# News & Current Events > U.S. Political News >  Poll: Judge Roy Moore leads competitors in runoff

## Swordsmyth

The poll found that Moore leads Strange 34-32, with 35 percent  undecided, in a hypothetical runoff. A matchup between Moore and Brooks  has Moore garnering 43 percent support to Brooks 20 percent, with 37  percent undecided.
 A matchup between Strange and Brooks has Strange leading Brooks 42-22, with 36 percent undecided.

More at: https://www.conservativereview.com/a...tors-in-runoff

----------


## AuH20



----------


## William Tell

Go Roy Moore.

----------


## Keith and stuff

Brooks is the most pro-liberty of the 3. Trump endorsed Strange, the least pro-liberty of the 3.

----------


## Madison320

> Go Roy Moore.


Seriously? I live in Alabama. Roy Moore is an idiot.

----------


## Keith and stuff

> Seriously? I live in Alabama. Roy Moore is an idiot.


Maybe that's why William supports him? A lot of people voted for Trump not because they like him, but because he is entertaining.

----------


## William Tell

> Seriously? I live in Alabama. Roy Moore is an idiot.


Seriously. I'd trade you Ted Cruz for Roy Moore any day. Moore wants the government completely out of education and healthcare and he opposes unconstitutional wars.

----------


## Sonny Tufts

> he opposes unconstitutional wars.


He's also in favor of unconstitutional religious displays and ignoring court orders he doesn't agree with, both of which got him removed as from the Alabama Supreme Court in 2004.  After he was subsequently reelected to the court he was charged with six ethical violations, all stemming from his effectively telling Alabama probate judges to ignore the U.S. Supreme Court's Obergefell decision and to refuse to issue same-sex marriage licenses.  The charges included:

1.Violation of the Alabama Canon of Judicial Ethics, for disregarding a federal injunction.
2.Violation of the Alabama Canon of Judicial Ethics, for demonstrated unwillingness to follow clear law.
3.Violation of the Alabama Canon of Judicial Ethics, for abuse of administrative authority.
4.Violation of the Alabama Canon of Judicial Ethics, for substituting his judgment for the judgment of the entire Alabama Supreme Court, including failure to abstain from public comment about a pending proceeding in his own court.
5.Violation of the Alabama Canon of Judicial Ethics, for interference with legal process and remedies in the United States District Court and/or Alabama Supreme Court related to proceedings in which Alabama probate judges were involved.
6.Violation of the Alabama Canon of Judicial Ethics, for failure to recuse himself from pending proceedings in the Alabama Supreme Court after making public comment and placing his impartiality into question.

On April 20, 2017 a special Alabama Supreme Court affirmed Moore's removal from the court.

Moore is a theocratic demagogue who thinks he's above the law.

----------


## William Tell

> He's also in favor of unconstitutional religious displays and  ignoring court orders he doesn't agree with, both of which got him  removed as from the Alabama Supreme Court in 2004.  After he was  subsequently reelected to the court he was charged with six ethical  violations, all stemming from his effectively telling Alabama probate  judges to ignore the U.S. Supreme Court's Obergefell decision and to  refuse to issue same-sex marriage licenses.  The charges included:
> 
> 1.Violation of the Alabama Canon of Judicial Ethics, for disregarding a federal injunction.
> 2.Violation of the Alabama Canon of Judicial Ethics, for demonstrated unwillingness to follow clear law.
> 3.Violation of the Alabama Canon of Judicial Ethics, for abuse of administrative authority.
> 4.Violation of the Alabama Canon of Judicial Ethics, for substituting his judgment for the judgment of the entire Alabama Supreme Court, including failure to abstain from public comment about a pending proceeding in his own court.
> 5.Violation of the Alabama Canon of Judicial Ethics, for interference with legal process and remedies in the United States District Court and/or Alabama Supreme Court related to proceedings in which Alabama probate judges were involved.
> 6.Violation of the Alabama Canon of Judicial Ethics, for failure to recuse himself from pending proceedings in the Alabama Supreme Court after making public comment and placing his impartiality into question.
> 
> On April 20, 2017 a special Alabama Supreme Court affirmed Moore's removal from the court.


Yeah. Those are other reasons  I support him. We need someone to stand up to the fedcoats and he proved he has guts.

----------


## Madison320

> Seriously. I'd trade you Ted Cruz for Roy Moore any day. Moore wants the government completely out of education and healthcare and he opposes unconstitutional wars.


I don't trust him as far as I can throw him. He's all politician. He filmed himself sneaking a statue of the 10 commandments into the courthouse, knowing it would cause a controversy and he wanted to make a name for himself. It's been awhile since it happened (2001?) so I can't remember all the stupid crap he did, but he was one of the reasons I quit voting for republicans after I moved to Alabama. Before that I used to vote libertarian and republican. Now I vote libertarian and leave the rest blank.

----------


## Sonny Tufts

> We need someone to stand up to the fedcoats and he proved he has guts.


Spin it however you want, but the fact remains that Moore was removed for violating the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics, which are state rules, not federal ones.  As the Alabama Court of the Judiciary noted in its decision:




> At the outset, this court emphasizes that this case is concerned only with alleged violations of the Canons of Judicial Ethics . This case is not about whether same-sex marriage should be permitted; indeed, we recognize that a majority of voters in Alabama adopted a constitutional amendment in 2006 banning same - sex marriage , as did a majority of states over the last 15 years . Moreover , this is not a case to review or to editorialize about the United States Supreme Court's June 2015 split decision in Obergefell v . Hodges , 135 S . Ct . 2584 (2015), a decision that some members of this court did not personally agree with or think was well reasoned. This court simply does not have the authority to reexamine those issues . This court convenes only "to hear complaints filed by the Judicial Inquiry Commission" as to alleged violations by judges of the Canons of Judicial Ethics adopted by the Alabama Supreme Court.  See§ 157 , Ala . Const . 1901 (Off . Recomp.) As this court stated in the 2003 action against Chief Justice Roy S . Moore:
> 
> "The Canons are not merely guide lines for proper judicial conduct; they are binding on all judges by the oath taken upon assuming office, and violations of the Canons can serve as the basis for disciplinary action. The charge or charges against a judge must be proved by clear and convincing evidence before any discipline may be imposed."
> 
>                                                                                                       ***
> 
> On the basis of the evidence presented, this Court unanimously finds that the JIC proved by clear and convincing evidence that Chief Justice Moore is guilty of charges nos . 1 - 6. Specifically, Chief Justice Moore is guilty of violating:
> 
> • Canon 1, in that he failed to uphold the integrity and independence of the judiciary;
> ...


Moore could have disagreed with and fought against the adverse decisions in both the Ten Commandments and gay marriage cases, but he couldn't do so in a manner that violated his oath of office, and that's exactly what he did.

----------


## William Tell

> Spin it however you want, but the fact remains that Moore was removed for violating the Alabama Canons of Judicial Ethics, which are state rules, not federal ones.  As the Alabama Court of the Judiciary noted in its decision:


I know. The state government are bootlickers Roy's the only one who isn't.

----------


## Madison320

> I know. The state government are bootlickers Roy's the only one who isn't.


He's a theocratic weasel.

This is from Wikipedia:

"A month after his election, Moore began making plans for a larger monument to the Ten Commandments, reasoning that the Alabama Supreme Court building required something grander than a wooden plaque. His final design involved a 5,280 pound (2,400 kg) granite block, three feet wide by three feet deep by four feet tall, covered with quotes from the Declaration of Independence, the national anthem, and various founding fathers.[20] The crowning element would be two large carved tablets inscribed with the Ten Commandments. High-grade granite from Vermont was ordered and shipped, and Moore found benefactors and a sculptor to complete the job.

On the evening of July 31, 2001, despite some initial installation difficulties and concerns regarding structural support for the monument's weight, Moore had the completed monument transported to the state judicial building and installed in the central rotunda. The installation was filmed, and videotapes of the event were sold by Coral Ridge Ministries, an evangelical media outlet in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, which later used proceeds from the sales of the film to underwrite Moore's ensuing legal expenses. Coral Ridge was the operation of the late Reverend D. James Kennedy, a staunch Moore supporter.[21]

The next morning, Moore held a press conference in the central rotunda to officially unveil the monument. In a speech following the unveiling, Moore declared, "Today a cry has gone out across our land for the acknowledgment of that God upon whom this nation and our laws were founded. ... May this day mark the restoration of the moral foundation of law to our people and the return to the knowledge of God in our land.""

----------


## Brian4Liberty

Hopefully all of this talk about establishment shill and comic book villain Luther Strange is wishful manipulation, just like all of the polls during the last POTUS race.

Mo Brooks is the best choice, and his platform is #DitchMitch. Swamp creatures are doing everything they can to stop him.

----------


## specsaregood

> He's a theocratic weasel.
> 
> This is from Wikipedia:
> 
> "A month after his election, Moore began making plans for a larger monument to the Ten Commandments, reasoning that the Alabama Supreme Court building required something grander than a wooden plaque. His final design involved a 5,280 pound (2,400 kg) granite block, three feet wide by three feet deep by four feet tall, covered with quotes from the Declaration of Independence, the national anthem, and various founding fathers.[20] The crowning element would be two large carved tablets inscribed with the Ten Commandments. High-grade granite from Vermont was ordered and shipped, and Moore found benefactors and a sculptor to complete the job.
> 
> On the evening of July 31, 2001, despite some initial installation difficulties and concerns regarding structural support for the monument's weight, Moore had the completed monument transported to the state judicial building and installed in the central rotunda. The installation was filmed, and videotapes of the event were sold by Coral Ridge Ministries, an evangelical media outlet in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, which later used proceeds from the sales of the film to underwrite Moore's ensuing legal expenses. Coral Ridge was the operation of the late Reverend D. James Kennedy, a staunch Moore supporter.[21]
> 
> The next morning, Moore held a press conference in the central rotunda to officially unveil the monument. In a speech following the unveiling, Moore declared, "Today a cry has gone out across our land for the acknowledgment of that God upon whom this nation and our laws were founded. ... May this day mark the restoration of the moral foundation of law to our people and the return to the knowledge of God in our land.""


I'm not religious and I have no problems with any of that.  oh no, he got a big monument with words and quotes on them installed.  big whoop.

----------


## Madison320

> I'm not religious and I have no problems with any of that.  oh no, he got a big monument with words and quotes on them installed.  big whoop.


If you don't mind living in a theocracy.

----------


## specsaregood

> If you don't mind living in a theocracy.


You must be reading something other than what you posted.   I didn't see anything in it that indicates a theocracy taking hold.  Oh no a moral foundation!  big whoop.  oh no, the knowledge of god.  big whoop.

----------


## William Tell

> I don't trust him as far as I can throw him. He's all politician.


 Well that's your right and I respect that. But I trust him because he's always been consistent. I might disagree with him and be annoyed at him some times, but he's not going to wake up tomorrow and start voting like a RINO.




> He filmed himself sneaking a statue of the 10 commandments into the courthouse, knowing it would cause a controversy and he wanted to make a name for himself. It's been awhile since it happened (2001?) so I can't remember all the stupid crap he did, but he was one of the reasons I quit voting for republicans after I moved to Alabama. Before that I used to vote libertarian and republican. Now I vote libertarian and leave the rest blank.


I can see how attention seeking would turn you off. But to me that's the least of my worries in politics I just care about how someone's going to vote on legislation and where they are pushing the ball. Strange is the second coming of Lindsey Graham. Brooks is Sessions/Cruz/tea party lite, endorsed by Hannity, Lamar Smith, and Mark Levin. Moore is a devout evangelical with a high regard for defending the Constitution as he understands it. Seems to me Moore is the best thing we could realistically get out of this race looking at the polls.

Btw what do you think about Trip Pittman? He's running for senate also and he's a legislator who supported Ron Paul.

----------


## Madison320

> You must be reading something other than what you posted.   I didn't see anything in it that indicates a theocracy taking hold.  Oh no a moral foundation!  big whoop.  oh no, the knowledge of god.  big whoop.


Maybe if you heard some of his speeches. He reminds me exactly of this guy:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzIs51GUVgg

----------


## William Tell

> If you don't mind living in a theocracy.


If having the 10 commandments in court makes a nation a theocracy we already are one, lots of times people swear oaths on the bible in court. I don't see why a monument is so controversial. The whole nation is going the opposite way, even if Roy was a theocrat he'd never accomplish anything like that. And considering the only thing he will have a chance to maybe accomplish is voting to shrink our out of control government I see exactly zero downside to electing him.

----------


## Madison320

> Well that's your right and I respect that. But I trust him because he's always been consistent. I might disagree with him and be annoyed at him some times, but he's not going to wake up tomorrow and start voting like a RINO.
> 
>  I can see how attention seeking would turn you off. But to me that's the least of my worries in politics I just care about how someone's going to vote on legislation and where they are pushing the ball. Strange is the second coming of Lindsey Graham. Brooks is Sessions/Cruz/tea party lite, endorsed by Hannity, Lamar Smith, and Mark Levin. Moore is a devout evangelical with a high regard for defending the Constitution as he understands it. Seems to me Moore is the best thing we could realistically get out of this race looking at the polls.


Yuch, I'll just leave my ballot blank.





> Btw what do you think about Trip Pittman? He's running for senate also and he's a legislator who supported Ron Paul.


I never heard of him but if he likes Ron Paul then he's probably worth voting for.

----------


## William Tell

> Yuch, I'll just leave my ballot blank.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I never heard of him but if he likes Ron Paul then he's probably worth voting for.


I found this a while back.
http://theresurgent.com/trip-pittman...esponsibility/

----------


## specsaregood

> Maybe if you heard some of his speeches. He reminds me exactly of this guy:
> 
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rzIs51GUVgg


So to back up your claim, you link to a clip of a comedy, fictional movie?  Well that's about all I need to know.

----------


## Madison320

> If having the 10 commandments in court makes a nation a theocracy we already are one, lots of times people swear oaths on the bible in court. I don't see why a monument is so controversial. The whole nation is going the opposite way, even if Roy was a theocrat he'd never accomplish anything like that. And considering the only thing he will have a chance to maybe accomplish is voting to shrink our out of control government I see exactly zero downside to electing him.


It was the way he did it, and the way he spoke (god this, god that, amen brothers and sisters). I don't get the sense that he even believes in god. To me it seemed like an act to get elected.

----------


## Madison320

> So to back up your claim, you link to a clip of a comedy, fictional movie?  Well that's about all I need to know.


It's an analogy. Duh.

I'll see if I can find some actual footage of the Judge for ya.


Here you go, AMEN BROTHER!!!!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=90M4DEuM0V8

----------


## dannno

> He's also in favor of unconstitutional religious displays


I wasn't aware the Constitution prohibited religious displays 




> and ignoring court orders he doesn't agree with


Could be good, could be bad.





> stemming from his effectively telling Alabama probate judges to ignore the U.S. Supreme Court's Obergefell decision and to refuse to issue same-sex marriage licenses.


So he is pro states rights?

----------


## AuH20

Strange was a Never Trumper. This is the downside of Trump.

----------


## Keith and stuff

> Strange was a Never Trumper. This is the downside of Trump.


Trump endorsed him, even though he is the worst candidate in the primary race. Sad.

----------


## Madison320

> I wasn't aware the Constitution prohibited religious displays


"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"

I would argue that displaying a big monument with the 10 commandments in a courthouse is the first step in establishing an official religion.

Aren't judges supposed to be impartial? The whole thing stunk. What about the Christian group that payed for the monument? And they made a video of moving the monument and sold it. You don't think they might get preferential treatment? A judge should keep a low profile. 

What if a muslim judge moved a statue of Muhammad into the courthouse and displayed the koran? And it was funded by a Islamic group? You'd be ok with that?

----------


## Sonny Tufts

> I wasn't aware the Constitution prohibited religious displays


It does when you place the display in a government building with the explicit purpose (as Moore admitted) of acknowledging the supremacy of the Judeo-Christian deity.  




> The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, made binding upon the States through the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, provides that government "shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." The question presented to this court is whether the Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court violated the Establishment Clause when he placed a slightly over two-and-a-half ton granite monument--engraved with the Ten Commandments and other references to God--in the Alabama State Judicial Building with the specific purpose and effect, as the court finds from the evidence, of acknowledging the Judeo-Christian God as the moral foundation of our laws...
> 
> Based on the evidence presented during a week-long trial and for the reasons that follow, this court holds that the evidence is overwhelming and the law is clear that the Chief Justice violated the Establishment Clause. But, in announcing this holding today, the court believes it is important to clarify at the outset that the court does not hold that it is improper in all instances to display the Ten Commandments in government buildings; nor does the court hold that the Ten Commandments are not important, if not one of the most important, sources of American law. Rather the court's limited holding, as will be explained below in more detail, is that the Chief Justice's actions and intentions in this case crossed the Establishment Clause line between the permissible and the impermissible...
> 
> Both in appearance and in stated purpose, the Chief Justice's Ten Commandments monument is an "extreme case"; it is nothing less than "an obtrusive year-round religious display" installed in the Alabama State Judicial Building in order to "place the government's weight behind an obvious effort to proselytize on behalf of a particular religion," the Chief Justice's religion...
> 
> In the Chief Justice's understanding, the Judeo-Christian God is sovereign over both the church and the state in this country, and both owe allegiance to that God... The court appreciates that, as a matter of conscience, one may believe that the Judeo-Christian God is sovereign over the state. In fact, the court understands that it is just this type of belief that the Free Exercise clause and the Establishment Clause are meant to protect. Thus, the court stresses that it is not disagreeing with Chief Justice Moore's beliefs regarding the relationship of God and the state.  Rather, the court disagrees with the Chief Justice to the extent that it understands him to be saying that, as a matter of American law, the Judeo-Christian God must be recognized as sovereign over the state, or even that the state may adopt that view...
> 
> The court appreciates that there are those who see a clear secular purpose in the Ten Commandments, for they command not only such things as "I am the Lord thy God" and "Thou shalt have no other Gods before me" but also, among other things, that "Thou shalt not kill" and "Thou shalt not steal," and that we should "Honour thy father and thy mother." If all Chief Justice Moore had done were to emphasize the Ten Commandments' historical and educational importance (for the evidence shows that they have been one of the sources of our secular laws) or their importance as a model code for good citizenship (for we all want our children to honor their parents, not to kill, not to steal, and so forth), this court would have a much different case before it. But the Chief Justice did not limit himself to this; he went far, far beyond. He installed a two-and-a-half ton monument in the most prominent place in a government building, managed with dollars from all state taxpayers, with the specific purpose and effect of establishing a permanent recognition of the "sovereignty of God," the Judeo-Christian God, over all citizens in this country, regardless of each taxpaying citizen's individual personal beliefs or lack thereof. To this, the Establishment Clause says no.  _Glassroth v. Moore_, No. 01-T-1268-N (M.D. Alabama 2002)





> So he is pro states rights?


No, he's pro Roy Moore and thinks that his opinions are superior, _as a legal matter_, than those of the United States Supreme Court.

----------


## William Tell

I voted for one of these Champions. Wish I could vote for the other. Defend the Constitution August 15th, Alabama!

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> If having the 10 commandments in court makes a nation a theocracy we already are one, lots of times people swear oaths on the bible in court. I don't see why a monument is so controversial. The whole nation is going the opposite way, even if Roy was a theocrat he'd never accomplish anything like that. And considering the only thing he will have a chance to maybe accomplish is voting to shrink our out of control government I see exactly zero downside to electing him.


My concern with Moore isn't his religious policy per se, but that he might focus on that to the exclusion of things that actually matter.

There's a similar problem on the other side, e.g. with Libertarians and pot. 

Basically I have no interest in electing any more culture warriors, of any stripe.

Where are the politiques?

----------


## William Tell

> My concern with Moore isn't his religious policy per se, but that he might focus on that to the exclusion of things that actually matter.
> 
> There's a similar problem on the other side, e.g. with Libertarians and pot. 
> 
> Basically I have no interest in electing any more culture warriors, of any stripe.


Although I guess I can see your point I frankly don't think it holds up as an objection when you think about it. Yeah, the headlines Roy makes may be about his own priorities, but senators make thousands of votes. He's going to be on the right side of more of them than everyone but Rand and maybe Lee. Same thing goes for Libertarians and pot. Every legit statesman has pet issues. For Ron it was the Fed and wars, for Rand it seems to be NSA spying/privacy. If you were elected you'd have some pet issue, and it might not be mine but as long as you stand strong on most issues you will be an asset to the cause.

#Pragmatism

----------


## Swordsmyth

> "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion"
> 
> I would argue that displaying a big monument with the 10 commandments in a courthouse is the first step in establishing an official religion.
> 
> Aren't judges supposed to be impartial? The whole thing stunk. What about the Christian group that payed for the monument? And they made a video of moving the monument and sold it. You don't think they might get preferential treatment? A judge should keep a low profile. 
> 
> What if a muslim judge moved a statue of Muhammad into the courthouse and displayed the koran? And it was funded by a Islamic group? You'd be ok with that?


"*Congress* *shall make no law* respecting an establishment of religion"

It says nothing about anyone but congress (you could try to stretch it to encompass the state legislature), and it prohibits nothing but the making of laws to establish a religion. If the people don't like a cultural/religious display in a court house they can through the legislature or the ballot box seek to change the judiciary or prohibit the display, the Feds have no say whatsoever.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Although I guess I can see your point I frankly don't think it holds up as an objection when you think about it. Yeah, the headlines Roy makes may be about his own priorities, but senators make thousands of votes. He's going to be on the right side of more of them than everyone but Rand and maybe Lee. Same thing goes for Libertarians and pot. Every legit statesman has pet issues. For Ron it was the Fed and wars, for Rand it seems to be NSA spying/privacy. If you were elected you'd have some pet issue, and it might not be mine but as long as you stand strong on most issues you will be an asset to the cause.
> 
> #Pragmatism


Sure, but isn't that true of Brooks as well? 

As I see it, Brooks is pretty much the same as Moore, but without the distracting culture war stuff.

----------


## Sonny Tufts

> "*Congress* *shall make no law* respecting an establishment of religion"
> 
> It says nothing about anyone but congress (you could try to stretch it to encompass the state legislature)


What you call a stretch has been the law for quite some time.  Most of the Bill of Rights has been made applicable to the States via the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.  See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorp...Bill_of_Rights

It never ceases to amaze me how some believers see no problem with government officials promoting a particular religious belief (as long as it's theirs, of course).

----------


## Swordsmyth

> What you call a stretch has been the law for quite some time.  Most of the Bill of Rights has been made applicable to the States via the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment.  See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incorp...Bill_of_Rights


A prohibition against establishing a religion is not a "privilege" or an "immunity" held by a citizen, that would have to be phrased "the people shall not be subjected to an established religion", in any case I don't want the states to "establish" a religion either but that is a legislative function and distinct from placing a monument in a courthouse. 




> It never ceases to amaze me how some believers see no problem with government officials promoting a particular religious belief (as long as it's theirs, of course).


You never answered the rest of my comment, so I will repeat it.

It prohibits nothing but the making of laws to establish a religion. If  the people don't like a cultural/religious display in a court house they  can through the legislature or the ballot box seek to change the  judiciary or prohibit the display, the Feds have no say whatsoever.

----------


## Keith and stuff

> My concern with Moore isn't his religious policy per se, but that he might focus on that to the exclusion of things that actually matter.
> 
> There's a similar problem on the other side, e.g. with Libertarians and pot. 
> 
> Basically I have no interest in electing any more culture warriors, of any stripe.
> 
> Where are the politiques?


William has the right to support any statist he wants! Sure he supports the anti-liberty candidate Moore, and that is fine. Just like he had the legal right to support Obama or Clinton. Just because his chosen candidate hates us and liberty doesn't matter. His rights come first!

Trip Pittman is the Ron Paul Republican, Mo Brooks is the only libertyish person with a chance, then there are the many anti-liberty candidates likes Moore. This is a somewhat free country (well, at least it is in New Hampshire), and people have the right to vote to destroy it!

----------


## Sonny Tufts

> It prohibits nothing but the making of laws to establish a religion. If  the people don't like a cultural/religious display in a court house they  can through the legislature or the ballot box seek to change the  judiciary or prohibit the display, the Feds have no say whatsoever.


The Establishment Clause means much more than that.  As much as you may not like it, the real law regarding the Clause that will be applied by the courts (except, of course, by courts in Moore's theocratic fantasyland) is determined by the Supreme Court, subject to the Court's reversing itself or the Constitution's being amended.  And a long line of SCOTUS decisions leads to the inescapable conclusion that no government, whether federal, state, or local, can promote a particular religions belief.  As the Court of Appeals noted in affirming the ruling against Moore:




> The First Amendment does not say that no government official may take any action respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof. It says that “Congress shall make no law” doing that. Chief Justice Moore is not Congress. Nonetheless, he apparently recognizes that the religion clauses of the First Amendment apply to all laws, not just those enacted by Congress. See Everson v. Bd. of Educ., 330 U.S. 1, 15, 67 S. Ct. 504, 511 (1947) (holding that the Establishment Clause applies to the states through the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment). Even with that concession, his position is still plenty bold. He argues that because of its “no law” language, the First Amendment proscribes only laws, which should be defined as “a rule of civil conduct . . . commanding what is right and prohibiting what is wrong.” Brief of Appellant at 19 (quoting 1 William Blackstone, Commentaries *44). Any governmental action promoting religion in general or a  particular religion is free from constitutional scrutiny, he insists, so long as it does not command or prohibit conduct. The monument does neither, but instead is what he calls “a decorative reminder of the moral foundation of American law.” Brief of Appellant at 19. The breadth of the Chief Justice’s position is illustrated by his counsel’s concession at oral argument that if we adopted his position, the Chief Justice would be free to adorn the walls of the Alabama Supreme Court’s courtroom with sectarian religious murals and have decidedly religious quotations painted above the bench. Every government building could be topped with a cross, or a menorah, or a statue of Buddha, depending upon the views of the officials with authority over the premises. A crèche could occupy the place of honor in the lobby or rotunda of every municipal, county, state, and federal building. Proselytizing religious messages could be played over the public address system in every government building at the whim of the official in charge of the premises.
> 
> However appealing those prospects may be to some, the position Chief Justice Moore takes is foreclosed by Supreme Court precedent. County of Allegheny, 492 U.S. at  12, 109 S. Ct. at 3110, which held unconstitutional the placement of a crèche in the lobby of a courthouse, stands foursquare against the notion that the Establishment Clause permits government to promote religion so long as it does not command or prohibit conduct. Id., 109 S. Ct. at 3110 (“To be sure, some Christians may wish to see the government proclaim its allegiance to Christianity in a religious celebration of Christmas, but the Constitution does not permit the gratification of that desire, which would contradict ‘the logic of secular liberty’ it is the purpose of the Establishment Clause to protect.”) (citation omitted).


If you really want to know the applicable law in this area, please read the appellate court's opinion here: https://web.archive.org/web/20040112.../200216708.pdf

----------


## Swordsmyth

> The Establishment Clause means much more than that.  As much as you may not like it, the real law regarding the Clause that will be applied by the courts (except, of course, by courts in Moore's theocratic fantasyland) is determined by the Supreme Court, subject to the Court's reversing itself or the Constitution's being amended.  And a long line of SCOTUS decisions leads to the inescapable conclusion that no government, whether federal, state, or local, can promote a particular religions belief.  As the Court of Appeals noted in affirming the ruling against Moore:
> 
> 
> 
> If you really want to know the applicable law in this area, please read the appellate court's opinion here: https://web.archive.org/web/20040112.../200216708.pdf


Then nothing the government does is unconstitutional because the supreme court gives them permission?
I don't care what nonsense the supreme court has said in the past, Moore's actions were not unconstitutional and shouldn't be, we should all be fighting for a restoration of the constitution as it should be and I have proven what it has to say on this subject.

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

> It never ceases to amaze me how some believers see no problem with government officials promoting a particular religious belief (as long as it's theirs, of course).





> The Establishment Clause means much more than that.



It never ceases to amaze me how government institutions like schools continue to promote their own religious beliefs embodied in secular humanism, which was declared to be a religion by a federal court in accord with the Establishment Clause.

It also never ceases to amaze me how your behavior here is progressive/antithetical to the site, and how your presence here apparently has nothing to do with liberty.  Why is that, tax lawyer?

----------


## William Tell

> William has the right to support any statist he wants! Sure he supports the anti-liberty candidate Moore, and that is fine. Just like he had the legal right to support Obama or Clinton. Just because his chosen candidate hates us and liberty doesn't matter. His rights come first!


Lol thanks, Keith. But actually it was the Live Free or Die state that elected Obama and voted for Hillary. 





> Trip Pittman is the Ron Paul Republican,


 Yeah. I was the first person on this site to point that out and it would be great if he makes the runoff.




> Mo Brooks is the only libertyish person with a chance, then there are the many anti-liberty candidates likes Moore.


 He's a career back bencher politican and he's been winning elections for decades by going with the flow. Moore stands for what he believes even when it means losing. 

There's a reason Lamar Smith and Hannity and Levin endorsed Brooks. Looking at his voting record I honestly can't see a difference between him and your average NeoCon. I mean you're calling a guy who supports Indefinite Detention, the Patriot Act and the Export Import bank 'libertyish' but I'm supporting an anti liberty candidate? What are you smoking??



> This is a somewhat free country (well, at least it is in New Hampshire), and people have the right to vote to destroy it!


 You really are fond of the arbitrary lines drawn on a map. I really do wish the FSP the best. But you guys aren't even honest about your own state's problems. You have some of the worst most draconian homeschooling laws in the nation in New Hampshire and when I pointed it out you just trashed the organization that dared to give you a bad grade, and then went on to say asking permission to school your kids isn't so bad after all.

At least those of us in other parts of the world can admit our local government is bad and try to make corrections instead of blindly worshipping it and playing down tyranny.

----------


## specsaregood

> You really are fond of the arbitrary lines drawn on a map. I really do wish the FSP the best. But you guys aren't even honest about your own state's problems. You have some of the worst most draconian homeschooling laws in the nation in New Hampshire and when I pointed it out you just trashed the organization that dared to give you a bad grade, and then went on to say asking permission to school your kids isn't so bad after all.


3rd highest property tax rate in the US aint anything to cheer about either.  When the only states worse than your own are NJ and IL, its time to get to work...

----------


## William Tell

> Sure, but isn't that true of Brooks as well? 
> 
> As I see it, Brooks is pretty much the same as Moore, but without the distracting culture war stuff.


No. Brooks supported the Patriot Act for crying out loud, vote for the NDAA and voted in favor of warrantless searches. He has supported intervention and a police state on multiple occasions. Why anyone on this site supports him is beyond me. I'm posting some of his bad votes below so people can see them.

----------


## William Tell

> Name: Mo Brooks
> 
> Congress: Alabama, District: 5, Republican
> 
> Cumulative Freedom Index Score: 74%
> 
> Status: Active Member of the House
> 
> Score Breakdown:
> ...


 https://www.thenewamerican.com/index...nameid=B001274

----------


## Swordsmyth

> https://www.thenewamerican.com/index...nameid=B001274


You must spread some reputation around before giving it to William Tell again.

----------


## William Tell

> Hopefully all of this talk about establishment shill and comic book villain Luther Strange is wishful manipulation, just like all of the polls during the last POTUS race.
> 
> Mo Brooks is the best choice, and his platform is #DitchMitch. Swamp creatures are doing everything they can to stop him.


After finally looking up his voting record, I can't see where you were coming from. Until today I thought they were both good but no way would I support Brooks now. The dude has a 74% rating on the Freedom index maybe slightly above your average swamp critter but his bad votes were the *really* bad ones.

----------


## William Tell

Two new polls.




> Roy Moore: 35%Luther Strange: 29%Mo Brooks:  19%Trip Pittman: 9%Mary Maxwell: 4%


 http://www.fox10tv.com/story/3609285...atewide-survey




> The survey from Cygnal and L2 found Mr. Moore leading Sen. Luther Strange by a 30.7 percent to 22.6 percent margin and that Rep. Mo Brooks is running in third place with 18.1 percent of the vote.
> 
> Unless a candidate secures more than 50 percent of the vote in the primary next week, the top two vote-getters will face-off in a September contest.
> 
> **************************************************  ************************************
> 
> The poll showed Mr. Moore has the highest favorability rating, coming in at 55.9 percent, versus 46.2 percent for Mr. Strange and 38.8 percent for Mr. Brooks.
> 
> And it showed that Mr. Moore would best Mr. Strange by 10 points in a head-to-head match-up.


 http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...strange-brook/

----------


## Origanalist

> .blah blah blah blah.....zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz  zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz  zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz  zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz  zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz  zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz  zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz  zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz  zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz


//

----------


## Origanalist

> You must spread some reputation around before giving it to William Tell again.


Just did that.

----------


## Origanalist

> William has the right to support any statist he wants! Sure he supports the anti-liberty candidate Moore, and that is fine. Just like he had the legal right to support Obama or Clinton. Just because his chosen candidate hates us and liberty doesn't matter. His rights come first!
> 
> Trip Pittman is the Ron Paul Republican, Mo Brooks is the only libertyish person with a chance, then there are the many anti-liberty candidates likes Moore. This is a somewhat free country (well, at least it is in New Hampshire), and people have the right to vote to destroy it!


That post was completely full of $#@!.

----------


## William Tell

> That post was completely full of $#@!.


Objectively, yes. But Keith's a good guy, I'm sure he'll be happy to explain how a patriot act supporter is libertyish or admit he didn't research the race.

----------


## Origanalist

> Objectively, yes. But Keith's a good guy, I'm sure he'll be happy to explain how a patriot act supporter is libertyish or admit he didn't research the race.


He is a good guy, hope my post wasn't misconstrued. And ya, I'll be waiting for that.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> No. Brooks supported the Patriot Act for  crying out loud, vote for the NDAA and voted in favor of warrantless  searches. He has supported intervention and a police state on multiple  occasions. Why anyone on this site supports him is beyond me. I'm  posting some of his bad votes below so people can see them.


Judging by his voting record, he's quite good on economic issues, mixed on foreign policy (never met a DoD budget he didn't like, but has criticized some interventions and opposed some foreign aid), and horrible on civil liberties. On the other hand, Moore's voting record is...non existent. So how are we evaluating him? Has someone analyzed his judicial opinions? If we're just going by statements to the media, my take (as I said) is that he's in the same ballpark as Brooks on  the liberty-scale, but then deeply obsessed with the culture war, which will _not_ be helpful to our cause.

----------


## Sonny Tufts

> Then nothing the government does is unconstitutional because the supreme court gives them permission?
> I don't care what nonsense the supreme court has said in the past, Moore's actions were not unconstitutional and shouldn't be, we should all be fighting for a restoration of the constitution as it should be and I have proven what it has to say on this subject.


The point is that someone has to make the determination of what's constitutional and have that determination have the force of law.  And that someone isn't you or Roy Moore -- it's SCOTUS.  Moore's antics are similar to George Wallace's standing in the doorway at the University of Alabama, refusing to let a black man enroll. in defiance of a federal court order.  It might have pleased his bigoted followers, but it violated the law.

----------


## Sonny Tufts

> It never ceases to amaze me how government institutions like schools continue to promote their own religious beliefs embodied in secular humanism, which was declared to be a religion by a federal court in accord with the Establishment Clause.


Strawman.  Just because the schools don't teach the brand of Christianity that some folks want them to doesn't mean they're teaching secular humanism.




> It also never ceases to amaze me how your behavior here is progressive/antithetical to the site, and how your presence here apparently has nothing to do with liberty.  Why is that, tax lawyer?


The antithesis of liberty is allowing the government, backed by force and financed by taxpayers' money, to promote a particular religious belief.  Do you really want governmental bureaucrats making theological decisions about which particular belief is to be the government's favorite?

----------


## Madison320

> "*Congress* *shall make no law* respecting an establishment of religion"
> 
> It says nothing about anyone but congress (you could try to stretch it to encompass the state legislature), and it prohibits nothing but the making of laws to establish a religion. If the people don't like a cultural/religious display in a court house they can through the legislature or the ballot box seek to change the judiciary or prohibit the display, the Feds have no say whatsoever.


My guess is the 14th makes it apply to states.  That being said, I don't like the 14th.

Forget the constitution for a minute. It's just wrong for a judge, who's supposed to be neutral, to be sneaking a religious monument into a courthouse. And then filming and selling the video. I can't believe you guys are ok with that.

Like I asked earlier. What if it was a muslim judge sneaking in a statue of muhammad? And all his speeches were muhammad this, muhammad that.

----------


## William Tell

> The point is that someone has to make the determination of what's constitutional and have that determination have the force of law.  And that someone isn't you or Roy Moore -- it's SCOTUS.


So you would have went along with Dred Scott back in the day and said Roy violated his oath if he thought blacks were human. That's some funny stuff right there. You're welcome to worship black robes though that's your right. If Roy gets on SCOTUS someday I guess you'll worship him too.

----------


## Keith and stuff

> 3rd highest property tax rate in the US aint anything to cheer about either.  When the only states worse than your own are NJ and IL, its time to get to work...


2nd lowest overall tax burden in the nation. More than half of NH land is in current use tax status with very low property taxes. Some communities in NH don't even have property tax.


Source: http://www.keypolicydata.com/blog-ar...n-nation-2015/

----------


## Keith and stuff

> Objectively, yes. But Keith's a good guy, I'm sure he'll be happy to explain how a patriot act supporter is libertyish or admit he didn't research the race.


Thanks and I enjoyed defending you and positive repping you, even if we disagree  

Of the 3 candidates doing best in the polls, Mo is the least bad. There is a Ron Paul Republican in the race. If I lived in AL, that's the yard sign that would be in my yard and the person I'd vote for.

----------


## specsaregood

> 2nd lowest overall tax burden in the nation. More than half of NH land is in current use tax status with very low property taxes. Some communities in NH don't even have property tax.


and yet



> Real-Estate Property Taxes by State
> Rank, State, Effective Real-Estate Tax Rate, Annual Taxes on $179K Home*, State Median Home Value, Annual Taxes on Home Priced at State Median Value 
> 51 New Jersey 2.35% $4,189 $315,900 $7,410 
> 50 Illinois 2.30% $4,105 $173,800 $3,995 
> *49 New Hampshire 2.15% $3,838 $237,300 $5,100* 
> 48 Connecticut 1.97% $3,517 $270,500 $5,327


https://wallethub.com/edu/states-wit...y-taxes/11585/

----------


## Keith and stuff

> and yet
> 
> https://wallethub.com/edu/states-wit...y-taxes/11585/


Exactly. Just because NH is the freest state with the 2nd lowest overall tax rate, and has communities without personal income, sales, or property taxes, and has the most pro-liberty weapons laws in the nation, and the lowest murder rate, and the lowest poverty tax, and so on, doesn't mean it is perfect in every way, just much better than any other states on average and in those specific areas.

----------


## specsaregood

> Exactly. Just because NH is the freest state with the 2nd lowest overall tax rate, and has communities without personal income, sales, or property taxes, and has the most pro-liberty weapons laws in the nation, and the lowest murder rate, and the lowest poverty tax, and so on, doesn't mean it is perfect in every way, just much better than any other states on average and in those specific areas.


I just think of property taxes as the worst of all the taxes.  But I pay property taxes in NJ, so who am I to bitch and point fingers...

----------


## Sonny Tufts

> If Roy gets on SCOTUS someday


LOL! You would sooner flap your arms and fly to the moon.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> The point is that someone has to make the determination of what's constitutional and have that determination have the force of law.  And that someone isn't you or Roy Moore -- it's SCOTUS.  Moore's antics are similar to George Wallace's standing in the doorway at the University of Alabama, refusing to let a black man enroll. in defiance of a federal court order.  It might have pleased his bigoted followers, but it violated the law.


Bunk.
The constitution is written in English, it means what it says, segregation in government schools was a violation of the privileges and immunities clause, the 10 commandments monument was not.
SCOTUS is not holy and people should defy it's unconstitutional dictates.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> My guess is the 14th makes it apply to states.  That being said, I don't like the 14th.
> 
> Forget the constitution for a minute. It's just wrong for a judge, who's supposed to be neutral, to be sneaking a religious monument into a courthouse. And then filming and selling the video. I can't believe you guys are ok with that.
> 
> Like I asked earlier. What if it was a muslim judge sneaking in a statue of muhammad? And all his speeches were muhammad this, muhammad that.


I would vote to prohibit the statue and unseat the judge, but the Feds or the courts would have no say.
America is a Christian nation, her laws were built on Christian legal doctrine a 10 commandments statue is not inappropriate in an American courthouse, if you and a bunch of Atheists don't like it you can vote to get rid of the monument or unseat the judge but the Feds have NO say whatsoever.

----------


## Sonny Tufts

> segregation in government schools was a violation of the privileges and immunities clause, the 10 commandments monument was not.
> SCOTUS is not holy and people should defy it's unconstitutional dictates.


No, school segregation violated the Equal Protection Clause, and the Ten Commandments monument violated the Due Process Clause.  While a Privileges and Immunity analysis might have been better suited to address things the states were prohibited from doing under the 14th Amendment, SCOTUS declined to adopt that analysis in the Slaughterhouse Cases in 1873.  The P&I clause has been somewhat of a dead letter ever since.

It might be better if you read the caselaw and learn what the law really is, rather than what you would like it to be.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> LOL! You would sooner flap your arms and fly to the moon.


I notice you didn't respond to the point about Dred Scott.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> No, school segregation violated the Equal Protection Clause


Nonsense, going to school is a privilege, it does not protect you from anything. 





> the Ten Commandments monument violated the Due Process Clause.


Bunk, nobody was denied as single piece of "due process" because there was a statue in the courthouse, "process" is a way of doing things, an inanimate object does not affect a way of doing things by sitting in the lobby.




> While a Privileges and Immunity analysis might have been better suited to address things the states were prohibited from doing under the 14th Amendment, SCOTUS declined to adopt that analysis in the Slaughterhouse Cases in 1873.  The P&I clause has been somewhat of a dead letter ever since.


No part of the constitution is "dead", and legal opinions can't make it so.




> It might be better if you read the caselaw and learn what the law really is, rather than what you would like it to be.


It might be better if you and SCOTUS learned English.

----------


## Sonny Tufts

> America is a Christian nation, her laws were built on Christian legal doctrine


The Constitution is a secular document, and the First Amendment in particular contravenes Christian doctrine.  After all, it denies the government the authority to prohibit someone from being a Buddhist, Muslim, atheist, polytheist (contrary to the First Commandment), or any other non-Christian adherent, any one of which should result in death under Biblical doctrine (see Deuteronomy 13:6-11).

