Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Which is worse - the last minute fake news bombshell or the concerted effort of both the left and never trumpers that is obvious?

All you people who are questioning the timing—seems like you want to prevent Alabamans from hearing about Roy Moore before they send him to the senate for 6 years. You make everything sound like a conspiracy but basically you want to keep Alabama residents from hearing any negative news.

The WaPo’s endorsement of the opposition can before the story. And they drum up an activist at random?

Link or it didn't happen.

Google is your friend. That little fact is no secret, nor surprise, given WaPo's bias.

All sources are biased. What matters is the accuracy of the reporting.

If I say they need to name their 30 sources, you will say "they don't have to". That is correct, they don't. And therefore, I don't have to believe they have 30 sources and that the story is accurate. They can simply make up anything they want, publish it, then hide.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There seems to be a contradiction between mother and daughter....no surprise...



Citing Corfman, the Post reported:

After her mother went into the courtroom, Corfman says, Moore asked her where she went to school, what she liked to do and whether he could call her sometime. She remembers giving him her number and says he called not long after. 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.

Corfman clearly claimed she spoke to Moore on what she said was “her phone in her bedroom” on at least one of those occasions. The Post did not specify whether the second or third alleged calls purportedly took place on a bedroom phone.

When her mother was asked whether or not her daughter had a phone in her room, this was the reply:


Wells, Corfman’s mother, was asked by Breitbart News: “Back then did she have her own phone in her room or something?”

“No,” she replied matter-of-factly. “But the phone in the house could get through to her easily.”

It's details like this that trip up stories - this is why police often question people multiple times in multiple ways - they want to see the inconsistencies that appear. Those inconsistencies are what leads an officer to break open a case.

What this is going to do is cause liberals here to me suppositions: "I bet she stretched the phone cord" or "Perhaps the cord was long enough for her to take the phone in her room?"

And those will just be 'perhaps' and 'maybes' and 'I bets'. That's it. That's all.

Everybody used to have one or two house phones back then. Many people used to have had a long cords that could reach to bedrooms or closets. Totally normal. If that’s all you got, you are losing this argument.

Except the girl clearly said it was HER phone in HER room. So you have to suppose and make things up. That's my exact point. You are embellishing her story to make it fit your narrative.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Which is worse - the last minute fake news bombshell or the concerted effort of both the left and never trumpers that is obvious?

All you people who are questioning the timing—seems like you want to prevent Alabamans from hearing about Roy Moore before they send him to the senate for 6 years. You make everything sound like a conspiracy but basically you want to keep Alabama residents from hearing any negative news.

The WaPo’s endorsement of the opposition can before the story. And they drum up an activist at random?

Link or it didn't happen.

Google is your friend. That little fact is no secret, nor surprise, given WaPo's bias.

All sources are biased. What matters is the accuracy of the reporting.

If I say they need to name their 30 sources, you will say "they don't have to". That is correct, they don't. And therefore, I don't have to believe they have 30 sources and that the story is accurate. They can simply make up anything they want, publish it, then hide.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe this thread it filled with Russian trolls.

37%of Alabam evangelicals say that allegations of pedophilia make them MORE likely to vote for more.

Birds of a feather?

I. Can’t. Even.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/360010-poll-37-percent-of-alabama-evangelicals-more-likely-to-vote-for-moore-after

No, they are not birds of a feather. They are people who know what liberals are made of.

Liberals are worse than pedophiles? Seriously? That’s the stance of Alabam Republicans? That they would rather have a pedophile than a liberal. I’m as liberal as they come, and I would rather have Ted Cruz than someone who would hurt kids like that.

Again— I. Can’t. Even.

Agree, and the only thing Ted Cruz has ever done that I approve of is liking porn with an actress that resembled his wife.

No, it was an intern who did it, remember? SMDH.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting story from the NYTimes on women voters from Alabama and how they perceive Moore, both pro and con.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.nytimes.com/2017/11/10/us/alabama-women-roy-moore.amp.html

The elementary school principal who thinks pedophilia is fine if it is not happening right now needs to be fired.

THIS. Even in Alabama this is so wrong.

But it's apparently ok with liberals in the UK:

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/462604/We-can-t-prove-sex-with-children-does-them-harm-says-Labour-linked-NCCL

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe this thread it filled with Russian trolls.

37%of Alabam evangelicals say that allegations of pedophilia make them MORE likely to vote for more.

Birds of a feather?

I. Can’t. Even.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/360010-poll-37-percent-of-alabama-evangelicals-more-likely-to-vote-for-moore-after

No, they are not birds of a feather. They are people who know what liberals are made of.

