Roy Moore the Pedophile

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anyway, look, the only defense for Moore -- assuming this woman isn't nuts and I don't think she's nuts or lying -- is that her timeline is off. I think there's a reasonable chance that it is.

It was still non-consenual sexual assault no matter how old she was. That’s disqualifying unless you are president.

It was only non consensual if she is deemed unable to give consent. That's why her age is important.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anyway, look, the only defense for Moore -- assuming this woman isn't nuts and I don't think she's nuts or lying -- is that her timeline is off. I think there's a reasonable chance that it is.

It was still non-consenual sexual assault no matter how old she was. That’s disqualifying unless you are president.

It was only non consensual if she is deemed unable to give consent. That's why her age is important.

False. It was non consensual if she DIDN'T CONSENT. Age is irrelevant.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anyway, look, the only defense for Moore -- assuming this woman isn't nuts and I don't think she's nuts or lying -- is that her timeline is off. I think there's a reasonable chance that it is.

It was still non-consenual sexual assault no matter how old she was. That’s disqualifying unless you are president.

It was only non consensual if she is deemed unable to give consent. That's why her age is important.

False. It was non consensual if she DIDN'T CONSENT. Age is irrelevant.

I don’t understand her to claim that.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Here's what I don't get: Even if your logic is purely partisan and your politics purely tribal, denouncing Weinstein while defending Roy Moore means you're basically taking the word of the famous Hollywood women but not the small-town Republican women.

No -- I am sorry. Weinstein accused credibly of non-statutory rape, i.e. non consensual sex. Weinstein accused of trapping women in his room. Weinstein accused of luring women to room under false pretenses. Weinstein accused of really weird masturbatory stuff.

Good lord! I pray for your children. That if they are forced into sexual contact, let it not be a GOP perp/perv because clearly you will not believe them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Half the posters here fooled around with older men as teenagers -- consensually. Who is kidding whom?

And really, how do we know that girl was 14? She may be mis-recollecting. She could easily have been 16-17. Kind of hard to say 40 years later.

I see that you are in the "believe the allegations but don't think Moore did anything wrong camp". I'm not sure if that is better or worse than the "lies, all lies" camp. But, in regard to your question about age, they know the date that Moore picked her up because they found the court records of the hearing. They know the woman's date of birth and presumably they can do math.

I am sorry -- you may be able to tie one date to a hearing. But you don't know when they went out, and frankly after this much time neither of them may know.

He took her to his house "days later" after they first met.

Wait, you are saying that you think they could have gone out but well maybe she wasn't 14 years old at the time???

How would he have known her that long after meeting her when she was 14 when her mother was at the courthouse?

And if she were then 16 and he 34 and got her to touch his erection, you think that is just find and dandy?

Yuck. I used to babysit at age 16 and some of the dads were in their mid-30s and if they had pulled stuff like that it would have been extremely inappropriate.

Ok, if you think she's assuredly accurate in her recollections -- that's fine. In my experience, timelines can get hazy decades later.

[Anonymous]

I never knew that Republicans support men in their 30s feeling up 14 yo girls. I guess you learn something new every day. Can’t wait to see Moore’s first bill on the senate: the Zechariah Bill mandating nationwide lowering of consent to 12.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

jsteele wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anyway, look, the only defense for Moore -- assuming this woman isn't nuts and I don't think she's nuts or lying -- is that her timeline is off. I think there's a reasonable chance that it is.

More collaboration:

https://twitter.com/LaurenWalshTV/status/928785872958492672

Mike Ortiz says he dated Corfman (Roy Moore’s accuser) for 2 years around 2009.
He says during that time, she told him about a sexual encounter w/ Moore when she was young.

Also video at the link.

He's really not corroborating her age at the time.

He met her when she was 14. Why would he be contacting her 2 or more years later to start making the moves on her?

[Anonymous]

One could not in 1979 or today, give legal consent for sexual behavior. As such, any inappropriate touching in 1979 to a consenting or non-consenting minor would be a crime, not to mention just yucky.

[Anonymous]

Moore is out with nonsensical statement referring to “sexual misconduct.” Support is jumping a sinking ship, starting with the NRSC and now Sens. Flake, McCain and Lee. The theocratic goose is cooked and best served cold. It’s about time to step aside to be able to spend more time with Satan and his 10 Commandments monument.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anyway, look, the only defense for Moore -- assuming this woman isn't nuts and I don't think she's nuts or lying -- is that her timeline is off. I think there's a reasonable chance that it is.

It was still non-consenual sexual assault no matter how old she was. That’s disqualifying unless you are president.

It was only non consensual if she is deemed unable to give consent. That's why her age is important.

Otherwise you and the rest of the GZoP are fine with a thirty-something man forcing a teenage to stroke his dick. Good to know. You do you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

What? Why should we believe his denials? This is twisted and guilty before proven innocent. The question is, in fair societies anyway, whether we should believe the accusations. The accusations are subject to proof and skepticism.

What process would you suggest for subjecting the accusations to proof?

[Anonymous]

From Al.com: "Alabama Media Group is a digital media company that operates AL.com, one of the country's largest local websites, produces television and video programming, and publishes Alabama's three most prominent newspapers"

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/11/_one_of_roy_moores_accusers_wo.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Anyway, look, the only defense for Moore -- assuming this woman isn't nuts and I don't think she's nuts or lying -- is that her timeline is off. I think there's a reasonable chance that it is.

It was still non-consenual sexual assault no matter how old she was. That’s disqualifying unless you are president.

It was only non consensual if she is deemed unable to give consent. That's why her age is important.

So if she had been 16 instead of 14, the whole thing would have been just fine? Why do you think this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
From Al.com: "Alabama Media Group is a digital media company that operates AL.com, one of the country's largest local websites, produces television and video programming, and publishes Alabama's three most prominent newspapers"

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/11/_one_of_roy_moores_accusers_wo.html

Short version: one of the accusers has a business providing sign language interpretation services and provided sign language interpretation at events for Democrats, including Hillary Clinton.

I'm not understanding what point you're making with this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Can we be honest here? Some 16 year olds are fully grown women. Frankly we need pictures of the "victims" before passing judgment, assuming he did it in the first place.

No. No, they are not. By legal definition they are not. And from everything we know about brain development, 16 year olds are not fully grown adults. Their bodies may appear mature to you, but the fact that you translate their appearance or sexual attractiveness to you into a belief that “some 16 year olds are fully grown women” is extremely disturbing.