----------


## Swordsmyth

> The Constitution is a secular document, and the First Amendment in particular contravenes Christian doctrine.  After all, it denies the government the authority to prohibit someone from being a Buddhist, Muslim, atheist, polytheist (contrary to the First Commandment), or any other non-Christian adherent, any one of which should result in death under Biblical doctrine (see Deuteronomy 13:6-11).


The "law of Moses" was given to Israel until Christ came and fulfilled the law, it no longer applies unlike the 10 commandments.

*Luke 16:16*  “The law and the prophets _were_ until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it.”

*John 1:17*  “For the law was given by Moses, _but_ grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.” 

*John
Chapter 8*They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?
6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with _his_ finger wrote on the ground, _as though he heard them not_.
7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
8 And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground.
9 And they which heard _it_, being convicted by _their own_ conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, _even_ unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst.
10 When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee?
11 She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more.

----------


## Madison320

> I would vote to prohibit the statue and unseat the judge, but the Feds or the courts would have no say.
> America is a Christian nation, her laws were built on Christian legal doctrine a 10 commandments statue is not inappropriate in an American courthouse, if you and a bunch of Atheists don't like it you can vote to get rid of the monument or unseat the judge but the Feds have NO say whatsoever.


Why would you vote to prohibit the statue if America is a Christian nation?

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Why would you vote to prohibit the statue if America is a Christian nation?


I was referring to the theoretical statue of muhammad.




> Like I asked earlier. What if it was a muslim  judge sneaking in a statue of muhammad? And all his speeches were  muhammad this, muhammad that.

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

> Strawman.  Just because the schools don't teach the brand of Christianity that some folks want them to doesn't mean they're teaching secular humanism.


They're already teaching it.  And you might want to learn the definition of strawman.






> The antithesis of liberty is allowing the government, backed by force and financed by taxpayers' money, to promote a particular religious belief.  Do you really want governmental bureaucrats making theological decisions about which particular belief is to be the government's favorite.



They already do.  See above.




You also missed a question, chief.  Here it is again:


It also never ceases to amaze me how your behavior here is progressive/antithetical to the site, and how your presence here apparently has nothing to do with liberty. Why is that, tax lawyer?

----------


## Madison320

> I was referring to the theoretical statue of muhammad.


Will you allow me to buy beer on sundays? That's really the main issue here.

----------


## Sonny Tufts

> The "law of Moses" was given to Israel until Christ came and fulfilled the law, it no longer applies unlike the 10 commandments.


The Ten Commandments were part of the Mosaic law.  So if you're gonna toss Deuteronomy, you'll have to toss the Ten (which, btw, are part of Deuteronomy as well as Exodus).

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Will you allow me to buy beer on sundays? That's really the main issue here.


No it isn't.
States might be able to pass such a law I would be against it. (the law)

----------


## Swordsmyth

> The Ten Commandments were part of the Mosaic law.  So if you're gonna toss Deuteronomy, you'll have to toss the Ten (which, btw, are part of Deuteronomy as well as Exodus).


No they were separate, Moses got the original 10 on the mount, the rest he got or made up himself later.
Christ told the woman to go and sin no more because adultery was still a sin.

----------


## Keith and stuff

> I just think of property taxes as the worst of all the taxes.  But I pay property taxes in NJ, so who am I to bitch and point fingers...


Yeah, I don't much like 'em there, which is why I pay none/almost none. And I do that without living in a NH community that is property tax free.

As for a whole state, AL tends to have some of the lowest property taxes in the nation. So likely all of the Senate candidates pay a lot less in property taxes than you do

----------


## William Tell

> Of the 3 candidates doing best in the polls, Mo is the least bad.


How do you figure? What do you like about Brooks? What about Roy Moore makes him worse than a supporter of undeclared wars and the Patriot Act? 




> There is a Ron Paul Republican in the race. If I lived in AL, that's the yard sign that would be in my yard and the person I'd vote for.


Go Pittman. I'm all for Ron Paulers winning. But in the event he loses as you agree is most likely go Roy Moore. And I am rooting for Moore + Pittman to make the runoff most certainly not Mo Brooks or Strange.

Most polls show it will be Moore vs Strange we will see. Of those two the choice is easy for sure.

----------


## William Tell

> LOL! You would sooner flap your arms and fly to the moon.


 A lot of people said the same about Trump becoming president. You like SCOTUS because they enforce humanistic socialism, someday the shoe may be on the other foot. That's the problem with giving unlimited power to an institution.

----------


## William Tell

> He is a good guy, hope my post wasn't misconstrued. And ya, I'll be waiting for that.


Ah well, hope you didn't hold your breath. But he + repped my post and said he defended me somehow, maybe by saying I am supporting a candidate who hates us all and liberty?

----------


## Sonny Tufts

> That's the problem with giving unlimited power to an institution.


SCOTUS doesn't have unlimited power.  It cannot enforce its own decisions but must rely on the Executive Branch to do so.  It has no control over its budget, which has to come from Congress.  And its decisions can be overturned by the legislature (if the issue is one of statutory interpretation) or by an amendment to the Constitution (if the issue is a constitutional one).

And it's not that I like SCOTUS -- in fact I disagree with many of its decisions, including Kelo and the upholding of Obamacare's individual mandate -- but I recognize that there has to be some institution that ultimately decides legal matters involving the Constitution and SCOTUS just happens to be that institution.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

http://www.lifezette.com/polizette/t...le-in-alabama/




> The Establishment Candidate: Sen. Luther Strange
> 
> "Big Luther," as his ads sometimes call him, is the nominal incumbent because he won the appointment to fill the seat after Sessions resigned to become attorney general. That has been both a blessing and a curse.
> 
> On the positive side, it has allowed Strange to build up a conservative voting record. He voted to repeal Obamacare and to confirm Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, for instance. Incumbency also has given Strange access to deep pockets. He has raised more than $3.2 million, more than the other nine candidates combined. The Senate Leadership Fund, a super PAC affiliated with Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), also has dumped nearly $2 million into the race in support of Strange and pounded his opponents with negative ads.
> ...
> The Tea Party Conservative: Mo Brooks
> 
> Brooks, who represents northern Alabama in the House of Representatives, is one of the most conservative members of Congress and a founding member of the House Freedom Caucus.
> ...

----------


## parocks

> "*Congress* *shall make no law* respecting an establishment of religion"
> 
> It says nothing about anyone but congress (you could try to stretch it to encompass the state legislature), and it prohibits nothing but the making of laws to establish a religion. If the people don't like a cultural/religious display in a court house they can through the legislature or the ballot box seek to change the judiciary or prohibit the display, the Feds have no say whatsoever.




If you ignore the actual words,  you could pretend that it says something entirely different.  


At least one state, Massachusetts I think, did actually have an established religion.  The actual meaning of that part of the 1st A is simply - if you, state, have an established religion, we, congress, won't hinder you.    And after 200 years,  they've interpreted it so it doesn't make any sense at all.

The point of that part of the 1st A is to allow Moore to put up the 10.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> If you ignore the actual words,  you could pretend that it says something entirely different.  
> 
> 
> At least one state, Massachusetts I think, did actually have an established religion.  The actual meaning of that part of the 1st A is simply - if you, state, have an established religion, we, congress, won't hinder you.    And after 200 years,  they've interpreted it so it doesn't make any sense at all.
> 
> The point of that part of the 1st A is to allow Moore to put up the 10.


Good point.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

Election Day. Fox News has been nice enough to cover the story by highlighting Trump's endorsement of Strange, and then having Karl Rove give his endorsement of Strange live.

----------


## William Tell

Yes Faux was asking Strange the tough questions like 


> There are a lot of qualified candidates, why do you think Trump chose you?

----------


## William Tell

Results coming in. 




> *Moore still ahead*
>  Moore is at 38 percent compared to Strange's 31 percent and Brooks'  22 percent. Brooks enjoyed a nice boost from his home base of Madison  County but still lags behind. Still waiting on voter-rich Shelby County.

----------


## William Tell

> Moore has 41 percent of the vote and Strange has 32 percent with 42  percent of precincts reporting, with Rep. Mo Brooks trailing at 19  percent. If no candidate gets 50 percent of the vote, the top two will  advance to a primary runoff on Sept. 26.


 http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...lection-241665

----------


## Brian4Liberty

Wait till the run-off. The establishment may make this the most expensive Senate race in history. How much can they smear (or set-up) Moore?

----------


## donnay

> No they were separate, Moses got the original 10 on the mount, the rest he got or made up himself later.
> Christ told the woman to go and sin no more because adultery was still a sin.


Jesus told her to go and sin no more, because the scribes and Pharisees just brought the woman.  Jesus was pointing out their hypocrisy.  It takes two to tango.  Also, Moses didn't make up any of the 10 Commandments they were all given from God.


Exodus 20:1 - 20:26
1 And *God spake all these words*, saying,..

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Jesus told her to go and sin no more, because the scribes and Pharisees just brought the woman.  Jesus was pointing out their hypocrisy.  It takes two to tango.  Also, Moses didn't make up any of the 10 Commandments they were all given from God.
> 
> 
> Exodus 20:1 - 20:26
> 1 And *God spake all these words*, saying,..


You misread my post, the 10 came from GOD, but Josephus tells us that Moses added the rest of the law a little bit at a time later, some of it also came from GOD but Christ himself repudiated Moses allowing divorce, much of the rest of the law is also clearly not divine and was Moses opinion.
Moses was not exactly perfect he defied GOD on several occasions and was barred from entering the promised land.

----------


## William Tell

> Wait till the run-off. The establishment may make this the most expensive Senate race in history. How much can they smear (or set-up) Moore?


It will take a lot. There are 67 counties in Alabama. One county hasn't come in yet. Brooks won 2. Strange won 5. Moore won the rest. If everyone who voted Moore shows back up for him he wins. Luther will need high turnout from the dense urban counties or else Moore swamps him.

----------


## donnay

> You misread my post, the 10 came from GOD, but Josephus tells us that Moses added the rest of the law a little bit at a time later, some of it also came from GOD but Christ himself repudiated Moses allowing divorce, much of the rest of the law is also clearly not divine and was Moses opinion.
> Moses was not exactly perfect he defied GOD on several occasions and was barred from entering the promised land.




God is a divorcee.

Jeremiah 3:8
And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> God is a divorcee.
> 
> Jeremiah 3:8
> And I saw, when for all the causes whereby backsliding Israel committed adultery I had put her away, and given her a bill of divorce; yet her treacherous sister Judah feared not, but went and played the harlot also.


Metaphor, GOD speaks to people in their own terms so they will understand.

*Mark
Chapter 10* 1 And  he arose from thence, and cometh into the coasts of Judaea by the  farther side of Jordan: and the people resort unto him again; and, as he  was wont, he taught them again.
2 And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away _his_ wife? tempting him.
3 And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you?
4 And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put _her_ away.
5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.
6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
7 For this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife;
8 And they twain shall be one flesh: so then they are no more twain, but one flesh.
9 What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
10 And in the house his disciples asked him again of the same _matter_.
11 And he saith unto them, Whosoever shall put away his wife, and marry another, committeth adultery against her.
12 And if a woman shall put away her husband, and be married to another, she committeth adultery.

----------


## donnay

> Metaphor, GOD speaks to people in their own terms so they will understand.
> 
> *Mark
> Chapter 10* 1 And  he arose from thence, and cometh into the coasts of Judaea by the  farther side of Jordan: and the people resort unto him again; and, as he  was wont, he taught them again.
> 2 And the Pharisees came to him, and asked him, Is it lawful for a man to put away _his_ wife? tempting him.
> 3 And he answered and said unto them, What did Moses command you?
> 4 And they said, Moses suffered to write a bill of divorcement, and to put _her_ away.
> 5 And Jesus answered and said unto them, For the hardness of your heart he wrote you this precept.
> 6 But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female.
> ...


Yes but it is a forgivable sin since Jesus died for our sins.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Yes but it is a forgivable sin since Jesus died for our sins.


I never said it wasn't.
If you look at how this discussion started you will see that my point was that Christians are not bound by the harsh "Law of Moses" the my opponent tried to stick us with.

----------


## Mikezelot

Let's try and stay on topic guys. 

Is this Moore guy a liberty politician? I don't know much about him.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Let's try and stay on topic guys. 
> 
> Is this Moore guy a liberty politician? I don't know much about him.


He is much better than Strange.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Let's try and stay on topic guys. 
> 
> Is this Moore guy a liberty politician? I don't know much about him.


TradCon mostly. Sorry about the wall o text, format fail.

https://www.roymoore.org/Positions/

Judge Roy Moore's Position on National Issues, 2017
Economy
Lower taxes, smaller government, and less spending will reduce the deficit and enable economic growth and a truly "stimulated" economy.
I believe in the reduction of taxes at all levels, and a need to reform the tax system by studying and implementing a "flat tax" or a "fair tax," which is a tax on goods and services purchased instead of a tax on income.
To paraphrase an old saying, the only two things in life that are certain are death and taxes, but the truth is we are being taxed to death while our businesses are failing and our economy continues to suffer.
We must return American manufacturing to our Country by rescinding unfair "free trade" agreements which have severely damaged our economy through loss of jobs and skill development. The phrase "Made in America" should mean something again.
We should cut the deficit and balance the budget using accurate data unlike budget projections used by past administrations.
Constitution
As a former Judge and Chief Justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, I know that the Constitution of the United States is the Supreme Law of the Land and all officials, state and federal, Legislative, Executive, and Judicial are bound thereby. All actions of state and federal officials must conform to the Constitution which should only be changed by amendments of the people, not decisions of activist judges. I support impeachment of judges and justices who knowingly and intentionally violate that principle.
Separation of Powers, Checks and Balances, States' Rights, and our Bill of Rights are integral parts of the Constitution which we must observe.
Immigration
We must stop the flow of illegal aliens across both our northern and southern borders. Open borders are a threat to our national security and to our economy.
We must allow willing states (like Arizona) to protect the health, safety, and welfare of their citizens, and use our own military to protect our border. If a wall is our only option, then we should build it immediately.
Health Care
We do not need socialized medicine which will ultimately lead to loss of quality and affordability of heath care, as well as a loss of access to the latest medical technology. Obamacare should be completely repealed as soon as possible.
Businesses should receive tax credits for employee health care coverage, and health insurance should be available between the states for competition and quality care.
Churches and charitable organizations should be encouraged to help the needy and poor.
Military
As a former military officer, Vietnam veteran, and graduate of the United States Military Academy at West Point, I believe in a strong military defense, and I will be a vocal advocate for the men and women who now serve in the Armed Forces.
More funding should be available to develop a missile defense system and to provide our Navy, Air Force, Army, Marines, and Coast Guard with the most modern technology including weapon systems.
Homosexuality should be against military policy as was the law prior to Bill Clinton.
We should not be entangled in foreign wars merely at the whim and caprice of a President.
Energy
To gain independence from foreign oil, we need to foster development of our own natural resources involving nuclear, solar, wind, and fossil fuels. Coal mining and oil drilling should be encouraged, subject only to reasonable regulations.
Education
The federal government should not hamper the educational systems of the states as there is no authority for federal involvement under the Constitution.
Programs like "Common Core" should be eliminated, and the development of educational programs returned to the people under state authority.
Competition between the states and freedom of various educational structures should be available to parents who are charged with the responsibility to teach their children.
Charter schools, vouchers, tax credits, home schooling, Christian schools, and technical training should be encouraged.
Foreign Affairs
America should serve as a good example to other nations.
We must treat sovereign nations as we would want to be treated and stand with allies to protect and preserve our national security.
Respect for our strength is the best defense. "Walk softly and carry a big stick" is and should be our guide.
We should not be subject to UN control and direction and should not rely on, or support, UN treaties like LOST (Law of the Sea Treaty) and the Convention on the Rights of the Child. Such treaties only undermine our sovereignty as a nation, as does the very presence of the United Nations on our soil.
We must maintain a strong nuclear defense and not rely on nuclear reduction treaties which leave us vulnerable to foreign powers.
Family
As a husband, father, and grandfather, I know the importance of the future we leave to our posterity.
A strong family based on marriage between one man and one woman is and should remain our only guide and model. I oppose abortion, same-sex marriage, civil unions, and all other threats to the traditional family order.
Federal funding for Planned Parenthood or any form of abortion should be stopped.
We must remain a moral and virtuous people, "One Nation under God." I support freedom of worship and the recognition of that God upon Whom we have always relied in peace and war.

----------


## Anti Federalist

And a "law and order" republican.

----------


## William Tell

Lol tell me this atheist progressive actually voted Roy Moore because Trump. That would be too good. https://twitter.com/BishopSavan/stat...14888076247040

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Lol tell me this atheist progressive actually voted Roy Moore because Trump. That would be too good. https://twitter.com/BishopSavan/stat...14888076247040


Maybe that is why Dump did it, his REAL base wasn't going to be fooled into voting for Strange and his enemies would vote against him, plus he gets bonus points from the establishment wing for the endorsement.

----------


## misterx

I'll tell you one thing, he's not afraid to stand up to the establishment, and he doesn't back down like Trump has.

----------


## Sonny Tufts

Moore came in first in the primary and will face Strange in a September runoff.  He's apparently the favorite to win.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/16/o...e.html?mcubz=0

If he gets to the Senate he'll likely have a stroke the first time a Muslim or Hindu gives the invocation as Guest Chaplain.

----------


## William Tell

> *Luther Strange in Deep Trouble After Roy Moore Broke His Ceiling*Judge Roy Moore and incumbent Republican Sen. Luther Strange will advance to the runoff on September 26 for the U.S. Senate in Alabama. With nearly all of the precincts reporting, Judge Moore received 38.9% of the vote, or 162,570 total votes, while Sen. Strange earned 32.8%, or 136,910 total votes.
> 
> Lets get right to the point.
> 
> Judge Moore broke his so-called ceiling and Sen. Strange is in big trouble. With President Donald Trumps endorsement, the power of the incumbency and Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kty., the appointed senator couldnt even muster the support of a third of Republican primary voters in Alabama.
> 
> Judging by President Trumps post-primary tweet, he learned Tuesday night what Barack Obama never did learn: Just because voters support you, doesnt mean theyll vote for an Establishment candidate they dont like and dont trust just because you told them to.
> 
> Private polling data conducted by PPD late last week indicated that nearly two-thirds of voters who planned to back Rep. Brooks would vote for Judge Moore against Sen. Strange in the runoff. Given we underestimated Judge Moore by several points, it is entirely possible some of those voters already made that strategic voting decision.
> ...


 continued https://www.peoplespunditdaily.com/n...e-his-ceiling/

----------


## William Tell

> A new poll shows former Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore with a commanding lead over Luther Strange, the Washington establishment backed candidate, heading into the GOP primary runoff for the Alabama U.S. Senate seat left open this year.
> 
> The poll from JMC Analytics provided to Breitbart News ahead of its public release shows Moore with 51 percent, a majority, supporting him, while Strange trails nearly 20 points behind with just 32 percent—and 17 percent are undecided. Moore’s commanding lead comes after he outperformed polls to finish around 39 percent in a multi-way primary this past Tuesday. Strange finished the first round of voting with just under 33 percent, and this poll seems to indicate that Moore is the only candidate gaining more votes while Strange is stuck with a ceiling of what he got on primary day before the runoff.


 http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...uther-strange/

----------


## Swordsmyth

> http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...uther-strange/


Lex Luther Strange will not be missed.

----------


## William Tell

We'll see how much money McConnell wants to flush into the swamp's septic system.

----------


## Swordsmyth

*Second poll shows Moore with big lead in Alabama Senate race*http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/347686-poll-moore-up-by-12-points-in-alabama-senate-race

----------


## Origanalist

Roy Moore won’t support Mitch McConnell as Senate majority leader  




> Former Alabama state Chief Justice Roy Moore tells Conservative Review that should he successfully win his Senate race, he would vote against Senator Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., remaining Senate majority leader.


https://www.conservativereview.com/a...undefined.uxfs

----------


## William Tell

Sen. Trip Pittman, the primary candidate who supported Ron Paul for president has now enthusiastically endorsed Judge Roy Moore.http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/201..._roy_moor.html

----------


## Zap!

Mo Brooks, who came in third place with nearly 20%, needs to endorse Roy Moore ASAP.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Mo Brooks, who came in third place with nearly 20%, needs to endorse Roy Moore ASAP.


Moore probably already has his voters.

I believe Bannon endorsed Moore recently too.

----------


## Zap!

House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows endorsed former Alabama Chief Justice Roy Moore today:

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/0...alabama-242380

----------


## William Tell

Moore stands with Rand.

----------


## Zap!

Rep. Mo Brooks just endorsed Moore!

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/rundown/...senate-runoff/

----------


## AuH20

They are scared to death of Moore inciting a brushfire that will spread to other primaries. That's why they are so adamant about spending money in Alabama.

----------


## AuH20



----------


## AuH20

Turtle is going down tonight in a big way. Time to call up the corporate donors and apologize!

----------


## Zippyjuan

> http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...ort-president/
> 
> 
> Good words. Constitution over personal politics.


Moore favors his religion over the Constitution. No separation of Church and State.

----------


## AuH20



----------


## georgiaboy

Here's to ya, Judge Moore.

----------


## EBounding



----------


## spudea

Doesn't look good for Moore, refusing to debate his opponent, now this.  He's gonna have to fight like hell.  Trump can't exactly swoop in and save him now with these disturbing allegations.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Doesn't look good for Moore, refusing to debate his opponent, now this.  He's gonna have to fight like hell.  Trump can't exactly swoop in and save him now with these disturbing allegations.


I'm not worried.

----------


## specsaregood

> Doesn't look good for Moore, refusing to debate his opponent, now this.  He's gonna have to fight like hell.  Trump can't exactly swoop in and save him now with these disturbing allegations.


I must have missed it, what disturbing allegations?  Is Moore a closeted tranny that has a secret career taking part in animal porn?

----------


## KEEF

> I must have missed it, what disturbing allegations?  Is Moore a closeted tranny that has a secret career taking part in animal porn?


Just read a tweet from evil McCain about the allegations... I guess he tried to hook up with teenagers back when he was in his 30s.

----------


## AuH20

Umm. Why didn't this come out during the primary?

----------


## William Tell

> Umm. Why didn't this come out during the primary?


Or any of his other bitterly contested races of the last 3 decades?

----------


## phill4paul

> Umm. Why didn't this come out during the primary?


  Do you have to ask? This gets the double digit Republican out of the race. Rules don't allow for another Republican to take his place this late in the game. Democrat wins. Why else would McConnel and McCain be asking him to step down?

----------


## William Tell

Not sure if this is true but I keep seeing things like this. https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DOPL2LBUQAEy6H5.jpg

----------


## anaconda

My only expectations of federal legislators is that they vote per the constitution. He might actually do it much of the time.

----------


## William Tell

> "I stand by the interview I did with (reporters) Stephanie  (McCrummen) and Beth (Reinhard)," Gibson told AL.com, *saying she had no  further statement beyond what she told the Post reporters.*
> 
> 
>  Corfman's son, Garner Polston, *referred AL.com to Corfman's attorney*  but said, "I can say that my mom has no reason to lie about this."


 OK? http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/201...y_im_sure.html

----------


## specsaregood

> Just read a tweet from evil McCain about the allegations... I guess he tried to hook up with teenagers back when he was in his 30s.


Oooooh how disturbing.

----------


## Swordsmyth

*Bannon compares Moore allegations to Trump 'Access Hollywood' tape*"By the way, the Bezos Amazon Washington Post that dropped that dime on Donald Trump is the same Bezos Amazon Washington that dropped a dime this afternoon on Judge Roy Moore," Bannon said Thursday.
"Is that a coincidence?" he asked.



http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...cess-hollywood

----------


## anaconda

What's the statute of limitations on these allegations?

----------


## anaconda



----------


## Anti Federalist

> Now if this had been a 30 year old male democrat candidate dating male teenagers, the press would have been silent.


And what's wrong with that, you white cisgender transphobic $#@!lord?

Love is Love.

----------


## phill4paul

> What's the statute of limitations on these allegations?


  They ran out long ago. His wife said they will sue the Post for defamation.

----------


## William Tell

Washington post act III.




> *After the Roy Moore allegations, can Democrats really win in Alabama?**Doug Jones has a shot at winning — if the Democratic Party gets behind him.*

----------


## fedupinmo

Interesting how they bring up the 17 year olds... they are over the age of consent in Alabama, and were then as well.

----------


## William Tell

Matt Drudge apparently hates Moore. He barely covered the primary and all his headlines were negative. Now he's going all out to destroy Moore and Bannon even putting up a headline from a homosexual site. Wonder if Matt's alleged personal preferences and Roy's outspokenness about morality are a part of that.

----------


## Tywysog Cymru

People get really upset when someone says something bad about a certain sexual behavior.

----------


## specsaregood

> Matt Drudge apparently hates Moore. He barely covered the primary and all his headlines were negative. Now he's going all out to destroy Moore and Bannon even putting up a headline from a homosexual site. Wonder if Matt's alleged personal preferences and Roy's outspokenness about morality are a part of that.


They are sure pulling out all stops against him now, the GOP establishment and the liberals united...
makes me want to support moore just for that reason alone.

----------


## Swordsmyth

*Republican Senatorial Committee Cuts Off Roy Moore's Funding* http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-1...and-step-aside

----------


## Swordsmyth

As pressure for Moore to step aside mounts, Axios is  reporting that Sen. Mike Lee of Utah has asked Roy Moore's team to stop  using Lee's image on their campaign fundraising materials. While it's  too late for Moore to be removed from the ballot, but responses like  those from Lee show he's quickly losing support from the GOP.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-1...and-step-aside

----------


## William Tell

https://twitter.com/crusher614/statu...58118062845953

----------


## William Tell

https://twitter.com/RightWingAngel/s...52877582163968

----------


## William Tell

Joe Biden's sign language interpreter?

----------


## Swordsmyth

*Washington Post Reporter Behind Roy Moore Hit Piece Has History Of Writing Fake Checks*http://gotnews.com/breaking-washington-post-reporter-behind-roy-moore-hit-piece-history-writing-fake-checks/

----------


## William Tell

> *Republican Senatorial Committee Cuts Off Roy Moore's Funding*
> 
> http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-1...and-step-aside


Meh. He raised his money without them. SLF refused to spend money to support him anyway after he beat Strange. If Moore wins McConnell better kiss himself goodbye. This is the dirtiest campaign I've ever seen.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Meh. He raised his money without them. SLF refused to spend money to support him anyway after he beat Strange. If Moore wins McConnell better kiss himself goodbye. This is the dirtiest campaign I've ever seen.


I'm not worried.

----------


## William Tell

> *Washington Post Reporter Behind Roy Moore Hit Piece Has History Of Writing Fake Checks*
> 
> http://gotnews.com/breaking-washingt...g-fake-checks/


She's pretty happy with herself. Look what she just retweeted. https://twitter.com/MichaelMossC/sta...56762010984448

----------


## William Tell

> *One of Roy Moore's accusers worked as interpreter for Hillary Clinton campaign*One of the women who said Senate candidate Roy Moore pursued her while she was in high school worked for Hillary Clinton's campaign as a sign language interpreter, according to videos and documents posted online.
> 
> 
>  Deborah Wesson Gibson, owner of the interpreting company Signs of  Excellence, provided services for Clinton during her 2016 campaign, as  well as working with former Democratic Vice President Joe Biden during  other events. Photos posted to her company's social media site show her providing sign language services for Sen. Patrick Murphy and Sen. Bill Nelson, both Florida Democrats.
> 
> 
>  Gibson's company has offices in Florida and Alabama, providing sign  language interpretation to businesses, politicians, governments and  more.
> 
> 
> ...


 http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/201...cusers_wo.html

----------


## Swordsmyth

*Roy Moore Denies "Completely False" Teen Sex-Abuse Allegations, Has "Evidence Of Collusion"*http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-11-10/roy-moore-denies-completely-false-teen-sex-abuse-allegations-has-evidence-collusion

----------


## phill4paul

> http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/201...cusers_wo.html


  This has all the signs of a set up to me. I don't particularly care for the guy but I hope he sues the hell out of them, especially if he gets evidence of collusion.

----------


## specsaregood

> This has all the signs of a set up to me. I don't particularly care for the guy but I hope he sues the hell out of them, especially if he gets evidence of collusion.


Obviously a setup.  And what might arguably make it worse is it appears to be a setup orchestrated by his own party.

----------


## Swordsmyth

*Gov. John Kasich: GOP must not support Alabama's Roy Moore*https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2017/11/10/gov-john-kasich-gop-must-not-support-alabamas-roy-moore/852034001/


*Alabama State Rep. Says Roy Moore's Accusers Should Be Prosecuted*https://www.yahoo.com/news/alabama-state-rep-says-roy-165329477.html


*2 GOP Senators Drop Endorsements Of Roy Moore*While some GOP politicians have said Moore should step aside, Sens. Steve Daines (Mont.) and Mike Lee (Utah) are the first Moore backers to do so. 
Daines made his announcement on Twitter.
 I am pulling my endorsement and support for Roy Moore for U.S. Senate.
— Steve Daines (@SteveDaines) November 10, 2017Lee  revealed his decision to a writer for The Washingtonian, citing both  the accusations of Moore’s misconduct and his response to the  allegations.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/2-gop-sen...232511304.html

----------


## phill4paul

> *Gov. John Kasich: GOP must not support Alabama's Roy Moore*https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2017/11/10/gov-john-kasich-gop-must-not-support-alabamas-roy-moore/852034001/


  Establishment.





> *Alabama State Rep. Says Roy Moore's Accusers Should Be Prosecuted*https://www.yahoo.com/news/alabama-state-rep-says-roy-165329477.html


  They will. In civil court.





> *2 GOP Senators Drop Endorsements Of Roy Moore*While some GOP politicians have said Moore should step aside, Sens. Steve Daines (Mont.) and Mike Lee (Utah) are the first Moore backers to do so. 
> Daines made his announcement on Twitter.
>  I am pulling my endorsement and support for Roy Moore for U.S. Senate.
> — Steve Daines (@SteveDaines) November 10, 2017Lee  revealed his decision to a writer for The Washingtonian, citing both  the accusations of Moore’s misconduct and his response to the  allegations.
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/news/2-gop-sen...232511304.html


  Establishment wanna be's.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

Neoconservative dirty tricks. McCain jumped right on it like a good little doggy.

----------


## FSP-Rebel

Mitch dumped $30 mill on Moore in the primary and only now does this come up.? Next, write-in campaign for Strange to dilute GOP votes when this defamation attempt fails.

----------


## Swordsmyth

Per WaPo: 
 

_While  reporting a story in Alabama about supporters of Moore’s Senate  campaign, a Post reporter heard that Moore allegedly had sought  relationships with teenage girls. Over the ensuing three weeks, two Post  reporters contacted and interviewed the four women._Levin posed the following questions:

 How did the WaPo reporter know there were four women, who they were, and how to contact them? How is it that the reporter's anonymous source, who they bumped into, knew about the four women *who don’t know each other and have never met*, and knew each woman's story and contact information? Why  hasn’t any of this been reported in Moore’s 38 years in politics? And  why now – a month before an important election to fill Jeff Sessions’  senate seat?



More at: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-1...everal-pastors

----------


## specsaregood

> *Gov. John Kasich: GOP must not support Alabama's Roy Moore*https://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/politics/2017/11/10/gov-john-kasich-gop-must-not-support-alabamas-roy-moore/852034001/
> *Alabama State Rep. Says Roy Moore's Accusers Should Be Prosecuted*https://www.yahoo.com/news/alabama-state-rep-says-roy-165329477.html
> 
> *2 GOP Senators Drop Endorsements Of Roy Moore*While some GOP politicians have said Moore should step aside, Sens. Steve Daines (Mont.) and Mike Lee (Utah) are the first Moore backers to do so. 
> Daines made his announcement on Twitter.
>  I am pulling my endorsement and support for Roy Moore for U.S. Senate.
> — Steve Daines (@SteveDaines) November 10, 2017Lee  revealed his decision to a writer for The Washingtonian, citing both  the accusations of Moore’s misconduct and his response to the  allegations.
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/news/2-gop-sen...232511304.html


Next, they'll start smearing anybody that endorsed him that haven't actively taken it back already.  I wonder if any of these sleaze bags have had the audacity to contact Randal and suggest he drop his endorsement.

----------


## phill4paul

> [FONT="]Per WaPo: [/FONT]
>  
> 
> [FONT="]_While  reporting a story in Alabama about supporters of Moore’s Senate  campaign, a Post reporter heard that Moore allegedly had sought  relationships with teenage girls. Over the ensuing three weeks, two Post  reporters contacted and interviewed the four women._[/FONT]Levin posed the following questions:
> 
>  How did the WaPo reporter know there were four women, who they were, and how to contact them? How is it that the reporter's anonymous source, who they bumped into, knew about the four women *who don’t know each other and have never met*, and knew each woman's story and contact information? Why  hasn’t any of this been reported in Moore’s 38 years in politics? And  why now – a month before an important election to fill Jeff Sessions’  senate seat?
> 
> 
> 
> More at: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-1...everal-pastors


  Wow. Even myself, who is not a reporter, thought of these questions. Who reports on the reporters?

----------


## AuH20

The Swamp has sunk to new lows and I thought they couldn't go lower than the McDaniel smear campaign.

----------


## Krugminator2

Moore is a guilty.  Conspiracies with this many people who have detailed and a number of people with no reason to lie just don't happen. This was apparently something that was known months ago and is only dropping now right before the election.

His interview with Hannity was apparently a  dumpster fire.  

He should drop out on the condition that Mo Brooks is his replacement. That sticks it to McConnell' s guy Strange. The voters won't feel as disenfranchised and all the people like Romney who are acting holier than thou will be happy with Brooks vs the alternative of Moore.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Wow. Even myself, who is not a reporter, thought of these questions. Who reports on the reporters?


It sounds like the kind of story a toddler would make up to explain having a cookie they shouldn't.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Moore is a guilty.  Conspiracies with this many people who have detailed and a number of people with no reason to lie just don't happen. This was apparently something that was known months ago and is only dropping now right before the election.
> 
> His interview with Hannity was apparently a  dumpster fire.  
> 
> He should drop out on the condition that Mo Brooks is his replacement. That sticks it to McConnell' s guy Strange. The voters won't feel as disenfranchised and all the people like Romney who are acting holier than thou will be happy with Brooks vs the alternative of Moore.


In the first place this is obviously a lie, and in the second it is too late to change the ballots.

----------


## spudea

> Moore is a guilty.  Conspiracies with this many people who have detailed and a number of people with no reason to lie just don't happen. This was apparently something that was known months ago and is only dropping now right before the election.
> 
> His interview with Hannity was apparently a  dumpster fire.  
> 
> He should drop out on the condition that Mo Brooks is his replacement. That sticks it to McConnell' s guy Strange. The voters won't feel as disenfranchised and all the people like Romney who are acting holier than thou will be happy with Brooks vs the alternative of Moore.


According to Alabama law its too late to replace Moore on the ballot.  3 of the 4 women stated he was respectful and the actions only involved hugging and kissing, these were the older teenagers, 17 or 18, and their parents knew about it.  Their stories actually refute and discredit the misconduct alleged by the 4th woman.  Your assumption this woman has no reason to lie is unimaginative.

----------


## Krugminator2

> 3 of the 4 women stated he was respectful and the actions only involved hugging and kissing, these were the older teenagers, 17 or 18, and their parents knew about it.


It was 16 and 18. 

Setting aside all other accusations  about the 14 year old, he is clearly lying when he says he can't remember if he "dated" teenage girls in his 30's. That isn't something you forget. So why would he lie about something that he can clearly remember?




> When asked by Hannity if he had any recollection of dating teenage girls when he was in his mid-thirties,





> Moore said “it would out of my customary behavior,” but stopped short of denying that he did. At another point in the interview he said he didn’t “generally” remember pursuing girls that young.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> According to Alabama law it’s too late to replace Moore on the ballot.  3 of the 4 women stated he was respectful and the actions only involved hugging and kissing, these were the older teenagers, 17 or 18, and their parents knew about it.  Their stories actually refute and discredit the misconduct alleged by the 4th woman.  Your assumption this woman has no reason to lie is unimaginative.


See, that was his mistake.

If he had buggered little boys with a baseball bat, it have been all good.

----------


## Swordsmyth

*Mitt Romney Tells Roy Moore To Step Aside: 'I Believe Leigh Corfman'*https://www.yahoo.com/news/mitt-romney-tells-roy-moore-154710491.html




You can tell a lot about a man by his enemies, this whole incident is making me like Moore even "Moore"

----------


## Anti Federalist

*PHOTOS: MOORE ACCUSER A DEMOCRAT ACTIVIST*

https://www.infowars.com/photos-moor...crat-activist/



*Gold* from the comments:

Dr. Nick Riviera • an hour ago

Right now, we’re lookin’ at about two generations of women, indoctrinated with and deluded by feminism. To a marked extent, they’ve managed to hijack the education system, the judicial system, the media, and Hollywood. They grew up with the misguided notion that they were surrounded by misogynists and sexists, so they had to fight for “equality”. 

The thing is, their “leaders” had no interest in equality. 

The goal was superiority. 

Their preferred methods included the destruction of marriage, abortion on demand, spurious lawsuits, and sociopathic chaos. 

*The only hurdle they failed to plan for was an unintended consequence – rejection. Real men with any sense at all want nothing to do with them. They simply don’t want to associate with them, work next to them, date them, marry them, or have sex with them. The result is an idiotic sub-culture of sexually frustrated feminazis who moronically believe that screaming helplessly at the sky will somehow benefit society.*

----------


## Swordsmyth

*White House dismisses Roy Moore claims as “mere allegation”*https://www.salon.com/2017/11/10/white-house-dismisses-roy-moore-claims-as-mere-allegation/

----------


## Swordsmyth

I expect something like this to happen the next time Rand runs for anything.

----------


## Swordsmyth

Rep.  Barbara Comstock, R-Va., likened Moore to Hollywood producer Harvey  Weinstein, former Rep. Anthony Weiner and former Fox News executive  Roger Ailes, all men accused of sexual misconduct."The defense from some of his supporters is beyond disgusting," Comstock wrote. "Moore should not serve in the U.S. Senate."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/sexual-mi...-election.html

----------


## Swordsmyth

Add Thune to the list of back-stabbers:

Two Republican senators, John McCain and John Thune, said Moore   should step aside immediately, with McCain calling the   accusations "deeply disturbing and disqualifying."

http://www.businessinsider.com/sean-...ensual-2017-11

----------


## anaconda

I'll bet Moore wins by at least 7%. The MSM is giving us Hillary type talking points all over again.

----------


## phill4paul

As planned, there goes Moores double digit  lead...




> Poll Shows Alabama Race Tied After Allegations Against Roy Moore
> 
>   A new poll shows the Senate race in Alabama is now too close to call, following an accusation that Republican nominee Roy Moore pursued a sexual encounter with a 14-year-old girl in 1979.
> 
> Moore and Democrat Doug Jones are tied at 46% in the survey, which was conducted Thursday by Opinion Savvy and commissioned by Decision Desk HQ in the aftermath of a bombshell Washington Post report in which the accuser, now 53, went on record with her story.
> 
> The results also suggested that a write-in campaign by another Republican could tip the seat to Democrats — a prospect that once seemed far-fetched in deep-red Alabama. A three-way race — with Moore, Jones, and interim Sen. Luther Strange as a write-in candidate — would favor Jones with roughly 44% of the vote, followed by Moore at 41%, and Strange at 12%.
> 
> The poll surveyed 515 likely voters by landline and mobile and has a margin of error of 4 points.


 https://www.buzzfeed.com/henrygomez/...YO#.lpb7xDoMWX

----------


## William Tell

AL dot come is using a clip from Colbert's show to say Alabama shouldn't elect Moore.

----------


## William Tell

> Innocent until proven guilty is for criminal convictions, not elections.  I believe Leigh Corfman. Her account is too serious to ignore. Moore is  unfit for office and should step aside. -Romney


So if some woman or man accuses Romney that's all it will take for him to be guilty and drop out of the Utah senate race.

----------


## William Tell

> *Alabama ABC Affiliate Can’t Find One Voter Who Believes WaPo Report About Roy Moore in Man-on-the-Street Segment*During a segment that aired on Friday’s broadcast of Birmingham, AL  ABC affiliate WBMA 33/40’s 5 p.m. local news, political reporter Lauren  Walsh sought out voters in Columbiana, AL to gauge their reactions to the Washington Post report  that alleged Republican U.S. Senate hopeful Roy Moore engaged in  inappropriate conduct with four teenage girls more than 34 years ago.
> 
> 
>   None of the respondents according to Walsh told her they believed the Post’s reporting.
> 
> 
>  “It’s hard to believe the events that transpired yesterday,” Gordon  Fluker of nearby Wilsonville, AL said to Walsh about the Washington Post  report.
> 
> 
> ...


 http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/...treet-segment/

----------


## Champ

The only thing I know with absolute certainty is that Moore has the correct enemies.

----------


## angelatc

> This has all the signs of a set up to me. I don't particularly care for the guy but I hope he sues the hell out of them, especially if he gets evidence of collusion.


I am going to wait and see.  I'm not a huge Moore fan so I'm not terribly invested here but there are witnesses of sorts who say the victims told them about it years ago.

----------


## Jamesiv1

> *The only hurdle they failed to plan for was an unintended consequence  rejection. Real men with any sense at all want nothing to do with them. They simply dont want to associate with them, work next to them, date them, marry them, or have sex with them. The result is an idiotic sub-culture of sexually frustrated feminazis who moronically believe that screaming helplessly at the sky will somehow benefit society.*


Truth. With laser-point accuracy.

----------


## donnay

> Next, they'll start smearing anybody that endorsed him that haven't actively taken it back already.  I wonder if any of these sleaze bags have had the audacity to contact Randal and suggest he drop his endorsement.


They aren't worried about Rand now, he is out of commission just like they planned.

They are going to go after anyone who is an ally for Trump.  I am not sure why a lot of people aren't seeing a coup forming here.

----------


## EBounding

This guy is doing a terrible job at denying it though.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> *EXCLUSIVE – Mother of Roy Moore Accuser: Washington Post Reporters Convinced My Daughter to Go Public*
> http://www.breitbart.com/big-journal...itbart+News%29


From the article:




> Corfman’s mother, Wells, told Breitbart News that reporters for the Washington Post convinced her daughter to give them an interview.
> 
> “She did not go to them,” said Wells. “They called her.”


