Roy Moore the Pedophile

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Post story has 30 sources. 4 women. On the record. None of whom knew one another. None of whom reached out to The Post to tell their story.

This rings true.

Why not? I would think that they would want to shout it from the rooftops - "that man molested me!" If my molester ever runs for office, the FIRST thing I do is contact the press MYSELF early on and tell my story.

Now I want to know how much they were paid...

And why should anyone believe you that you were molested?

(See how that works?)

Here's the fun part - I don't expect you to believe me. I don't CARE if you believe me. I don't seek YOUR approval. What I DO do? Go to the press. If they don't believe me? So be it. But I'VE done something.

Huh. That's interesting. I'd go to the police.

Keep in mind that Roy Moore was the local prosecutor at the time. Would you still go to the police? Do you think they would help you?

He was the local prosecutor just last week, or whenever these women went to WaPo?

When the incidents occurred. Please keep up.

You missed the point. Why would the women go to the press instead of the police in 2017?

It is my understanding that the WaPo came to them. And only one probably would have a real case to take to police. I doubt he will be charged with anything and surely she knows that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sens Perdue and Murkowski with the right response.

Why is anyone on this forum defending Moore?

Tribalism...and a low level of respect for women's bodily autonomy.

I've seen *no one* on this forum defending Moore. What I have seen, thankfully, is a lot of evidence of Democratic hypocrisy. Plenty of Dem politicians have been involved in underage sex scandals (or just sex scandals in general, plenty of those) and we haven't heard a peep from you people. So save us your outrage.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, even more than Trump's election after the Access Hollywood video, Moore winning will confirm to me what I already know about what Americans think of women and their rights to their own body. This isn't a Rep/Dem issue, really, because there are sex predator Dems...and most voters are Independents.

EXACTLY.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sens Perdue and Murkowski with the right response.

Why is anyone on this forum defending Moore?

Tribalism...and a low level of respect for women's bodily autonomy.

I've seen *no one* on this forum defending Moore. What I have seen, thankfully, is a lot of evidence of Democratic hypocrisy. Plenty of Dem politicians have been involved in underage sex scandals (or just sex scandals in general, plenty of those) and we haven't heard a peep from you people. So save us your outrage.

LONG LIVE WHATABOUTISM!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sens Perdue and Murkowski with the right response.

Why is anyone on this forum defending Moore?

I wonder if they'll push Moore to drop out and Strange to come back in. It's not like Moore was a huge GOP favorite (although they did give him 1$mn for his campaign). Doug Jones is a terrific classy candidate--I really hope he flips that seat blue for Alabamans.

I was wondering the same thing. It's probably too late to get Strange on the ballot, though. Would be really interesting if someone ran a write-in campaign for him.

It is too late. And, that is why they held off on this story. Smells really fishy to me.

It takes months to put together good investigative reporting. Do you think the Washington Post would have run a story like this if they didn't have a ton of sources and their lawyers sign off on it?

Well, Rolling Stone certainly did...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sens Perdue and Murkowski with the right response.

Why is anyone on this forum defending Moore?

I wonder if they'll push Moore to drop out and Strange to come back in. It's not like Moore was a huge GOP favorite (although they did give him 1$mn for his campaign). Doug Jones is a terrific classy candidate--I really hope he flips that seat blue for Alabamans.

I was wondering the same thing. It's probably too late to get Strange on the ballot, though. Would be really interesting if someone ran a write-in campaign for him.

It is too late. And, that is why they held off on this story. Smells really fishy to me.

It takes months to put together good investigative reporting. Do you think the Washington Post would have run a story like this if they didn't have a ton of sources and their lawyers sign off on it?

Well, Rolling Stone certainly did...

Ouch.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm shocked, SHOCKED that someone who espouses moral superiority and judgement over the sovereignty of others, has sick skeletons in his closet.

Anthony Weiner, is that you? or is this Ted kennedy?

Well, no, because they don't/didn't the moral high ground and judge people like the party of "family values" does. So, not the same thing.

Also, nice try and deflection. Typical, you can't defend your party's guy so you attack others. Maybe instead of being on here, you should do some soul searching to reconcile your need to do that.

Not the PP, but spare us your sanctimony. No one is deflecting - we're simply pointing out what hypocrites you are for somehow putting your outrage on mute when it comes to Democrats and their own share of sex scandals. And please - Democrats claim the moral high ground every single day. Moron.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sens Perdue and Murkowski with the right response.

Why is anyone on this forum defending Moore?

Tribalism...and a low level of respect for women's bodily autonomy.

I've seen *no one* on this forum defending Moore. What I have seen, thankfully, is a lot of evidence of Democratic hypocrisy. Plenty of Dem politicians have been involved in underage sex scandals (or just sex scandals in general, plenty of those) and we haven't heard a peep from you people. So save us your outrage.

That's because you haven't read the entire thread.

