to their eyeballs in corruption. Look at those that shout he loudest about Trump, and you'll find the dirtiest.

I hear you..but if I am a voter, I am not sure that I would vote for someone that I KNOW going in will have a hard time being an effective legislator. I am not saying that is right or wrong, it just is what it is.

And that would be your choice. The establishment Rs are attempting to remove that choice and putting in what they consider to be a better choice.

You are just lying now.

Roy Moore will be on the ballot. The Alabama Sec of State has already said so. Absentee ballots have already gone out. Even if Moore were to choose to withdraw, his name probably cannot be removed any more. And the national GOP cannot remove the endorsement by the State GOP. ALL they can do is direct national GOP funds to a particular write in. Voters in Alabama can vote for the write in. Or for Moore. Or for Jones.

How many have told him to step down? They are attempting to remove the people of Alabama's choice. They saw the latest polls.

[Anonymous]

PHOTOS! Oh my GOD! This has a TOTES changed my mind!

LOL

[Anonymous]

Yes, in breaking news, the national party can pick who it chooses to support.

[Anonymous]

My guess is next there will be a hit job on his wife and other members of his family.

[Anonymous]

And Chuck Todd agrees with me - this is orchestrated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PHOTOS! Oh my GOD! This has a TOTES changed my mind!

LOL

Too old for you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

It is VERY clear what he means in this statement. They are looking for a write in option means they plan to choose that person. They have no desire to leave it to the people of Alabama. You know, those hicks that know nothing about 'how this works'. And I've bolded for you just how they intend to do this per your words. Because you are not the only one that knows how this works. They will provide the cash for the candidate they choose as the write in option.

yes, looking for a write in option. But Moore will still be on the ballot. And another write in candidate could try also. They are hand picking whom they will support, as is their right. They are not obligated to endorse the primary winner under any circumstances. Neither legally, nor, IMO, morally. But the final choice is up to the voters of Alabama.

Now it may be that the voters of Alabama (like most voters) are not aware enough to know the names of all write in candidates without being handed a palm card. Thats too bad (and suggests that the limit on the sovereignty of the people has a lot to do with, well, the people). But handing someone a palm card is not forcing them to vote for the name on it. Certainly not when other names are actually on the ballot.