So if this woman, and the other women, never came forward, and the WaPo had to "convince" them to tell their story, *how did the WaPo know which women to approach?* 

Did they just troll the whole state?

I'm not in Alabama, I'm not sure what to think of Moore, (wonder what he thinks of the good doctor?) but this is utter horse$#@! on the part of WaPo.

Hope they get sued blind.

----------


## specsaregood

> I'm not in Alabama, I'm not sure what to think of Moore, (wonder what he thinks of the good doctor?)


While I assume you meant Ron; but immediately after winning the primary Moore went on the usual trip to DC to meet with party members.  He didn't meet with the party "leaders" but instead had a private meeting with Randal.   That is encouraging in my book.

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/...-senate-243507



> Roy Moore rode into Washington this week to shore up his main constituency: Rebellious Republicans.
> 
> The GOP’s divisive nominee in the Alabama Senate race visited on Wednesday and Thursday with three of the most defiant Republican senators: Rand Paul of Kentucky, Ted Cruz of Texas and Mike Lee of Utah. He was expected to meet with House Freedom Caucus Chairman Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) later Thursday. And Moore was dining with conservative leaders Jim DeMint, the former senator from South Carolina and ex-president of The Heritage Foundation, and David McIntosh, the president of the Club for Growth, on Thursday evening, according to a source familiar with the gathering.

----------


## phill4paul



----------


## Anti Federalist

> While I assume you meant Ron; but immediately after winning the primary Moore went on the usual trip to DC to meet with party members.  He didn't meet with the party "leaders" but instead had a private meeting with Randal.   That is encouraging in my book.
> 
> https://www.politico.com/story/2017/...-senate-243507


Could have been either good doctor.

Thanks for posting that.

----------


## specsaregood

> Could have been either good doctor.
> 
> Thanks for posting that.


Randal endorsed Moore after that meeting, so he must have liked what he heard.

----------


## William Tell

> Randal endorsed Moore after that meeting, so he must have liked what he heard.


Especially on foreign policy.




> The lawmakers who have met with him say that Moore is unlikely to be  tamed. Instead he’s angling to to join the small clutch of lawmakers  willing to take lonely stands on the Senate floor against McConnell, and  invite torrents of blame from the establishment.
> *
> “He’s less likely to be beholden to Washington-think, the idea that we  can’t do anything. I think he’ll plan on coming and trying to change  things. And I think we do need change,” Paul said of Moore, whom he’s  spoken with multiple times. “He agrees with me that foreign aid is not  constitutional. And there are a lot of things like that where we will be  able to find common ground. And he doesn’t like Graham-Cassidy,” the  Senate GOP's leading Obamacare repeal proposal, which fell short last  week.*


https://www.politico.com/story/2017/...-senate-243507

----------


## William Tell

Now they are rolling out Gloria Allred... come on guys.




> An Alabama woman is expected to disclose allegations of sexual  assault against Roy Moore during a press conference today in New York.
> 
> 
>  New York Attorney Gloria Allred is holding a press conference at 1:30  p.m. CST (2:30 p.m. EST) with the new accuser, whose name hasn't been  made public. The woman alleges that Moore, Alabama's Republican  candidate for U.S. Senate, assaulted her when he was a minor.
> 
> 
>  "The new accuser wishes to state what she alleges Roy Moore did to  her without her consent," a news release from the lawyer states.


 hxxp://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/11/roy_moore_alabama_sex_claims.html

----------


## euphemia

Don't let previous stories about Weinstein and the rest weaponize the accusations against Moore.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Don't let previous stories about Weinstein and the rest weaponize the accusations against Moore.


The whole sexual misconduct thing has worked it's way into mass hysteria. Just ask Sulu.

Can't imagine they would do this purely in prep for Judge Moore, but there probably is a political motive. It's reminiscent of the pre-Hillary 2016 campaign gender wars they tried to gin up. No doubt they think they can take down more men with a witch hunt like this. 

Kind of funny that Weinstein is a friend of Hillary. Hillary is not the woman they want to push though. They probably want to take her out of the running at this point. There is always Elizabeth Warren or Michelle Obama, but don't forget Kamala Harris. They have been pushing her hard.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Now they are rolling out Gloria Allred... come on guys.
> 
>  hxxp://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/11/roy_moore_alabama_sex_claims.html


Here's how it works. They put out the first story with a few women, and they know that afterwards, more will come out, either valid or just those who just want to jump on the bandwagon. Crazies and political operatives more than welcome. 

Do it all a month before election, so that there's no way to verify anything (or go through any kind of due process). All will be forgotten the day after the election.

----------


## georgiaboy

And this will continue until December 12.  Uggghh.

My hope rests in the good people of Alabama.

----------


## euphemia

> Can't imagine they would do this purely in prep for Judge Moore, but there probably is a political motive.


They definitely have motive, and the opportunity was practically handed to them.  I don't know if this is premeditated, but it is definitely opportunistic.

----------


## William Tell

Yes! 


> The person who should step aside is @*SenateMajLdr* Mitch McConnell. He has failed conservatives and must be replaced. #*DrainTheSwamp*


https://twitter.com/MooreSenate/stat...28259035082756

----------


## Swordsmyth

"I believe the women," McConnell, R-Ky., said Monday in response to a  question at an appearance in Louisville. And he said flatly that Moore  should step aside for another GOP candidate.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/moore-thr...-election.html

----------


## phill4paul

> "I believe the women," McConnell, R-Ky., said Monday in response to a  question at an appearance in Louisville. And he said flatly that Moore  should step aside for another GOP candidate.
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/news/moore-thr...-election.html


   Need some women men to lob some accusations against McConnell.

----------


## phill4paul

Just finishing watching the live Allred accuser presser. Beverly Young Nelson was a pretty, young, 16 yr. old that worked at a diner. She claims he used to touch the end of her hair as she walked by and compliment her looks. She claims that after the diner closed, and her boyfriend was late, Moore offered her a ride. Claims he drove to a dark area behind the diner, fondled her and tried to force her head to his crotch. She put up a fight, he cautioned her not to say anything as no one would believe her, pushed her out the door and left "burning rubber." The "smoking gun" is that he signed her yearbook. Paraphrased ""To a sweeter more beautiful girl, I could not say Merry Christmas.", Love Roy Moore, DA and the date Dec. 22, 1977." She remembered the type of shoe he was wearing, but not his type of car. Allred held up a portrait from a theme park showing how pretty she was at the time along with showing her yearbook photo.

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/201...ex_claims.html

----------


## sparebulb

I have no clue what to think about this woman's claim about Moore, but why should we take any person represented by Gloria Allred as being credible, considering her track record.

----------


## phill4paul

> I have no clue what to think about this woman's claim about Moore, but why should we take any person represented by Gloria Allred as being credible, considering her track record.


  It's just more "he said/she said" with no proof. Why, of all possible persons, would this accuser specifically search out Gloria Allred?

----------


## phill4paul

> It's just more "he said/she said" with no proof. Why, of all possible persons, would this accuser specifically search out Gloria Allred?


  I think at this point, if Moore wanted to seem clean in the face of these accusations that perhaps *he* should call for a Senate hearing and demand that _all_ accusers be subpoena'd. If he truly is innocent then that should scare the bejuses out of some accusers if they did it for financial gain.

----------


## phill4paul

Allred at presser..."And I noticed he hasn't denied my client..."   Well, no $#@!. She just now made the accusation.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Allred at presser..."And I noticed he hasn't denied my client..."   Well, no $#@!. She just now made the accusation.


He also has denied ANY misconduct EVER, so I think that covers her client.

----------


## sparebulb

If these accusers are telling the truth, we are left with the impression that Moore is the Don Knotts or Mr. Bean of attempted serial rapists.

----------


## sparebulb

This would really be proof.

----------


## spudea

> Just finishing watching the live Allred accuser presser. Beverly Young Nelson was a pretty, young, 16 yr. old that worked at a diner. She claims he used to touch the end of her hair as she walked by and compliment her looks. She claims that after the diner closed, and her boyfriend was late, Moore offered her a ride. Claims he drove to a dark area behind the diner, fondled her and tried to force her head to his crotch. She put up a fight, he cautioned her not to say anything as no one would believe her, pushed her out the door and left "burning rubber." The "smoking gun" is that he signed her yearbook. Paraphrased ""To a sweeter more beautiful girl, I could not say Merry Christmas.", Love Roy Moore, DA and the date Dec. 22, 1977." She remembered the type of shoe he was wearing, but not his type of car. Allred held up a portrait from a theme park showing how pretty she was at the time along with showing her yearbook photo.
> 
> http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/201...ex_claims.html


So she knew him as a creeper before getting in his car, then why go with him instead of waiting for her boyfriend???  This doesn't add up at all. Typical Gloria Allred.

----------


## phill4paul

> So she knew him as a creeper before getting in his car, then why go with him instead of waiting for her boyfriend???  This doesn't add up at all. Typical Gloria Allred.


  Yeah, no $#@!. Also, back in those days, most down home diner establishment owners stuck around until their high school female employees caught a ride, or offered them one themselves. And then after the alleged assault she went back out front and her boyfriend showed up. How long were they at the back of the building? If I were Moore I would subpoena her boyfriend at the time and the owner of the establishment, if still living.

----------


## spudea

Another thing no cellphones! Back then I imagine if someone is scheduled to pick you up, you damn well better wait, can't let the bf know you left with someone else so when he does show up you aren't there!

----------


## William Tell

Lindsey Graham just called for Moore to drop out. Guess the Neocons decided to do it in a trickle.

----------


## Swordsmyth

National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman Cory Gardner,  R-Colo., called for Judge Roy Moore to be expelled from the Senate if he  is elected next month in the wake of multiple reports of sexual  assault.
 “I believe the individuals speaking out against Roy Moore spoke with  courage and truth, proving he is unfit to serve in the United States  Senate and he should not run for office," Gardner said in a statement.  "If he refuses to withdraw and wins, the Senate should vote to expel  him, because he does not meet the ethical and moral requirements of the  United States Senate."

More at: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/co...rticle/2640538

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Just finishing watching the live Allred accuser presser. Beverly Young Nelson was a pretty, young, 16 yr. old that worked at a diner. She claims he used to touch the end of her hair as she walked by and compliment her looks. She claims that after the diner closed, and her boyfriend was late, Moore offered her a ride. Claims he drove to a dark area behind the diner, fondled her and tried to force her head to his crotch. She put up a fight, he cautioned her not to say anything as no one would believe her, pushed her out the door and left "burning rubber." The "smoking gun" is that he signed her yearbook. Paraphrased ""To a sweeter more beautiful girl, I could not say Merry Christmas.", Love Roy Moore, DA and the date Dec. 22, 1977." She remembered the type of shoe he was wearing, but not his type of car. Allred held up a portrait from a theme park showing how pretty she was at the time along with showing her yearbook photo.
> 
> http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/201...ex_claims.html





> So she knew him as a creeper before getting in his car, then why go with him instead of waiting for her boyfriend???  This doesn't add up at all. Typical Gloria Allred.





> Another thing no cellphones! Back then I imagine if someone is scheduled to pick you up, you damn well better wait, can't let the bf know you left with someone else so when he does show up you aren't there!


Exactly. No way to check with boyfriend or tell him not to come. Just taking off with someone else? How does she explain that to her boyfriend? If there is a real story there, we are not getting all of it.




> Nelson said she was waiting for her boyfriend to pick her up from work one night when Moore offered to give her a ride home.


And she jumped right in with no way to tell her boyfriend...

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> National Republican Senatorial Committee Chairman Cory Gardner,  R-Colo., called for Judge Roy Moore to be expelled from the Senate if he  is elected next month in the wake of multiple reports of sexual  assault.
>  “I believe the individuals speaking out against Roy Moore spoke with  courage and truth, proving he is unfit to serve in the United States  Senate and he should not run for office," Gardner said in a statement.  "If he refuses to withdraw and wins, the Senate should vote to expel  him, because *he does not meet the ethical and moral requirements of the  United States Senate*."
> 
> More at: http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/co...rticle/2640538


Really? LOL. How do these people say things like this with a straight face?

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Lindsey Graham just called for Moore to drop out. Guess the Neocons decided to do it in a trickle.


SOP.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Really? LOL. How do these people say things like this with a straight face?


No conscience means no embarrassment.

----------


## phill4paul

> Lindsey Graham just called for Moore to drop out. Guess the Neocons decided to do it in a trickle.


  McConnel: "You hold off Linsay, John and I will call for him to step down and then you can do it a week later. We don't want to look too suspicious."

----------


## Swordsmyth

> McConnel: "You hold off Linsay, John and I will call for him to step down and then you can do it a week later. We don't want to look too suspicious."


We also don't want this to drop out of the news cycle, we have to pace ourselves.

----------


## Valli6

I see that people are saying that Rand Paul and Ted Cruz are the only senators who have not un-endorsed Moore yet.

Guess Cruz is waiting to see what Rand says before giving an opinion.

----------


## Madison320

I'm not a fan of Roy Moore but this is weird. This was 40 years ago!!!

----------


## Swordsmyth

*More Than 50 Alabama Pastors Are Publicly Supporting Roy Moore*https://www.yahoo.com/news/more-50-alabama-pastors-publicly-215044848.html

----------


## Brian4Liberty

Ever notice that it's always the establishment side that smears "outsider" candidates like this?

Not only do they have every insider advantage possible, when they do fall behind, they are the dirtiest fighters.

----------


## Swordsmyth

The Federalist:
*We Don’t Have To Wait For Due Process To Hold An Opinion On Roy Moore*

----------


## Danke

> The Federalist:
> *We Don’t Have To Wait For Due Process To Hold An Opinion On Roy Moore*


Could you vote for a alcohol/drug abuser that quit over 30 years ago?

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Could you vote for a alcohol/drug abuser that quit over 30 years ago?


What are his policy positions?

In any case The Federalist is just being establishment scum, Moore is obviously not guilty so he no more needs to have quit 30 years ago than I need to stop beating the wife I don't have.

----------


## phill4paul

> The Federalist:
> *We Don’t Have To Wait For Due Process To Hold An Opinion On Roy Moore*


 


> But Moore is not on trial for rape of a 14-year-old, he’s running for political office.


  He's not even accused of it. So, there's that................

----------


## donnay

It would seem to me that if these allegations were true, the ACLU and the SPLC's would have used it against Moore when they sued him to take down his 10 Commandment granite tablets outside the state Judicial Building.

Moore was in the news for a while and these women just now had flashbacks of decades ago alleged abuse?  

This is all a diversion,

----------


## Valli6

Fox news channel just reported that Ted Cruz has dropped his support for Moore.
I believe Rand is the only one left who hasn't.

edit: 
people are pestering Rand on his twitter account about whether he supports the "pedo". 
They'll be stalking him for a statement now.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Fox news channel just reported that Ted Cruz has dropped his support for Moore.
> I believe Rand is the only one left who hasn't.


Hopefully Moore will remember it when he is in the Senate.

----------


## Influenza

So can any of you guys answer these questions?

Why are RPF forum members so quick to believe allegations against people on the left, but will fight tooth and nail if someone on the right is accused?

Why didn't "TPTB" use this fake news trick to oust _actually_ decent congressmen like Rand, Amash, or Massie?

Why did they put so much effort into funding fake allegations for an Israel firster who wants to bolster the largest military in the world even more? Just cuz he wants to behead the gays?

This dude was in his 30s and admitted to dating teenagers ~16 years old. Complete freak. It's more likely than not that he also engaged in sexual misconduct

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Why didn't "TPTB" use this fake news trick to oust _actually_ decent congressmen like Rand, Amash, or Massie?


Ummm, they *did*.

Thankfully, those efforts failed.

----------


## Influenza

> Ummm, they *did*.
> 
> Thankfully, those efforts failed.


Obviously they didn't try nearly as hard as they are with Roy Moore. Can you answer any of the other questions, or was that it?

----------


## EBounding

> Why didn't "TPTB" use this fake news trick to oust _actually_ decent congressmen like Rand, Amash, or Massie?


That's what I was thinking too.  Rand's response to "Aqua Buddah" was flat out denial.  Moore's response is bizzare and makes it sound like he did _something_.

Even if all of these allegations are false, Moore can't even deny them without any ambiguity and should have no business in the Senate.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Why couldn't he just say "The allegations are completely false"?


He has.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Originally Posted by r3volution 3.0
> 
> 
> Couple thoughts:
> 
> 1. The allegations ring true to me.
> 
> 2. He's almost certainly cooked regardless.
> 
> ...


Moore wrote dozens of articles for WND from 2006 to 2009.

I  skimmed a random sample.

Here were the topics he wrote about in those articles:

anti abortion
how Constitution based on Christianity
pro death penalty
people should respect the flag
federalism (but actually about banning gay marriage, abortion, and restricting immigration)
school prayer
anti immigration
profanity and Godlessness in the media
anti lobbyist registration because it stifles Christian activism
Christmas
Jerry Falwell
public religious displays
how Christianity civilized the Indians

...yea, I must deranged for thinking he's an Evangelical culture warrior first and a small government guy second (or 99th, or not at all).

----------


## sparebulb

> Moore wrote dozens of articles for WND from 2006 to 2009.
> 
> I  skimmed a random sample.
> 
> Here were the topics he wrote about in those articles:
> 
> anti abortion
> how Constitution based on Christianity
> pro death penalty
> ...


Your right.

Luther Strange will be much, much better.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Your right.
> 
> Luther Strange will be much, much better.


Luther Strange: votes for "clean" debt ceiling hike because McConnell asks him to

Roy Moore: votes for "clean" debt ceiling hike in exchange for McConnell's promise to put a Christmas tree on the Senate floor (next year)

----------


## Danke

> Your right.
> 
> Luther Strange will be much, much better.

----------


## sparebulb

For all of those people who dared to dream that Congress would stop all of their partisan bickering and come together....

You have your wish.

In fact, it is becoming clear that they've been doing just that for a very long time.

----------


## phill4paul

> Moore wrote dozens of articles for WND from 2006 to 2009.
> 
> I  skimmed a random sample.
> 
> Here were the topics he wrote about in those articles:
> 
> anti abortion
> how Constitution based on Christianity
> pro death penalty
> ...


  Had no accusations been proffered would you accept that Rand, having met him, when Moore snubbed McConnel, determined he would be an ally when considering foreign policy, would your determination be different?

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Had no accusations been proffered would you accept that Rand, having met him, when Moore snubbed McConnel, determined he would be an ally when considering foreign policy, would your determination be different?


If you're asking me whether Rand's endorsement changes my opinion of Moore, no, not really. 

I don't know why Rand endorsed him.

It wasn't necessarily because Rand thought as much of Moore as some here.

Hell, Rand endorsed McConnell, for purely strategic reasons.

And I'm fine with such endorsements in general, but in this case, whatever the goal, it's not working out.

----------


## euphemia

Nobody thinks Menendez should resign until due process has run its course and the jury has spoken.  

Bunch of hypocrites.

----------


## phill4paul

> If you're asking me whether Rand's endorsement changes my opinion of Moore, no, not really. 
> 
> I don't know why Rand endorsed him.
> 
> It wasn't necessarily because Rand thought as much of Moore as some here.
> 
> Hell, Rand endorsed McConnell, for purely strategic reasons.
> 
> And I'm fine with such endorsements in general, but in this case, whatever the goal, it's not working out.


  Well, I just told you why Rand endorsed him. Specifically for Moore's Constitutional belief in war powers. Not the line that McConnell, McCain and Lindsey adhere to.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Well, I just told you why Rand endorsed him.


Only Rand knows why Rand endorsed him. You told me what Rand said about the endorsement. 

Maybe Rand knows something I don't, but I'm not seeing anything in Moore's record that instills confidence.

...on economic issues, war, or anything else of importance. 

I see a culture warrior who _talks_ about the Constitution, Ted Cruz on steroids.

----------


## phill4paul

> Only Rand knows why Rand endorsed him. You told me what Rand said about the endorsement. .


  Well, $#@!, you caught me. Rand said what he said and I posted what he said. How much more could I be remiss.  Done with you for the night.

----------


## Krugminator2

> If you're asking me whether Rand's endorsement changes my opinion of Moore, no, not really. 
> 
> I don't know why Rand endorsed him.
> 
> It wasn't necessarily because Rand thought as much of Moore as some here.
> 
> Hell, Rand endorsed McConnell, for purely strategic reasons.
> 
> And I'm fine with such endorsements in general, but in this case, whatever the goal, it's not working out.


I am certain it was because Moore is crazy and likely to be someone who will ally with Rand just because they are both outliers.

Rand could be a hero to everyone in this situation. The ballots can't be changed but even if Moore wins, he won't take office because the Senate will reject him. He is a child molester. Rand could tell Moore to say he will resign after getting elected if Mo Brooks is the replacement. That would save Moore the disgrace of getting rejected by the Senate, Moore's supporters will get someone who closer to their views, Brooks is better from a libertarian perspective, and it will prevent a Democrat from winning since Republicans won't actually be voting for Moore.  Rand could save either a Democrat or establishment Republican from taking office by having Moore use what little leverage he has left to demand Brooks be who the Governor appoints in exchange for effectively dropping out.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> I am certain it was because Moore is crazy and likely to be someone who will ally with Rand just because they are both outliers.
> 
> Rand could be a hero to everyone in this situation. The ballots can't be changed but even if Moore wins, he won't take office because the Senate will reject him. He is a child molester. Rand could tell Moore to say he will resign after getting elected if Mo Brooks is the replacement. That would save Moore the disgrace of getting rejected by the Senate, Moore's supporters will get someone who closer to their views, Brooks is better from a libertarian perspective, and it will prevent a Democrat from winning since Republicans won't actually be voting for Moore.


Moore is almost guaranteed to be innocent, the charges are extremely dubious.

Stop spreading Dem hysteria, if we let them do this to Moore they will do it to Brooks or Rand or anyone else.

----------


## Krugminator2

> Moore is almost guaranteed to be innocent, the charges are extremely dubious.
> 
> Stop spreading Dem hysteria, if we let them do this to Moore they will do it to Brooks or Rand or anyone else.


Conspiracies this size can't/don't exist. There are too many people and too many moving parts.  

And even if you reject all the evidence, his answers to Hannity were disqualifyingly bad for someone who is actually innocent.  

And even if you believe he has a "faulty" memory about whether the dated underage girls,  the guy refuses to debate his Democratic opponent' s view of "transgenderism." That doesn't seem like a very good reason to duck a debate.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Conspiracies this size can't/don't exist. There are too many people and too many moving parts.


Bunk.




> And even if you reject all the evidence, his answers to Hannity were disqualifyingly bad for someone who is actually innocent.


Not really.





> And even if you believe he has a "faulty" memory about whether the dated underage girls,  the guy refuses to debate his Democratic opponent.  That's not good.


Why debate when you are ahead by double digits? all it does is give your enemy a chance to cut into your lead.

The problems with the accusers and their stories are much bigger than any you perceive with his response.

----------


## EBounding

> He has.


Along with a lot of other statements that are ambiguous at best.  

Why do we have to rally behind this guy again?

----------


## specsaregood

> Why haven't they done it already to someone like Rand?


They accused Randal of assault and kidnapping.    It is also a different tone right now, this whole sex assault thing is in the media right now, its quite timely.  If Randal was running now I wouldn't put it past them.

As far as Moore, except for 1 heavy petting claim and the newest claim the rest are just basically dating with consensual teens with no sex involved right?

----------


## Influenza

> They accused Randal of assault and kidnapping.    It is also a different tone right now, this whole sex assault thing is in the media right now, its quite timely.  If Randal was running now I wouldn't put it past them.
> 
> As far as Moore, except for 1 heavy petting claim and the newest claim the rest are just basically dating with consensual teens with no sex involved right?


Yea just a 30+ year old dude dating high schoolers, and buying alcohol for them, not creepy at all. Not indicative of larger psychological issues or ulterior motives. Just a normal, everyday member of the Christian Taliban. 

Why, at this point, is it seen as ironic for the God-warrior type to be guilty of such immoral actions? It happens more often than not. Like the anti abortion guy wanting an abortion for his mistress. Or all the priests that touch kids or cover-up the ones that do. Or all the anti-gays trying to hide their own homosexuality. You know, there's a huge chance that anyone who says "it's a choice to be gay" is probably gay as $#@! themselves

----------


## fedupinmo

> Re the "they framed him" theory,
> 
> 
> 
> Do you think McConnell et al want to hand this seat, along with others in both houses, to the Dems in 2018? If not, do you think they'd risk painting themselves as the party of child molesters (what the Dems are already working on, I guarantee you), just to prevent Roy run-of-the-mill Christian conservative from entering the Senate? McConnell's a son of a bitch, but he's not an idiot.


Ever hear of Todd Akin? They would rather have McCaskill than a conservative in the senate, I am sure this time it's no different.

----------


## Influenza

> Ever hear of Todd Akin? They would rather have McCaskill than a conservative in the senate, I am sure this time it's no different.


oh you mean the guy who knew absolutely nothing about biology, pretended he did, looked like a total idiot, and rightfully lost the election because of it?

----------


## EBounding

> They accused Randal of assault and kidnapping.    It is also a different tone right now, this whole sex assault thing is in the media right now, its quite timely.  If Randal was running now I wouldn't put it past them.
> 
> As far as Moore, except for 1 heavy petting claim and the newest claim the rest are just basically dating with consensual teens with no sex involved right?


And Rand immediately denied it and said it was flat out lie.   He didn't dance around and say he didn't "generally go around kidnapping girls" or something.  Or deny it and go on to say that it happened 40 years ago.  Or go back and forth saying who he knew or didn't know. 

Like I said, even if all of this is false, he's not handling it well at all. How's he going to respond to real pressure in Senate?  My guess is not very well, especially with this still hanging over his head.

----------


## Origanalist

> It was the late 60's when I was 16. Yeah, there were people (I should say men) that bought beer for kids at that age - but they weren't the reputable people in town. If they were caught, they were prosecuted. They dispensed weed and coke too. They were generally guys out looking for a little strange (male and female strange). 
> 
> I only knew a couple of men beyond college age that dated 16-18 year old girls. Even the 24 year old guy caught the "ewwwww" factor when he came to the Junior Prom.
> 
> But I grew up in the North (the Adirondacks), and it may have been different in the South. In Moore's defense, his wife is 14 years younger than he is - so he definitely likes younger women. She was 22 when they met though (he was 36) - and there's a big difference between 16 year-olds in high school and women who have seen a bit of the world and aren't quite so naive.
> 
> I'm not a fan of the guy, but I don't think he needs to withdraw over an accusation, or multiple accusations. Let the chips fall where they may and let the voters decide.


I guess it all depends on your definition of reputable. And that's not to say it was the norm, just that it wasn't altogether uncommon.

----------


## Voluntarist

xxxxx

----------


## The Rebel Poet

> *Yes.* 
> Anything it takes to stymie Trump and Bannon


Stymie Trump by trying to knock out the guy Trump tried and failed to knock out? Or stymie Trump by giving him the right to say "I told you Moore would lose. I warned you. Next time join me in support of the establishment"?

----------


## fedupinmo

> oh you mean the guy who knew absolutely nothing about biology, pretended he did, looked like a total idiot, and rightfully lost the election because of it?


The conservative older fellow who wasn't going into a medical field but was available for making law and was polling VERY close to that fat Obama clone in a pantsuit $#@! we have instead?
With the support of the RNC, they could have had that seat instead of letting it go to "their mortal enemy"...
This is the same play over again, and the RNC would rather lose that seat than let a real conservative have it, and with things being as close as they are it is foolish.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Stymie Trump by trying to knock out the guy Trump tried and failed to knock out? Or stymie Trump by giving him the right to say "I told you Moore would lose. I warned you. Next time join me in support of the establishment"?


No, I was saying that they would willingly lose seats in 2018 to stymie Trump and Bannon about other things, things like the judicial nominations in the link I put in that post.

----------


## AuH20

Body Language Expert States that Moore is not lying in this segment:

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017...genuine-video/

----------


## anaconda

Poll released today says Moore is up by 6 points.

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign...ma-senate-race

----------


## Swordsmyth

*GOP Senators Believe Roy Moore's Accusers But Not Donald Trump's*https://www.yahoo.com/news/senators-believe-roy-moore-apos-232401331.html

----------


## Origanalist

> *GOP Senators Believe Roy Moore's Accusers But Not Donald Trump's*https://www.yahoo.com/news/senators-believe-roy-moore-apos-232401331.html


Ha ha ha ha ha. Of course they do. So does Sessions. Moore isn't sitting in the White House.

----------


## Swordsmyth

Fox News host Sean Hannity called for Roy Moore,  the Republican candidate running for Alabama’s open Senate seat, to  withdraw from the race if he cannot clear up allegations that he  sexually abused teenage girls when he was in his 30s.
The change in Hannity’s tune comes after several companies pulled their advertisements from his Fox News program and radio show over his coverage of the allegations of four women published in The Washington Post last week.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/now-sean-...040815217.html

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Fox News host Sean Hannity called for Roy Moore,  the Republican candidate running for Alabama’s open Senate seat, to  withdraw from the race if he cannot clear up allegations that he  sexually abused teenage girls when he was in his 30s.
> The change in Hannity’s tune comes after several companies pulled their advertisements from his Fox News program and radio show over his coverage of the allegations of four women published in The Washington Post last week.
> 
> https://www.yahoo.com/news/now-sean-...040815217.html


It's not a good sign when the most shameless whore on television is too embarrassed to shill for you.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> It's not a good sign when the most shameless whore on television is too embarrassed to shill for you.


Hannity is indeed selling out to money pressure, but that has no relevance to Moore's guilt or innocence.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Hannity is indeed selling out to money pressure, but that has no relevance to Moore's guilt or innocence.


I don't particularly care whether he's guilty or innocent, just commenting on the trainwreck.

----------


## Swordsmyth

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell  on Tuesday did not rule out trying to expel Roy Moore if the Alabama  Republican wins a U.S. Senate seat in that state's special election next  month. “He’s obviously not fit to  be in the United States Senate,” the Kentucky Republican told reporters  on Tuesday. “And we’ve looked at all the options to try to prevent that  from happening.”

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ion/863619001/

----------


## Brian4Liberty

So what would have happened if the latest woman had gone to the Police the next day? What would the crime be? Would anything be prosecuted? What would the punishment be? Would this be an issue today if it had played out back then?

For example, girl goes to Police station: "I am here to report a crime. I got in a car for a ride home with a customer. He pulled into the back parking lot, tried to kiss me, grab my breasts, and push my head down towards his crotch. He gave up, and I got out of the car." How would that play out?

----------


## anaconda

> Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell  on Tuesday did not rule out trying to expel Roy Moore if the Alabama  Republican wins a U.S. Senate seat in that state's special election next  month. “He’s obviously not fit to  be in the United States Senate,” the Kentucky Republican told reporters  on Tuesday. “And we’ve looked at all the options to try to prevent that  from happening.”


Mitch is butt hurt.

----------


## TheCount

> So what would have happened if the latest woman had gone to the Police the next day? What would the crime be? Would anything be prosecuted? What would the punishment be? Would this be an issue today if it had played out back then?
> 
> For example, girl goes to Police station: "I am here to report a crime. I got in a car for a ride home with a customer. He pulled into the back parking lot, tried to kiss me, grab my breasts, and push my head down towards his crotch. He gave up, and I got out of the car." How would that play out?


The cops would say "that's what Joseph did to Mary" and that would be that.

----------


## Anti Federalist

Woemen are as toxic as cops.

Avoid them at all costs.

----------


## Valli6

Just for the record - and I can't imagine why the media seems to be unaware of this  - but Gloria Alldred is the mother of Lisa Bloom - the lawyer that helped Harvey Weinstein undermine his accusers.

----------


## fedupinmo

> Mitch is butt hurt.


He needs the spike  to heal that right up.

----------


## timosman

http://thegoldwater.com/news/11904-S...-a-Filthy-Liar

----------


## fedupinmo

> Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell  on Tuesday did not rule out trying to expel Roy Moore if the Alabama  Republican wins a U.S. Senate seat in that state's special election next  month. “He’s obviously not fit to  be in the United States Senate,” the Kentucky Republican told reporters  on Tuesday. “And we’ve looked at all the options to try to prevent that  from happening.”
> 
> https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/...ion/863619001/


Ooooh... billboard idea.

----------


## EBounding

Post how many hours you would be comfortable leaving your daughter/wife/girlfriend alone with Roy Moore.

----------


## nikcers

> What is your problem?


I think he has been watching too much fake news. The only cure fore this is more RP liberty report.

----------


## EBounding

> I think he has been watching too much fake news. The only cure fore this is more RP liberty report.


Is Ron Paul defending this guy?  How is it that Ron Paul managed to not be accused of any sexual assault despite decades in office?

----------


## dannno

> He admitted to 'dating' 16 yr olds when he was in his mid-30s.


I call bull$#@!, I just read the Hannity interview and he said he did NOT date girls in their late teens when he was in his early 30s.. but even if he did admit at one point to dating girls in their late teens, that doesn't mean he admitted to dating a 16 year old.




> I don't care that it was 'Alabama in the 70's'.... that's $#@!ing PEDO territory right there.


No it isn't.

"Plenty of 16 year old girls look, act and dress like 21 year olds."

That is something my friend's girlfriend who is in her 30s said last night, in regards to a band member who it has recently come out allegedly had sex with underage girl(s) (lol, duhh.... it's called groupies )

And yes, I date girls in their late teens and early 20s and I am in my mid 30s. Why? Because THEY pursue ME, and they are purposely pursuing older men because they don't like guys their age.

----------


## phill4paul

> Well for one, he never let himself ever be in a room alone with a female that was not a family member.


  Yep.

----------


## Lamp

> He admitted to 'dating' 16 yr olds when he was in his mid-30s.  I don't care that it was 'Alabama in the 70's'.... that's $#@!ing PEDO territory right there.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of...t_-_Global.svg

Most of Continental America has a minimum of 16

----------


## Swordsmyth

Amid spiraling accusations of sexual misconduct, Alabama Senate  candidate Roy Moore has just announced that he and his attorney will  hold an unplanned press conference at 5pm EST...which gives the world  just under 1 hour to speculate as to whether Moore will resign or double  down on efforts to defend himself.

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-1...erence-5pm-est

----------


## dannno

> which gives the world  just under 1 hour to speculate as to whether Moore will resign or double  down on efforts to defend himself.
> 
> http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-1...erence-5pm-est



...and it gives us only about 10 minutes.....

Go!

----------


## Swordsmyth

*Watch Live: Roy Moore Holds Surprise Press Conference*http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-11-15/roy-moore-hold-unplanned-press-conference-5pm-est

----------


## Swordsmyth

According to the campaign chair this is a counter attack.

----------


## William Tell

Wow, Moore presided over Ms Nelson's divorce?

----------


## phill4paul

> Amid spiraling accusations of sexual misconduct, Alabama Senate  candidate Roy Moore has just announced that he and his attorney will  hold an unplanned press conference at 5pm EST...which gives the world  just under 1 hour to speculate as to whether Moore will resign or double  down on efforts to defend himself.
> 
> http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-1...erence-5pm-est





> ...and it gives us only about 10 minutes.....
> 
> Go!


  Denial and Lawsuits!

----------


## William Tell

The campaign is challenging Allred to allow a professional to examine the signature.

----------


## Swordsmyth

They are demanding the yearbook be examined by an expert.

----------


## Swordsmyth

The signature seems to have been copied from the divorce judgement.

----------


## Swordsmyth

It's over.

----------


## dannno

> The signature seems to have been copied from the divorce judgement.


Funny, I was just reading this..

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017...arbook-forged/

----------


## georgiaboy

> Well for one, he never let himself ever be in a room alone with a female that was not a family member.


Aka The Billy Graham rule.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Funny, I was just reading this..
> 
> http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017...arbook-forged/


Yup, it's not even a good forgery.

----------


## phill4paul

> Wow, Moore presided over Ms Nelson's divorce?


  Nothing suspicious about that, now is there? Did she bring it up at that time and demand he recuse himself or did she make use of the situation to get her way or is she just pissed over the settlement and making all of it up?

----------


## William Tell

Not sure if anyone's posted this yet. The front page of Al dot com literally is attacking Moore for being married to a younger woman. 



> *When did Roy Moore meet his wife?*
> 
> 
> According to recent allegations in the Washington Post and Al.com,  Roy Moore routinely pursued much younger women while he was in his early  30s, until he met and married a woman 14 years his junior.
> 
> 
>  Moore was 38 when he married 24-year-old Kayla Kisor. They met a year  before they married, according to Moore's autobiography, "So Help Me  God."
> 
> "Sitting with her mother on the sofa against the wall was a beautiful  young woman," Moore wrote. "I learned that her name was Kayla."
> Moore wrote that he had been invited to recite poetry at a church Christmas party and spotted his future wife in the crowd.


 hxxp://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/11/when_did_roy_moore_meet_his_wi.html

----------


## William Tell

So, anyone here really think the accuser and Allred will allow hand writing and ink experts to examine it?

----------


## Swordsmyth

> So, anyone here really think the accuser and Allred will allow hand writing and ink experts to examine it?


Will they have a choice when he sues for slander?

Will it "ACCIDENTALLY" get destroyed?

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Not sure if anyone's posted this yet. The front page of Al dot com literally is attacking Moore for being married to a younger woman. 
>  hxxp://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/11/when_did_roy_moore_meet_his_wi.html





> Moore was *38* when he married *24*-year-old Kayla Kisor


Get a rope!

----------


## William Tell

> Will they have a choice when he sues for slander?
> 
> Will it "ACCIDENTALLY" get destroyed?


That would be after the election though.

----------


## phill4paul

> So, anyone here really think the accuser and Allred will allow hand writing and ink experts to examine it?


  Might not have a choice in a civil lawsuit for defamation.

----------


## William Tell

> Get a rope!


Woah, and he got the poor girl pregnant 4 TIMES AND FORCED HER TO CARRY HIS FETUSES TO TERM AND GAVE BIRTH. When will the media really cover this scandal.

----------


## William Tell

> Might not have a choice in a civil lawsuit for defamation.


After December 12 I presume.

----------


## RonPaulMall

> So, anyone here really think the accuser and Allred will allow hand writing and ink experts to examine it?



Doesn't really matter at this point. The revelation he was the Judge in her divorce and that his assistant signed her own initials (D.A) after his orders in that case pretty much wrap this thing up. That was one thing that always stood out to me because never in my life had I known a District Attorney to use D.A as a post-nominal. This explains it, and explains it in a way that pretty much proves Allred and the Accuser faked the Yearbook, and if they faked the Yearbook the story is false. Moore just won the election.

Irony is if Allred had ever actually practiced law in her life rather than just fronting an elaborate legalized bribery service she'd have known how fake that D.A thing looked.

----------


## phill4paul

> After December 12 I presume.


  Of course. The damage is already being done. However, he should include Gloria Allred in the civil suit. She's got a lot of money.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> *No comment about Roy Moore: Sens. Tom Cotton, Mike Crapo, Deb Fischer and John Kennedy*
> 
> *Not withdrawing his endorsement of Moore: Sen. Rand Paul*


Rand hasn't withdrawn his endorsement, but he also hasn't commented.

He certainly hasn't given any indication of continued support for Moore.

..mind you he's been away for over a week with broken ribs, just got back to town Monday.

----------


## phill4paul

Amazingly enough some 30 minutes after the presser no synopsis regarding forgery on Google. 2 minutes after the Allred presser there was a transcript and photos for 3 pages.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Rand hasn't withdrawn his endorsement, but he also hasn't commented.
> 
> He certainly hasn't given any indication of continued support for Moore.
> 
> ..mind you he's been away for over a week with broken ribs, just got back to town Monday.


The "no comment" Senators never endorsed Moore.

I know Rand has bigger problems but he has tweeted about tax reform and he has yet to withdraw his endorsement, something I hope Moore remembers when he is in the Senate.

----------


## sparebulb

> The campaign is challenging Allred to allow a professional to examine the signature.


I am anxiously awaiting our usual contributors to make a *"Libertarian Case For Not Allowing Judge Moore to Examine the Yearbook"* thread.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> I am anxiously awaiting our usual contributors to make a *"Libertarian Case For Not Allowing Judge Moore to Examine the Yearbook"* thread.


NO NO NO, Moore signed it wrong in anticipation of needing to deny it silly, it will be proven authentic.

----------


## phill4paul

> Rand hasn't withdrawn his endorsement, but he also hasn't commented.
> 
> He certainly hasn't given any indication of continued support for Moore.
> 
> ..mind you he's been away for over a week with broken ribs, just got back to town Monday.


   At this point I don't think he should. There is nothing proven, all "he said/she said" driven by a WAPO article. If his assistant really did initial "DA", after his signature and they can attest to it or prove it, then the signature is a forgery. Done deal. If Moore wins he will remember Rand was the only one that didn't call for him to get out.

----------


## sparebulb

> Neither are "my man." Brooks was the only good pick of the three, but obviously what he's selling isn't what Alabama is looking for.
> 
> If I were voting in that election, I'd sit it out.  I have a particular dislike for hypocritical holier-than-thou types equaled only by my dislike for chickenhawks.


Fair, honest, and well-reasoned.

Personally, I would vote for Moore just to spite those rallied against him.

At this point, it would appear if he makes it, he will be indebted to a certain senator from Kentucky.

----------


## phill4paul

> Doesn't really matter at this point. The revelation he was the Judge in her divorce and that his assistant signed her own initials (D.A) after his orders in that case pretty much wrap this thing up. That was one thing that always stood out to me because never in my life had I known a District Attorney to use D.A as a post-nominal. This explains it, and explains it in a way that pretty much proves Allred and the Accuser faked the Yearbook, and if they faked the Yearbook the story is false. Moore just won the election.
> 
> Irony is if Allred had ever actually practiced law in her life rather than just fronting an elaborate legalized bribery service she'd have known how fake that D.A thing looked.


  It stood out because he was the ADA at the time. Not the DA.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> The "no comment" Senators never endorsed Moore.
> 
> I know Rand has bigger problems but he has tweeted about tax reform and he has yet to withdraw his endorsement, something I hope Moore remembers when he is in the Senate.


I hope Rand takes whatever course of action is best for him politically, which will probably be an un-endorsement within the next day or two.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> I hope Rand takes whatever course of action is best for him politically, which will probably be an un-endorsement within the next day or two.