Democrats don't defend Wiener. He's serving time as pedophiles should and Democrats agree with that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm shocked, SHOCKED that someone who espouses moral superiority and judgement over the sovereignty of others, has sick skeletons in his closet.

Anthony Weiner, is that you? or is this Ted kennedy?

Well, no, because they don't/didn't the moral high ground and judge people like the party of "family values" does. So, not the same thing.

Also, nice try and deflection. Typical, you can't defend your party's guy so you attack others. Maybe instead of being on here, you should do some soul searching to reconcile your need to do that.

Not the PP, but spare us your sanctimony. No one is deflecting - we're simply pointing out what hypocrites you are for somehow putting your outrage on mute when it comes to Democrats and their own share of sex scandals. And please - Democrats claim the moral high ground every single day. Moron.

Bye, Felicia.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm shocked, SHOCKED that someone who espouses moral superiority and judgement over the sovereignty of others, has sick skeletons in his closet.

Anthony Weiner, is that you? or is this Ted kennedy?

Well, no, because they don't/didn't the moral high ground and judge people like the party of "family values" does. So, not the same thing.

Also, nice try and deflection. Typical, you can't defend your party's guy so you attack others. Maybe instead of being on here, you should do some soul searching to reconcile your need to do that.

Not the PP, but spare us your sanctimony. No one is deflecting - we're simply pointing out what hypocrites you are for somehow putting your outrage on mute when it comes to Democrats and their own share of sex scandals. And please - Democrats claim the moral high ground every single day. Moron.

If by moral high ground you mean we don't think a man who brags about grabbing women's genitalia should become president then I plead guilty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Other than it looks bad to you, I'm sorry to say, not too many people will find it objectionable.

So he likes girls on the young side. They were all 16 to 18, certainly an age where girls date and have sexual relationships without raising eyebrows. If they were 12 or 13, that's another story. But 16+...meh. None of them reported forced contact or sexual relationship. So...what's the big deal? He couldn't have known he'd become a public figure. I get that you think a 30-year old should not be dating 16-year olds, and that's certainly a prudent point of view. But as far as I'm concerned, nothing criminal took place.

This. I think Roy Moore is skeevy and gross and can't imagine why anyone would vote for him (and I'm a moderate conservative). But come on. He didn't rape anyone, or even have consensual sex with these girls. His behavior was highly inappropriate, yes, but he didn't commit a crime. Certainly, there are plenty of other politicians who can't say the same thing - including Democrats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sens Perdue and Murkowski with the right response.

Why is anyone on this forum defending Moore?

Tribalism...and a low level of respect for women's bodily autonomy.

I've seen *no one* on this forum defending Moore. What I have seen, thankfully, is a lot of evidence of Democratic hypocrisy. Plenty of Dem politicians have been involved in underage sex scandals (or just sex scandals in general, plenty of those) and we haven't heard a peep from you people. So save us your outrage.

That's because you haven't read the entire thread.

Democrats don't defend Wiener. He's serving time as pedophiles should and Democrats agree with that.

Weiner is pathetic. But it’s still a case of selective prosecution by Cy Vance.

[Anonymous]

How do we know the GOP didn’t dig this story up?

Everyone knows everyone’s business in a state like Alabama and Roy Moore’s a complete goober ready to do Trump’s bidding.

They’ve got enough trouble without him crawling out of his cesspool to join their ranks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Other than it looks bad to you, I'm sorry to say, not too many people will find it objectionable.

So he likes girls on the young side. They were all 16 to 18, certainly an age where girls date and have sexual relationships without raising eyebrows. If they were 12 or 13, that's another story. But 16+...meh. None of them reported forced contact or sexual relationship. So...what's the big deal? He couldn't have known he'd become a public figure. I get that you think a 30-year old should not be dating 16-year olds, and that's certainly a prudent point of view. But as far as I'm concerned, nothing criminal took place.

And out come the fellow pedophiles. Roy Moore apparently now has the endorsement of NAMBLA.

Excuse me, what? More like, out come the outraged hysterics. The PP stated facts. Grow up.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Other than it looks bad to you, I'm sorry to say, not too many people will find it objectionable.

So he likes girls on the young side. They were all 16 to 18, certainly an age where girls date and have sexual relationships without raising eyebrows. If they were 12 or 13, that's another story. But 16+...meh. None of them reported forced contact or sexual relationship. So...what's the big deal? He couldn't have known he'd become a public figure. I get that you think a 30-year old should not be dating 16-year olds, and that's certainly a prudent point of view. But as far as I'm concerned, nothing criminal took place.

This. I think Roy Moore is skeevy and gross and can't imagine why anyone would vote for him (and I'm a moderate conservative). But come on. He didn't rape anyone, or even have consensual sex with these girls. His behavior was highly inappropriate, yes, but he didn't commit a crime. Certainly, there are plenty of other politicians who can't say the same thing - including Democrats.

Quite a standard to which an individual seeking election to the US Senate should be held.