Liberals are worse than pedophiles? Seriously? That’s the stance of Alabam Republicans? That they would rather have a pedophile than a liberal. I’m as liberal as they come, and I would rather have Ted Cruz than someone who would hurt kids like that.

Again— I. Can’t. Even.

Agree, and the only thing Ted Cruz has ever done that I approve of is liking porn with an actress that resembled his wife.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting story from the NYTimes on women voters from Alabama and how they perceive Moore, both pro and con.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.nytimes.com/2017/11/10/us/alabama-women-roy-moore.amp.html

The elementary school principal who thinks pedophilia is fine if it is not happening right now needs to be fired.

THIS. Even in Alabama this is so wrong.

But it's apparently ok with liberals in the UK:

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/462604/We-can-t-prove-sex-with-children-does-them-harm-says-Labour-linked-NCCL

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting story from the NYTimes on women voters from Alabama and how they perceive Moore, both pro and con.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.nytimes.com/2017/11/10/us/alabama-women-roy-moore.amp.html

The elementary school principal who thinks pedophilia is fine if it is not happening right now needs to be fired.

THIS. Even in Alabama this is so wrong.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe this thread it filled with Russian trolls.

37%of Alabam evangelicals say that allegations of pedophilia make them MORE likely to vote for more.

Birds of a feather?

I. Can’t. Even.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/360010-poll-37-percent-of-alabama-evangelicals-more-likely-to-vote-for-moore-after

No, they are not birds of a feather. They are people who know what liberals are made of.

Liberals are worse than pedophiles? Seriously? That’s the stance of Alabam Republicans? That they would rather have a pedophile than a liberal. I’m as liberal as they come, and I would rather have Ted Cruz than someone who would hurt kids like that.

Again— I. Can’t. Even.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There seems to be a contradiction between mother and daughter....no surprise...



Citing Corfman, the Post reported:

After her mother went into the courtroom, Corfman says, Moore asked her where she went to school, what she liked to do and whether he could call her sometime. She remembers giving him her number and says he called not long after. 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.

Corfman clearly claimed she spoke to Moore on what she said was “her phone in her bedroom” on at least one of those occasions. The Post did not specify whether the second or third alleged calls purportedly took place on a bedroom phone.

When her mother was asked whether or not her daughter had a phone in her room, this was the reply:


Wells, Corfman’s mother, was asked by Breitbart News: “Back then did she have her own phone in her room or something?”

“No,” she replied matter-of-factly. “But the phone in the house could get through to her easily.”

It's details like this that trip up stories - this is why police often question people multiple times in multiple ways - they want to see the inconsistencies that appear. Those inconsistencies are what leads an officer to break open a case.

What this is going to do is cause liberals here to me suppositions: "I bet she stretched the phone cord" or "Perhaps the cord was long enough for her to take the phone in her room?"

And those will just be 'perhaps' and 'maybes' and 'I bets'. That's it. That's all.

This is neither a police investigation or a trial. A candidate for Senate isn’t entitled to a presumption of innocence or a standard of proof beyond a reasonable doubt. This is being tried in the court of public opinion, as these matters often are, and was the case of Juanita Broaddrick, which the right-wing noise machine ne was fine sith Moore doesn’t have a David Brock running around trying to dig up dirt. And the best he can do is offer non-committal comments about his “customary behavior.” Moore should put on his big boy pants. It’s nobody's fault but his own that he took them off in the first place. #GOPervs #GOPedos

Everyone is entitled to a presumption of innocence, at least in my world. I thought the Dems were a party of facts and science?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe this thread it filled with Russian trolls.

37%of Alabam evangelicals say that allegations of pedophilia make them MORE likely to vote for more.

Birds of a feather?

I. Can’t. Even.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/360010-poll-37-percent-of-alabama-evangelicals-more-likely-to-vote-for-moore-after

No, they are not birds of a feather. They are people who know what liberals are made of.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Maybe this thread it filled with Russian trolls.

37%of Alabam evangelicals say that allegations of pedophilia make them MORE likely to vote for more.

Birds of a feather?

I. Can’t. Even.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/360010-poll-37-percent-of-alabama-evangelicals-more-likely-to-vote-for-moore-after

No, they are not birds of a feather. They are people who know what liberals are made of.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Interesting story from the NYTimes on women voters from Alabama and how they perceive Moore, both pro and con.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/mobile.nytimes.com/2017/11/10/us/alabama-women-roy-moore.amp.html

The elementary school principal who thinks pedophilia is fine if it is not happening right now needs to be fired.