LOL

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> At this point I don't think he should. There is nothing proven, all "he said/she said" driven by a WAPO article. If his assistant really did initial "DA", after his signature and they can attest to it or prove it, then the signature is a forgery. Done deal. If Moore wins he will remember Rand was the only one that didn't call for him to get out.


If Moore wins, and is seated, he'll be an even bigger distraction than he would have been as a run-of-the-mill culture warrior. 

I see nothing to be gained from continuing to support him. 

It's more a question of how to minimize the damage (Rand should have never endorsed him in the first place).

----------


## sparebulb

> I hope Rand takes whatever course of action is best for him politically, which will probably be an un-endorsement within the next day or two.


Had to double-check to see if it was The Texican who wrote this.

----------


## dannno

> I hope Rand takes whatever course of action is best for him politically, which will probably be an un-endorsement within the next day or two.


Ya, then he should pull his pants down, suck his thumb and walk home 

This is war, soldier. You're on the wrong side, thinking you are or pretending to be on the right side. 

Roy Moore is pro-small government and against for a non-interventionist foreign policy. I'm not religious, but I could give a flying $#@! about a religious display on Christmas. If that is your big position that you are so concerned about, then maybe you need to reconsider your priorities.

----------


## phill4paul

> If Moore wins, and is seated, he'll be an even bigger distraction than he would have been as a run-of-the-mill culture warrior. 
> 
> I see nothing to be gained from continuing to support him. 
> 
> It's more a question of how to minimize the damage (Rand should have never endorsed him in the first place).


  Disagree. There's a reason Rand endorsed him. He didn't have to. They must have seen eye to eye on some important issues.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Roy Moore is pro-small government and against for a non-interventionist foreign policy.


Roy Moore is a culture warrior whose obsession with those issues totally overshadows any libertarian-ish inclinations he may have.

----------


## phill4paul

> Roy Moore is a culture warrior whose obsession with those issues totally overshadows any libertarian-ish inclinations he may have.


  He's not a libertarian so...there's that.  But, he obviously had good talks with Rand regarding foreign intervention. Though I'm sure the Democrat in the race is probably closer to your libertarian values.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Disagree. There's a reason Rand endorsed him. He didn't have to. They must have seen eye to eye on some important issues.


Or Rand mistakenly thought they did, or had some more pragmatic reason for supporting the guy, who knows. 

I know that's Rand's motives are sound, so I don't really care why he made this error.

But it was an error and it needs to be corrected, in whatever way is least damaging.

----------


## dannno

> Roy Moore is a culture warrior whose obsession with those issues totally overshadows any libertarian-ish inclinations he may have.


Pretty sure you are more obsessed about how obsessed he is obsessed with those issues than he is..

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> He's not a libertarian so...there's that.  But, he obviously had good talks with Rand regarding foreign intervention. Though I'm sure the Democrat in the race is probably closer to your libertarian values.


Did you see the post a few pages back where I took a random sample of articles written by Moore at WND (he wrote dozens)?

If not, take a gander, and then tell me he's not totally obsessed with the culture war, to the exclusion of everything else.

----------


## phill4paul

> Or Rand mistakenly thought they did, or had some more pragmatic reason for supporting the guy, who knows. 
> 
> I know that's Rand's motives are sound, so I don't really care why he made this error.
> 
> But it was an error.


  The Democrat is probably closer to your Libertarian ideology so why don't you just come out and say you support Doug Jones for Senate?

----------


## dannno

> Or Rand mistakenly thought they did, or had some more pragmatic reason for supporting the guy, who knows. 
> 
> I know that's Rand's motives are sound, so I don't really care why he made this error.
> 
> But it was an error and it needs to be corrected, in whatever way is least damaging.


Rand has warred for Christian culture before, it's my least favorite thing that he does, but I could care less if he does it if he is successful in his overall goals which he is.. I mean, he has almost been killed twice.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Did you see the post a few pages back where I took a random sample of articles written by Moore at WND (he wrote dozens)?
> 
> If not, take a gander, and then tell me he's not totally obsessed with the culture war, *to the exclusion of everything else*.


That is unprovable, as a Senator he will have to vote on everything that comes up anyway so his focus won't make much difference if he holds the right positions on important subjects, which he does.

----------


## phill4paul

> The Democrat is probably closer to your Libertarian ideology so why don't you just come out and say you support Doug Jones for Senate?

----------


## dannno

> Amazingly enough some 30 minutes after the presser no synopsis regarding forgery on Google. 2 minutes after the Allred presser there was a transcript and photos for 3 pages.


Fake news is too busy trotting out liar #6 and liar #7...

----------


## Swordsmyth

*Drudge Report comes out strongly against Senate candidate Roy Moore*https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2017/11/15/drudge-report-comes-out-strongly-against-senate-candidate-roy-moore/866483001/?utm_source=feedblitz&utm_medium=FeedBlitzRss&utm_  campaign=usatoday-newstopstories

----------


## Swordsmyth

Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore is taking preliminary legal steps to  challenge the reporting on the recent allegations that he had multiple  relationships with teenagers, by issuing a demand letter to the local Alabama Media Group, the publisher of AL.com, which has been reporting the story following the _Washington Post_’s  story last week. The letter accuses the publication of defamation,  libel, slander, fraud, malice, suppression, wantonness, conspiracy, and  negligence.

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...cal_media.html

----------


## Swordsmyth

Was it the press conference?:

*Mysterious boom rattles Alabama and no one knows what caused it*

http://www.newsweek.com/mysterious-b...-it-was-712050

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> That is unprovable, as a Senator he will have  to vote on everything that comes up anyway so his focus won't make much  difference if he holds the right positions on important subjects, which  he does.


Why does Congress routinely jam hundreds of unrelated bills together into an omnibus?




> Luther Strange: votes for "clean" debt ceiling hike because McConnell asks him to
> 
> Roy Moore: votes for "clean" debt ceiling hike in exchange for  McConnell's promise to put a Christmas tree on the Senate floor (next  year)


...




> Rand has warred for Christian culture before, it's  my least favorite thing that he does, but I could care less if he does  it if he is successful in his overall goals which he is.. I mean, he has  almost been killed twice.


99% of Rand's political comments/actions don't revolve around social conservatism. 

Again, it's a matter of priority. 

I  could care less where a politician falls on the cultural  spectrum, provided they don't focus on culture to the exclusion of things that  matter.




> The Democrat is probably closer to your  Libertarian ideology so why don't you just come out and say you support  Doug Jones for Senate?




Is the ignorance real or feigned?

----------


## spudea

From the press conference the yearbook signature is a fake.  Did Gloria Allred know or did the woman fake it on her own?

The woman stated she had no contact with Moore after the alleged incident.  That was false, Moore was the judge for her divorce decree.  Did Gloria Allred know her "client" made a false statement?

I'm still confused how do you retain a lawyer like Gloria Allred when there's no legal case or actions being taken, just holding a press conference.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Fake news is too busy trotting out liar #6 and liar #7...


*New Roy Moore accuser*http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/11/new_roy_moore_accuser_he_didnt.html

----------


## phill4paul

Ivanka just came out in support of the accusers.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Ivanka just came out in support of the accusers.


That settles it.

----------


## AuH20

> Ivanka just came out in support of the accusers.


She caught the Hebrew Flu. It's hard to shake.

----------


## phill4paul

Some talking head broad on Fox just called him a pedophile. She should look up the definition.

----------


## Raginfridus

> pedophile


A word soon to become as meaningless as collusion.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Some talking head broad on Fox just called him a pedophile. She should look up the definition.


Hannity, while discussing the Moore situation, went on a tangent about how much he despises "child molesters". As if it applies to these accusations. How old was the latest accuser? 28?

Seeing as how accusations of sexual harassment have already been thrown at Hannity, and it is the go to tactic to remove right wing media people, it's ironic how he has jumped on the bandwagon. Suppose his "white knight" weakness is being used against him, and he is now a useful idiot for the left.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Hannity, while discussing the Moore situation, went on a tangent about how much he despises "child molesters". As if it applies to these accusations. How old was the latest accuser? 28?
> 
> Seeing as how accusations of sexual harassment have already been thrown at Hannity, and it is the go to tactic to remove right wing media people, it's ironic how he has jumped on the bandwagon. Suppose his "white knight" weakness is being used against him, and he is now a useful idiot for the left.


Money is the only explanation needed, his sponsors were leaving unless he turned against Moore so he caved, hopefully his audience will abandon him and his sponsors.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Ivanka just came out in support of the accusers.


I guess that's Trump's attempt at threading the needle.

----------


## phill4paul

> Hannity, while discussing the Moore situation, went on a tangent about how much he despises "child molesters". As if it applies to these accusations. How old was the latest accuser? 28?
> 
> Seeing as how accusations of sexual harassment have already been thrown at Hannity, and it is the go to tactic to remove right wing media people, it's ironic how he has jumped on the bandwagon. Suppose his "white knight" weakness is being used against him, and he is now a useful idiot for the left.


  According to WAPO there were 4 accusers. 3 of which said that after they denied consent he took them home. They were all over the legal age of consent at the time. 16 or older. 
   Only one accuser was under that age. 14. She said he called her at home and on "her" phone set up a date. She accuses the date lead to getting down to underwear and him heavy petting her. She alleges that when he guided her hand to his dick, she expressed that she wanted to be taken home. He did. Her mother has since stated that her daughter didn't have a private phone. There was only a "house" phone.
   The latest to come forward, Allreds presser, has been called out regarding the yearbook signature. I think she was 17 at the time.

  As far as Hannity he is an opportunist and he saw money dwindling away. So he blew which way the wind did.

----------


## phill4paul

> Is the ignorance real or feigned?


  Naw, I was just getting your goat. I didn't vote for Trump, because my not voting, was a vote for Hillary.

----------


## dannno



----------


## phill4paul

> 


 tl;dl

----------


## dannno

> tl;dl


It's ok, I just listened to it twice for us.

----------


## phill4paul

> It's ok, I just listened to it twice for us.


  If you could listen to it a third time for us, that'd be great. I don't think I caught it all.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> If you could listen to it a third time for us, that'd be great. I don't think I caught it all.


Better make it 4

----------


## spudea

Gloria Allred on CNN:  Asked about Roy Moore serving as a judge in Nelson's divorce, Allred dodges the question: "This is not a senate hearing, last time I checked, and we're not going to put everything out there until there is a senate hearing."

Additionally said not submitting the yearbook for verification until senate hearings..... WHICH MEANS IT WASN'T VERIFIED IN THE FIRST PLACE!  By god these idiots, how do you not verify the signature before going public and the press conference.  I'll tell you why....these are EVIL people.

----------


## Danke

He should have just followed the pilot formula.

Take you age, devide by two and add seven.

----------


## phill4paul

> Gloria Allred on CNN:  Asked about Roy Moore serving as a judge in Nelson's divorce, Allred dodges the question: "This is not a senate hearing, last time I checked, and we're not going to put everything out there until there is a senate hearing."
> 
> Additionally said not submitting the yearbook for verification until senate hearings..... WHICH MEANS IT WASN'T VERIFIED IN THE FIRST PLACE!  By god these idiots, how do you not verify the signature before going public and the press conference.  I'll tell you why....these are EVIL people.


   Of course not. It would be long after the election for a civil trial. A Senate hearing isn't gonna happen unless Rand calls for it, and even then it won't happen before the election. The RNC wants Doug Jones to win.

----------


## EBounding

> Please do tell us how do you properly deny ridiculous accusations? Is there a playbook?


When a friendly Hannity asks you:
Do you remember dating girls that young at that time?

The correct answer is No. It never happened.

NOT:

Not generally, no. If did, you know, I'm not going to dispute anything but I don't remember anything like that.

At best, this guy is a doofus and whatever Rand saw in him isnt going to happen.  Rand doles out endorsements way too easily.

----------


## Jan2017

> According to WAPO there were 4 accusers.  . . .
> 
>   As far as Hannity he is an opportunist and he saw money dwindling away. So he blew which way the wind did.


NPR seemed proud to announce this morning that "3 more accusers have come forward, bringing the total to 8"

But it makes no sense that "voters will have to be the jurors that decide this" - they'll need evidence.
The Governor or an election commission should decide to delay a very Special Election in this case at least but I dunno.

----------


## specsaregood

> NPR seemed proud to announce this morning that "3 more accusers have come forward, bringing the total to 8"
> 
> But it makes no sense that "voters will have to be the jurors that decide this" - they'll need evidence.
> The Governor or an election commission should decide to delay a very Special Election in this case at least but I dunno.


Why delay it?  that doesn't sound very constitutional.  So in the future all you need to do to delay an election or disqualify a candidate is have people come out with murky accusations that arent' even of illegal actions and no proof?   that doesn't sound like a good idea.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> *Report: Robocall Claiming to Be Washington Post Reporter Seeks Damaging Information on Roy Moore*
> 
> http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/...ion-roy-moore/
> 
> by JEFF POOR14 Nov 2017433
> According to a report from Mobile, AL CBS affiliate WKRG, at least one person in their viewing area had received a robocall seeking damaging information about Roy Moore.
> 
> The robocall, captured in a voicemail recording by Creola, AL pastor Al Moore, is from a man claiming to be a Washington Post reporter by the name of Bernie Bernstein and offers a reward for damaging remarks.
> 
> *Hi, this is Bernie Bernstein, Im a reporter for The Washington Post calling to find out if anyone at this address is a female between the ages of 54 to 57 years old willing to make damaging remarks about candidate Roy Moore for a reward of between $5,000 and $7,000. We will not be fully investigating these claims however we will make a written report. I can be reached by email at albernstein@washingtonpost.com, thank you.*


Keep on trolling the trailer park with $100 bills.

----------


## euphemia

I say this very carefully:  As broadly as the rules seem to be defined, I think one would have a hard time finding a man anywhere who has not said or done something inappropriate with a woman at some point in his life.  It seems to be the way men are hard wired.  That doesn't make it right, but it also doesn't mean it's wrong in every case.  

I don't blame you guys for being frustrated over it.

----------


## EBounding

And just like that, it's Stuart Smalley who will end up saving Roy Moore.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> It doesn't have to be either/or. 
> 
> 
> 
> *That, and there's heavy overlap between Trump supporters and Moore supporters.*
> 
> Whatever Trump says, he'll alienate either his own base or the rest of the party.
> 
> Smart move to stay silent; I wonder who told him to do that?


As one woman said, she would rather vote for a rapist Republican than a single Democrat.

----------


## timosman

> As one woman said, she would rather vote for a rapist Republican than a single Democrat.


You switched the parties.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> As one woman said, she would rather vote for a rapist Republican than a single Democrat.

----------


## Swordsmyth

*Moore hits McConnell over handling of Franken groping allegation*

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/...connell-245195

----------


## nikcers

*'God Is So Good.' Man Wrongfully Convicted of Rape as a Teen Leaves Prison After Nearly 50 Years*



“Freedom. After more than 45 years and ten months. That’s going through  my mind,” Jones said as he hugged his brother, Plem Jones, and other  relatives outside the gates of the East Baton Rouge Parish Prison.

Jones was *arrested on* *suspicion of abducting* a nurse at gunpoint from a  Baton Rouge hospital’s parking lot and raping her behind a building on  the night of Oct. 2, 1971. He was convicted of aggravated rape at a 1974  retrial that *“rested entirely” on the nurse’s testimony* and her  “questionable identification” of Jones as her assailant, the judge said.

----------


## Swordsmyth

*McConnell discussing asking Strange to resign, kicking off new special election*http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/360627-mcconnell-discussing-asking-strange-to-resign-kicking-off-new-special

----------


## Swordsmyth

The Alabama Republican Party is shrugging off pressure from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.) to disqualify Roy Moore as its nominee for Senate.
Members  of the state party’s executive committee met in person and by phone  Wednesday to discuss the Alabama Senate race, according to sources  familiar with the call, but made no move to strip Moore of the  nomination. 

More at: http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign...ndon-roy-moore

----------


## Swordsmyth

Dear Sean:
 I am suffering the same treatment other Republicans have had to endure.
 A month prior to the general election for U.S. Senate in Alabama, I have been attacked by the _Washington Post_ and other liberal media in a desperate attempt to smear my character and defeat my campaign.
 Over the last 40 years I have held several public offices, including  Deputy District Attorney, Circuit Judge, and Chief Justice of the  Alabama Supreme Court. In addition to running five statewide and three  country campaigns for public office, I have been involved in two major  controversies that attracted nation attention, one about the Ten  Commandments and the other the sanctity of marriage.
 The Alabama Judicial Inquiry Commission, Court of the Judiciary, and  Attorney General have investigated, scrutinized, examined and vetted me,  not to mention every opposing candidate against whom I have run.
 I have been married for almost 33 years to my wife Kayla. We have four children and five granddaughters.
 We are in the process of investigating these false allegations to  determine their origin and motivation. For instance, we have documented  that the most recent accuser, Beverly Nelson, was a part in a divorce  action before me in Etowah County Circuit Court in 1999, a matter that  apparently caused her no distress at a time that was 18 years closer to  the alleged assault. Yet 18 years later, while talking before cameras  about the supposed assault, she seemingly could not contain her  emotions.
 My signature on the order of dismissal in the divorce case was  annotated with the letters “D.A.,” representing the initials of my court  assistant. Curiously the supposed yearbook inscription is also followed  by the same initials- “D.A.” But at that time I was Deputy District  Attorney, not district attorney. Those initials as well as the date  under the signature block and the printed name of the restaurant are  written in a style inconsistent with the rest of the yearbook  inscription. The “7’s” in “Christmas 1977” are in a noticeably different  script than the “7’s” in the state “12-22-77.” I believe tampering has  occurred.
 Are we at a stage in American politics in which false allegations can  overcome a public record of 40 years, stampede the media and  politicians to condemn an innocent man, and potentially impact the  outcome of an election of national importance? When allegations of  events occurring 40 years ago – and never before mentioned during a  40-year career of public service- are brought out and taken seriously  only 30 days before a critical election, we may be in trouble as a  country.
 I adamantly deny the allegations of Leigh Corfman and Beverly Nelson,  did not date underage girls, and have taken steps to begin a civil  action for defamation. Because of that, at the direction of counsel, I  cannot comment further.
 - Roy S. Moore


https://twitter.com/MooreSenate/stat...47969012158464

----------


## dannno

> My signature on the order of dismissal in the divorce case was  annotated with the letters D.A., representing the initials of my court  assistant. Curiously the supposed yearbook inscription is also followed  by the same initials- D.A. But at that time I was Deputy District  Attorney, not district attorney. Those initials as well as the date  under the signature block and the printed name of the restaurant are  written in a style inconsistent with the rest of the yearbook  inscription. The 7s in Christmas 1977 are in a noticeably different  script than the 7s in the state 12-22-77. I believe tampering has  occurred.


..

----------


## Swordsmyth

Embattled Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore  denied allegations of sexual misconduct again today at a press  conference in Birmingham alongside faith leaders and his wife, Kayla.
Moore said that the accusations against him are "an effort by Mitch McConnell and his cronies to steal this election from the people of Alabama."
McConnell, the Senate Majority Leader, and a score of top Republicans have called on Moore to leave the race.
Moore called the allegations, first reported by the Washington Post, false.
"They're not only untrue, but they have no evidence to support them," he said.
During the press conference, Moore was surrounded by more than a dozen faith and political leaders — including former Republican presidential candidate Alan Keyes — who all offered impassioned defenses.
Moore left no doubt about whether he will drop out of the race for the seat once held by Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
"I'll quit standing when they lay me in that box and put me in the ground," Moore said.

More at: https://www.yahoo.com/gma/roy-moore-...opstories.html

----------


## dannno

> Embattled Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore  denied allegations of sexual misconduct again today at a press  conference in Birmingham alongside faith leaders and his wife, Kayla.
> Moore said that the accusations against him are "an effort by Mitch McConnell and his cronies to steal this election from the people of Alabama."
> McConnell, the Senate Majority Leader, and a score of top Republicans have called on Moore to leave the race.
> Moore called the allegations, first reported by the Washington Post, false.
> "They're not only untrue, but they have no evidence to support them," he said.
> During the press conference, Moore was surrounded by more than a dozen faith and political leaders — including former Republican presidential candidate Alan Keyes — who all offered impassioned defenses.
> Moore left no doubt about whether he will drop out of the race for the seat once held by Attorney General Jeff Sessions.
> "I'll quit standing when they lay me in that box and put me in the ground," Moore said.
> 
> More at: https://www.yahoo.com/gma/roy-moore-...opstories.html


STILL no mention of the fraudulent yearbook sig..

----------


## Swordsmyth

*Donald Trump breaks silence to back Roy Moore staying in Senate race despite teenage girl allegations*Donald Trump  has backed Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore remaining in the  election race despite multiple claims of sexual harassment of teenage  girls. 
Mr  Trump believes that “Alabama should take the decision” about their next  senator and that Mr Moore should only quit if the allegations are  proved. 

More at: https://www.yahoo.com/news/donald-tr...220136313.html

----------


## Jamesiv1

> And just like that, it's Stuart Smalley who will end up saving Roy Moore.

----------


## Madison320

> Franken has admitted his guilt and we have a photograph and yet nobody has even mentioned expelling him from the Senate, Moore denies everything and there is zero evidence or testimony with any credibility, as for the morons in the comments if the charges were proven about the girls below the age of consent then that would be worse but no one has even alleged rape.
> 
> I don't see groping as a reason to expel Franken but I would not vote for anyone guilty of it, Moore is innocent however and if I lived in Alabama I would vote for him.


I think the groping photo was obviously a joke. The other part where Franken was accused of the kissing thing is still "he said she said". To me both accusations are about a wash. Moore's was more serious but unlikely, while Franken's was less serious but more likely. Either way let the voters decide.

----------


## dannno

> I think the groping photo was obviously a joke. The other part where Franken was accused of the kissing thing is still "he said she said". To me both accusations are about a wash. Moore's was more serious but unlikely, while Franken's was less serious but more likely. Either way let the voters decide.


So the fake accusations mean more to you than the real accusations.. 

What do you mean a joke?? She was asleep.. Did you read her accusation? I took it seriously because there was photographic evidence. 

Turns out the only evidence against Moore was fraudulent.. and it turns out the establishment GOP is the one going after Moore. 

How can you be so naive to what is going on here?

----------


## Ender

> I think the groping photo was obviously a joke. The other part where Franken was accused of the kissing thing is still "he said she said". To me both accusations are about a wash. Moore's was more serious but unlikely, while Franken's was less serious but more likely. Either way let the voters decide.


That was my first thought when I saw the picture- and I pretty much agree with your consensus.

----------


## dannno

> That was my first thought when I saw the picture- and I pretty much agree with your consensus.


Obviously she wasn't in on the joke because she was $#@!ing asleep, you $#@!.. she was very upset about it later, and there is ACTUAL evidence of this all happening... whereas the Moore stuff is all fake, there is zero evidence, the yearbook was fabricated and this was clearly a setup by the establishment GOP. 

Why do you literally bathe in MSM lies on a daily basis? 

Do you think Patty Hearst robbed a bank for nothing???

----------


## specsaregood

> I think the groping photo was obviously a joke.


Of course it was a "joke".  Unfortunately she was the butt of the joke and nobody likes that.  And while such a joke would probably not be a big deal just 10 years ago, we are now in the era of weaponized hurt feelings and that kind of $#@! don't fly.  Sorta like a 30yr old dating 17-18yr olds wouldn't have been a big deal almost 40 years ago.

----------


## Ender

> Obviously she wasn't in on the joke because she was $#@!ing asleep, you $#@!.. she was very upset about it later, and there is ACTUAL evidence of this all happening... whereas the Moore stuff is all fake, there is zero evidence, the yearbook was fabricated and this was clearly a setup by the establishment GOP. 
> 
> Why do you literally bathe in MSM lies on a daily basis? 
> 
> Do you think Patty Hearst robbed a bank for nothing???


Oooooh, poor widdo dannno- got no argument so name-calling-name-calling.  

It's obvious that Franken was having a joke at her expense- I'm sure she was pissed, but as @specsaregood said:




> And while such a joke would probably not be a big deal just 10 years ago, we are now in the era of weaponized hurt feelings and that kind of $#@! don't fly.


And BTW- YOU bathe in the Trump lies on a minute-by-minute basis. He talks about groping women by the pussy and that's OK but when he turns around and chastises Franken, well then Franken is baaaaaad. 

AGAIN as @Madison320 pointed out:



> I think the groping photo was obviously a joke. The other part where Franken was accused of the kissing thing is still "he said she said". To me both accusations are about a wash. Moore's was more serious but unlikely, while Franken's was less serious but more likely. Either way let the voters decide.

----------


## Champ

> One thing that keeps going through my mind, especially since both Ron and Rand Paul have avoided passing any judgement on Moore so  far - Remember the 2012 interview with Doug Wead, where he says that the reason the campaign decided not to go after Romney was because they threatened to assassinate Ron Paul's character?
> 
> Is _this_ what that would've looked like? Is this what's happening to Roy Moore? 
> 
> I suspect that Ron and Rand have unique knowledge about just how vicious the establishment can be - and how involved their tactics can get. After all, just going back to 1996, the GOP, Newt Gingrich, even then-governor Bush financially supported Ron's opponent, who up until then had been a democrat! And I believe it was around that time, (or perhaps the following year?) that the accusations about the newsletters were first publicized. 
> 
> *Doug Wead: Romney Threatened Ron Paul with PR A-Bomb* (21:15)
> _Quote mentioned above happens around 15:30_
> 
> ...

----------


## Anti Federalist

> The calls were made- just not by anybody at the Washington Post as the caller claimed.


And how is the person called supposed to know whether the call was legitimately from the WaPo?

----------


## phill4paul

> And how is the person called supposed to know whether the call was legitimately from the WaPo?


  I'd like to know how the WaPo got 4 accusations from women unfamiliar with each other. I find it hard to believe that 4 different women just, out of the blue, decided to contact WaPo.

----------


## Swordsmyth

*Hillary Clinton Defends Al Franken After Sex Assault Accusations, But Doesn't Have Kind Words for Donald Trump and Roy Moore*http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clinton-defends-al-frankens-response-sex-assault-accusations-715946?utm_source=yahoo&utm_medium=yahoo_news&utm_  campaign=rss&utm_content=/rss/yahoous/news

----------


## Raginfridus

> *Hillary Clinton Defends Al Franken After Sex Assault Accusations, But Doesn't Have Kind Words for Donald Trump and Roy Moore*
> 
> http://www.newsweek.com/hillary-clin...s/yahoous/news









-----------------------------------------------------------------
RELATED:

----------


## Madison320

> The fake yearbook evidence is a big part of it, but the other way you usually know is from things like he is clearly an enemy of the establishment which provides strong motivation for a crime like this, as well as the fact that none of this stuff has ever come forward about him until now.. and then finally how the establishment media has organized against him and how they have been reporting it all. 
> 
> If your'e paying attention, though, the media is starting to hedge on this one, because the yearbook forgery is really damning and they know it and they want to protect their brand. That is yet ANOTHER clue...
> 
> 
> 
> Well it depends on what they can prove with the yearbook photo lady, he may be able to sue her. The other ones it would be difficult to prove unless there was some evidence that it definitely didn't happen.. but it's that process of how this all happened and how the establishment and media coalesced with not a previous accusation that makes me think the whole thing is a setup by the establishment.
> 
> Does that mean there is not one woman here who is telling some vague amount of truth? Maybe he did date younger girls and made passes on occasion, but it could be none of that ever happened at all. 
> ...


OK, but what I really want to know are the other two questions I asked:

Do you think the "groping photo" was a criminal act? Personally I don't think sexual harassment should be crime. Only sexual assault.

I don't think either Moore or Franken should be removed from office, it should be up to the voters. Do you think Franken should be charged with a crime or removed from office?

----------


## dannno

> OK, but what I really want to know are the other two questions I asked:
> 
> Do you think the "groping photo" was a criminal act? Personally I don't think sexual harassment should be crime. Only sexual assault.
> 
> I don't think either Moore or Franken should be removed from office, it should be up to the voters. Do you think Franken should be charged with a crime or removed from office?



Ya I tried to answer those questions earlier and I don't really know how to answer them well.

I think it should become public what he did, since she chose to make it public, and I would hope the voters would stop voting for him - if anything else for being a hypocrite on the issue. 

I don't think that Al Franken should definitely be kicked out of the Senate, but that is kinda up to the Senate. I suppose they could, but there are many other politicians who have done much worse so it would set a pretty low precedent. 

If I were the girl, I wouldn't charge him with a crime, I would just make it public and say that it was hurtful and I want everybody to know what he did. I don't think jail time is going to provide any sort of restitution for her, and it doesn't really rise to the level of imprisonment to keep other women safe.  Assaulting a woman in her sleep should be a crime, technically he committed it, but there is some context that makes it a little less severe than say a guy doing the same in a dark alley.

----------


## Madison320

> If I were the girl, I wouldn't charge him with a crime, I would just make it public and say that it was hurtful and I want everybody to know what he did. I don't think jail time is going to provide any sort of restitution for her, and it doesn't really rise to the level of imprisonment to keep other women safe.  Assaulting a woman in her sleep should be a crime, technically he committed it, but there is some context that makes it a little less severe than say a guy doing the same in a dark alley.


I can't believe you'd think that the "groping photo" thing would be even remotely close to being a crime. I think you are way off there. And it shouldn't be up to the victim to determine whether some act is a crime. The victim can determine if they want to press charges, but not if the act is actually criminal or not.

The other part where Franken was trying to get her to rehearse the kissing scene is much worse but I still don't think it's ca real crime. A real crime needs to be physical or the threat of it. If Franken was physically trying to restrain her against her will, or threatened it, that would be a crime. But if she just has to say no and that's the end of it, it shouldn't be a crime.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> That would be a horrendous precedent and violation of the constitution. Roy Moore, and the state of Alabama would bring it to court.  There's no way the senate can force another election on the state until after expulsion of Moore.


Art. I Sec. 5




> Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its  Members for disorderly Behaviour, and, with the Concurrence of two  thirds, expel a Member.


Moore can bring it to court, sure, and the court will decline to make a decision.

It's a "political question," like impeachment of a President. 

As I said, the courts won't touch it.

----------


## phill4paul

> Art. I Sec. 5
> 
> 
> 
> Moore can bring it to court, sure, and the court will decline to make a decision.
> 
> It's a "political question," like impeachment of a President. 
> 
> As I said, the courts won't touch it.


  I don't think it's about Moore bring it forward. However, if he is elected, and denied, the state could bring it before the supreme's and they would have to answer.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> I don't think it's about Moore bring it forward. However, if he is elected, and denied, the state could bring it before the supreme's and they would have to answer.


The State could do that, sure.

And the SCOTUS would deny certiorari.

No court will ever review this decision.

----------


## dannno

> I can't believe you'd think that the "groping photo" thing would be even remotely close to being a crime. I think you are way off there. And it shouldn't be up to the victim to determine whether some act is a crime. The victim can determine if they want to press charges, but not if the act is actually criminal or not.
> 
> The other part where Franken was trying to get her to rehearse the kissing scene is much worse but I still don't think it's ca real crime. A real crime needs to be physical or the threat of it. If Franken was physically trying to restrain her against her will, or threatened it, that would be a crime. But if she just has to say no and that's the end of it, it shouldn't be a crime.


How can she say no if she is asleep?

Pretty sure if you go up to a girl on the street and honk her boobs like that, she can charge you with assault.

----------


## spudea

> Art. I Sec. 5
> 
> 
> 
> Moore can bring it to court, sure, and the court will decline to make a decision.
> 
> It's a "political question," like impeachment of a President. 
> 
> As I said, the courts won't touch it.


No they can't do whatever they want.  The constitution sets the qualifications, and the states determine their methods of elections and selection of their senators.  Each house can judge these terms and certify the candidate has met these terms, but to deny to seat a duly elected candidate that meets the constitutional qualifications would constitute a trespass against the state of Alabama.  When brought to federal court it would be a easy decision for a Judge to say anyone seeking to prevent Roy Moore from entering the senate will be in contempt and face jail time.

The question on seating a senator is stupid anyways.  They could just immediately hold a vote to expel.  I'm sure they have the 2/3rds needed to kick out roy moore right now.

----------


## pao

> The other part where Franken was trying to get her to rehearse the kissing scene is much worse but I still don't think it's ca real crime. A real crime needs to be physical or the threat of it. If Franken was physically trying to restrain her against her will, or threatened it, that would be a crime. But if she just has to say no and that's the end of it, it shouldn't be a crime.


I also think the "kiss" was much worse...
From what I heard in her interview, he physically forced their mouths together by grabbing the back of her head and shoved his tongue into her mouth, and she had to strongly push him away to get him to stop. That sounds pretty physical and restraining to me.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> No they can't do whatever they want.  The constitution sets the qualifications, and the states determine their methods of elections and selection of their senators.  Each house can judge these terms and certify the candidate has met these terms, but to deny to seat a duly elected candidate that meets the constitutional qualifications would constitute a trespass against the state of Alabama.  When brought to federal court it would be a easy decision for a Judge to say anyone seeking to prevent Roy Moore from entering the senate will be in contempt and face jail time.
> 
> The question on seating a senator is stupid anyways.  They could just immediately hold a vote to expel.  I'm sure they have the 2/3rds needed to kick out roy moore right now.


That isn't what will happen.

----------


## euphemia

> How can she say no if she is asleep?
> 
> Pretty sure if you go up to a girl on the street and honk her boobs like that, she can charge you with assault.


When I heard her tell it, Franken had pretty much been a jerk the whole trip.  

I have a very low tolerance for that sort of nonsense.  Men are hard wired to be display their manliness and to be aggressive.  I get that.  At the same time, I am not going to let a man keep embarrassing himself if I'm not interested.  "Dude, you've got to stop."  And I don't mind saying that loudly.  One chance, and I go into crescendo.  "Sir, I don't think you heard me."  _"Sir, I think I was very clear."_ *"Sir, keep your hands to yourself and leave me alone."* 

He would have understood very well, and would have been in too much pain to mug for the camera after that.

----------


## Swordsmyth

“Donations have been pouring in from Alabama and from all over the  country in an unprecedented way,” Moore campaign manager Brett Doster  told The Post on Saturday.
 Moore’s campaign raised $500,000 in three days last week and ramped up its online fundraising efforts, Doster said.
 The embattled Republican collected more online donations between Nov.  10 and Nov. 15 — the first six days after the scandal broke — than in  the six weeks after winning the GOP nomination in a contentious  September primary, Doster confirmed.
 “We are confident that we will have the resources over the next three weeks to finish strong with victory,” he said.

More at: https://nypost.com/2017/11/18/roy-mo...-school-girls/

----------


## spudea

> That isn't what will happen.





> Stanley Brand, an expert in congressional ethics investigations, said a vote to expel Moore could run afoul of the *1969 Supreme Court Powell v. McCormack* ruling, because Moore’s alleged misconduct took place before the election and was known to voters.
> 
> *The court ruled nearly 50 years ago that the House acted unconstitutionally* by voting overwhelmingly to exclude Adam Clayton Powell Jr. of New York because of alleged personal and financial misconduct. 
> 
> “If the electorate votes for that member notwithstanding the conduct, the presumption is they’ve condoned or pardoned the conduct,” Brand said.
> 
> He noted the Supreme Court ruled in Powell v. McCormack that the qualifications for the Senate are fixed in the constitution and Moore meets them as a resident of Alabama over the minimum age requirement. 
> 
> “*You can’t refuse to seat a member who possesses those qualifications*. That leaves open the issue of whether you could expel that member,” Brand said.


http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/3...-to-stop-moore




> Brief Fact Summary. After being elected to the House of Representatives (the House), the House denied membership to the Plaintiff-Petitioner, Powell (Plaintiff). Plaintiff now sues for installment as a representative.


https://www.casebriefs.com/blog/law/...l-v-mccormack/

Anything else Rev?

----------


## Zippyjuan

Trump spokeswoman Conway says don't vote for Doug Jones so they can get a vote on the tax plan but refuses to actually endorse Roy Moore on Fox TV. When asked about voting for Moore she changed the subject back to Jones. 




> Kellyanne Conway suggested that the White House remains open to Roy Moore's embattled senate candidacy on Monday when she told Fox & friends that "we want the votes in the Senate to get this tax bill through" -- less than a week after Conway said that "no Senate seat is worth more than a child" in the wake of a series of sexual allegations against Moore.
> 
> Conway was interviewed by Fox News on Monday morning, and was discussing tax reform when she began hammering Doug Jones, the Democrat in the Alabama Senate race.
> 
> "Doug Jones in Alabama, folks, don't be fooled. He will be a vote against tax cuts. He is weak on crime. Weak on borders. He is strong on raising your taxes. He is terrible for property owners."
> 
> The "Fox & Friends" hosts seemed surprised by Conway's remarks, and host Brian Kilmeade cut in,* "So vote Roy Moore?"
> 
> "I'm telling you that we want the votes in the Senate to get this tax bill through.* And the media -- if the media were really concerned about all of these allegations, and if that's what this is truly about, and the Democrats -- Al Franken would be on the ash heap of bygone half funny comedians," Conway said, referencing allegations made against the Minnesota senator.
> ...

----------


## dannno

> I can't believe you'd think that the "groping photo" thing would be even remotely close to being a crime. I think you are way off there.


Let's say Biff was at a frat party and there was a picture taken of him groping a passed out girl's breasts and it got out.

How fast would Biff be expelled from school and charged with sexual assault?

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Let's say Biff was at a frat party and there was a picture taken of him groping a passed out girl's breasts and it got out.
> 
> How fast would Biff be expelled from school and charged with sexual assault?


Let's say he posted a video on Facebook where he bragged about groping women.  Should he be kicked out of school?

----------


## dannno

> Let's say he posted a video on Facebook where he bragged about groping women.  Should he be kicked out of school?


Was it with their consent? Did they let him do it?

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Was it with their consent? Did they let him do it?


He will say they consented- whether they did or didn't. Should the school keep an admitted predator?

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Trump spokeswoman Conway says don't vote for Doug Jones so they can get a vote on the tax plan but refuses to actually endorse Roy Moore on Fox TV. When asked about voting for Moore she changed the subject back to Jones.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 			
> 				"And a lot of women," co-host Ainsley Earhardt added.


And that is the current political goal of this hysteria. It's all about discouraging women from voting for a specific candidate.

The other ramifications and unintended consequences of this witch hunt are secondary. The end (defeating Moore) justifies the means and the collateral damage, in the eyes of the Bolshevik establishment and leftist radicals.

----------


## dannno

> He will say they consented- whether they did or didn't. Should the school keep an admitted predator?


Where did the predator stuff come from? I thought the evidence was based on the video admission? 

If in the video admission, he bragged about groping women with their consent, then what is he admitting to that is illegal?

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Where did the predator stuff come from? I thought the evidence was based on the video admission? 
> 
> If in the video admission, he bragged about groping women with their consent, then what is he admitting to that is illegal?


Clinton never admitted wrongdoing.  Should his impreachment investigation have been called off?  Afterall, it was just politically motivated accusations from the opposing party.

----------


## dannno

> Clinton never admitted wrongdoing.  Should his impreachment investigation have been called off?  Afterall, it was just politically motivated accusations from the opposing party.


His impeachment investigation was a white wash, it should have focused on his actual crimes and sexual assaults, not Lewinsky.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> His impeachment investigation was a white wash, it should have focused on his actual crimes and sexual assaults, not Lewinsky.


But like Moore, they were alleged crimes.  He was only found guilty of lying to congress- not for anything he actually did.   If Moore deserves a pass, doesn't Clinton?

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Where did the predator stuff come from? I thought the evidence was based on the video admission? 
> 
> If in the video admission, he bragged about groping women with their consent, then what is he admitting to that is illegal?


Isn't the video an admission of guilt?

----------


## Jamesiv1

> But like Moore, they were alleged crimes.  He was only found guilty of lying to congress- not for anything he actually did.   If Moore deserves a pass, doesn't Clinton?


If Moore's accuser produces a 40-yr old garment with Moore's love juice on it, yes.

----------


## dannno

> But like Moore, they were alleged crimes.  He was only found guilty of lying to congress- not for anything he actually did.   If Moore deserves a pass, doesn't Clinton?


There are hundreds of murders, financial dealings and sexual assaults that if investigated would land both of the Clintons in jail for thousands of years.

One huge difference between Clinton and Moore is that one of Clinton's sexual assaults was witnessed by a worker at a hotel and they can corroborate the story with the woman.

----------


## dannno

> Isn't the video an admission of guilt?


No, it's an admission of pimp. He specifically said the women consented. Did they? I don't know, but he did not admit guilt at all. He admitted that women wanted to $#@! him for his money and power.

Pretty straightforward, unless you have Trump derangement syndrome.

----------


## specsaregood

> But like Moore, they were alleged crimes.  He was only found guilty of lying to congress- not for anything he actually did.   If Moore deserves a pass, doesn't Clinton?


What crimes have been alleged against Moore?

----------


## Jamesiv1

> Isn't the video an admission of guilt?


That recording sounds pretty much exactly like being in a courtroom, swearing on a Bible and being asked a question by the prosecuting attorney under threat of contempt of court.

Doesn't sound at all like a rich bigshot bragging to impress a giggling, fawning audience.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> No, it's an admission of pimp. He specifically said the women consented. Did they? I don't know, but he did not admit guilt at all. He admitted that women wanted to $#@! him for his money and power.
> 
> Pretty straightforward, unless you have Trump derangement syndrome.


Clinton said the same thing- that it was consensual. No big deal- depending on your political leanings.

----------


## dannno

> Clinton said the same thing- that it was consensual. No big deal.


Ya, the worker who heard all the commotion and screaming has a different story.

----------


## Brian4Liberty



----------


## Swordsmyth

*Manager Disputes Claim That Roy Moore Was Banned From Mall*One of the strangest allegations leveled against U.S. Senate  candidate Roy Moore (shown) of Alabama is that he was “banned” from a  shopping mall in Gadsden, Alabama, in the late 1970s for allegedly  “trolling” for young women. As with similar accusations that have been  lodged against Moore, the candidate has denied the charge.
 In this case, the mall manager from 1981-1998, Barnes Boyle, told  local TV station WBRC late last week that Moore was never banned from  the mall.
 “Sure, it’s part of the job, yeah. We did have written reports and  things, so, but to my knowledge, he was not banned from the mall,” Boyle  told WBRC, A Fox affiliate. News anchor Janet Hall found Boyle after_ The_ _New Yorker_  magazine ran a story citing rumors that Moore had been banned, finally  conceding, “We cannot confirm that,” in regard to the magazine’s  charges.
_The New Yorker_ began digging for information on the  allegations that Moore pursued teenage girls at a time he was in his  early thirties. Moore has been married for almost 33 years, and has four  children and five granddaughters. As Snopes — a fact-checking Internet  site which is regarded as having a general liberal bias — noted, “The  report, however, is based on sources recalling a rumor, in some cases.”
 Snopes contacted mall officials, who told them that they do not have any records that date back that far.
_The New Yorker_ reporter Charles Bethea appears to have based  much of his story on either rumors, hearsay, or anonymous sources who  asked that he leave their names out of his article.
 Teresa Jones, who was a deputy attorney in Etowah County (where Moore  was later a judge) in the 1980s, told CNN that she had heard a “rumor”  that Moore was banned.

More at: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...nned-from-mall

----------


## Zippyjuan

> *We did have written reports and things*


So he was trolling for girls at the mall, just wasn't banned from it for doing so?  




> information on the allegations that Moore* pursued teenage girls at a time he was in his early thirties.*

----------


## Swordsmyth

> So he was trolling for girls at the mall, just wasn't banned from it for doing so?


So what? Idiots report all sorts of things that are not a problem.

----------


## dannno

> So he was trolling for girls at the mall, just wasn't banned from it for doing so?


He didn't specifically say that the written reports were about Roy Moore and underage girls, he just said that they took and collected reports on those type of things. I suppose that could be what he meant, but he wasn't specific.

----------


## Swordsmyth

In an “unscientific” poll conducted by the _Trussville_ (Alabama) _Tribune_ on Monday, Senate candidate Judge Roy Moore is leading his Democratic opponent Doug Jones by 58 percent to 35 percent. The _Tribune_  quizzed 2,741 readers in Trussville and surrounding towns in the  suburbs of Birmingham (total population: 70,000) 80 percent of whom told  the _Tribune_ that they were not buying into the media depiction of Moore as a sexual predator.

More at: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...udge-roy-moore

----------


## Jamesiv1

> In an “unscientific” poll conducted by the _Trussville_ (Alabama) _Tribune_ on Monday, Senate candidate Judge Roy Moore is leading his Democratic opponent Doug Jones by 58 percent to 35 percent. The _Tribune_  quizzed 2,741 readers in Trussville and surrounding towns in the  suburbs of Birmingham (total population: 70,000) 80 percent of whom told  the _Tribune_ that they were not buying into the media depiction of Moore as a sexual predator.
> 
> More at: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...udge-roy-moore


Sweet.

----------


## Swordsmyth

Flanked by fame-seeking feminist attorney Gloria Allred, Beverly  Young Nelson gave a teary-eyed press conference November 13 claiming  that GOP Senate candidate Roy Moore violently sexually assaulted her in  1977, when she was 16. But other individuals, in positions to know, are  now disputing key facts in Nelson’s story.
 Notable among them is retired public school teacher Rhonda Ledbetter,  who for almost three years, 1977 -’79, worked at the restaurant where  the alleged assault took place, Olde Hickory House in Gadsden, Alabama.  Another is former sheriff's deputy Johnny Belyeu, Sr., who stated that  he was a “regular” at the restaurant and that he personally knew Moore  from the Etowah County courthouse in the 1970s. The last is former  waitress Renee Schivera, who says that she worked at Olde Hickory House  during the summer of ’77.
 Here are their revelations, summed up by _Gateway Pundit_:
 1.) The Olde Hickory House required employees to be at least 16. Beverly Nelson claims she was 15 when she started.
 2.) The restaurant’s dumpsters were on the side of the building and not in back as Nelson claimed.
 3.) A former employee says the restaurant NEVER closed at 11 PM as Nelson claimed and at midnight on most nights.
 4.) Customers at the counter were served  by the bartender or cook and not by any waitress [thus, Moore wouldn’t  have had occasion to interact with Nelson, the theory goes].
 5.) *The witnesses claim they have shared this information with several news outlets but they have refused to report the truth!*
 Most significantly, all three witnesses state that they _never saw Judge Moore dining at the restaurant_. Ledbetter told WHNT 19 News, “I never once saw Roy Moore come into the restaurant in all the time that I worked there.”
 Likewise, Johnny Belyeu, Sr., who, again, knew Moore personally,  tells us, “I was a regular customer at Olde Hickory House … and I never  once saw Judge Moore come in there,” reported One News Now. Schivera also states that she never saw the judge at the restaurant.
 This appears to vindicate Judge Moore’s statement, “I don’t even know  where the restaurant is or was,” which initially was scoffed at.

Much more at: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...-been-debunked

----------


## phill4paul

> Flanked by fame-seeking feminist attorney Gloria Allred, Beverly  Young Nelson gave a teary-eyed press conference November 13 claiming  that GOP Senate candidate Roy Moore violently sexually assaulted her in  1977, when she was 16. But other individuals, in positions to know, are  now disputing key facts in Nelson’s story.
>  Notable among them is retired public school teacher Rhonda Ledbetter,  who for almost three years, 1977 -’79, worked at the restaurant where  the alleged assault took place, Olde Hickory House in Gadsden, Alabama.  Another is former sheriff's deputy Johnny Belyeu, Sr., who stated that  he was a “regular” at the restaurant and that he personally knew Moore  from the Etowah County courthouse in the 1970s. The last is former  waitress Renee Schivera, who says that she worked at Olde Hickory House  during the summer of ’77.
>  Here are their revelations, summed up by _Gateway Pundit_:
>  1.) The Olde Hickory House required employees to be at least 16. Beverly Nelson claims she was 15 when she started.
>  2.) The restaurant’s dumpsters were on the side of the building and not in back as Nelson claimed.
>  3.) A former employee says the restaurant NEVER closed at 11 PM as Nelson claimed and at midnight on most nights.
>  4.) Customers at the counter were served  by the bartender or cook and not by any waitress [thus, Moore wouldn’t  have had occasion to interact with Nelson, the theory goes].
>  5.) *The witnesses claim they have shared this information with several news outlets but they have refused to report the truth!*
>  Most significantly, all three witnesses state that they _never saw Judge Moore dining at the restaurant_. Ledbetter told WHNT 19 News, “I never once saw Roy Moore come into the restaurant in all the time that I worked there.”
> ...


  Is it any wonder she won't submit the signature for scrutiny?

----------


## Swordsmyth

After refusing to discuss allegations that Alabama Senate candidate  Roy Moore had inappropriate sexual contact with nine women when they  were still teenagers, President Donald Trump *has for the first time spoken out about the controversy*  during a impromptu conference with a group of reporters just before he  and his family departed Washington for the Thanksgiving holiday.
 In a response that outraged at least one reporter who shouted  questions about the girls' alleged age at the time after the president  finished speaking, Trump suggested that he has taken Moore's denials at  face value. And even if the allegations are true, the "Republican party  doesn't need a liberal Democrat in that seat" Trump said.
  "Well he denies it, Roy Moore totally denies it. And by the way, he  gives a total denial. And I have to say, 40 years is a long time. He's  run eight races and this has never come up. The women are Trump voters,  most of them are Trump voters. So I guess you have to do what you have  to do," Trump said.
*"I can tell you one thing for sure. We don't need a liberal  person in there, a Democrat. I looked at his record he's terrible on  crime terrible on borders," Trump added. "We don't need somebody who's  soft on crime like Jones." 

*More at: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-1...-democrat-seat*

Before anyone jumps on the "soft on crime" comment to claim Moore is a statist law and order type read this:

*
 *Shocker: New York Times Writes Positive Article on Roy Moore*

Maybe it wasn’t meant that way. From the _Times’_  piece’s title,  “In Sex Crimes and Other Cases, Roy Moore Often Sided  With Defendants,”  readers may assume the implication is that Judge  Moore exhibited the  common human tendency to go soft on that of which  one is himself guilty.  (As with seemingly everyone now, Moore currently  faces  sexual-misconduct allegations.) Instead, however, the _Times_ paints a picture of a moral, principled judge who often sided with the little guy against the powers that be.

What may surprise many, however, is that judge Moore’s principles, as   true principles will, extended to areas that his passions didn’t. As   the _Times_ reports,   “‘He consistently was more interested in the arguments of the criminal   defendants than many of his colleagues,’ said Matt Lembke, an  appellate  lawyer in Birmingham who has argued several cases in front of  Mr. Moore.  ‘And I think that stemmed from a distrust of government  power reflected  in his judicial philosophy.’”
 As for Moore’s empathy, the _Times_ provides some striking examples:
 When a man on death row missed a filing  deadline with a lower court,  and when most of the Alabama Supreme Court  opted not to review his  case, Mr. Moore was one of two justices who  voted the other way and  said some of the evidence used to convict him  seemed deficient.
 In another instance, Mr. Moore wrote that  a man’s “sentence of life  imprisonment without the possibility of  parole for a nonviolent,  drug-related crime reveals grave flaws in our  statutory sentencing  scheme.”
 And in another case, Mr. Moore dissented  and said a man’s unpaid meal  at a Waffle House should have led to a  theft conviction, not a 35-year  sentence for robbery. He called the  case, which the majority voted not  to review, “a serious miscarriage of  justice.”
 Two lawyers who worked with Moore told the _Times_ that the  judge  sought to protect those wronged by the system. “‘He had no love  for  criminals, but he believed that every defendant was entitled to due   process of law,’ one of the lawyers, Matthew Clark, said in an e-mail.   ‘He saw many cases where the defendants, especially young black men,   would be convicted solely on very weak circumstantial evidence.’”
 Unsurprisingly — to those acquainted with the soul of a dutiful judge  —  Moore’s constitutionalism extended beyond social issues and to all   areas of his jurisprudence. A good example was the case of a black   17-year-old named Eric L. Higdon, who received 23 years’ incarceration   for sexually assaulting a younger boy at a daycare center. Moore   dissented from the majority opinion in Higdon’s appeal, reasoning that   “while Mr. Higdon was guilty of one form of sodomy, another sodomy law   used to convict him was never meant to apply to abuse ‘of children by   other children,’ the _Times_ informs. “Mr. Moore wrote that   ‘sodomy is an abhorrent crime and should be strictly punished’ but that   ‘I am concerned the court is stepping into the shoes of the legislature   in this case.’”
 This dissent was used against Moore in the Republican primary by his   opponent, Luther Strange, who accused the judge of being soft on child   molesters. Yet Moore was merely exhibiting discipline, a quality   required for a judge to rule contrary to his own will, feelings, or   agenda. And without discipline there is no rule of law.

More at: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...e-on-roy-moore


*Tell me again what a "statist" "law and order" type he is.*

----------


## milgram

ABC News (TV) reported that Trump would rather have an "accused child molester" in the Senate than a Democrat

----------


## Influenza

> No, it's an admission of pimp. He specifically said the women consented. Did they? I don't know, but he did not admit guilt at all. He admitted that women wanted to $#@! him for his money and power.
> 
> Pretty straightforward, unless you have Trump derangement syndrome.


I remember when we had the discussion about this video before and you came to the conclusion that Trump had a 100% success rate in determining which women would be ok with his kiss first ask questions later policy. But we actually know, from trump himself, that he didn't have a 100% success rate. In the same conversation even

Trump: I moved on her, actually. You know, she was down on Palm Beach. I moved on her, and I failed. I’ll admit it.
Trump: I did try and $#@! her. She was married.

So he did fail at least once in knowing which women would accept his advances. So, we know that the option you chose was definitely wrong, which only leaves two options:

I. Trump has sexually harassed/assaulted at least 1 woman
II. Trump lied and doesn't actually just start kissing women before consent

He has also admitted to other accusations against him - like walking into miss usa/universe changing rooms unannounced to look at naked girls&women

Or maybe the 90s lawsuit that was settled outside of court for millions of dollars

Or maybe the myriad of other accusations against him, in which the women claimed he would "just start kissing/grabbing them," in the exact way he described

----------


## dannno

> I remember when we had the discussion about this video before and you came to the conclusion that Trump had a 100% success rate in determining which women would be ok with his kiss first ask questions later policy. But we actually know, from trump himself, that he didn't have a 100% success rate. In the same conversation even
> 
> Trump: I moved on her, actually. You know, she was down on Palm Beach. I moved on her, and I failed. Ill admit it.
> Trump: I did try and $#@! her. She was married.
> 
> So he did fail at least once in knowing which women would accept his advances. So, we know that the option you chose was definitely wrong, which only leaves two options:
> 
> I. Trump has sexually harassed/assaulted at least 1 woman
> II. Trump lied and doesn't actually just start kissing women before consent
> ...



No, there is nothing Trump has said that indicates he assaulted a woman. All he said is he moved on her.. That could mean he went in for a kiss and she pulled away..

Making a move on a woman is not necessarily sexual assault, in fact MOST women EXPECT the man to make the first move.. 

If the first move is grabbing her pussy, and it fails, then I suppose the woman could press charges for sexual assault. So ya, the first move is done in a sneaky way where they can't see it coming and the guy does something really egregious, it could be considered sexual assault..

----------


## angelatc



----------


## dannno

> Trump endorsed Strange.


Ya, but he realized that was a mistake that came from the swamp and now he is endorsing the right person.

----------


## TheCount

> Ya, but he realized that was a mistake that came from the swamp and now he is endorsing the right person.


 The true Trump Derangement Syndrome.

----------


## Jamesiv1

> The true Trump Derangement Syndrome.


You just crying cuz Trump keeps winning. SAD!

----------


## LibertyEagle

> Clinton never admitted wrongdoing.  Should his impreachment investigation have been called off?  Afterall, it was just politically motivated accusations from the opposing party.


Yes, I agree.  It was stupid to impeach Clinton for getting a blowjob in the white house.  What he should have been impeached for and then hanged for was for selling military technical secrets to the Chinese government.

----------


## Jamesiv1

> Yes, I agree.  It was stupid to impeach Clinton for getting a blowjob in the white house.  What he should have been impeached for and then hung for was for selling military technical secrets to the Chinese government.


^yep.

Anybody that thinks its wrong for POTUS to get a bj now and then from a grateful US American Citizen© can get the hell on out.

----------


## FSP-Rebel

> The true Trump Derangement Syndrome.


You are clearly infected.

----------


## sparebulb

> Yes, I agree.  It was stupid to impeach Clinton for getting a blowjob in the white house.  What he should have been impeached for and then hung *hanged* for was for selling military technical secrets to the Chinese government.


Being "hung" relates to the subject of his impeachment.

Grammar matters.

----------


## angelatc

> Ya, but he realized that was a mistake that came from the swamp and now he is endorsing the right person.


It's weird to see you here politicking for a theocrat, but whatever. 

IMHO, his endorsement of Strange saved him a lot of grief.

----------


## Jamesiv1

> It's weird to see you here politicking for a theocrat, but whatever. 
> 
> IMHO, his endorsement of Strange saved him a lot of grief.


6D chess.

----------


## specsaregood

> IMHO, his endorsement of Strange saved him a lot of grief.


The irony of it all being what "strange" is slang for.

----------


## Madison320

> But like Moore, they were alleged crimes.  He was only found guilty of lying to congress- not for anything he actually did.   If Moore deserves a pass, doesn't Clinton?


LOL!

Yeah, they're almost the same except that Clinton was accused of more crimes, that were more serious, over a longer period of time, more recent and with more evidence. Other than that they were almost identical!

----------


## Jamesiv1

> LOL!
> 
> Yeah, they're almost the same except that Clinton was accused of more crimes, that were more serious, over a longer period of time, more recent and with more evidence. Other than that they were almost identical!


Moore didn't leave behind a blue dress with love juice on it, either.

----------


## dannno

> It's weird to see you here politicking for a theocrat, but whatever. 
> 
> IMHO, his endorsement of Strange saved him a lot of grief.


He is a military non-interventionist and promotes small government.. From what I've read he was a fair judge who helped people that were being screwed by the system.  I don't care that much if he wants to put up or allow religious displays..

----------


## AuH20

What are they going to do with Kelli Ward, when you examine the treatment both McDaniel and Moore have received?

----------


## Champ

> What are they going to do with Kelli Ward, when you examine the treatment both McDaniel and Moore have received?


If they go ahead with the exorcism of the Clintons to save the Democrat party and continue building the allegations against Hillary as an enabler for Bill who silenced and attacked his victims, they could eventually make the same accusations against Ward.  Beginning to see more articles in this vein, especially regarding Juanita Broaddrick.

"Kelli Ward: a misogynistic sexual abuse enabler, who allowed and supported her husband in groping women in the work place making her an enemy of women in our courageous fight for feminism and social justice."

Twisted thought and strategy like this are no longer that far fetched.  Now whether it will work or not is another question, but leftism seems to have run out of options but to double down on this technique.

----------


## TheCount

> Moore didn't leave behind a blue dress with love juice on it, either.


Because the girls weren't old enough to wear dresses?

----------


## dannno

> Because the girls weren't old enough to wear dresses?


How old is somebody who doesn't exist?

----------


## Raginfridus

> Being "hung" relates to the subject of his impeachment.


I thought that was sprung. Oh well.

----------


## phill4paul

> Because the girls weren't old enough to wear dresses?


  All the accusers were old enough to wear dresses. But, I suppose that doesn't support the "Moore is a "child" molester" left/progressive meme that is being used to equate what he may or may not have done with pedophilia.

----------


## Influenza

> How old is somebody who doesn't exist?


Even Roy Moore himself admits they all existed, was familiar with each of them, and may or may not have dated some of them (He doesn't recall whether or not he used to date teenagers while in his 30s)

----------


## sparebulb

> Even Roy Moore himself admits they all existed, was familiar with each of them, and may or may not have dated some of them (He doesn't recall whether or not he used to date teenagers while in his 30s)


Do you think that he is a danger to date teenage girls now?

Should we be nervous about Moore to the extent that we should support Jones?

----------


## phill4paul

> Even Roy Moore himself admits they all existed, was familiar with each of them, and may or may not have dated some of them (He doesn't recall whether or not he used to date teenagers while in his 30s)


  Are you being esoteric? Because it seems like you are being esoteric.

----------


## sparebulb

> Are you being esoteric? Because it seems like you are being esoteric.


If "esoteric" means "like Zippy", then I would say yes.

----------


## dannno

> Even Roy Moore himself admits they all existed, was familiar with each of them, and may or may not have dated some of them (He doesn't recall whether or not he used to date teenagers while in his 30s)


Bull$#@!, he said he never recalled meeting any of them, he even said he had never heard of the restaurant where he allegedly signed the forged yearbook.

There was an article just posted in this thread about how people who worked at the restaurant claimed the former 'waitress' never even worked there, made inaccurate statements about the restaurant and that they had never seen Roy Moore at the restaurant.

----------


## anaconda

> No conviction needed for Franken, the photographic evidence is right there.


I noticed the lady had all kinds of body armor on. Does this lessen the alleged offense?

----------


## Influenza

> Bull$#@!, he said he never recalled meeting any of them, he even said he had never heard of the restaurant where he allegedly signed the forged yearbook.
> 
> There was an article just posted in this thread about how people who worked at the restaurant claimed the former 'waitress' never even worked there, made inaccurate statements about the restaurant and that they had never seen Roy Moore at the restaurant.


Actually he said he dated many young women after vietnam, and he admitted to knowing two of the accusers by name. So, if workers at that restaurant don't remember a specific waitress from 40 years ago then she must be lying? Makes a lot of sense. But, if you want to refer to witness testimony, there sure is plenty of that in the favor of the accusers. The freak was banned from an Alabama mall for trying to pick up teenagers. Others said he liked to hangout at highschool football games and the police were instructed to keep him away from cheerleaders. "it was common knowledge that roy moore dated high school girls."

----------


## sparebulb

> The freak was banned from an Alabama mall for trying to pick up teenagers. Others said he liked to hangout at highschool football games and the police were instructed to keep him away from cheerleaders.


You keep recirculating allegations that are refuted by other witnesses.

Until you can produce more evidence, this is just as dishonest as recirculating the narrative that Rand and his neighbor fought over trees and compost.

----------


## dannno

> Actually he said he dated many young women after vietnam, and he admitted to knowing two of the accusers by name. So, if workers at that restaurant don't remember a specific waitress from 40 years ago then she must be lying? Makes a lot of sense. But, if you want to refer to witness testimony, there sure is plenty of that in the favor of the accusers.


Which two accusers did he claim to know, what did he claim their relationship was and how old were they? I guarantee they were not the underage accusers if he was claiming to have dated them.

I still don't believe you until you provide evidence, everything I've heard from Moore is that he completely denied all of the specific allegations, and that he dated younger girls. 




> The freak was banned from an Alabama mall for trying to pick up teenagers. Others said he liked to hangout at highschool football games and the police were instructed to keep him away from cheerleaders. "it was common knowledge that roy moore dated high school girls."


That is all bull$#@!, the mall manager was interviewed and said they never banned him from the mall and didn't even specify that he had received complaints about Moore.. turned out to be a rumor that some stooge reported to CNN.. sorta like that $#@!ing Skaggs tool with Rand. 

You know, we have a whole thread on all this stuff.. oh ya, it's this one.. why don't you read it?

----------


## Influenza

> Which two accusers did he claim to know, what did he claim their relationship was and how old were they? I guarantee they were not the underage accusers if he was claiming to have dated them.
> 
> I still don't believe you until you provide evidence, everything I've heard from Moore is that he completely denied all of the specific allegations, and that he dated younger girls.


Are you serious? Do you really have your head this far up your ass? He has certainly not "completely denied all specific allegations." He admitted to knowing two of the girls and said about one of them "I don't remember dating her, but if we did go on dates, we did." Very convincing.

Then when asked about buying alcohol for a minor on a date, he said something like "No, I remember she was at least 19, I wouldn't buy alcohol for a minor" which basically admitted that he had definitely dated that accuser.

He said "I dated a lot of young ladies" then he later said "I always had mothers permission before I dated the girls." How old would these girls be if he needed their mothers permission? 16? 17? 18? 19? He is literally admitting to dating teenagers, unless you really $#@!ing believe that its common for girls 20+ to need their mothers permission to date.

You retards earlier in this thread were saying amazingly stupid $#@! like "in the late 70s it was normal for 30+ year old guys to date high school girls," which is complete bull$#@! and anyone who claims this is simply lying. It's the 1970's not the 19th century what the $#@!.





> That is all bull$#@!, the mall manager was interviewed and said they never banned him from the mall and didn't even specify that he had received complaints about Moore.. turned out to be a rumor that some stooge reported to CNN.. sorta like that $#@!ing Skaggs tool with Rand. 
> 
> You know, we have a whole thread on all this stuff.. oh ya, it's this one.. why don't you read it?


The article is total BS. The manager that said Roy hadn't been banned was the manager from 81-88. Roy would have been banned in the late 70s, so very easy for it not to be known by this particular manager. There are plenty of people, like former police officers and colleagues of Moore who said he was interested in high school teenagers, and to watch out for him at malls/football games.

I don't know why you are supporting this guy and lying about his "small government credentials" when he 
1. wants more military spending
2. wants to outlaw homosexuality
3. spend billions on the wall
4. israel firster, wants to move embassy to jerusalem
5. wants to maintain huge nuclear arsenal

this list would likely be way longer but roy moore is extremely unintelligent and is thus scared to debate his opponents on the issues. In his interview with hannity, to which I was referring, he answers the same exact question in 3 different ways. "I'm not gonna dispute that I dated teenagers" "I don't remember dating teenagers" "I definitely didn't date teenagers" He is certainly a liar, but I suppose that you want to support this bible thumping taliban member low IQ low energy creep anyways

----------


## nikcers

> Are you serious? Do you really have your head this far up your ass? He has certainly not "completely denied all specific allegations." He admitted to knowing two of the girls and said about one of them "I don't remember dating her, but if we did go on dates, we did." Very convincing.
> 
> Then when asked about buying alcohol for a minor on a date, he said something like "No, I remember she was at least 19, I wouldn't buy alcohol for a minor" which basically admitted that he had definitely dated that accuser.
> 
> He said "I dated a lot of young ladies" then he later said "I always had mothers permission before I dated the girls." How old would these girls be if he needed their mothers permission? 16? 17? 18? 19? He is literally admitting to dating teenagers, unless you really $#@!ing believe that its common for girls 20+ to need their mothers permission to date.
> 
> You retards earlier in this thread were saying amazingly stupid $#@! like "in the late 70s it was normal for 30+ year old guys to date high school girls," which is complete bull$#@! and anyone who claims this is simply lying. It's the 1970's not the 19th century what the $#@!.
> 
> 
> ...


I don't think it has anything to do with politics, its the same stuff the left tried to hit Trump with. They had audio recordings of him talking about dating girls when they get a couple years older. Girls that are way too young. The same people defending him defended Trump's statements with the same talking points.  Men that are attracted to girls of the "consentual" age are probably cheering for him, like he is silently fighting for their cause. I just think the whole thing is fake news and it reminded me of the $#@! they did during the election that helped Trump win.

----------


## dannno

> Are you serious? Do you really have your head this far up your ass? He has certainly not "completely denied all specific allegations." He admitted to knowing two of the girls and said about one of them "I don't remember dating her, but if we did go on dates, we did." Very convincing.
> 
> Then when asked about buying alcohol for a minor on a date, he said something like "No, I remember she was at least 19, I wouldn't buy alcohol for a minor" which basically admitted that he had definitely dated that accuser.
> 
> He said "I dated a lot of young ladies" then he later said "I always had mothers permission before I dated the girls." How old would these girls be if he needed their mothers permission? 16? 17? 18? 19? He is literally admitting to dating teenagers, unless you really $#@!ing believe that its common for girls 20+ to need their mothers permission to date.
> 
> You retards earlier in this thread were saying amazingly stupid $#@! like "in the late 70s it was normal for 30+ year old guys to date high school girls," which is complete bull$#@! and anyone who claims this is simply lying. It's the 1970's not the 19th century what the $#@!.
> 
> 
> ...


Wow.... ok.. so you're saying that the girl who he knew but said he never recalled dating her must have dated him.. even though she may have lied about a civics lecture.. she was 17 but did not report any assaults.

And then he dated an 18 year old "accuser" who only accused him of buying alcohol for her a year before it was legal.. which he denies, says it was a dry county and he never would have done that.. took her on dates, no assault..

That's pretty weak sauce..

None of the girls who he actually assaulted, is there any proof that he ever knew any of them.

----------


## dannno

> I don't know why you are supporting this guy and lying about his "small government credentials" when he 
> 1. wants more military spending
> 2. wants to outlaw homosexuality
> 3. spend billions on the wall
> 4. israel firster, wants to move embassy to jerusalem
> 5. wants to maintain huge nuclear arsenal


He's a non-interventionist and for small government, those are our biggest issues right now.. If there was more than 10 senators who wanted to ban gay sex and that was becoming a legitimate issue of concern, I would have some pretty big reservations, but that isn't something that is going to come up for vote.

----------


## anaconda

> He's a non-interventionist and for small government, those are our biggest issues right now.. If there was more than 10 senators who wanted to ban gay sex and that was becoming a legitimate issue of concern, I would have some pretty big reservations, but that isn't something that is going to come up for vote.


This is my take on it, too. The 1 million citizens of the Middle East who don't get bombed or turned into refugees because of a Roy Moore vote might be quite happy. As long as a legislator is not in jail he/she can vote. Plus, uhmm, innocent until proven guilty. Forgive me for not believing a damn thing from the main stream media anymore. I also first assume that all newsworthy acts of violence are false flags or faked.

----------


## enhanced_deficit

If he won, that could be a paradigm shift indicating that a Republican can win even with tacit opposition from Trump clan.


*Ivanka Trump: There's a 'special place in hell for people who prey on children'*

----------


## Champ

Ok, the sexual allegation strategy has all but failed.  Bringing in Allred had the discrediting effect many here predicted, regardless if some of these women are telling the truth.  Allred's past and the link to her daughter, Lisa Bloom, a recent attorney and defender of Harvey Weinstein's behavior, did not escape the minds of many, but desperation seems to very much be a key factor in determining strategy here.

What is next in the establishment playbook?  Time is running out before the December election and there is no way they will capitulate on a Trump/Bannon momentum building candidate.  I guess we will find out soon.

----------


## Influenza

> Wow.... ok.. so you're saying that the girl who he knew but said he never recalled dating her must have dated him.. even though she may have lied about a civics lecture.. she was 17 but did not report any assaults.
> 
> And then he dated an 18 year old "accuser" who only accused him of buying alcohol for her a year before it was legal.. which he denies, says it was a dry county and he never would have done that.. took her on dates, no assault..
> 
> That's pretty weak sauce..
> 
> None of the girls who he actually assaulted, is there any proof that he ever knew any of them.


You said he denied all specific allegations, which was a lie as I just proved otherwise. He admitted to dating one teenager, basically said 50/50 on the other, then said he got mother's permission to date these very young ladies, so there were certainly more than one. Then he denied that he dated teenagers at all. 

He's proven to be a liar. But for some reason, because he didn't admit to assaulting some of the girls, you think there's no proof whatsoever. So you think only two of the women were telling the truth, because Roy Moore admitted to most of what they said, and the others are lying, because he didn't admit. And that's you're only reason. Anything short of CCTV footage and DNA evidence would fail to convince you. Only Roy Moore's own admission can do that. 

"Roy didn't assault those girls! He said he didn't!" -danno, ignoring the fact that Roy is a liar

----------


## sparebulb

> Do you think that he is a danger to date teenage girls now?
> 
> Should we be nervous about Moore to the extent that we should support Jones?


relevant bump

----------


## dannno

> You said he denied all specific allegations, which was a lie as I just proved otherwise. He admitted to dating one teenager, basically said 50/50 on the other, then said he got mother's permission to date these very young ladies, so there were certainly more than one. Then he denied that he dated teenagers at all. 
> 
> He's proven to be a liar. But for some reason, because he didn't admit to assaulting some of the girls, you think there's no proof whatsoever. So you think only two of the women were telling the truth, because Roy Moore admitted to most of what they said, and the others are lying, because he didn't admit. And that's you're only reason. Anything short of CCTV footage and DNA evidence would fail to convince you. Only Roy Moore's own admission can do that. 
> 
> "Roy didn't assault those girls! He said he didn't!" -danno, ignoring the fact that Roy is a liar


I wasn't including dating an 18+ teenager on the list of "allegations", nobody gives a $#@! about that. The allegation is that he gave her alcohol, which even then she was 18+ and most people start drinking in high school, almost everybody drinks in college..

If it came out he definetely dated 17 year olds, I guess even though it was legal there and then you could include it because it many places it is not legal, but 18+ is not some type of real "allegation" and most definitely not a crime.

----------


## nikcers

> I wasn't including dating an 18+ teenager on the list of "allegations", nobody gives a $#@! about that. The allegation is that he gave her alcohol, which even then she was 18+ and most people start drinking in high school, almost everybody drinks in college..
> 
> If it came out he definetely dated 17 year olds, I guess even though it was legal there and then you could include it because it many places it is not legal, but 18+ is not some type of real "allegation" and most definitely not a crime.


Not only that but society has changed since then, people keep acting like it hasn't. Back then people were married with kids by a certain age or had problems or baggage. It was way more common for women to marry older men back then because of this. Now because of the amount of women working in society its not as common because women aren't married to men for income as much anymore.

----------


## Swordsmyth

A new poll shows that Trump’s outspoken advocacy for Roy Moore is having a big impact in the Alabama primary, despite the multiple allegations of sexual assault against the Republican Senate candidate.
 The number of Trump supporters  who believe the assault allegations to be true has decreased  substantially, helping to prop Moore up. Ten days ago, 16 percent of  Trump supporters believed the women, compared with 51 percent who  didn’t. Today, just 9 percent say they believe them, while 63 percent  believe the women to be lying. 

More at: https://thinkprogress.org/trump-conv...-6e3cd734c9a7/

----------


## Swordsmyth

Moore has re-opened his 49 – 44 lead over the Democrat Doug Jones, according to progressive polling outlet Change Research. His lead is now as large as it was prior to November 9th, when the Washington Post first broke the story about a string of sexual assault allegations against Moore.

----------


## eleganz

Even if he wins, he is toxic and will be ineffective until this is resolved.  

The only thing he can do is vote yes or no (hey not bad if that vote is lock step with Rand every time) and beyond that he will have no voice.

----------


## specsaregood

> Moore has re-opened his 49 – 44 lead over the Democrat Doug Jones, according to progressive polling outlet Change Research. His lead is now as large as it was prior to November 9th, when the Washington Post first broke the story about a string of sexual assault allegations against Moore.


That must be why the new write-in campaign was just started.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ele...labama-n824531

----------


## parocks

> Yes, I agree.  It was stupid to impeach Clinton for getting a blowjob in the white house.  What he should have been impeached for and then hanged for was for selling military technical secrets to the Chinese government.


He was impeached because he lied about the blowjob in court, under oath, perjury, a felony, when Bill Clinton was being sued by Paula Jones for sexual harassment.

----------


## merkelstan

It's a little embarassing this soap opera commands anyone's attention while the US-supported genocide (near genocide?) in Yemen is happening.

----------


## William Tell



----------


## William Tell

> They could do it and no court would ever review it; they can do what they like.


 Your opinion vs Judge Nap's, should be interesting.

----------


## JamesFischer

I can't wait for him to win. It'll be a huge blow to the GOPe and the pro-thot agenda peddled by the left.

----------


## JamesFischer

> They could do it and no court would ever review it; they can do what they like.


No. The Supreme Court has ruled that Congress cannot refuse to seat a duly elected Congressman other than for failure to adhere to the qualifications stated under the Qualifications of Members Clause of Article One of the United States Constitution.

See  _Powell v. McCormack_

----------


## Anti Federalist

Negotiate Rights Away strikes again.



*NRA Hasn’t Rated Pro-Gun Roy Moore vs Pro-Gun Control Doug Jones (We Will)*

http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...ug-jones-will/

by AWR Hawkins29 Nov 201741

The NRA has not rated pro-gun Republican Roy Moore vs. pro-gun control Democrat Doug Jones in the race for the Alabama U.S. Senate seat, so Breitbart News is rating the two men for voters who are curious as to where the candidates stand on the Second Amendment.

To begin with, Doug Jones is not only open to more gun control but is actually supportive of more gun control.

On November 21 Breitbart News reported that Jones’ support of gun control might not be readily apparent to potential voters because Jones stayed mum on where he stood. But he uttered enough bits and pieces about his positions that clear pro-gun control positions came into focus. For example, he told the Washington Post that expanding background checks to gun shows “would be helpful.”

Jones did not point to even once incident where a mass public attacker acquired his guns at a gun show. Rather, he simply blew the dog whistle for leftists via the Democrats’ age-old war on gun shows.

Jones’ willingness to expand background checks is simply an outgrowth of his overarching belief that the Second Amendment is limited. The Alabama Political Reporter quoted him saying, “We’ve got limitations on all constitutional amendments in one form or another.” Again, this is same phraseology other leftists use when they seek to justify infringing on those rights of which it is written, “Shall not be infringed.” Gun control Sen. Chris Murphy (D-CT), for instance, said similar things when he told told Rachel Maddow, “The Second Amendment is not an absolute right, not a God-given right. It has always had conditions upon it like the First Amendment has.”

But wait–there is more. Politico recently gave Jones the opportunity to convince voters that he did not want to take their guns and Jones pivoted, focusing instead on another part of the question.

The bottom line is that Jones is another pro-gun control Democrat who varnishes over his liberal positions by assuring everyone he is pro-hunting, although the Second Amendment is not about hunting. Rather, it is about defending our lives and liberty from a tyranny within or without our borders. And this is where Roy Moore comes in. On September 12 he told Breitbart News that national reciprocity for concealed carry should be passed immediately and on September 25 he told an audience, “We’ve got to uphold the Second Amendment.”

He added, “You know, they say that guns are bad; that they kill people. Well I know a lot about guns–I’m the one that used guns in combat. I know what guns do…[But] guns don’t kill, people kill. [You could say] cars kill, are we going to get rid of our cars? Are we going to get rid of our knives?”

Moore lifted a concealed carry revolver in the air in two separate campaign events to show that he and his wife do more than just talk about carrying guns, they actually carry them.

And the differences between Moore and Jones are even clearer when one considers that Moore opposes the very gun controls Jones supports. For example, on September 20 Breitbart News reported that “Moore opposes an expansion of background checks for gun purchases. He views an expansion of background checks as a ruse by which the left can secure government-mandated firearm registration.”

It is clear that Moore understands the insidious nature of expanding background checks, be that expansion at gun shows or to all private sales. He sees that the end of such an expansion is gun registration. Moreover, Moore opposes an ‘assault weapons’ ban and a ‘high capacity’ magazine ban, two bans that are being feverishly pushed by the Democrat Party to which Doug Jones belongs.

*So rating these two candidates is not so hard. Moore is absolutely pro-Second Amendment, which includes being for concealed carry and self-defense while opposing the various infringements on liberty being pushed by the Democrat Party. On the other hand, Jones is absolutely pro-gun control, which includes supporting an expansion of background checks and viewing the Second Amendment as limited, therefore open to government regulation.

A victory for Moore means Republicans gain a strong pro-Second Amendment vote in the Senate. A victory for Jones means Sens. Chris Murphy (D-CT), Dianne Feinstein (D-CA), and Chuck Schumer (D-NY) get another pro-gun control vote, which bolsters their push to restrict to the Second Amendment.*

----------


## dannno

> No. The Supreme Court has ruled that Congress cannot refuse to seat a duly elected Congressman other than for failure to adhere to the qualifications stated under the Qualifications of Members Clause of Article One of the United States Constitution.
> 
> See  _Powell v. McCormack_


How could the founders of the country possibly envision that men would sexually harass women??

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> That must be why the new write-in campaign was just started.
> 
> https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ele...labama-n824531


Even McMuffin 2.0.

Wonder where Bill Kristol dug up this neocon loser?

----------


## William Tell

> Do you think reporters would NOT ask Anthony Weiner a pedo question in an interview today?


If Moore was convicted and sent to prison like Weiner you'd have a point. Alleged personal scandals go away after they've been proven ineffective at stopping a candidate. This is all about beating Moore.

----------


## fedupinmo

> Do you think reporters would NOT ask Anthony Weiner a pedo question in an interview today?


I am not aware of Weiner being accused of pedophilia, and Moore certainly hasn't been. Are you sure you know what that means?

----------


## Champ

> I am not aware of Weiner being accused of pedophilia, and Moore certainly hasn't been. Are you sure you know what that means?


Both of these people are accused of this on just about a daily basis depending on which website you visit.

----------


## fedupinmo

> Both of these people are accused of this on just about a daily basis depending on which website you visit.


Websites can claim anything... I refer to actual accusers. None of the accusations are actually pedophilia.
Then again, Weiner was texting pics of his junk to illegal aged girls, Moore might have asked young but legal girls out on dates. Conflating the two is just as fraudulent as pedo accusations.

----------


## Champ

> Websites can claim anything... I refer to actual accusers. None of the accusations are actually pedophilia.
> Then again, Weiner was texting pics of his junk to illegal aged girls, Moore might have asked young but legal girls out on dates. Conflating the two is just as fraudulent as pedo accusations.


This is correct.  No one that has come forward has actually called either a "pedophile" as far as I know, it's simply been implied and the media has ran with it for maximum effect.  They are both accused by many people and websites on a daily basis of being such, regardless of it being true or not, or the original accusers ever stating it.

----------


## EBounding

Who are the other "anti-establishment" candidates smeared with multiple sex abuse allegations?

----------


## Champ

Trump and Moore may have set the blueprint for defeating establishment mega money and smear campaign strategies that many are going to be forced to follow if they want any chance at winning in 2018.  Use of Twitter and alternative media sources allowing for manuveurability around the media blockade is required.

The establishment still has some tricks up their sleeve, as their roots run deep and pocketbooks are limitless.  Would be kind of hard to believe the ridiculous write in campaign to steal votes is all they have left, but time is running out.

----------


## johnwk

> Trump and Moore may have set the blueprint for defeating establishment mega money and smear campaign strategies that many are going to be forced to follow if they want any chance at winning in 2018.  Use of Twitter and alternative media sources allowing for manuveurability around the media blockade is required.
> 
> The establishment still has some tricks up their sleeve, as their roots run deep and pocketbooks are limitless.  Would be kind of hard to believe the ridiculous write in campaign to steal votes is all they have left, but time is running out.


The good news is, the Establishment loyalists' heads are exploding because they can no longer control and dominate the debate using their pinko and globalist establishment media.  Ordinary people are beginning to realize, through alternative media sources, how the leadership of our Establishment socialists/communists and Globalists, and their henchmen in the media, have been lying to them for years and lying about those running for political office who pose a threat to their notoriously evil  agenda.


JWK

*
Without our Fifth Column Media, Loretta Lynch, a corrupted FBI, Hillary Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama, would be making license tags in a federal penitentiary
*

----------


## Zippyjuan

Polls basically say a toss-up right now.  It will depend on which side turns out the most voters.   This is usually a very secure Republican seat. Jeff Sessions took 95% of the vote for this seat the last time around.

----------


## William Tell

Let me get this straight, Moore leads in 8 out of the 9 last Senate polls conducted from Nov. 18th to present. The only one he did not lead was a weird cell phone poll by the Washington Post the news outlet which has endorsed his opponent and created the attacks against him. Even in that poll he was only behind by 3%, and to Zippy that's a tossup.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Let me get this straight, Moore leads in 8 out of the 9 last Senate polls conducted from Nov. 18th to present. The only one he did not lead was a weird cell phone poll by the Washington Post the news outlet which has endorsed his opponent and created the attacks against him. Even in that poll he was only behind by 3%, and to Zippy that's a tossup.


With a five percent margin of error, a three percent lead is within the margin of error- hence a "toss up".

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/201...es_latest.html




> The Real Clear Politics polling compilation shows Moore leading Jones by an average of 2.6 percentage points - 48.2 percent for Moore, 45.6 for Jones.* For polls taken in November, Moore has an average lead of 1.5 percentage points, within the average margin of error.*
> 
> The figures reflect a stark turnaround for Moore, who *lead Jones by as much as 22 points* in an Emerson poll taken in September. After the Washington Post report, the match up *became a virtual tie and subsequent polls show a back-and-forth race* with numbers ranging from a 6-point lead for Moore in a CBS News/You Gov poll taken Nov. 28-Dec. 1 to a 3-point lead for Jones in a Nov. 27-30 poll conducted by the Washington Post.


And again to note that the Republicans got 95% of the vote for the same seat the last time around.

----------


## specsaregood

> And again to note that the Republicans got 95% of the vote for the same seat the last time around.


Right, in an off year where he ran against a nobody that raised/spent a grand total <5000USD.  In 2008 he only got 63% and in 2002 he got 58%, so don't act like 95% is the norm.

----------


## William Tell

> With a five percent margin of error, a three percent lead is within the margin of error- hence a "toss up".


 In other words Moore may have actually lead the WaPo poll. On the flip side most of the polls with Roy leading have him outside the margin of error.

----------


## JamesFischer

> In other words Moore may have actually lead the WaPo poll. On the flip side most of the polls with Roy leading have him outside the margin of error.


Moore will win, I don't think there's any doubt about that.

It all comes down to who votes and those more likely to vote for Jones (blacks, young people, low IQ cretins) generally don't vote and even less during special elections.

----------


## Swordsmyth

*Pro-Doug Jones Super PAC Using Voter Intimidation Tactics — Ad Claims ‘Your Vote Is Public Record’**Highway 31, a Birmingham-based pro-Doug Jones super PAC is using  what could be perceived as voter intimidation tactics against Roy Moore  by suggesting the votes cast in a December 12 special election  are “public record.”* Beginning last week, some Alabamians were posting on social media  about encountering online pre-roll video advertising making such a  claim.
 "Your vote is Public Record. And your community  will know if you helpd stop Roy Moore"  Anyone else think this looks  like voter intimidation? #VoterIntimidation pic.twitter.com/31dixv9aeu
 — Joemantler (@Joemantler) December 3, 2017 In watching some youtube videos on Cash Cab there  is an ad running for Doug Jones as follows:  "Your vote is public  record & your community will know if you voted to stop Roy Moore" @MooreSenate  I will just leave this here. #VoteRoyMoore
 — Joan Alexander (@joanalex28) December 3, 2017 @fmtalk1065  have you seen the YouTube ad for Doug Jones where they state that "your  vote is public record and your community will know if you fought to  stop Roy Moore "? Is that not voter intimidation?
 — James Owens (@JamesOw52157488) December 3, 2017 I keep hearing there are Doug Jones' ads declaring your vote will be public, which is silly and untrue.
 Anyone have proof of this? #alpolitics #alsen
 — Dale Jackson (@TheDaleJackson) December 2, 2017Breitbart News has obtained two of those ads, both which taken by a resident in the Montgomery, AL designated market area.
  One declares Moore to be a “child predator,” a claim apparently based on a report  that lays out decades-old allegations that he acted inappropriately and  that he engaged in sexual misconduct with underage women while employed  as a prosecutor in Etowah County, AL in the late 1970s and early 1980s.


After leveling the “child predator” charge, the narrator tells  viewers their vote is public record, and their community will know if  they “helped stop Roy Moore.”
 “If you don’t vote, and Roy Moore – a child predator – wins, could  you live with that? Your vote is public record and your community will  know whether or not you helped stop Roy Moore,” she said.
     Another shorter advertisement, clocked at five seconds, also declares  your vote public record and says “you community will know whether or  not you helped stop Roy Moore.”

More at: http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...public-record/

----------


## phill4paul

> *Pro-Doug Jones Super PAC Using Voter Intimidation Tactics — Ad Claims ‘Your Vote Is Public Record’**Highway 31, a Birmingham-based pro-Doug Jones super PAC is using  what could be perceived as voter intimidation tactics against Roy Moore  by suggesting the votes cast in a December 12 special election  are “public record.”* Beginning last week, some Alabamians were posting on social media  about encountering online pre-roll video advertising making such a  claim.
>  "Your vote is Public Record. And your community  will know if you helpd stop Roy Moore"  Anyone else think this looks  like voter intimidation? #VoterIntimidation pic.twitter.com/31dixv9aeu
>  — Joemantler (@Joemantler) December 3, 2017 In watching some youtube videos on Cash Cab there  is an ad running for Doug Jones as follows:  "Your vote is public  record & your community will know if you voted to stop Roy Moore" @MooreSenate  I will just leave this here. #VoteRoyMoore
>  — Joan Alexander (@joanalex28) December 3, 2017 @fmtalk1065  have you seen the YouTube ad for Doug Jones where they state that "your  vote is public record and your community will know if you fought to  stop Roy Moore "? Is that not voter intimidation?
>  — James Owens (@JamesOw52157488) December 3, 2017 I keep hearing there are Doug Jones' ads declaring your vote will be public, which is silly and untrue.
>  Anyone have proof of this? #alpolitics #alsen
>  — Dale Jackson (@TheDaleJackson) December 2, 2017Breitbart News has obtained two of those ads, both which taken by a resident in the Montgomery, AL designated market area.
>   One declares Moore to be a “child predator,” a claim apparently based on a report  that lays out decades-old allegations that he acted inappropriately and  that he engaged in sexual misconduct with underage women while employed  as a prosecutor in Etowah County, AL in the late 1970s and early 1980s.
> 
> ...


  There should be a libel/slander lawsuit filed tomorrow. And Roy Moore should come out with his own ad saying he has filed said lawsuit against Jones for false allegations.

----------


## dannno

> There should be a libel/slander lawsuit filed tomorrow. And Roy Moore should come out with his own ad saying he has filed said lawsuit against Jones for false allegations.


It's a PAC

----------


## phill4paul

> It's a PAC


  Then the PAC and it's officers needs to be sued.

----------


## Swordsmyth

*RNC Reverses, Will Back Roy Moore Following Trump Endorsement*http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-12-04/rnc-reverses-will-back-roy-moore-following-trump-endorsement

----------


## Swordsmyth

More lies:




One of Roy Moore's accusers has uncovered a note the Alabama Senate  candidate allegedly wrote to her when she was a senior in high school,  the latest in possible written evidence of Moore's alleged inappropriate  relationships with minors. 

"Happy graduation Debbie," the  message, written on a graduation card Debbie Wesson Gibson found in her  senior year scrapbook, reads. "I wanted to give you this card myself. I  know that you’ll be a success in anything you do. Roy."

http://www.newsweek.com/roy-moore-li...accuser-730851

----------


## sparebulb

> More lies:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of Roy Moore's accusers has uncovered a note the Alabama Senate  candidate allegedly wrote to her when she was a senior in high school,  the latest in possible written evidence of Moore's alleged inappropriate  relationships with minors. 
> 
> "Happy graduation Debbie," the  message, written on a graduation card Debbie Wesson Gibson found in her  senior year scrapbook, reads. "I wanted to give you this card myself. I  know that youll be a success in anything you do. Roy."
> 
> http://www.newsweek.com/roy-moore-li...accuser-730851


That's just the type of hard evidence that Zippy needs to finally get off the fence about Moore.

----------


## dannno

> More lies:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> One of Roy Moore's accusers has uncovered a note the Alabama Senate  candidate allegedly wrote to her when she was a senior in high school,  the latest in possible written evidence of Moore's alleged inappropriate  relationships with minors. 
> 
> *"Happy graduation Debbie,"* the  message, written on a graduation card Debbie Wesson Gibson found in her  senior year scrapbook, reads. *"I wanted to give you this card myself. I  know that you’ll be a success in anything you do. Roy."*
> 
> http://www.newsweek.com/roy-moore-li...accuser-730851


What would Anthony Weiner have written?


#WWWW (What Would Weiner Write) ?

----------


## Swordsmyth

*Roy Moore Dings Mitt Romney's 'Courage' After Mitt Calls Roy A 'Stain' On The GOP*Alabama  Senate candidate Roy Moore took a shot at Mitt Romney on Twitter after  the onetime Republican presidential contender ripped Moore on Monday.Romney  tweeted that Moore’s presence in the Senate would be a “stain on the  GOP and the nation.” Moore, in turn, suggested Romney had “lost his  courage.” 
The  Twitter tiff occurred just hours after President Donald Trump threw his  full support behind Moore despite the accusations of sexual misconduct  against the candidate by multiple women.
Romney  started it by calling the women who spoke out against Moore  “courageous” and declaring that “no majority is worth losing our honor,  our integrity.” 
 Roy  Moore in the US Senate would be a stain on the GOP and on the nation.  Leigh Corfman and other victims are courageous heroes. No vote, no  majority is worth losing our honor, our integrity.
— Mitt Romney (@MittRomney) December 4, 2017The  “no majority” comment appeared to be a dig as well at Trump, who  earlier in the day said “we need” Moore in the Senate to help advance  the GOP’s agenda.


Moore,  who has denied the accusations, fired back that Romney “doesn’t care  about truth anymore.” He hailed “America’s reawakening ... led by  @realDonaldTrump.” The candidate also used a signature Trump  adjective: “Sad day!”
 Either @MittRomney has lost his courage or he doesn’t care about truth anymore. Sad day!

America’s reawakening was led by #DefeatTheElite#DrainTheSwamp
— Judge Roy Moore (@MooreSenate) December 4, 2017 



More at: https://www.yahoo.com/news/roy-moore...014552055.html


Romney must never be allowed to hold public office again.


*Definition of Romney* *:* any of a British  breed of hardy long-wooled sheep especially adapted to damp or marshy  regions and raised for both mutton and wool                     

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Romney

----------


## SpiritOf1776_J4

> The good news is, the Establishment loyalists' heads are exploding because they can no longer control and dominate the debate using their pinko and globalist establishment media.  Ordinary people are beginning to realize, through alternative media sources, how the leadership of our Establishment socialists/communists and Globalists, and their henchmen in the media, have been lying to them for years and lying about those running for political office who pose a threat to their notoriously evil  agenda.
> 
> 
> JWK
> 
> *
> Without our Fifth Column Media, Loretta Lynch, a corrupted FBI, Hillary Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama, would be making license tags in a federal penitentiary
> *


And hence, the necessity of laying the groundwork online for the people to use alternate sources of media for the last 20 years, even if they call you names and conspiracy theorist.

I believe we have arrived at the next stage.

----------


## SpiritOf1776_J4

> Moore's been hammering that point almost every single day on Twitter counting how long Gloria Allred has refused to let it be examined. I think that's a big part of why people are seeing through the smears.


It's obvious looking at it numerous different ways, and that was before CNN (unwittingly to higher ups) released a color photograph showing two different ink colors, and the second color was all in the "looks different spot" people were already noting.

----------


## Swordsmyth

*Jeff Flake donates to Alabama Democrat Doug Jones' senate campaign*

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gop-sen...nate-campaign/

----------


## William Tell

Live rally with Bannon etc.

----------


## Swordsmyth

Populist  firebrand Steve Bannon savaged national Republican leaders Tuesday  night in a fiery call to rally voters behind embattled Senate candidate  Roy Moore as the battle for the GOP's soul spilled into a dirt-floor  barn deep in rural Alabama.Bannon,  known best for his former role as President Donald Trump's chief  strategist, called GOP leaders in Congress "cowards" and attacked the  party's 2012 presidential nominee Mitt Romney as a draft dodger as he  defended Moore, who is fighting several allegations of sexual misconduct  and a Washington establishment that wants him to lose the Dec. 12  election.
"The  days of taking it silently are over," Bannon declared at a rally that  drew hundreds of Moore supporters to a local farm in the southwestern  corner of the state.
"They  want to destroy Judge Roy Moore. You know why? They want to take your  voice away," Bannon said as Moore looked on. "If they can destroy Roy  Moore, they can destroy you."


Bannon  was most aggressive Tuesday night with Romney, charging that Moore had  more integrity and honor than Romney's entire family. He noted that  Moore graduated from the United States Military Academy, while Romney  received a draft deferment for his missionary work in France.
"You hid behind your religion," Bannon said. 'Do not talk to me about honor and integrity."

https://www.yahoo.com/news/moore-foe...-election.html

----------


## Swordsmyth

Roy Moore is turning to the law in the final days of his Senate  campaign, making a flurry of demands, sometimes backed by legal threats,  that appear designed to redirect the public focus of the race. The  Republican’s campaign has sent out letters demanding that ads by his  opponent, Doug Jones, and a Democratic super PAC, Highway 31, be pulled  from the airwaves, alleging that they are false and misleading.
 Moore’s  campaign has also accused Democrats of “voter intimidation” after  Highway 31 released digital ads informing voters that it would be a  matter of public record if they cast ballots Tuesday. 

Finally, Moore’s campaign has demanded an investigation by the  Alabama secretary of state into a report that sample ballots in Bullock  County, a Democratic stronghold, had been marked with a vote for Jones.  The ballots, which could not have been legally counted, were destroyed  under the direction of Secretary of State John Merrill (R).
 Afterward,  Moore’s campaign sent a public letter to Merrill asking to “be assured  that what happened in Bullock County was an isolated incident, and not  part of a broader plot to steal this election.”

More at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.e47cc8dd2a0d

----------


## phill4paul

> Roy Moore is turning to the law in the final days of his Senate  campaign, making a flurry of demands, sometimes backed by legal threats,  that appear designed to redirect the public focus of the race. The  Republican’s campaign has sent out letters demanding that ads by his  opponent, Doug Jones, and a Democratic super PAC, Highway 31, be pulled  from the airwaves, alleging that they are false and misleading.
>  Moore’s  campaign has also accused Democrats of “voter intimidation” after  Highway 31 released digital ads informing voters that it would be a  matter of public record if they cast ballots Tuesday. 
> 
> Finally, Moore’s campaign has demanded an investigation by the  Alabama secretary of state into a report that sample ballots in Bullock  County, a Democratic stronghold, had been marked with a vote for Jones.  The ballots, which could not have been legally counted, were destroyed  under the direction of Secretary of State John Merrill (R).
>  Afterward,  Moore’s campaign sent a public letter to Merrill asking to “be assured  that what happened in Bullock County was an isolated incident, and not  part of a broader plot to steal this election.”
> 
> More at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.e47cc8dd2a0d


  Pulling out all the dirty tricks.

----------


## Swordsmyth

Sen. Ben Sasse blasted the Republican National Committee for financially  backing controversial Alabama GOP Senate candidate Roy Moore, vowing  that he would withdraw from fundraising for and donating to the National  Republican Senate Committee if it decides to support Moore's campaign.

More at: http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/06/politi...ore/index.html

----------


## William Tell

> *Shock Doug Jones Ad Targeting Roy Moore Slammed as ‘Racist’*With less than a week until Election Day, Alabama Democrat Senate candidate Doug Jones has angered black voters by attacking Republican opponent Roy Moore with a flyer some critics are calling a racist advertisement.
> 
> The mailing was created to look something like an Internet meme. At the top, it reads, “Think if a Black man went after high school girls anyone would try to make him a senator?” Beneath that is a photo of a young black man with a comical skeptical look on his face.


 http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...at-doug-jones/

----------


## Swordsmyth

> http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...at-doug-jones/


LOL

----------


## dannno

> http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...at-doug-jones/

----------


## William Tell

> LOL


I hope Moore slams him as a racist and does a countdown till election day waiting for him to apologize.

----------


## Jamesiv1

> http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...at-doug-jones/


I think this could be a political move.

When you know you're going to get trounced, you do something like this so that you can blame it on "poor judgement".

----------


## euphemia

> Trump and Moore may have set the blueprint for defeating establishment mega money and smear campaign strategies that many are going to be forced to follow if they want any chance at winning in 2018.  Use of Twitter and alternative media sources allowing for manuveurability around the media blockade is required.


When people complain to me about Trump's use of Twitter, I ask, "Isn't it refreshing to get unfiltered, unspun Presidential words?"  Trump is not the first president who was hated by the media.  He won't be the last.  It's nice to get the straight story, even if I don't like the way he expresses things.

----------


## AuH20

America was greater than present, even when slavery was in effect. I hate progs with a passion and can't wait to see them go down in flames after this Moore election. Maybe they'll self-immolate.

http://www.newsweek.com/roy-moore-la...slavery-741845

I bet Ron Paul privately thinks the same, especially when he views the world through the prism of negative rights.

----------


## Anti Federalist



----------


## Anti Federalist

https://twitter.com/Eugene_Scott/sta...698049/photo/1

----------


## fedupinmo

> 


And what if he did it 40 years ago in Alabama? 
Also, is the black man a strict constitutionalist with 40 years of experience upholding the real law in the face of "bipartisanship" and NWO mission creep?

----------


## Sonny Tufts

> Also, is the black man a strict constitutionalist with 40 years of experience upholding the real law in the face of "bipartisanship" and NWO mission creep?


A strict constructionist wouldn't claim that Muslims shouldn't be allowed to sit in Congress; apparently Moore's copy of the Constitution doesn't contain the no-religious-test clause.

----------


## specsaregood

The meltdown is gonna be great when Moore wins.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> 


It would make him controllable by TPTB. As long as he tows the Party line, he would go to the front of the list. And the voters could not care less.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> A strict constructionist wouldn't claim that Muslims shouldn't be allowed to sit in Congress; apparently Moore's copy of the Constitution doesn't contain the no-religious-test clause.


Don't construe any commentary on this leftist hysteria and political games as enthusiastic support for Moore.

----------


## William Tell

> *Roy Moore accuser alters story on yearbook signing, to hold press conference*Beverly Young Nelson, the former Gadsden waitress who presented her  high school yearbook she said was signed by Roy Moore, altered the story  she originally told regarding the yearbook signature.
> 
> 
>  In an interview Friday with ABC's Good Morning America, Nelson said  she made some notes in the yearbook below where Moore signed it.  Underneath Moore's alleged signature is a date and location that Nelson  said Moore signed the yearbook - "12-22-77" and on the next line "Olde  Hickory House," the restaurant where Nelson worked and she said Moore  was a frequent customer.
> 
> 
> At her original press conference making the allegations on Nov. 13, Nelson said that Moore signed the yearbook and made no references to any notes she added later.


hxxp://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/12/roy_moore_accuser_alters_story.html#incart_river_h  ome




> *Beverly Young Nelson has finally admitted that she forged a portion  of the infamous high school yearbook that she and attorney Gloria Allred  used as proof of her accusations against U.S. Senate candidate Roy  Moore.* And in yet another blow  to the credibility of ABC News, the disgraced, left-wing network  downplayed the bombshell by presenting this admission of forgery as  adding “notes” to the inscription.
> 
> 
>  Beverly Young Nelson, one of the women accusing GOP Senate candidate Roy Moore of sexual misconduct, tells @GMA it “sickens” her to think what might happen if Moore is elected. https://t.co/wuEGWr0kng pic.twitter.com/lcp5OY4x3A
>  — ABC News Politics (@ABCPolitics) December 8, 2017
> 
> “Nelson admits she did make notes to the inscription,” ABC News tells us, “But the message was all Roy Moore.”
> 
> 
> ...


 http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...rged-yearbook/

----------


## William Tell

> http://thegoldwater.com/news/11904-S...-a-Filthy-Liar


And now his step mom is changing her story.

----------


## phill4paul

> hxxp://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/12/roy_moore_accuser_alters_story.html#incart_river_h  ome
> 
> http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...rged-yearbook/


  I knew when Allred refused to release it for independent review it was only a matter of time.

----------


## sparebulb

Nelson and Allred should be criminally charged with mayhem.

----------


## phill4paul

> Don't construe any commentary on this leftist hysteria and political games as enthusiastic support for Moore.


  Indeed. I personally don't much care for him, but Rand spoke with him and it seems he is willing to work with Rand on some issues. I've just enjoyed watching the political efforts of the left implode and the fact that two of their own senators got caught up in it.

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Indeed. I personally don't much care for him, but Rand spoke with him and it seems he is willing to work with Rand on some issues. I've just enjoyed watching the political efforts of the left implode and the fact that two of their own senators got caught up in it.


That.

If he and Rand see eye to eye on many issues, than I have no problem with him.

In case anybody has not noticed already, the Bolsheviks have declared open, violent warfare on us and the people who represent us.

We need every ally we can get.

----------


## William Tell

> *Nolte  Flashback: WaPo Document Expert Said Forged Roy Moore Yearbook Consistent with One Writer**Three weeks ago, in a partisan effort to dismiss what is now an admitted forgery, and what at the time was an obvious forgery, the left-wing Washington Posts Philip Bump (already a proven  liar) consulted former FBI agent Mark Songer, a forensics documents  examiner, to examine a yearbook produced by one of Roy Moores accusers  as evidence he assaulted her. The expert concluded that the writing seems consistent with one writer.* The context of when Bump published this piece is important. If you recall, the _Washington Post_  was the news outlet that first broke the story of the Moore  allegations, and it was during this time that outside fact-checking of  the _Post_s reporting revealed serious lapses, all them pointing to a Moore accuser who manufactured a false narrative.


http://www.breitbart.com/big-journal...nt-one-writer/

----------


## Zippyjuan

> hxxp://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/12/roy_moore_accuser_alters_story.html#incart_river_h  ome
> 
> http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...rged-yearbook/


So he still signed it but she added:




> D.A. 12-22-77 Olde Hickory House."




http://www.oann.com/judge-roy-moore-...yearbook-note/

Does not disprove any allegations.  Why did a 30 year old man sign her yearbook?

----------


## phill4paul

> So he signed it and she added:


    She lied about the signature. Two other waitresses there also exposed her lies. She's a lieing liar. And she STILL won't release the book for independent review.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> So he still signed it but she added:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.oann.com/judge-roy-moore-...yearbook-note/


It looks like she wrote all of it:

*Nolte — Flashback: WaPo Document Expert Said Forged Roy Moore Yearbook ‘Consistent with One Writer’*

*Three weeks ago, in a partisan effort to dismiss what is now an admitted forgery, and what at the time was an obvious forgery, the left-wing Washington Post’s Philip Bump (already a proven   liar) consulted former FBI agent Mark Songer, a forensics documents   examiner, to examine a yearbook produced by one of Roy Moore’s accusers   as evidence he assaulted her. The expert concluded that the “writing seems consistent with one writer.”*

 The context of when Bump published this piece is important. If you recall, the _Washington Post_   was the news outlet that first broke the story of the Moore   allegations, and it was during this time that outside fact-checking of   the _Post_‘s reporting revealed serious lapses, all them pointing to a Moore accuser who manufactured a false narrative.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journal...nt-one-writer/

----------


## EBounding

> So he still signed it but she added:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.oann.com/judge-roy-moore-...yearbook-note/


Why didn't she disclose that from the very beginning?

----------


## phill4paul

> Moore accusers- fake. Trump accusers- fake.  Clinton accusers- real.  Deny.  Deny.  Deny.


  And there are two former waitresses that discredit her account.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Roy Moore signature comparisions: (signatures do change over time  but these do seem very similar)


She admitted she wrote the note so it looks like she must have written it all:


*Nolte — Flashback: WaPo Document Expert Said Forged Roy Moore Yearbook ‘Consistent with One Writer’*

*Three weeks ago, in a partisan effort to dismiss what is now an admitted forgery, and what at the time was an obvious forgery, the left-wing Washington Post’s Philip Bump (already a proven    liar) consulted former FBI agent Mark Songer, a forensics documents    examiner, to examine a yearbook produced by one of Roy Moore’s accusers    as evidence he assaulted her. The expert concluded that the “writing seems consistent with one writer.”*

 The context of when Bump published this piece is important. If you recall, the _Washington Post_    was the news outlet that first broke the story of the Moore    allegations, and it was during this time that outside fact-checking of    the _Post_‘s reporting revealed serious lapses, all them pointing to a Moore accuser who manufactured a false narrative.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journal...nt-one-writer/






> Moore accusers- fake. Trump accusers- fake.  Clinton accusers- real.  Deny.  Deny.  Deny.


The quality of the accusations and evidence is quite different in each of those cases.

----------


## Zippyjuan

She said she wrote part of it- not all of it.   The first part is in his handwriting.

----------


## phill4paul

> Moore accusers- fake. Trump accusers- fake.  Clinton accusers- real.  Deny.  Deny.  Deny.


  Has either Moore or Trump left any DNA evidence? Because Clinton did. So, there's that.

----------


## William Tell

> She said she wrote part of it- not all of it.   The first part is in his handwriting.


That's what she said a month after the story was he wrote ALL of it. Remember WaPo expert said it all looked like it could be from the same hand.

----------


## timosman

> Moore accusers- fake. Trump accusers- fake.  Clinton accusers- real.  Deny.  Deny.  Deny.

----------


## William Tell

> She said she wrote part of it- not all of it.


Find us a link from before 12/8/2017 please and thank you.

----------


## William Tell

NeoCon McMuffin throwing in half a million $ to try to stop Moore. Probably because Bannon trashed Romney.




> MONTGOMERY, Ala. — Stand Up Republic, a 501(c)4 group co-founded by  former independent anti-Trump presidential candidate Evan McMullin, is  spending $500,000 on digital and TV ads that ask Alabama conservatives  to reject Republican nominee Roy Moore’s Senate bid.
> 
>  In two  30-second spots, the group presents Moore as an unacceptable choice for  conservatives — but does not suggest a particular alternative. In one  ad, a Republican voter named Robert du Buys works in his yard, recounts  his lifetime of party-line voting, and says Moore “makes Republicans and  us Christians look bad.”


hxxps://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/12/08/anti-trump-conservatives-place-500000-ad-buy-against-roy-moore/?utm_term=.cf5f3e3fc86f

----------


## Swordsmyth

> She said she wrote part of it- not all of it.   The first part is in his handwriting.


She admitted she wrote the note so it looks like she must have written it all:


*Nolte — Flashback: WaPo Document Expert Said Forged Roy Moore Yearbook ‘Consistent with One Writer’*

*Three weeks ago, in a partisan effort to dismiss what is now an admitted forgery, and what at the time was an obvious forgery, the left-wing Washington Post’s Philip Bump (already a proven     liar) consulted former FBI agent Mark Songer, a forensics documents     examiner, to examine a yearbook produced by one of Roy Moore’s  accusers    as evidence he assaulted her. The expert concluded that the “writing seems consistent with one writer.”*

 The context of when Bump published this piece is important. If you recall, the _Washington Post_     was the news outlet that first broke the story of the Moore     allegations, and it was during this time that outside fact-checking of     the _Post_‘s reporting revealed serious lapses, all them pointing to a Moore accuser who manufactured a false narrative.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-journal...nt-one-writer/



She wrote ALL of it, it was ALL written by ONE PERSON and she admitted to writing the note so SHE WROTE ALL OF IT.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> That's what she said a month after the story was he wrote ALL of it. Remember WaPo expert said it all looked like it could be from the same hand.


WaPost noted that the "add on" had problems- especially with the numbers.   https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.2d8eadd27ac7




> pointed out that “Old Hickory House” and the second date appear to be different stylistically

----------


## William Tell

> Birmingham, ALABAMA — Delbra Adams, Roy Moore’s former longtime secretary and judicial assistant, says that in 13 years of working for the senatorial candidate she never saw or experienced any inappropriate conduct toward women.
> 
> Adams was working in Moore’s law office during the period that a new accuser claims that he groped her in the same office in 1991 after a meeting. Her desk was right outside his office door at the time.
> 
> “I think he is a good man,” Adams told Breitbart News in an interview. “I don’t believe any of this. I don’t believe it until somebody actually proves it to me. But I never saw anything like that out of him.”
> 
> Asked whether she saw or experienced any inappropriate conduct on the part of Moore at any time, Adams replied, “No. None.”
> 
> She further stated that she is surprised by the allegations against her former boss.
> ...


 http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2...-dont-believe/

----------


## William Tell

> WaPost noted that the "add on" had problems- especially with the numbers.   https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...=.2d8eadd27ac7


Wonder how Delbra Adams initials got there.

----------


## William Tell

Never seen Drudge ignore a huge story like this. He must really hate Moore as his 100% negative coverage suggests.

----------


## William Tell



----------


## Zippyjuan

> Wonder how Delbra Adams initials got there.


She wasn't even Moore's assistant for another ten years (assuming the "DA" refer to her).  Also her "DA" is different from the "DA" in the yearbook.  Note the odd point at the top of the "D" in the yearbook.  Her "D" is fuller, more rounded, and no odd shape at the top.  Definitely not her. 

(she would sometimes initial documents if Moore's signature was made with a stamp).

----------


## Swordsmyth

> She wasn't even Moore's assistant for another ten years (assuming the "DA" refer to her).  Also her "DA" is different from the "DA" in the yearbook.  Note the odd point at the top of the "D" in the yearbook.  Her "D" is fuller, more rounded, and no odd shape at the top.  Definitely not her. 
> 
> (she would sometimes initial documents if Moore's signature was made with a stamp).


The liar copied the signature that was followed by "DA" from a later document (like the divorce decree) and she did it in her own poor attempt at forging Moore's writing.

----------


## William Tell

> *Roy Moore accuser alters story on yearbook signing, to hold press conference
> 
> *hxxp://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/12/roy_moore_accuser_alters_story.html#incart_river_h  ome


 ALdotcom has changed the headline of this story to: 
*Roy Moore accuser believes her life is in danger, lawyer Gloria Allred says*

Most impressive.

----------


## phill4paul

> She wasn't even Moore's assistant for another ten years (assuming the "DA" refer to her).  Also her "DA" is different from the "DA" in the yearbook.  Note the odd point at the top of the "D" in the yearbook.  Her "D" is fuller, more rounded, and no odd shape at the top.  Definitely not her. 
> 
> (she would sometimes initial documents if Moore's signature was made with a stamp).


   You really need to keep up with the story. Whether it is ignorance or intentional $#@! stirring I don't know, but your killing any credibility by not even researching enough to put together a time line.

----------


## Pericles

> She said she wrote part of it- not all of it.   The first part is in his handwriting.


Doesn't matter at this point, as the narrative is collapsing faster than the Hindenburg.

----------


## timosman

> She said she wrote part of it- not all of it.   The first part is in his handwriting.


Zippy, you have to understand not everybody is forced to believe this crap. Maybe your situation is different. Do they keep your family hostage? If yes - please call 911, if not - consider taking the red pill.

----------


## Zippyjuan

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry...b069ec48ac1aae




> *Roy Moore Believes America Was Great During Slavery.*
> 
> GOP Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore stunned some listeners when he said he thought America was “great” during the era of slavery. Though he made the comments at a campaign rally in Florence, Alabama, more than two months ago, they’ve re-emerged in a viral tweet just days before the election.
> 
> Back in September, one of the few African-Americans in the crowd asked the candidate when he thought was the “last time” America was great. 
> 
> *“I think it was great at the time when families were united. Even though we had slavery, they cared for one another. ... Our families were strong, our country had a direction,”* Moore responded, according to a Los Angeles Times report in September.
> 
> *At the same rally, he also referred to Native Americans and Asians as “reds and yellows*,” the LA Times reported.


Ah, the good old days.  When a woman could not afford to live by herself and men owned other men (slavery forcefully broke up families).

LA Times link:  http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-n...921-story.html




> At Moore’s Florence rally, the former judge outlined all the wrongs he sees in Washington and “spiritual wickedness in high places.” He warned of “the awful calamity of abortion and sodomy and perverse behavior and* murders and shootings and road rage” as “a punishment inflicted upon us for our presumptuous sins.”*





> At the same event, Moore referred to Native Americans and Asian Americans as “reds and yellows,” and earlier this year he suggested* the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks were divine punishment*.


He likes the "good ole days" enough to ride his horse to go vote.  http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign...olling-station




> OP Senate candidate Roy Moore and his wife* will ride horses to their Alabama polling location on Tuesday.*
> 
> A schedule released by the Moore campaign for the Dec. 12 election includes “Traditional Horseback Ride to their Polling Location."
> 
> Moore and his wife, Kayla, typically ride horses to every election where Moore is a candidate. They rode horseback to the Alabama run-off, where Moore beat out Sen. Luther Strange to be the GOP nominee, and to the first round of the GOP primary in August.

----------


## NorthCarolinaLiberty

> Note the odd point at the top of the "D" in the yearbook.  Her "D" is fuller, more rounded, and no odd shape at the top.  Definitely not her.



People change handwriting all the time, especially from a young age to an older age.  I once used the cursive letters A, B, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, P, Q, S, T, U, V, Y, and Z, until I changed to non-cursive.  I have also changed other writing habits.  I notice a lot of people do this.

----------


## spudea

> Ah, the good old days.  When a woman could not afford to live by herself and men owned other men (slavery forcefully broke up families).


This is out of context horse manure, they obviously left out part of his response, and he clearly acknowledged slavery as a detriment and not part of what was great about it.  I think most people here would count any period prior to 1913 as much greater than now.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> This is out of context horse manure, they obviously left out part of his response, and he clearly acknowledged slavery as a detriment and not part of what was great about it.  I think most people here would count any period prior to 1913 as much greater than now.


If you were wealthy then, maybe.  What would you consider much better then vs today?  Life was certainly much harder.

----------


## William Tell

> *Does not disprove any allegations.*





> Writing a note to help you remember it does not mean it did not take place.


 Zippy, here were her exact words at the original press conference. No mention of any notes.




> "He wrote in my yearbook as follows: 'To a sweeter more beautiful girl, I  could not say Merry Christmas, Christmas, 1977, Love, Roy Moore, Olde  Hickory House. Roy Moore, DA,'" she said.


 https://youtu.be/tHPOm6yIy6k?t=638

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Zippy, here were her exact words at the original press conference. 
> 
> https://youtu.be/tHPOm6yIy6k?t=638


And now she admits she wrote "part" of it.  The "DA" and "Old Hickory House" plus the second date seems to be in a different hand. The first part matches examples of Moore's writing.

----------


## William Tell

> And now she admits she wrote "part" of it.


That is to say, she now says Roy Moore did not do something she previously said he did.

----------


## dannno

> And now she admits she wrote "part" of it.


Now she admits she was lying, which discredits her entire allegation since that is the only evidence it was based on. The evidence was her word, and the yearbook signature, now both besmirched.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> That is to say, she now says Roy Moore did not do something she previously said he did.


Her writing "part" does not say he did not write the other part.  It does look like his handwriting. (see my previous post- edited after yours). Plus there are seven other women also making allegations against him.  But the voters don't seem to care anyways. We will find out on Tuesday.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Now she admits she was lying, which discredits her entire allegation since that is the only evidence it was based on. The evidence was her word, and the yearbook signature, now both besmirched.


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/n...208-story.html





> The inscription reads, "To a sweeter more beautiful girl I could not say, 'Merry Christmas.'" It is followed by the signature "Roy Moore D.A." and the notation "12-22-77 Olde Hickory House."
> 
> Gloria Allred said Friday that a hired handwriting expert *found the signature to be authentic.*
> 
> "We think it's important evidence that supports Beverly's statements that Roy Moore asked to sign her yearbook when she was just 16 years old. And it demonstrates that when Roy Moore stated, quote, 'I do not know any of these women,' end quote, that statement does not appear to be true," Allred said.
> 
> Allred acknowledged that *Nelson added the date and restaurant name below the signature.*

----------


## FSP-Rebel

> Her writing "part" does not say he did not write the other part.  It does look like his handwriting. (see my previous post- edited after yours). Plus there are seven other women also making allegations against him.  But the voters don't seem to care anyways. We will find out on Tuesday.


Bev came this far but admitted this, at this time w/ only 4 days to go? Wat. Allred has been non-responsive for over two weeks regarding the authenticity of this alleged signing, since she initially stated that Moore wrote the whole thing himself. She's a complete fraud and Bev just schmucked up her credibility at the final hour so to speak. Moore gonna win.

----------


## timosman

> Her writing "part" does not say he did not write the other part.  It does look like his handwriting. (see my previous post- edited after yours). Plus there are seven other women also making allegations against him.  But the voters don't seem to care anyways. We will find out on Tuesday.


Zippy, you are spending too much time thinking about it. Why do you care so much? Why don't you take the rest of the weekend off and on Monday, if you come up with something significant, let us know.

----------


## spudea

> She said she wrote part of it- not all of it.   The first part is in his handwriting.


So the reason she gave for annotating it was???? Shouldn't there be other signatures with the same annotations???? The entire year book must be submitted to an independent analyst, complete with chemical analysis of the ink to determine when it was written.  Without this, nothing can be presented as a factual conclusion.

----------


## spudea

> If you were wealthy then, maybe.  What would you consider much better then vs today?  Life was certainly much harder.


No Federal Reserve, no income tax, smaller government, no military industrial complex, no empire, no welfare state, no department of education, the list goes on and on Zipp.

Additionally, Moore's campaign responded to further inquiry on those comments and he was referring to after the American Revolution.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

Moore doesn't care about the growth of the state in the way that libertarians do.

His one and only interest is Christian morality (as he understands it).

----------


## timosman

> Moore doesn't care about the growth of the state in the way that libertarians do.
> 
> His one and only interest is Christian morality (as he understands it).


Ok Nostradamus, your feedback has been recorded.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Moore doesn't care about the growth of the state in the way that libertarians do.
> 
> His one and only interest is Christian morality (as he understands it).


9/11 was God punishing the US for our sins.  So are all those shootings.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> 9/11 was God punishing the US for our sins.  So are all those shootings.


Obviously

And if we put more ten commandments carvings in court houses, ....Leviathan will just wither away, somehow.

----------


## timosman

> 9/11 was God punishing the US for our sins.  So are all those shootings.


Now we are going to have two morons spouting nonsense back and forth. Great teamwork.

----------


## William Tell

Poor Roy Moore, who else gets accused of being both too moral and immoral?

----------


## dannno

> Moore doesn't care about the growth of the state in the way that libertarians do.
> 
> His one and only interest is Christian morality (as he understands it).


More clueless nonsense..

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Poor Roy Moore, who else gets accused of being both too moral and immoral?


His voters don't care.  They see it as a conspiracy against him so they ignore or dismiss it. Even Republican's saying he should step aside.  Trump voters didn't care either.

----------


## RJB

> Poor Roy Moore, who else gets accused of being both too moral and immoral?


...and from the same mouths as well.

----------


## FSP-Rebel



----------


## Zippyjuan

> He is right, the prohibition on "religious tests" for office was meant in reference to different sects of Christianity, and* in any case he is not saying that we should actually bar them from office,* he is saying that we should not elect them, our Constitution and laws were built on Christian culture so they are compatible other religions may not be.


Yes, he did.  He said that Ellison should not be permitted to hold office he was elected to. That is calling for barring him from office. 




> should act to *prohibit Ellison from taking the congressional oath* today!


The Constitution calls for a separation between church and state.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Yes, he did.  He said that Ellison should not be permitted to hold office he was elected to. That is calling for barring him from office.


OK, then he is making a claim that evades the "religious test" ban, he is claiming that Ellison doesn't believe in our Constitutional principles and is incapable of protecting and defending them because of his professed belief in a philosophical system that is directly in conflict with them.

----------


## sparebulb

> The Constitution calls for a separation between church and state.


No it doesn't.

You are a liar.

Neg rep for you.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> The Constitution calls for a separation between church and state.


No it doesn't.

----------


## William Tell

> The Constitution calls for a separation between church and state.


Lol.

----------


## William Tell

> No it doesn't.
> 
> You are a liar.
> 
> Neg rep for you.


To be fair, maybe he means Gloria Allred added it after the fact.

----------


## Danke

> Yes, he did.  He said that Ellison should not be permitted to hold office he was elected to. That is calling for barring him from office. 
> 
> 
> 
> The Constitution calls for a separation between church and state.


it was not quite like that.   The Constitution limits the Federal Government WRT that.  For a while States had religious requirements.

----------


## Sonny Tufts

> He is right, the prohibition on "religious tests" for office was meant in reference to different sects of Christianity


It doesn't say that.  If it had intended to enshrine Christianity as the official religion of the country it would have said so.




> our Constitution and laws were built on Christian culture so they are compatible other religions may not be.


Nonsense.  The First Amendment prohibits the government from preventing someone from being a polytheist, idolater, or some other non-Christian faith, all in violation of the first and second commandments and various edicts in Leviticus and Deuteronomy.

----------


## Sonny Tufts

> For a while States had religious requirements.


Which were later barred by the 14th Amendment.

For those who think it's OK for the government to enshrine its preference for certain religious beliefs into law, ask yourself: would you be OK if a State granted tax exemptions for land owned by [churches following the State's preferred belief] but denied it to all others?

----------


## Danke

> Which were later barred by the 14th Amendment.
> 
> For those who think it's OK for the government to enshrine its preference for certain religious beliefs into law, ask yourself: would you be OK if a State granted tax exemptions for land owned by [churches following the State's preferred belief] but denied it to all others?


Noted, I was referring to the original Constitution and its intent that one can find reading the Federalist papers.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> It doesn't say that.  If it had intended to enshrine Christianity as the official religion of the country it would have said so.


The founders never envisioned a Europe or an America in which Christianity wasn't dominant.






> Nonsense.  The First Amendment prohibits the government from preventing someone from being a polytheist, idolater, or some other non-Christian faith,


And that has nothing to do with my point, I said that islam  prevented Ellison from protecting and defending the Constitution making  him incapable of taking the oath of office.




> all in violation of the first and second commandments and various edicts in Leviticus and Deuteronomy.


Nonsense, the 10 commandments do not require the government to do anything about the first 2, they are commands to the individual and the various edicts in Leviticus and Deuteronomy are part of the law of Moses that was done away at the coming of Christ.

----------


## Swordsmyth

MYTH-BUSTED: ALLEGATIONS AGAINST JUDGE ROY MOORE DEBUNKED
All the false allegations of sexual misconduct raised against Judge Moore have been
thoroughly debunked and discredited, but the Washington establishment and liberal media have
tried to keep the claims alive with four of the women to smear Judge Moore’s name and stop his
Senate campaign. Doing the job most of the press has not bothered to do, we have prepared a
primer that lists the “fake news” put out by four women followed by some of the evidence and
responses that has been uncovered and that show the claims to be entirely false. Links to
supporting articles are provided.

Leigh Corfman: Debunked
•

•
•

Claims Moore twice picked her up near her mother’s house in Gadsden, AL.
FALSE: Court documents show on February 21, 1979, both parents got court approval to
transfer custody of Corfman within a few days from her mother to her father, who lived 20
miles from Gadsden in Ohatchee, Alabama.
Claims Moore called on “her phone in her bedroom” several times before meetings.
FALSE: Corfman’s own mother refuted this and said she had no phone in her bedroom.
Claims Moore started her on “course of doing other things that were bad.”
FALSE: Corfman’s parents requested custody change because of her existing “disciplinary
and behavioral problems” which her father was better suited to handle.

Beverly Nelson: Debunked
•

•

•

Claims Moore signed her yearbook before Christmas 1977.
FALSE: Nelson’s radical feminist lawyer Gloria Allred refuses to release the yearbook for
inspection despite obvious forgeries and alterations in the yearbook writing. When CNN
asked Allred if signature was forged, she would not answer directly and said it didn’t
matter. She also couldn’t tell NBC whether Nelson saw Moore sign the yearbook.
Claims Moore ate often at Olde Hickory House counter when she was a 15-year-old
waitress.
FALSE: Former employees and customers said restaurant didn’t hire 15-year-olds, and that
customers who sat at the counter were served by the bartender or cook, not the servers, and
they never saw Moore or Nelson at the restaurant.
Claims Moore offered her a ride home after restaurant closed at 10, then drove to back
where it was dark, near dumpsters, and forcefully groped her.
FALSE: Former employees said the restaurant closed at 11:00 or midnight because of shift change at a nearby plant at 10:00, the dumpsters were on side (not back), and the back was
well-lit. There were no witnesses and Nelson says she didn’t even tell her then-boyfriend
who picked her up shortly after the supposed assault. The former boyfriend and her stepson
have each come forward to say she is lying.

Tina Johnson: Debunked
•

Claims Moore grabbed her rear as she and her mother walked out of his law office in 1991.
FALSE: Delbra Adams, Moore’s then-secretary and later judicial assistant, said that in her
13 years working for Moore, she never saw any inappropriate conduct toward women.
Johnson is not believable, has pled guilty to writing bad checks and third-degree theft of
property, and may be retaliating against Moore for representing her mother, Mary Cofield,
in the custody dispute over her son that brought them to Moore’s law office.

Debbie Wesson Gibson: Debunked
•

•

Washington Post claimed Gibson (who alleged no misconduct by Moore) is a Republican
and did not donate to or work for Democrat Doug Jones.
FALSE: Gibson promotes her sign language interpreting business with pictures of her
working for Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, and she shared on her Facebook page pro-Doug
Jones material and announcements of Jones campaign events.
Further, the Washington Post claimed that Moore stated that he never knew Gibson and
that he was lying about not knowing her.
FALSE: Judge Moore went on a national radio show and stated that he did know Gibson
and her family but did not recall ever having a date with her. Gibson is doing everything
in her power to tear down Judge Moore.

The Mall: Debunked
•

MSNBC and CNN have featured local witnesses claiming that Judge Moore was on a ban
list at the local Gadsden Mall.
FALSE: The so-called local witnesses have admitted that they were reporting on rumors
and hearsay. According to better witnesses, including mall employees and the operations
manager for the mall at the time, there was no ban list, and Judge Moore was never a person
of concern. As an Assistant District Attorney at the time, had he been on a mall watch list,
it would have made major news locally, and his employment as a prosecutor would have
been in jeopardy.

###

PAID FOR BY JUDGE ROY MOORE FOR U.S. SENATE

PAID FOR BY JUDGE ROY MOORE FOR U.S. SENATE

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-polit...al-allegations

----------


## Occam's Banana

> Originally Posted by Occam's Banana
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>  Originally Posted by Zippyjuan
> ...


_Jesus H. Christ._

When I was composing my reply to Zippy (post #40), I thought about including some song lyrics or something in which "red" and "white" and "yellow" and "black" were used in an innocuous context to promote the idea of our commonly humanity. I figured there had be something like that out there somewhere (especially from the '60s or '70s). So I did a Google search on "song lyrics red yellow black white," like so:

https://www.google.com/search?q=song...ow+black+white
Guess what the top result was?




> *Jesus Loves the Little Children - Child Bible Songs*
> childbiblesongs.com/song-30-jesus-loves-the-little-children.shtml
> Child Bible *Songs*: *Lyrics* from children's Bible *songs* taught in church, Bible class, and vacation Bible school (VBS). ... Jesus loves the little children. All the children of the world. *Red*, brown, *yellow*. *Black* and *white*. They are precious in His sight. Jesus loves the little children. Of the world. Jesus died for all the children.


For the sake of brevity and concision, though, I decided to just let my point stand "as is" without extraneous references to any songs or what-have-you.

And now it turns out that that not only was a song relevant, but _that particular song_ was the source of Moore's reference to "reds and yellows."

_Jesus H. Christ on a hopped-up Harley._




> “We were torn apart in the Civil War — brother against brother, North against South, party against party. What changed?” Moore said. “Now we have blacks and whites fighting, reds and yellows fighting, Democrats and Republicans fighting, men and women fighting."
> 
> "What’s going to unite us? What’s going to bring us back together? A president? A Congress?" Roy asked, and then answered, "No. It’s going to be God.”
> 
> Red, yellow, black and white they are precious in His sight. Jesus loves the little children of the world. This is the Gospel. (1/2)
> — Judge Roy Moore (@MooreSenate) September 18, 2017
> 
> If we take it seriously, America can once again be united as one nation under God. (2/2)
> — Judge Roy Moore (@MooreSenate) September 18, 2017
> ...


And THIS is what Zippyjuan, HuffPo and the LA Times are using as basis for spreading innuendo that tries to make Moore out to be some kind of despicalbe racist?

Well, I guess one of my questions has been answered: now we know why they couldn't be bothered to tell us why we are supposed to be upset about this.

_Jesus H. Christ on a hopped-up Harley with Santa in a sidecar ..._

DISCLAIMER: I don't give a pair of fetid dingo's kidneys about Roy Moore, one way or the other. But trying to smear someone as a racist for having made reference to the lyrics of a children's song as a metaphor for our common humanity is just low and contemptible. SMGDH. You really ought to be ashamed of yourself, Zippy.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> You really ought to be ashamed of yourself, Zippy.


Zippy has no shame.

----------


## Danke

> Zippy has no shame.


Which  one?

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Which  one?


Any of them.

----------


## timosman

> Any of them.


Shouldn't this be against the site rules? Multiple people using the same account?

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Shouldn't this be against the site rules? Multiple people using the same account?


I do not comment on such matters since I don't have proof.

----------


## timosman

> I do not comment on such matters since I don't have proof.


The mods sure do know.

----------


## William Tell

> *EXCLUSIVE – Handwriting Expert Touted by Washington Post Turns on Gloria Allred: Calls for Activist Attorney to Release Yearbook**Birmingham, ALABAMA — A handwriting expert prominently cited by the Washington Post  on the matter of the yearbook presented as evidence by Roy Moore  accuser Beverly Young Nelson raised new questions today in a Breitbart  News interview about the inscription and signature at the center of  national controversy. *  Specifically, the expert raised doubts about whether the initials  “DA” at the end of Moore’s alleged signature evidenced stylistic  differences when compared to the rest of the writing in the yearbook.
> 
> 
>   The forensic document examiner, Mark Songer, a former FBI agent, also  called for Nelson’s attorney, activist Gloria Allred, to release the  original yearbook “to all parties for examination. I think it is only  fair. It shouldn’t be hidden or anything like that in my opinion.”
> 
> 
>  Songer revealed that he “didn’t spend a whole lot of time” on his  original examination of the publicly available yearbook inscription  image, which was presented at a press conference by Allred, before he  provided quotes on the matter to the _Washington Post. 
> 
> _
> ...


 http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...ease-yearbook/

----------


## fedupinmo

> A strict constructionist wouldn't claim that Muslims shouldn't be allowed to sit in Congress; apparently Moore's copy of the Constitution doesn't contain the no-religious-test clause.


Did he rule that way, or attempt to make it the law? He is still entitled to have an opinion.

----------


## fedupinmo

> Her writing "part" does not say he did not write the other part.  It does look like his handwriting. (see my previous post- edited after yours). Plus there are seven other women also making allegations against him.  But the voters don't seem to care anyways. We will find out on Tuesday.


Forgeries are often made to look like the other person's handwriting for some reason...

----------


## sparebulb

> handwriting expert
> 
> a former FBI agent
> 
>  “didn’t spend a whole lot of time” on his original examination


Windsock ex-government hack changing his tune.

Good thing that he didn't overexert himself on his best expert opinion the first time around.

----------


## William Tell

> ...fairly common phenomenon


Nah. See, the dude is in his 70s and for his entire life every single attack on him has been for being too strict. From his troops in Vietnam to the left wing. He has been criticized and attacked by thousands of people. And now in the past 3 weeks it has pivoted to the point where people are saying everyone knew he was a pervert. Which is laughable because that would have been a far easier way to destroy his political career for his opponents than saying he is a super religious strict Baptist like his supporters want in a candidate.

The people Moore has associated with are the hardcore believers of his worldview. Very strict right wingers, people who would die for their religion. Not the cheap hypocrites of the mega churches. Moore is the Christian Right version of Ron Paul, which is not to say they agree on everything at all but there is a lot of overlap in their circles (Chuck Baldwin, Michael Peroutka etc) and they are both principled true believers in their respective worldviews. Normal every day politicians don't hang out with the crowd he does. The attacks thrown against him now are a complete 180 and I would have to say absurd considering the target he's had on his back.

----------


## phill4paul

> Never seen Drudge ignore a huge story like this. He must really hate Moore as his 100% negative coverage suggests.


  Still ignoring.

----------


## sparebulb

Drudge has done a lot of good over the years.

But Drudge does pack fudge.

He must fear some fudge-block if someone like Moore gets in.

----------


## William Tell

> Still ignoring.


Yep. Every other news outlet I checked have covered the story from one angle or another.

----------


## johnwk

> The Constitution calls for a separation between church and state.



Why are you misrepresenting what our federal Constitution declares in crystal clear language?


JWK



*
Without our Fifth Column Media and a corrupted FBI, Loretta Lynch, Hillary Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama, would be making license tags in a federal penitentiary
*

----------


## phill4paul

> Why are you misrepresenting what our federal Constitution declares in crystal clear language?
> 
> 
> JWK
> 
> 
> 
> *
> Without our Fifth Column Media and a corrupted FBI, Loretta Lynch, Hillary Clinton and Barack Hussein Obama, would be making license tags in a federal penitentiary
> *


  Because only the militia should have guns and "providing for the common wealth" means free healthcare and college tuition, donchaknow.

----------


## johnwk

> Originally Posted by Danke  
> For a while States had religious requirements.
> 			
> 		
> 
> 
> Which were later barred by the 14th Amendment.


Please post the wording you are referring to.


JWK

----------


## Anti Federalist

> And THIS is what Zippyjuan, HuffPo and the LA Times are using as basis for spreading innuendo that tries to make Moore out to be some kind of despicalbe racist?
> 
> Well, I guess one of my questions has been answered: now we know why they couldn't be bothered to tell us why we are supposed to be upset about this.
> 
> _Jesus H. Christ on a hopped-up Harley with Santa in a sidecar ..._
> 
> DISCLAIMER: I don't give a pair of fetid dingo's kidneys about Roy Moore, one way or the other. But trying to smear someone as a racist for having made reference to the lyrics of a children's song as a metaphor for our common humanity is just low and contemptible. SMGDH. You really ought to be ashamed of yourself, Zippy.


Sweet weeping Jesus, happens to be my particular choice swear, that fits here as well.

Thanks for tracking all that down, I figured all along that what he was quoting, an entirely innocent children's Sunday School song.

Only in the feverish swamps of Amerikan Bolshevism could that in any way be construed as "racist".

----------


## Superfluous Man

> The Constitution calls for a separation between church and state.


How is it possible for you to believe this myth?

----------


## Superfluous Man

> Which were later barred by the 14th Amendment.


Or rather, they were barred by judicial extrapolation from the 14th Amendment.

----------


## Sonny Tufts

> Please post the wording you are referring to.


Amendment I: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...

Amendment XIV: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. 




> The 'establishment of religion' clause of the First Amendment means at least this: Neither a state nor the Federal Government can set up a church. Neither can pass laws which aid one religion, aid all religions, or prefer one religion over another. Neither can force nor influence a person to go to or to remain away from church against his will or force him to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion. No person can be punished for entertaining or professing religious beliefs or disbeliefs, for church attendance or non-attendance. No tax in any amount, large or small, can be levied to support any religious activities or institutions, whatever they may be called, or whatever from they may adopt to teach or practice religion. Neither a state nor the Federal Government can, openly or secretly, participate in the affairs of any religious organizations or groups and vice versa. In the words of Jefferson, the clause against establishment of religion by law was intended to erect 'a wall of separation between Church and State.' Reynolds v. United States, supra, 98 U.S. at page 164.  Everson v. Board of Education, 330 U.S. 1, 15-16 (1947)


See also Torcaso v. Watkins, 367 U.S. 488 (1961), a unanimous decision holding unconstitutional a requirement in the Maryland Constitution that all state officials profess a belief in the existence of God:




> There is, and can be, no dispute about the purpose or effect of the Maryland Declaration of Rights requirement before us -- it sets up a religious test which was designed to, and, if valid, does, bar every person who refuses to declare a belief in God from holding a public "office of profit or trust" in Maryland. The power and authority of the State of Maryland thus is put on the side of one particular sort of believers -- those who are willing to say they believe in "the existence of God." It is true that there is much historical precedent for such laws. Indeed, it was largely to escape religious test oaths and declarations that a great many of the early colonists left Europe and came here hoping to worship in their own way. It soon developed, however, that many of those who had fled to escape religious test oaths turned out to be perfectly willing, when they had the power to do so, to force dissenters from their faith to take test oaths in conformity with that faith. This brought on a host of laws in the New Colonies imposing burdens and disabilities of various kinds upon varied beliefs depending largely upon what group happened to be politically strong enough to legislate in favor of its own beliefs. The effect of all this was the formal or practical "establishment" of particular religious faiths in most of the Colonies, with consequent burdens imposed on the free exercise of the faiths of nonfavored believers...
> 
> We repeat and again reaffirm that neither a State nor the Federal Government can constitutionally force a person "to profess a belief or disbelief in any religion." Neither can constitutionally pass laws or impose requirements which aid all religions as against nonbelievers, [Footnote 10] and neither can aid those religions based on a belief in the existence of God as against those religions founded on different beliefs. 
> 
> [Footnote 10]...In discussing Article VI [which prohibits religious tests for federal offices] in the debate of the North Carolina Convention on the adoption of the Federal Constitution, James Iredell, later a Justice of this Court, said:
> 
> ". . . [i]t is objected that the people of America may, perhaps, choose representatives who have no religion at all, and that pagans and Mahometans may be admitted into offices. But how is it possible to exclude any set of men without taking away that principle of religious freedom which we ourselves so warmly contend for?" (emphasis added)


Iredell had it right; Moore doesn't.

Although SCOUTS has based the applicability of the Establishment Clause to the States upon the 14th's Due Process Clause, the same result could be attained under an Equal Protection analysis.  Take my previous example -- it's hard to imagine that a state or local government's granting tax exemption to, say, Catholic churches but denying them to all other churches would survive an equal protection challenge.

----------


## William Tell

> Still ignoring.


Oh, he found a negative article now. * Election of Roy Moore could test boundaries of Senate ethics committee...*

----------


## johnwk

> Amendment I: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof...
> 
> Amendment XIV: No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.



So, there is absolutely nothing in the Constitution calling for "a separation between church and state".


Why do so many misrepresent the wording, and legislative intent, of our federal Constitution? 


JWK

----------


## Influenza

> How is it possible for you to believe this myth?


It's not a myth. Only stupid Christians actually believe the USA was founded on Christian ideals, when it was actually a complete rejection of political Christianity, which plagued Europe for centuries and led to millions of deaths. Thomas Jefferson, the most influential founder, wasn't even a Christian, and interpreted the first amendment as " building a wall of separation between church and state."

----------


## Swordsmyth

> It's not a myth. Only stupid Christians actually believe the USA was founded on Christian ideals, when it was actually a complete rejection of political Christianity, which plagued Europe for centuries and led to millions of deaths. Thomas Jefferson, the most influential founder, wasn't even a Christian, and interpreted the first amendment as " building a wall of separation between church and state."


Bunk.

----------


## Influenza

> Bunk.


Thank you for the very insightful comment that I have grown accustomed to reading from you

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Thank you for the very insightful comment that I have grown accustomed to reading from you


Your drivel doesn't deserve anything better.

----------


## Danke

> Bunk.


Exactly.  Some people need to study the Federalist papers.

----------


## Influenza

> Exactly.  Some people need to study the Federalist papers.


Are those the papers that coincide with your worldview, so you ignore everything else that says otherwise?

*Treaty of Tripoli:
*
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.

*Thomas Jefferson:
*
"I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."


The federalist papers do not even mention Christianity or the bible, they mention a god existing and that is it. The founders were mostly deistic, which acknowledges that some god exists, who created the universe (AND THATS IT,) but certainly not a personal heavenly mass-murderer father like yahweh.

*James Madison:

*“the existing character, distinguished as it is by its religious features, and the lapse of time now more than 50 years since the legal support of Religion was withdrawn sufficiently prove that it does not need the support of Government, and it will scarcely be contended that Government has suffered by the exemption of Religion from its cognizance, or its pecuniary aid.”


The federalist papers do nothing at all to help your case, in fact, some fundamentalist christians HATE the federalist papers and claim that they should not be used in interpreting the constitution. BECAUSE IT DOESNT MENTION CHRISTIANITY ENOUGH

https://americanvision.org/6155/the-truth-about-the-federalist-papers/

----------


## Influenza

Look at what some christian put together trying to prove how important the federalist papers for the USA and christianity

http://federaltheology.blogspot.com/...st-papers.html

oh look he couldn't quote mine a single thing about jesus, the bible, or christianity. Just "god" and "the creator," which were believed in by the religious and non religious alike. Guess what? almost all the founders fit in that "non-religious" category

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Are those the papers that coincide with your worldview, so you ignore everything else that says otherwise?
> 
> *Treaty of Tripoli:
> *
> Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
> 
> *Thomas Jefferson:
> *
> "I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should 'make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,' thus building a wall of separation between Church & State."
> ...


None of that says that America and her laws were founded on anything but Christian culture, the Treaty of Tripoli doesn't represent reality, it was a case of pandering to the muslims and even it only says that America wasn't founded on the Christian RELIGION which is an important distinction.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Look at what some christian put together trying to prove how important the federalist papers for the USA and christianity
> 
> http://federaltheology.blogspot.com/...st-papers.html
> 
> oh look he couldn't quote mine a single thing about jesus, the bible, or christianity. Just "god" and "the creator,"


Because Americans were Christians and they didn't need to specify.





> which were believed in by the religious and non religious alike.


Christian culture, just like I said.






> Guess what? almost all the founders fit in that "non-religious" category


Bunk.

----------


## Influenza

> None of that says that America and her laws were founded on anything but Christian culture, the Treaty of Tripoli doesn't represent reality, it was a case of pandering to the muslims and even it only says that America wasn't founded on the Christian RELIGION which is an important distinction.


Treaty of tripoli doesn't represent reality because you don't like what it says. If it said the opposite you would love it. The culture developed in western countries has little to do with the ideals of christianity, and were developed during the enlightenment, which completely rejected christianity. "Christian culture" has little in common with western culture. You wanna see what real christianity is? Look at that christian liberty and hells unicorn, who are horrible people and would probably start another holy war if they had their way

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Treaty of tripoli doesn't represent reality because you don't like what it says. If it said the opposite you would love it.


When people pander to an enemy they often lie, if it had said the opposite it would have been a case of spitting in the enemies face and therefore more reliable.





> The culture developed in western countries has little to do with the ideals of christianity, and were developed during the enlightenment, which completely rejected christianity.


No, that is wrong, the enlightenment only modified western Christian culture and the enlightenment did not completely reject Christianity.





> "Christian culture" has little in common with western culture. You wanna see what real christianity is? Look at that christian liberty and hells unicorn, who are horrible people and would probably start another holy war if they had their way


I don't know those posters well but assuming that they are the worst kind of "Christian" then all I have to say is that you can't tar Christian culture in it's entirety with them anymore than it would be fair for me to claim that all atheists or agnostics are evil murderers like Stalin and Mao, or that all muslims are like OBL or all hindus are like thuggees etc.

----------


## Influenza

> When people pander to an enemy they often lie, if it had said the opposite it would have been a case of spitting in the enemies face and therefore more reliable.
> 
> 
> 
> No, that is wrong, the enlightenment only modified western Christian culture and the enlightenment did not completely reject Christianity.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't know those posters well but assuming that they are the worst kind of "Christian" then all I have to say is that you can't tar Christian culture in it's entirety with them anymore than it would be fair for me to claim that all atheists or agnostics are evil murderers like Stalin and Mao, or that all muslims are like OBL or all hindus are like thugees etc.


How would you describe christian culture? Would it be not washing ur hands like jesus advised? if thats what u mean I think america is definitely a christian nation

----------


## Swordsmyth

> How would you describe christian culture? Would it be not washing ur hands like jesus advised? if thats what u mean I think america is definitely a christian nation


Now you are just pathetic.

As I said above your drivel is not worthy of an extended response.

----------


## Influenza

> Now you are just pathetic.
> 
> As I said above your drivel is not worthy of an extended response.


Luke 11:38-40
But the Pharisee was surprised when he noticed that Jesus did not first wash before the meal.

Then the Lord said to him, "Now then, you Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside you are full of greed and wickedness.

You foolish people! Did not the one who made the outside make the inside also?

God made everything, harmful bacteria doesn't exist, washing your hands isn't important. That's why there are so many retarded christians who refuse medical treatment for their sick kids and instead want to pray the sickness away. Many people actually think diseases are caused by sin

----------


## RJB

You have made some really idiotic points.  If you are trolling, congratulations.  That's some grade A material.  I hope you are getting a good laugh.  If you are serious, you should reevaluate your sense of reality.  You are a bit off kilter to put it mildly.



> Luke 11:38-40
> But the Pharisee was surprised when he noticed that Jesus did not first wash before the meal.
> 
> Then the Lord said to him, "Now then, you Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside you are full of greed and wickedness.
> 
> You foolish people! Did not the one who made the outside make the inside also?
> 
> God made everything, harmful bacteria doesn't exist, washing your hands isn't important. That's why there are so many retarded christians who refuse medical treatment for their sick kids and instead want to pray the sickness away. Many people actually think diseases are caused by sin

----------


## Swordsmyth

> You have made some really idiotic points.  If you are trolling, congratulations.  That's some grade A material.  I hope you are getting a good laugh.  If you are serious, you should reevaluate your sense of reality.  You are a bit off kilter to put it mildly.


You must spread some reputation around before giving it to RJB again.

----------


## The Rebel Poet

> Luke 11:38-40
> But the Pharisee was surprised when he noticed that Jesus did not first wash before the meal.
> 
> Then the Lord said to him, "Now then, you Pharisees clean the outside of the cup and dish, but inside you are full of greed and wickedness.
> 
> You foolish people! Did not the one who made the outside make the inside also?
> 
> God made everything, harmful bacteria doesn't exist, washing your hands isn't important. That's why there are so many retarded christians who refuse medical treatment for their sick kids and instead want to pray the sickness away. Many people actually think diseases are caused by sin




The Bible was lightyears ahead of other religions, the church, and the secular world in terms of sanitation and health. The Bible actually commands bathing and washing, among other sanitation laws, while the Jews had/have other extra washing rituals. In that context, Jesus' statement means something different from how you took it; He is just saying that rituals and _excessive_ washing are unnecessary. But at any rate, what does this have to do with Roy Moore?

----------


## Anti Federalist

Show up to protest (actually to vote, but since that's all kinds of illegal, the flyer doesn't put it quite that way) and get $50





http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...participation/

----------


## Anti Federalist

dupe

----------


## samforpaul

> But Drudge does pack fudge.
> 
> He must fear some fudge-block if someone like Moore gets in.



Please clarify.  I don't get what you're saying.

----------


## Suzanimal

> Show up to protest (actually to vote, but since that's all kinds of illegal, the flyer doesn't put it quite that way) and get $50
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...participation/

----------


## Anti Federalist

> Please clarify.  I don't get what you're saying.


Matt Drudge is a homersexual.

Roy Moore is not a supporter of homersexualism.

----------


## Sonny Tufts

> So, there is absolutely nothing in the Constitution calling for "a separation between church and state".


It's a handy encapsulation of the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses -- the government isn't to interfere with the church, and the church isn't to use the government to proselytize or to favor its particular belief.

Unfortunately, too many believe that their free exercise right includes having the government use its powers to help them spread their message or otherwise suggest that their belief is the correct one.  Such a view is an implicit admission that their belief isn't persuasive enough by itself, but rather needs governmental force to back it up.

It never ceases to amaze me how so many believers who otherwise want the government out of their lives see no problem with the government's promoting religious beliefs (as long as it's theirs, of course).

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Show up to protest (actually to vote, but since that's all kinds of illegal, the flyer doesn't put it quite that way) and get $50
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...participation/


They botched it, the whole thing talks about voting and how they want you to vote, they only mention a rally in the line offering money and then they immediately link it to your vote in the next line.

They can be prosecuted for buying votes over this.

----------


## specsaregood

> Show up to protest (actually to vote, but since that's all kinds of illegal, the flyer doesn't put it quite that way) and get $50
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.breitbart.com/big-governm...participation/


that is obscene

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Originally Posted by Influenza
> 
> 
> It's not a myth. Only stupid Christians  actually believe the USA was founded on Christian ideals, when it was  actually a complete rejection of political Christianity, which plagued  Europe for centuries and led to millions of deaths. Thomas Jefferson,  the most influential founder, wasn't even a Christian, and interpreted  the first amendment as " building a wall of separation between church  and state."
> 
> 
> Bunk.


Not bunk

The Founders were children of the Enlightenment and the Enlightenment  was in very large party a rejection of Christianity: or "superstition"  or "ignorance" or "priestly tyranny," etc, as they would put it.  Christianity virtually died out in the United States around the turn of  the 18th century as a result of Enlightenment thought. [And when it returned  during the revival movement a few decades later, it was radically  changed, having become low-church, do-gooder Yankeeism  (which eventually dropped the theological clothing altogether and became  modern progressivism), but I digress...] Point is, the First Amendment  was definitely intended to be a radical break from the previous  traditions of European Christianity, and it in fact was. The US around  the founding may have been a more Christian society (at least by  customs, if not by actual belief) than it is today, but it was in no way  founded as a Christian state. It was founded as a secular state in  self-conscious opposition to the Christian states of Europe. Any  traditional European Christian in 1790 let's say, would have looked at  what was happening in France with regard to religion and thought "O boy,  it's happening again, I knew we shouldn't have helped those colonists," lumping the anticlerical elements in Paris in  with the American revolutionaries, and with good reason (developments in the US had been much less radical, of course, but they moved in the same direction and under the same impulse).

*note that I have little but contempt for the Enlightenment, and am fairy sympathetic to (at least high-church) Christianity

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Not bunk
> 
> The Founders were children of the Enlightenment and the Enlightenment  was in very large party a rejection of Christianity: or "superstition"  or "ignorance" or "priestly tyranny," etc, as they would put it.  Christianity virtually died out in the United States around the turn of  the 18th century as a result of Enlightenment thought. [And when it returned  during the revival movement a few decades later, it was radically  changed, having become low-church, do-gooder Yankeeism  (which eventually dropped the theological clothing altogether and became  modern progressivism), but I digress...] Point is, the First Amendment  was definitely intended to be a radical break from the previous  traditions of European Christianity, and it in fact was. The US around  the founding may have been a more Christian society (at least by  customs, if not by actual belief) than it is today, but it was in no way  founded as a Christian state. It was founded as a secular state in  self-conscious opposition to the Christian states of Europe. Any  traditional European Christian in 1790 let's say, would have looked at  what was happening in France with regard to religion and thought "O boy,  it's happening again, I knew we shouldn't have helped those colonists," lumping the anticlerical elements in Paris in  with the American revolutionaries, and with good reason (developments in the US had been much less radical, of course, but they moved in the same direction and under the same impulse).
> 
> *note that I have little but contempt for the Enlightenment, and am fairy sympathetic to (at least high-church) Christianity


It's bunk, regardless of anyone's opinion of the enlightenment or America or Christianity, some members of the enlightenment may have completely rejected Christianity but others merely wanted to change it and while America may have reduced the interaction of church and state it was never intended to reduce the presence of Christianity in society, and in any case American legal theory was based on Christian culture and tradition.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> It's bunk, regardless of anyone's opinion of the enlightenment or America or Christianity, some members of the enlightenment may have completely rejected Christianity but others merely wanted to change it and while America may have reduced the interaction of church and state it was never intended to reduce the presence of Christianity in society, and in any case American legal theory was based on Christian culture and tradition.


If you define "Christian culture" as any culture which isn't Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, etc, sure.

But that'd be silly, since no one's claiming that the Founders belonged to some other religion's culture. 

If there was such a thing as secular, non-Christian culture in the West at the 18th century, the Founders were part of it.

If not, because you define "Christian culture" so broadly, then the debate is meaningless.

----------


## Krugminator2

https://dougjonesforsenate.com/priorities/




> Health care is a right, not a privilege limited to the wealthy and those with jobs that provide coverage.Coverage must meet basic standards that protect individuals. Nobody should have to sell their house because a family member has cancer. A “cheap” plan that won’t cover preventative care, serious illness, pharmaceutical coverage, mental health, maternity care, birth control or other care for women is a sham. So is a policy that nobody can afford.




Health care is not a right and private citizens shouldn't be forced to violate their religious beliefs to provide coverage.

Roy Moore is a clown and not very libertarian. Even excluding the fact that he is a child molester, he is bad on numerous economic issues and catastrophically bad on most social issues. All of that said, I would vote for him because the Senate is 52-48.  Conceding a vote from a Republican state is really bad when Clarence Thomas, Ginsurg and Kennedy all might retire soon.  I am not eager to see a guy who wants single payer health care to win.

----------


## Influenza

> The Bible was lightyears ahead of other religions, the church, and the secular world in terms of sanitation and health. The Bible actually commands bathing and washing, among other sanitation laws, while the Jews had/have other extra washing rituals. In that context, Jesus' statement means something different from how you took it; He is just saying that rituals and _excessive_ washing are unnecessary. But at any rate, what does this have to do with Roy Moore?


More lies of course. That's the only way christians can justify their idiotic religious texts

https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topi...-For-Cleansing

Notice how only two of the verses are from the new testament, you know the book about jesus and stuff. And one of those verses is specifically about NOT WASHING. and then there's the obligatory foot fetishizing from jesus. Imagine if Jesus washed his hands more thoroughly than what the mosaic law prescribed. We would never hear the end of it from Christians who would proclaim that Jesus knew about the importance of cleanliness. Unfortunately that's not true, and we just laugh as you make excuses for the nonsense you believe. 

And if christianity was so advanced in sanitation, why were all the Christian european countries the filthiest on the planet for so long? That's why half of everyone in Europe died from the Bubonic plague, because they were disgustingly filthy. 

And you know how it's related to Roy Moore? Because the only reason he has any support at all is because of christianity. If that sick religion was dead, roy moore would not have even a single voter.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> If you define "Christian culture" as any culture which isn't Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, etc, sure.
> 
> But that'd be silly, since no one's claiming that the Founders belonged to some other religion's culture. 
> 
> If there was such a thing as secular, non-Christian culture in the West at the 18th century, the Founders were part of it.
> 
> If not, because you define "Christian culture" so broadly, then the debate is meaningless.


It is not meaningless, this started when I pointed out that our Constitution and laws were based on Christian legal tradition and that it was impossible for an avowed muslim who wanted to use a koran instead of a bible to take the oath of office to protect and defend them.

Islamic culture and legal theory are directly in opposition to our culture of GOD given rights including the right to freedom of religion.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> It is not meaningless, this started when I pointed out that our Constitution and laws were based on Christian legal tradition and that it was impossible for an avowed muslim who wanted to use a koran instead of a bible to take the oath of office to protect and defend them.


You could say exactly the same thing about an avowed Christian (hell, like Moore!), which proves my point. 




> Islamic culture and legal theory are directly in opposition to our culture of GOD given rights including the right to freedom of religion.


Freedom of religion is not an aspect Christian culture any more than it is of Islamic culture; it was a secular idea developed in the Enlightenment.

...in direct contradiction of Christian culture as it had existed for the better part of two millenia.

----------


## Influenza

> You have made some really idiotic points.  If you are trolling, congratulations.  That's some grade A material.  I hope you are getting a good laugh.  If you are serious, you should reevaluate your sense of reality.  You are a bit off kilter to put it mildly.


How does it make you feel knowing that Jesus made it a point to NOT wash his hands? If he did the opposite, Christian and atheist alike would hail him has a revolutionary genius. Jesus clearly said that only foolish people wash their hands before eating, citing that God created everything both on your hands and inside your body. What those verses mean is really obvious. I'm sorry you're so miserably brainwashed that all you can do is ignore how laughable your religion is and instead berate me for pointing it out

----------


## Swordsmyth

> You could say exactly the same thing about an avowed Christian (hell, like Moore!), which proves my point.


Bunk






> Freedom of religion is not an aspect Christian culture any more than it is of Islamic culture; it was a secular idea developed in the Enlightenment.
> 
> ...in direct contradiction of Christian culture as it had existed for the better part of two millenia.


Does "Love thine enemy" ring a bell? Christians did not attempt to suppress other religions until the Roman empire hijacked the church.
And freedom of religion was a protestant ideal that was resurrected in Christianity to help keep protestants from fighting among themselves and giving an advantage to Papists in the religious wars.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Bunk


Is there anything which the federal government could do Constitutionally, which would contradict Christian principles?

Is there anything which the federal government could not do Constitutionally, which Christian principles say it ought to?

How about for state government, where the sphere of Constitutional action is much larger?




> Does "Love thine enemy" ring a bell? Christians did not attempt to suppress other religions until the Roman empire hijacked the church.


So, only since the early 4th century AD...

...only for the vast majority of Christianity's existence.




> And freedom of religion was a protestant ideal that was resurrected in Christianity to help keep protestants from fighting among themselves and giving an advantage to Papists in the religious wars.


Protestants favored toleration when they were in the minority, e.g. in France.

In Protestant ruled states, e.g. England or Massachusetts, they were at least as intolerant as Catholics.

----------


## RJB

I am sorry.  I assumed you were intelligent enough to realize that Jesus was speaking of what makes a person spiritually unclean.  I won't give you that benefit of the doubt in the future.

The lesson was: it's what is in your heart rather than a ritual (in this case washing of the hands) that makes someone holy.  (Jesus did not come into the world to save germs, LOL)  If you are implying that Christians don't wash their hands, yes, I think you are goofing around-- at least I hope you are.


Furthermore, pointing out fringe Christians like odd posters on the forum or tyrants who furthered their desires misusing a belief to judge all Christians is as silly as me using fringe atheistic posters such as yourself and atheistic tyrants like Stalin to judge all atheists.  I would not do that.   There are atheist who I respect for there intellect and honesty.




> How does it make you feel knowing that Jesus made it a point to NOT wash his hands? If he did the opposite, Christian and atheist alike would hail him has a revolutionary genius. Jesus clearly said that only foolish people wash their hands before eating, citing that God created everything both on your hands and inside your body. What those verses mean is really obvious. I'm sorry you're so miserably brainwashed that all you can do is ignore how laughable your religion is and instead berate me for pointing it out

----------


## Superfluous Man

> almost all the founders fit in that "non-religious" category


Of all people who have ever lived and are alive today and ever will live, the number of nonreligious ones is zero.

If the religion that informed the views of the people you refer to as the founders was something other than a biblical faith, it was not on that account any less religious.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> Jesus clearly said that only foolish people wash their hands before eating


Jesus never said that.

----------


## Influenza

> I am sorry.  I assumed you were intelligent enough to realize that Jesus was speaking of what makes a person spiritually unclean.  I won't give you that benefit of the doubt in the future.
> 
> The lesson was: it's what is in your heart rather than a ritual (in this case washing of the hands) that makes someone holy.  (Jesus did not come into the world to save germs, LOL)  If you are implying that Christians don't wash their hands, yes, I think you are goofing around-- at least I hope you are.
> 
> 
> Furthermore, pointing out fringe Christians like odd posters on the forum or tyrants who furthered their desires misusing a belief to judge all Christians is as silly as me using fringe atheistic posters such as yourself and atheistic tyrants like Stalin to judge all atheists.  I would not do that.   There are atheist who I respect for there intellect and honesty.


Oh I see, so Jesus refused to wash his hands before eating and taught his followers the same in order to make a point about a concept as arcane and useless as "spiritual purity." That makes a lot of sense. 

btw, I was referring to those "fringe Christians" because they are the most honest Christians of all - they believe what is written, and don't throw out and ignore all the ugly parts of their religion. And because of that, they are awful people.

----------


## Influenza

> Of all people who have ever lived and are alive today and ever will live, the number of nonreligious ones is zero.
> 
> If the religion that informed the views of the people you refer to as the founders was something other than a biblical faith, it was not on that account any less religious.


More dishonest theistic propaganda. Beliefs and ideas that are not based on blind faith have absolutely NOTHING to do with "religion."

----------


## RJB

> Oh I see, so Jesus refused to wash his hands before eating and taught his followers the same in order to make a point about a concept as arcane and useless as "spiritual purity."


Are you capable of reading comprehension?  What you are writing is silly.  




> That makes a lot of sense.


If you wish to post as a clown, please stop using the Ron Paul picture and please use an avatar with a person with a big red ball for his nose.



> btw, I was referring to those "fringe Christians" because they are the most honest Christians of all - they believe what is written, and don't throw out and ignore all the ugly parts of their religion. And because of that, they are awful people.


Again, I am sure my atheistic friends are glad that I don't lump them in with you and Stalin.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Is there anything which the federal government could do Constitutionally, which would contradict Christian principles?


Yes, as could any government including a Christian theocracy.




> Is there anything which the federal government could not do Constitutionally, which Christian principles say it ought to?


Not to my knowledge, if you have anything in mind let me know.




> How about for state government, where the sphere of Constitutional action is much larger?


Same answers as above.






> So, only since the early 4th century AD...
> 
> ...only for the vast majority of Christianity's existence.


That's right, REAL Christianity didn't suppress other religions and many people understood that, that is why freedom of religion was accepted by many Christians especially Protestants who were willing to admit that Rome had become heretical.






> Protestants favored toleration when they were in the minority, e.g. in France.
> 
> In Protestant ruled states, e.g. England or Massachusetts, they were at least as intolerant as Catholics.


Some acted that way, others did not, England is a good example their religious tolerance varied, at one time it was said that "the French have a hundred sauces and one religion, while the English are a nation of a hundred religions and one sauce".

Those Protestant sects that were persecuted by the majority came to America and sought to establish states with religious tolerance like Pennsylvania.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> More dishonest theistic propaganda. Beliefs and ideas that are not based on blind faith have absolutely NOTHING to do with "religion."


If blind faith refers to beliefs that people hold without first proving them, every person who ever has lived or ever will live has those.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Yes, as could any government including a Christian theocracy.
> 
> Not to my knowledge, if you have anything in mind let me know.
> 
> Same answers as above.


So then how could a Christian take an oath to uphold the Constitution (federal or state)?

He would face the same conflict of conscience as a devout Muslim, no?




> That's right, REAL Christianity didn't suppress other religions and many people understood that, that is why freedom of religion was accepted by many Christians especially Protestants who were willing to admit that Rome had become heretical...
> 
> Some acted that way, others did not, England is a good example their religious tolerance varied, at one time it was said that "the French have a hundred sauces and one religion, while the English are a nation of a hundred religions and one sauce".
> 
> Those Protestant sects that were persecuted by the majority came to America and sought to establish states with religious tolerance like Pennsylvania.


In England, Mass was outlawed while attendance at Anglican services was made mandatory. Catholics were required to pay tithes to support the Anglican Church. Catholic schools were outlawed. Catholics were legally prohibited from serving on juries, holding university positions, being lawyers, serving in the military, voting, or holding most public offices. Hundreds of Catholic priests and others were executed for treason simply for public practice of their religion. Most of these restrictions lasted into the 1820s. It was more or less the same story throughout Protestant Europe (and in Catholic Europe, in reverse). 

Christianity around the time of the Founding was not tolerant, Protestant or otherwise. 

The Founders were reacting against the Christian culture of the day.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> So then how could a Christian take an oath to uphold the Constitution (federal or state)?
> 
> He would face the same conflict of conscience as a devout Muslim, no?


Islam demands that the state do things that would violate the Constitution, Christianity does not, a Christian can protect and defend the Constitution until it required him to violate his principles then he can resign when it does.






> In England, Mass was outlawed while attendance at Anglican services was made mandatory. Catholics were required to pay tithes to support the Anglican Church. Catholic schools were outlawed. Catholics were legally prohibited from serving on juries, holding university positions, being lawyers, serving in the military, voting, or holding most public offices. Hundreds of Catholic priests and others were executed for treason simply for public practice of their religion. Most of these restrictions lasted into the 1820s. It was more or less the same story throughout Protestant Europe (and in Catholic Europe, in reverse). 
> 
> Christianity around the time of the Founding was not tolerant, Protestant or otherwise. 
> 
> The Founders were reacting against the Christian culture of the day.


The "war" against Rome was a large exception to the growing belief in religious liberty but hardly any concept is fully implemented from it's birth and it was Protestant Christians who began the movement.

And Pennsylvania did not persecute Catholics even if other colonies did.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Islam demands that the state do things that would violate the Constitution, Christianity does not


There are/have been many Christian-inspired policy proposals which are clearly unconstitutional at the federal level: e.g. alcohol prohibition, banning abortion, banning gay marriage. On the other side, there are many Constitutional things at the state level (e.g. funding abortions) which Christians could not support in good conscience. In either case (the Christian wanting to do unconstitutional things, or refusing ti enforce constitutional laws, there's an oath problem). 




> a Christian can protect and defend the Constitution until it required him to violate his principles then he can resign when it does.


But a Muslim couldn't, because....?




> The "war" against Rome was a large exception to the growing belief in religious liberty....


It wasn't an exception, it was the norm throughout Protestant Europe until the 19th century.

I can just as well find examples of tolerant Catholic states, and they too would be exceptions.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> There are/have been many Christian-inspired policy proposals which are clearly unconstitutional at the federal level: e.g. alcohol prohibition, banning abortion, banning gay marriage. On the other side, there are many Constitutional things at the state level (e.g. funding abortions) which Christians could not support in good conscience. In either case (the Christian wanting to do unconstitutional things, or refusing ti enforce constitutional laws, there's an oath problem).


Some Christians may want to do unconstitutional things but Christianity doesn't demand that they be done.






> But a Muslim couldn't, because....?


Because islam demands that the government do many things which are unconstitutional.






> It wasn't an exception, it was the norm throughout Protestant Europe until the 19th century.


I meant it was an exception to the concept of religious tolerance not that it was an exception to the majority of how states behaved.




> I can just as well find examples of tolerant Catholic states, and they too would be exceptions.


Catholic culture saw the advantages of tolerance and copied the Protestants, in any case it was a movement within Christian culture.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Some Christians may want to do unconstitutional things but Christianity doesn't demand that they be done.
> 
> Because islam demands that the government do many things which are unconstitutional.


Christian: My book says (or I interpret it as saying) demon rum should be illegal, let's ban it.

Muslim: Hey, me too, let's ban it. 

What's the difference?

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Christian: My book says (or I interpret it as saying) demon rum should be illegal, let's ban it.
> 
> Muslim: Hey, me too, let's ban it. 
> 
> What's the difference?


The Christian book doesn't say it should be illegal (it doesn't even say it is immoral, even Mormon scripture doesn't say it should be illegal and the passage that is interpreted as forbidding it specifically states that it is advice not a command, the doctrinal change to treat it as a command was heresy, it even specifically allows beer and says that when the end-times are over wine will be acceptable since the advice to avoid it is meant to prevent poisoning plots) and if a particular sect says that it does say it should be illegal then they too should be barred from taking the oath.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> The Christian book doesn't say it should be illegal (it doesn't even say it is immoral, even Mormon scripture doesn't say it should be illegal and the passage that is interpreted as forbidding it specifically states that it is advice not a command, the doctrinal change to treat it as a command was heresy, it even specifically allows beer and says that when the end-times are over wine will be acceptable since the advice to avoid it is meant to prevent poisoning plots) and if a particular sect says that it does say it should be illegal then they too should be barred from taking the oath.


Your narrow definition of Christian appears to rule out most self-ascribed Christians in America. If you're using a similarly narrow definition of Muslim (only those who believe in some Koranic command to unconstitutional things are real Muslims), well then your argument might be better expressed as "people who think the government should do unconstitutional things shouldn't be allowed to take the oath," which rules out almost all people, Christian or Muslim.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Your narrow definition of Christian appears to rule out most self-ascribed Christians in America. If you're using a similarly narrow definition of Muslim (only those who believe in some Koranic command to unconstitutional things are real Muslims), well then your argument might be better expressed as "people who think the government should do unconstitutional things shouldn't be allowed to take the oath," which rules out almost all people, Christian or Muslim.


A good idea but it requires some way to determine that they do believe in using the government to do unconstitutional things, being a muslim qualifies for that being a Christian doesn't, being a Democrat should but that would start a civil war.

----------


## dannno



----------


## sparebulb

So, can we put Zippy, Rev3, and the Flu down for Doug Jones?

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> A good idea but it requires some way to determine that they do believe in using the government to do unconstitutional things, being a muslim qualifies for that being a Christian doesn't, being a Democrat should but that would start a civil war.


Except you're defining Muslim and Christian in such a way that most people who call themselves Muslims or Christians aren't, by your definition. 

So, someone walks into your office and says "I'm a Christian" you still have to determine what that means _to them_, right?

....and by the way (should have mentioned this earlier), 

"but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."

...?

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Except you're defining Muslim and Christian in such a way that most people who call themselves Muslims or Christians aren't, by your definition. 
> 
> So, someone walks into your office and says "I'm a Christian" you still have to determine what that means _to them_, right?


If you want to give ir/semireligious muslims a "fair shake" then they should be required to renounce Sharia law etc.




> ....and by the way (should have mentioned this earlier), 
> 
> "but no religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States."
> 
> ...?


It is NOT a religious test, it is a "protect and defend" test, if there was a muslim sect that declared that the state should not enforce it's beliefs then there would not be a reason to refuse to let them take office.

----------


## RJB

> So, can we put Zippy, Rev3, and the Flu down for Doug Jones?


As a Christian, I was blessed to learn that Jesus came into the world to tell me to have dirty hands.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> If you want to give ir/semireligious muslims a "fair shake" then they should be required to renounce Sharia law etc.


And Christians will be required to renounce the various unconstitutional beliefs that many Christians have/do hold?




> It is NOT a religious test, it is a "protect and defend" test, if there was a muslim sect that declared that the state should not enforce it's beliefs then there would not be a reason to refuse to let them take office.


Isn't that impossible by definition, i.e. by you definition of Muslim?

----------


## Swordsmyth

> And Christians will be required to renounce the various unconstitutional beliefs that many Christians have/do hold?


If their sect holds it as doctrine that government should do those things then it would be a good idea.






> Isn't that impossible by definition, i.e. by you definition of Muslim?


I do not know of the existence of such a sect but it would be perfectly possible for some group to claim divine inspiration altering the teachings of mohammad and create one.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> If their sect holds it as doctrine that government should do those things then it would be a good idea.


I would bet you that the vast majority of self-ascribed Christians could not state clearly what sect they belong to and what its dogma is. 

Likewise for the vast majority of Muslims.

To figure out what you want to know, you're going to have to interview them, not just rely on their (vague to non-existent) self-identification. 




> I do not know of the existence of such a sect but it would be perfectly possible for some group to claim divine inspiration altering the teachings of mohammad and create one.


Now I'm confused...

Every self-ascribed Muslims wants the state to enforce Shariah, or every "true Muslim" as you define it does (tautologically)?

----------


## Swordsmyth

> I would bet you that the vast majority of self-ascribed Christians could not state clearly what sect they belong to and what its dogma is. 
> 
> Likewise for the vast majority of Muslims.
> 
> To figure out what you want to know, you're going to have to interview them, not just rely on their (vague to non-existent) self-identification.


And then any office seekers will lie, the only ones you can rule out are those who openly profess to believe in the teachings of a sect that teaches that government must do things that violate the Constitution.






> Now I'm confused...
> 
> Every self-ascribed Muslims wants the state to enforce Shariah, or every "true Muslim" as you define it does (tautologically)?


If you know of a muslim sect that doesn't require Sharia law I would like to hear about it, meanwhile I said that you might need to allow individual muslims to renounce Sharia law and then be allowed to take office.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> And then any office seekers will lie, the only ones you can rule out are those who openly profess to believe in the teachings of a sect that teaches that government must do things that violate the Constitution.


If you're saying that the oath is useless as an actual screening tool and purely a matter of civic ritual, I agree. 




> If you know of a muslim sect that doesn't require Sharia law I would like to hear about it, meanwhile I said that you might need to allow individual muslims to renounce Sharia law and then be allowed to take office.


As I said, you're giving them too much credit.

Most Muslims just grew up that way, don't know anything, many have never attended any service as an adult, etc.

Just like with most Americans - "I grew up a Methodist/Catholic/Whatever." 

And that's about the extent of their religious knowledge. 

Anyway, I'm sure googling "liberal Muslim" or something to that effect you'll find plenty of specific examples.

----------


## The Rebel Poet

> More lies of course. That's the only way christians can justify their idiotic religious texts
> 
> https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topi...-For-Cleansing
> 
> Notice how only two of the verses are from the new testament, you know the book about jesus and stuff. And one of those verses is specifically about NOT WASHING. and then there's the obligatory foot fetishizing from jesus. Imagine if Jesus washed his hands more thoroughly than what the mosaic law prescribed. We would never hear the end of it from Christians who would proclaim that Jesus knew about the importance of cleanliness. Unfortunately that's not true, and we just laugh as you make excuses for the nonsense you believe. 
> 
> And if christianity was so advanced in sanitation, why were all the Christian european countries the filthiest on the planet for so long? That's why half of everyone in Europe died from the Bubonic plague, because they were disgustingly filthy. 
> 
> And you know how it's related to Roy Moore? Because the only reason he has any support at all is because of christianity. If that sick religion was dead, roy moore would not have even a single voter.


I'm trying to decide if you are being serious? You have always seemed like a reasonable person as far as I can remember, so for now I'll go on the assumption that you're just being a bit sloppy.

Jesus isn't explicitly quoted as having endorsed the sanitation laws in the OT as far as I remember, but that is the argument from silence. He repeatedly endorsed the whole Law, and denying that is either ignorant or dishonest. As far as the dirtiness of Europe, you seem to be confusing the Church with biblical Christianity. The Church for a long time denied biblical laws of all sorts as pagan or Jewish, so they went backwards in time on sanitation science, but a quick perusal through the NT shows that biblical Christianity never made such distinctions. One more thing, the link you provided took me to John 13:10
which is quoted as 


> Jesus said to him, "He who has bathed needs only to wash his feet, but is completely clean; and you are clean, but not all of you."


 This explains His point of view on bathing/washing; do you wash your hands after a bath?

Re your point about Roy Moore's connection to Christianity, you're right, there are probably an awful lot of people who are only voting for him because of the C by his name, but it's a bit much to say he would get NO support.

----------


## Swordsmyth

*Saturday, December 9*
Alabama Senate Special Election - Moore vs. Jones

Trafalgar Group (R)

Moore 51, Jones 46

Moore +5

Alabama Senate Special Election - Moore vs. Jones
Gravis
Moore 49, Jones 45
Moore +4



https://realclearpolitics.com/epolls/latest_polls/

----------


## phill4paul

> Oh, he found a negative article now. * Election of Roy Moore could test boundaries of Senate ethics committee...*


  And now he has several pro-Jones/anti-Moore articles at the top of the page.

----------


## fedupinmo

> https://dougjonesforsenate.com/priorities/
> 
> 
> 
> Health care is not a right and private citizens shouldn't be forced to violate their religious beliefs to provide coverage.
> 
> Roy Moore is a clown and not very libertarian. Even excluding the fact that he is a child molester, he is bad on numerous economic issues and catastrophically bad on most social issues. All of that said, I would vote for him because the Senate is 52-48.  Conceding a vote from a Republican state is really bad when Clarence Thomas, Ginsurg and Kennedy all might retire soon.  I am not eager to see a guy who wants single payer health care to win.


Fact, eh? Prove it. The only "child" that accuses him has a habit of accusing men in power, claims they met at the courthouse where Moore practiced yet is documented as having her custody transferred at a different court (for behavioral problems no less) and has been shown to be generally disreputable. None of the rest were children according to Alabama law...

----------


## TheCount

> If their sect holds it as doctrine that government should do those things then it would be a good idea.


Given the quantity of law in the United States that is based upon the Christian version of Sharia law, wouldn't that make the vast majority of American Christians ineligible?

----------


## Brian4Liberty

Somebody on "This Week" said that real Christians would not vote for Judge Moore...

----------


## spudea

> Somebody on "This Week" said that real Christians would not vote for Judge Moore...


They are already accepting this is a lost election, and how do they turn it in their favor.  There is an article today on Politico stating its better for the democrats if Moore does win, that way they can call every republican in the nation a pedophile.

----------


## The Rebel Poet

> Fact, eh? Prove it. The only "child" that accuses him has a habit of accusing men in power, claims they met at the courthouse where Moore practiced yet is documented as having her custody transferred at a different court (for behavioral problems no less) and has been shown to be generally disreputable. None of the rest were children according to Alabama law...


I think he means child according to muh feelz. I believe in the current Amerikan herd that is defined as 18 or 21 or 35 or something.

----------


## Jan2017

*Moore bumps Jones from top spot in Alabama Senate poll*

Embattled Republican Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore is now leading his Democratic rival, Doug Jones, by 4 points, according to a new survey.
A Gravis Marketing poll finds Moore has 49 percent support in the Alabama Senate race, while 45 percent back Jones.

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign...ma-senate-poll
*

Doug Jones needs black voters to beat Roy Moore in Alabama. They arent there yet.*

African-Americans make up about 27 percent of the state's population, and Jones will need them to turn out in droves on Tuesday, 
since he's expected to win just a third of whites, at best.

One campaign mailer in particular has lit up black social media with criticism.
It's aimed at calling attention to the allegations of sexuality impropriety against Moore, and features a photo of a skeptical looking young black man 
and the text, "Think if a black man went after high school girls, anyone would try to make him a senator?"

 Sen. Cory Booker (D-NJ) on Saturday tweeted that he would worry about the safety of Senate pages if Moore served in the chamber with him.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/ele...g-them-n827846

----------


## r3volution 3.0

Did you know we need to spend Moore money on the military because it's been "gutted"?

...especially the fantastic new Littoral Combat Ship.




> The U.S. Navy’s newest class of small surface combatants, the Littoral  Combat Ships, come with a few minor flaws. They don’t have the firepower  to hit anything more than a few miles away. They’re unlikely to survive  being hit by anything in return. They cost more than twice as  much as promised, and require 75 percent more crew to operate than  planned for. The modular-mission capabilities that were a key selling  point had to be abandoned. And they’re breaking down constantly.


http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the...ch-below-23042

And it'll create jerbs too!

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Did you know we need to spend Moore money on the military because it's been "gutted"?
> 
> ...especially the fantastic new Littoral Combat Ship.
> 
> 
> 
> http://nationalinterest.org/blog/the...ch-below-23042
> 
> And it'll create jerbs too!


And Doug Jones would never vote for Welfare/Warfare spending?

----------


## phill4paul

> And Doug Jones would never vote for Welfare/Warfare spending?


 


> Invoking a popular Republican talking point, Democratic Senate candidate *Doug Jones said a strong national defense is "incredibly important" and pointed to the valuable role Alabama plays in that industry.*
> 
> Jones met last week with officials from the Huntsville-Madison County Chamber of Commerce, responding to their invitation to learn more about the area and its priorities in a town dependent upon federal spending.





> "You have to be smart about how money is spent," Jones said in an interview with AL.com. "The federal budget is very large and it contains many components. But I think in today's world, *defense spending is very important, making sure we have a capable and modern military to protect this country is incredibly important. That is the most paramount thing.*
> *
> "It is also very important for this state, not just the Huntsville area, but Mobile and Anniston, there's any number of areas in this state, that defense spending really boosts this economy. Anything we can do in this state to boost Alabama's economy should be a priority for any United States senator.*"


http://www.al.com/news/huntsville/in...ional_def.html

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Given the quantity of law in the United States that is based upon the Christian version of Sharia law, wouldn't that make the vast majority of American Christians ineligible?


Nothing in Christianity requires the government to enforce it, if there is a sect of Christians who believe otherwise then they should be required to renounce such belief or be barred from office,.

I already covered this point with R3v, which you would know if you had bothered to read my posts before opening your mouth.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> And Doug Jones would never vote for Welfare/Warfare spending?


I agree, Moore is as bad as Jones.

----------


## timosman

> I agree, Moore is as bad as Jones.


LOL. You should be an entertainer. Your transparent efforts to promote an agenda would be less objectionable.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> I agree, Moore is as bad as Jones.


Not hardly.

----------


## Zap!

> I agree, Moore is as bad as Jones.


I take it you didn't like Jesse Helms either?

----------


## phill4paul

> I agree, Moore is as bad as Jones.


  Hardly, lol.




> Jones:* I am a firm believer that a woman should have the freedom to choose what happens to her own body*, and I’m going to stand up for that, and I’m going to make sure that that continues to happen. I want to make sure that as we go forward, people have access to contraception, they have access to the abortion that they might need, if that’s what they choose to do. 
> 
>  Todd: *You wouldn’t be in favor of legislation that said “ban abortion after 20 weeks,”* or something like that? 
> 
> Jones:* No, I’m not in favor of anything that is going to infringe on a woman’s right and her freedom to choose.* That’s just the position that I’ve had for many years, it’s the position I continue to have.


Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...ghts-extremist

----------


## William Tell

> And now he has several pro-Jones/anti-Moore articles at the top of the page.


And mostly old news or BS like NeoCon Shelby voting against him or how he's 'disappeared'. Dude is trying to get out the vote making important phone calls and held a rally with Bannon and has another one tomorrow.

----------


## William Tell

> I agree, Moore is as bad as Jones.


This kind of thinking is why almost no one in this movement has or ever will have any influence in the direction this country will head besides Rand Paul and his dad.

Only one sitting U.S Senator has had the intestinal fortitude to back Roy Moore through all this. When Moore wins y'all will see why Rand and Massie stand with Roy.

----------


## William Tell

LOL!




> *Watch: AL.com Columnist Ripped on CNN’s ‘Reliable Sources’ for Asking If Roy Moore Was Gay
> 
> 
> *


 http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/...roy-moore-gay/

----------


## dannno

3:28




> LOL!
> 
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/...roy-moore-gay/

----------


## Swordsmyth

> LOL!
> 
> http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/...roy-moore-gay/


They are drowning in de Nile river.

----------


## William Tell

MSM dug up an old alternative radio interview with Roy Moore. Interesting stuff on the Constitution, investigating a certain terror attack, and a strong condemnation of NeoConservatism by the Judge. http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/10/politi...men/index.html

----------


## William Tell

This explains why the Democrat, RINO, and LINO establishment all want to destroy this man so badly.

"I think NeoConservatism is liberalism in disguise" -Judge Roy Moore

----------


## dannno

> MSM dug up an old alternative radio interview with Roy Moore. Interesting stuff on the Constitution, investigating a certain terror attack, and a *strong condemnation of NeoConservatism by the Judge*. http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/10/politi...men/index.html

----------


## euphemia

As much as we see how the allegations against Moore are largely discredited, moving forward, we really need to make sure our folks are fully vetting candidates before supporting them for office.

----------


## phill4paul

> As much as we see how the allegations against Moore are largely discredited, moving forward, we really need to make sure our folks are fully vetting candidates before supporting them for office.


  Which folks are you talking about when you say "we?" I don't think many here particularly care for Moore. What we cared about was the establishment attack on his morals by those who have none.
  Secondly, how do you "vet" someone, that is for all appearances is moral, against a smear campaign, that have never been made before, when they appear only a few weeks before an election?

----------


## euphemia

I think this boils down to a failure of the Alabama Republican Party.  When Moore announced for office, someone should have brought him in to ask him if there were any skeletons in his closet that might be problematic during the election.  In my experience state and local parties are very lazy.  But with Moore being somewhat a liberty candidate, it seems like they would have run him out of the election on a rail.  They didn't, and now they are stuck.  If "everyone knew," why didn't the party?

----------


## phill4paul

> I think this boils down to a failure of the Alabama Republican Party.  When Moore announced for office, someone should have brought him in to ask him if there were any skeletons in his closet that might be problematic during the election.  In my experience state and local parties are very lazy.  But with Moore being somewhat a liberty candidate, it seems like they would have run him out of the election on a rail.  They didn't, and now they are stuck.  If "everyone knew," why didn't the party?


  Why do you assume that there are "skeletons in his closet" as opposed to believing that this is a discredited smear campaign?

----------


## specsaregood

> Which folks are you talking about when you say "we?" I don't think many here particularly care for Moore.


I want moore to win because the liberal meltdown will rival their meltdown when Trump won and that was great entertainment.  it might even be better because even those "republicans" that had to pretend to be happy about Trump winning won't have to pretend this time and can have their little crying public meltdowns as well.

----------


## William Tell

> I think this boils down to a failure of the Alabama Republican Party.  When Moore announced for office, someone should have brought him in to ask him if there were any skeletons in his closet that might be problematic during the election.  In my experience state and local parties are very lazy.  But with Moore being somewhat a liberty candidate, it seems like they would have run him out of the election on a rail.  They didn't, and now they are stuck.  If "everyone knew," why didn't the party?


Everybody's been poking in his closet for decades trying to find skeletons to bring him down and nothing showed up until last month. Vetting can't stop people from lying and saying a man or woman tried to sleep with them. If you ever come close to being a U.S Senator you will see how it works.

----------


## phill4paul

They're keeping sexual allegations in the news today. Trumps accusers are making a media statement calling for Congressional investigations. Not surprising that it is on election day in Ala. Trump supports Moore and made a robo call for him. So...guilt be association and all that.

----------


## William Tell

Doug Jones is using Obama at the last minute.




> (CNN)Former  President Barack Obama is adding his voice to the Alabama Senate race,  imploring voters to go to the polls Tuesday to reject the candidacy of  Roy Moore as part of an aggressive effort by Democrats to try and  counter President Donald Trump's full-throated endorsement of the  controversial Republican candidate.
> 
> 
> 
> "This one's serious," Obama says in the call. "You can't sit it out."
> 
> 
> Two  Democratic officials familiar with the Alabama race tell CNN that Obama  recorded the phone message in recent days, at the very time Trump  stepped up his own involvement in the campaign with a recorded message.  Obama does not mention Moore by name.


 http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/11/politi...ate/index.html

----------


## phill4paul

> Doug Jones is using Obama at the last minute.
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/11/politi...ate/index.html


  Yup. Throwing everything, including the kitchen sink, at him. On Drudge:  FOXNEWS SHOCK POLL: ROY MOORE DOWN BY 10...

----------


## William Tell

> Yup. Throwing everything, including the kitchen sink, at him. On Drudge:  FOXNEWS SHOCK POLL: ROY MOORE DOWN BY 10...


 Yeah, the last Fox poll was about the same but Emerson has Moore up 9 today, and every other recent poll has Moore up 4+. Emerson says Moore is leading in every congressional district except 7, and possibly 5. Fox has Jones up 30 with Cell Phone users and is counting on people who don't usually show up to vote.

My guess is Moore wins tomorrow by 6-11% but we shall see.

----------


## phill4paul

> Doug Jones is using Obama at the last minute.
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/11/politi...ate/index.html


  Biden has made a robo call too. Lol. Freaking Creepy Joe Biden. 




> Alabama senate candidate Doug Jones is getting some last-minute help from Barack Obama and Joe Biden, who are separately recording robo-calls for the Democratic hopeful.
> 
> A source close to campaign confirmed that the former president will record a call for Jones, while a Democrat close to Biden told POLITICO that he’ll also work on Jones’ behalf.
> 
> In addition to recording the call that will hit Alabamian's phones one day before they vote, the former vice president is planning to tap his large email list on behalf of the former U.S. Attorney running against Roy Moore. The call will make no mention of Moore, the person familiar with the plan said.


https://www.politico.com/story/2017/...alabama-288961

 Relevant:  http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...er-creeper-vid

----------


## dannno

> I think this boils down to a failure of the Alabama Republican Party.  When Moore announced for office, someone should have brought him in to ask him if there were any skeletons in his closet that might be problematic during the election.  In my experience state and local parties are very lazy.  But with Moore being somewhat a liberty candidate, it seems like they would have run him out of the election on a rail.  They didn't, and now they are stuck.  If "everyone knew," why didn't the party?


The accusers have a lot of skeletons in their closet, I doubt Moore has any.. haven't you been paying attention?

----------


## Jamesiv1

> I want moore to win because the liberal meltdown will rival their meltdown when Trump won and that was great entertainment.  it might even be better because even those "republicans" that had to pretend to be happy about Trump winning won't have to pretend this time and can have their little crying public meltdowns as well.


This will be different. This will be cursing and gnashing of teeth (Moore victory) as opposed to salty tears (Trump victory).

The establishment, both Dem and Rep, hate Roy Moore. He's a Trump guy, as well as a Steve Bannon guy.

If the Trump/Bannon coalition continues to grow, things will definitely get interesting.

----------


## Jan2017

> Doug Jones is using Obama at the last minute.
> 
> http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/11/politi...ate/index.html


Former presidents are supposed to keep out of the Senate races, usually - sorta (?)

Both will support increased military spending, but Jones would want more and more for the Obamacare hole,
and then there is the sanctity to life difference . . .

----------


## dannno

> Both will support increased military spending


Moore is an anti-neocon non-interventionist.

----------


## Jan2017

> Moore is an anti-neocon non-interventionist.


I was going to say _probably_ both . . . 
so is Jones trying to suck over neocon GOP support or is it all like everything is a non-issue in this race
except for "the security of Senate pages if Moore is there"  - Sen. Cory Booker

----------


## Swordsmyth

*Committeewoman Resigns Over RNC's Support For Roy Moore*A member of the Republican National Committee  resigned Monday over the committee’s support for Roy Moore, the Alabama  GOP Senate candidate who faces multiple accusations of preying on  teenage girls decades ago.In  an email addressed to her fellow RNC members, Nebraska committeewoman  Joyce Simmons said she “strongly” disagrees with the RNC’s recent decision to reinstate its financial support  for the controversial Senate nominee after initially cutting off  funding in the wake of the allegations. The RNC reversed its stance in  the race after President Donald Trump offered his full endorsement to Moore.
“I  will miss so many of you that I knew well: and I wish I could have  continued my service to the national Republican Party that I used to  know well,” Simmons wrote in an email obtained by the Associated Press.

More at: https://www.yahoo.com/news/committee...152951883.html



Good riddance!

----------


## dannno

> *Committeewoman Resigns Over RNC's Support For Roy Moore*
> 
> A member of the Republican National Committee  resigned Monday over the committee’s support for Roy Moore, the Alabama  GOP Senate candidate who faces multiple accusations of preying on  teenage girls decades ago.In  an email addressed to her fellow RNC members, Nebraska committeewoman  Joyce Simmons said she “strongly” disagrees with the RNC’s recent decision to reinstate its financial support  for the controversial Senate nominee after initially cutting off  funding in the wake of the allegations. The RNC reversed its stance in  the race after President Donald Trump offered his full endorsement to Moore.
> “I  will miss so many of you that I knew well: and I wish I could have  continued my service to the national Republican Party that I used to  know well,” Simmons wrote in an email obtained by the Associated Press.
> 
> More at: https://www.yahoo.com/news/committee...152951883.html
> 
> 
> 
> Good riddance!

----------


## Swordsmyth

_Big League Politics_ is making the case that establishment Republicans are behind the _Washington Post’s_  allegations that Republican U.S. Senate candidate Roy Moore had  multiple romantic relationships with teenage girls in the 1970s, when  Moore was single and in his early 30s.
 Patrick Howley, the editor-in-chief of _Big League Politics_,  is claiming that Tim Miller, who served as communications director for  former Florida Governor Jeb Bush’s 2016 presidential bid, “pitched” the  Moore allegations to _Post_ reporter Beth Reinhard. He offers as  proof a text in which Miller not only questions Moore’s fitness for  office, but also brags that “Beth” is “good to work with.” While Miller  does not specify exactly how she is “good to work with,” Beth Reinhard  is one of the principal _Post_ reporters who wrote the articles alleging improper behavior by Moore.
 Miller denies the accusations. He told_ Breitbart News_, “I had no involvement in pitching the_ Washington Post_ story or any others where women spoke out about Judge Moore.” He added that “there is no truth to it.”
 Miller and Reinhard got to know each other during the unsuccessful  Bush campaign, which began in 2015. Miller’s role as the campaign’s  communications director led to his development of a professional  relationship with Reinhard, as she was the embedded reporter in the Bush  campaign for the_ Wall Street Journal_ at the time.

  Howley, however, made his case against Miller. “These text messages  reveal a few things: the Republican Establishment’s relationship with  the _Post’s_ anti-Moore coverage, the cunning of writer Charles  Johnson [of the conservative GotNews.com, who captured screenshots of  text messages beween himself and Miller] in trapping Miller, and former  Bush staffer Miller’s cluelessness about how to conduct himself in the  world of political subterfuge.” Howley argued that although Miller had  denied any involvement in the _Post_ story, “the text messages below leave no doubt as to his involvement.”
 Even after Trump had won enough delegates to capture the Republican  Party nomination, Miller still fought to deny him the party’s nod, and  was regarded as a “Never Trumper.” Salon.com, a left-wing site, has even  designated Miller as one of its 25 favorite conservatives.
 Miller is also a strong opponent of Moore’s efforts to be elected  senator from Alabama, even going as far as donating money to Moore’s  liberal Democrat opponent, Doug Jones, and announcing it on Twitter.  Miller even bragged to the Associated Press, “Given all the re-tweets, I  probably raised more money for Doug Jones than I ever raised for Jeb.”
 Miller is now a partner with Matt Rhoades, the manager of Mitt  Romney’s 2012 presidential bid, in Definers Public Affairs. In addition,  Miller was a founder of America Rising, a “super PAC” regarded as a  Republican establishment group.

More at: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...-post-articles

----------


## dannno

> _Big League Politics_ is making the case that establishment Republicans are behind the _Washington Post’s_  allegations that Republican U.S. Senate candidate Roy Moore had  multiple romantic relationships with teenage girls in the 1970s, when  Moore was single and in his early 30s.


Of course the establishment Republicans are behind the Roy Moore allegations, derr... and so is Rev 3, Influenza and TheCount, they are ALL on "Team 'I'm a Tool for the Republican establishment!'"

edit: sorry, can't forget SM...

----------


## Superfluous Man

> _Big League Politics_ is making the case that establishment Republicans are behind the _Washington Post’s_  allegations that Republican U.S. Senate candidate Roy Moore had  multiple romantic relationships with teenage girls in the 1970s, when  Moore was single and in his early 30s.
>  Patrick Howley, the editor-in-chief of _Big League Politics_,  is claiming that Tim Miller, who served as communications director for  former Florida Governor Jeb Bush’s 2016 presidential bid, “pitched” the  Moore allegations to _Post_ reporter Beth Reinhard. He offers as  proof a text in which Miller not only questions Moore’s fitness for  office, but also brags that “Beth” is “good to work with.” While Miller  does not specify exactly how she is “good to work with,” Beth Reinhard  is one of the principal _Post_ reporters who wrote the articles alleging improper behavior by Moore.
>  Miller denies the accusations. He told_ Breitbart News_, “I had no involvement in pitching the_ Washington Post_ story or any others where women spoke out about Judge Moore.” He added that “there is no truth to it.”
>  Miller and Reinhard got to know each other during the unsuccessful  Bush campaign, which began in 2015. Miller’s role as the campaign’s  communications director led to his development of a professional  relationship with Reinhard, as she was the embedded reporter in the Bush  campaign for the_ Wall Street Journal_ at the time.
> 
>   Howley, however, made his case against Miller. “These text messages  reveal a few things: the Republican Establishment’s relationship with  the _Post’s_ anti-Moore coverage, the cunning of writer Charles  Johnson [of the conservative GotNews.com, who captured screenshots of  text messages beween himself and Miller] in trapping Miller, and former  Bush staffer Miller’s cluelessness about how to conduct himself in the  world of political subterfuge.” Howley argued that although Miller had  denied any involvement in the _Post_ story, “the text messages below leave no doubt as to his involvement.”
>  Even after Trump had won enough delegates to capture the Republican  Party nomination, Miller still fought to deny him the party’s nod, and  was regarded as a “Never Trumper.” Salon.com, a left-wing site, has even  designated Miller as one of its 25 favorite conservatives.
>  Miller is also a strong opponent of Moore’s efforts to be elected  senator from Alabama, even going as far as donating money to Moore’s  liberal Democrat opponent, Doug Jones, and announcing it on Twitter.  Miller even bragged to the Associated Press, “Given all the re-tweets, I  probably raised more money for Doug Jones than I ever raised for Jeb.”
>  Miller is now a partner with Matt Rhoades, the manager of Mitt  Romney’s 2012 presidential bid, in Definers Public Affairs. In addition,  Miller was a founder of America Rising, a “super PAC” regarded as a  Republican establishment group.
> ...


OK. But so what? I don't see how this changes anything.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> OK. But so what? I don't see how this changes anything.


We already know the women are liars, this article just helps to document the RINO's complicity.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> We already know the women are liars, this article just helps to document the RINO's complicity.


I haven't followed the story. How do we know the women are liars?

----------


## dannno

> OK. But so what? I don't see how this changes anything.


It means you're a tool for helping the Republican establishment.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> It means you're a tool for helping the Republican establishment.


How am I doing that?

----------


## Swordsmyth

> I haven't followed the story. How do we know the women are liars?


Try reading this thread.

----------


## dannno

> How do we know the women are liars?


Because they have been shown to be liars?

----------


## dannno

> How am I doing that?


Repeating their bull$#@! narratives like the msm even though they've been disproven?

----------


## Superfluous Man

> Try reading this thread.


I'm not gonna waste my time going back through this huge thread if you don't have an answer.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> Repeating their bull$#@! narratives like the msm even though they've been disproven?


Such as?

----------


## Swordsmyth

> I'm not gonna waste my time going back through this huge thread if you don't have an answer.


Fine, the short version is that their claims were dubious in the first place and they have been caught in multiple lies.

----------


## timosman

> I'm not gonna waste my time going back through this huge thread if you don't have an answer.

----------


## phill4paul

> I haven't followed the story. How do we know the women are liars?


  Then read the thread and catch up.  If you can't be bothered to do that then why even comment at all?

----------


## RJB

> Then read the thread and catch up.  If you can't be bothered to do that then why even comment at all?


His sock puppet was getting cabin fever and needed an outlet, of course.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> Then read the thread and catch up.  If you can't be bothered to do that then why even comment at all?


I didn't realize it was such a high maintenance thread.

Carry on.

----------


## timosman

> I didn't realize it was such a high maintenance thread.
> 
> Carry on.


Have you ever met Rev3.0?

----------


## Swordsmyth

Gov. Charlie Baker might not quite be writing “Doug Jones for U.S. Senate” checks like some  of his fellow Republicans. But the Massachusetts governor strongly  suggested Monday that he is backing the Alabama Democrat in Tuesday’s  election against Republican Roy Moore — albeit in a somewhat tortured  exchange.
 “I’m certainly not supporting Roy Moore,” Baker said at a public  event Monday afternoon. “I think the only other candidate on the ballot  is Doug Jones.”
 The governor was then asked by a reporter if that meant he was supporting Jones.
 “I think Doug Jones – I certainly don’t want to see Roy Moore win –  that means, obviously, that I would be supporting the alternative,” he  said.

More at: https://www.boston.com/news/politics...ace-in-alabama

----------


## Swordsmyth

Republican Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore weighed in on the terror attack in Manhattan on Monday, vowing to back President Trump’s tough stance against Islamic terrorists if elected.
 “As we get news this morning of yet another radical Islamic terrorist  attack, I am grateful that it appears no one was critically injured,  and, as always, I am thankful for the quick action of law enforcement  who have the suspect in custody,” Moore wrote on Twitter, hoping to generate some positive press for himself by seizing on the bombing.
 “This incident underscores the continued threats our nation faces  from those who want nothing more than to destroy the freedoms we enjoy. I  am committed to implementing the president’s travel ban, putting an end  to sanctuary cities, building the wall and making America safer,” he  continued.

More at: https://nypost.com/2017/12/11/roy-mo...terror-attack/

----------


## Sonny Tufts

> It is NOT a religious test, it is a "protect and defend" test.


Of course it's a religious test.  You and Moore are making the unwarranted assumption that all Muslims, and Senator Ellison in particular, wish to impose Sharia law on the country.  It's reminiscent of the objections that some had to electing Kennedy -- that as a Catholic he would take orders from the Pope instead of abiding by the Constitution.

The Founders were well aware of the possibility that some day a Muslim might be elected or appointed to a federal office (see the quote from James Iredell that I previously posted).  Nevertheless, they didn't restrict the No-Religious-Test Clause to any particular faith. 

Moore's contempt for the rule of law was made plain when he disobeyed lawful court orders in connection with the Ten Commandments display and his attempt to block the implementation of the Obergefell decision, both of which got him removed from the Alabama Supreme Court.  If Ellison is disqualified to serve in the Senate because he can't support the Constitution, Moore is doubly so.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> This kind of thinking is why almost no one in this movement has or ever will have any influence in the direction this country will head besides Rand Paul and his dad.
> 
> Only one sitting U.S Senator has had the intestinal fortitude to back Roy Moore through all this. When Moore wins y'all will see why Rand and Massie stand with Roy.


If Moore wins, he's going to be voting with the non-Rand majority except on social issues.

I don't know why Rand endorsed him, but if it's because he thought he was a small-government guy, he was mistaken.

----------


## dannno

> I don't know why Rand endorsed him, but if it's because he thought he was a small-government guy, he was mistaken.


lol, ya, it couldn't possibly be that YOU are mistaken, as you almost always are.

----------


## William Tell

> If Moore wins, he's going to be voting with the non-Rand majority except on social issues.
> 
> I don't know why Rand endorsed him, but if it's because he thought he was a small-government guy, he was mistaken.


LMAO I can't wait till one of us is proven wrong.

----------


## William Tell

> lol, ya, it couldn't possibly be that YOU are mistaken, as you almost always are.


Well, maybe he's right and a guy who speaks to the Constitution Party of Alabama and flirted with that party for president will actually be a clone of Mitch McConnell who spent 30 million against him.

Maybe guys who the MSM attack for only wanting the first 10 amendments actually want huge government.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Hardly, lol.
> 
> 
> Read more at: http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...ghts-extremist


Abortion is as important as the decor on the courtroom wall. 

I'm interested in issues that matter, like socialism and militarism.

----------


## dannno

> Abortion is as important as the decor on the courtroom wall. 
> 
> I'm interested in issues that matter, like socialism and militarism.


Good, cause Moore is a non-interventionist, anti-neocon and against socialism. You should be a big supporter. He's also great on gun rights. 

The fact that you are here trying to obfuscate that fact completely discredits your already discredited presence here.

----------


## William Tell

> Abortion is as important as the decor on the courtroom wall. 
> 
> I'm interested in issues that matter, like socialism and militarism.


Pop quiz, who has been Roy Moore's biggest donor over his career and how does he feel about nation building and socialism?

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> LMAO I can't wait till one of us is proven wrong.


On the one hand, I'd like Moore to lose to hurt the Bannon-populist movement.

On the other hand, I'd kind of like his supporters (those who are not deranged, e.g. yourself) to learn a lesson. 

It's probably better altogether that he lose, though, which is what I'm expecting to happen. 

So, anyway, I don't think we'll get to see who's right.

----------


## EBounding

> On the one hand, I'd like Moore to lose to hurt the Bannon-populist movement.
> 
> On the other hand, I'd kind of like his supporters (those who are not deranged, e.g. yourself) to learn a lesson. 
> 
> It's probably better altogether that he lose, though, which is what I'm expecting to happen. 
> 
> So, anyway, I don't think we'll get to see who's right.


I'm betting he'll win, but I agree with the rest.  He'll be about as helpful as Ted Cruz or worse.  Being an accused pedophile isn't going to help either.  Has Rand said a single word about Roy since he endorsed him?

----------


## Superfluous Man

> Precisely, and this is what so many libertarians don't understand about this race. Moore is not a Santorum type religious phony. He's a fire-breathing limited government type, closely aligned with Baldwin and other prominent Paul supporters and donors.


Except, as far as I know, he never went on record as a Paul supporter, did he?

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> So on his top 99 issues he'll be part of the resistance against the GOP establishment.
> 
> That's a point in his favor if nothing else is.


The GOP establishment doesn't care about social issues. Their only goal is to keep the Evangelicals voting GOP, without actually doing anything (because doing something would lose them the other 70% of voters). On immigration, the GOP establishment is actually on the right side (not for noble reasons, mind you). The very fact that Moore (a guy who will do nothing to address the fundamental problems) is seen as "anti-establishment" is a huge problem in itself, just like with Trump. People like that (fake rebels, you might say) steal the thunder of genuine reformers.

----------


## dannno

> Except, as far as I know, he never went on record as a Paul supporter, did he?


*Election Surprise: Judge Roy Moore Backs Ron Paul
*01-03-2008

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...Backs-Ron-Paul

----------


## William Tell

> Couldn't tell you.


He maxed out to Ron Paul.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Peroutka

----------


## Zippyjuan

Voter turnout will be key today.  They are expecting only 10- 20% total turnout so which side brings out the most voters will likely win.  Trump wants Moore so he doesn't lose any more supporters for his agenda. 

http://www.cnn.com/2017/12/11/politi...ate/index.html




> *Kayla Moore: 'One of our attorneys is a Jew'*
> 
> Roy Moore's wife, Kayla, argued that* her husband is no bigot at a Monday night campaign rally, saying that "one of our attorneys is a Jew."
> *
> "Fake news would tell you that we don't care for Jews. And I tell you all this because I've seen it and I just want to set the record straight while they're here," she said. "One of our attorneys is a Jew. We have very close friends that are Jewish, and rabbis, and we also fellowship with them."


Liking how things used to be in the 1800's- the "good ole days", Moore, as usual, rode his horse to vote.

----------


## William Tell

> *Election Surprise: Judge Roy Moore Backs Ron Paul
> *01-03-2008
> 
> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...Backs-Ron-Paul


There was a similar thread I saw here years ago with quotes from Moore but I haven't been able to find it again.

----------


## Jamesiv1

Roy Moore, the Bannon/Trump candidate, despite the Establishment's best efforts to take him down, kicks Luther Strange's ass:

----------


## William Tell

> Voter turnout will be key today.  They are expecting only 10- 20% total turnout


Where are you getting this? Alabama SOS John Merrill says they are on track for 25%.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> He maxed out to Ron Paul.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Peroutka


Most people who supported Ron weren't libertarians, or anything of the sort, so I don't know that that says much. 

Based on the Wiki, the guy sounds a lot like Moore - focused on social issues.

It makes a lot more sense for a right culture warrior to support a libertarian than vice versa.

----------


## timosman

> Of course it's a religious test.  You and Moore are making the unwarranted assumption that all Muslims, and Senator Ellison in particular, wish to impose Sharia law on the country.  It's reminiscent of the objections that some had to electing Kennedy -- that as a Catholic he would take orders from the Pope instead of abiding by the Constitution.
> 
> The Founders were well aware of the possibility that some day a Muslim might be elected or appointed to a federal office (see the quote from James Iredell that I previously posted).  Nevertheless, they didn't restrict the No-Religious-Test Clause to any particular faith. 
> 
> Moore's contempt for the rule of law was made plain when he disobeyed lawful court orders in connection with the Ten Commandments display and his attempt to block the implementation of the Obergefell decision, both of which got him removed from the Alabama Supreme Court.  If Ellison is disqualified to serve in the Senate because he can't support the Constitution, Moore is doubly so.


How many sock puppet accounts can a single $#@! have?

----------


## r3volution 3.0

Beside weakening the populist wing of the GOP, a Moore loss would be good because for tightening the majority in the Senate.

51-49 will mean that nothing can pass without both Rand and Lee.

Lose one more Republavik and Rand controls the show.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> *Election Surprise: Judge Roy Moore Backs Ron Paul
> *01-03-2008
> 
> http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...Backs-Ron-Paul


On the first page of that thread it says that Moore and Paul expressed agreement on some issues but that Moore did not endorse him. Did he go on to endorse him after that?

----------


## William Tell

> Beside weakening the populist wing of the GOP, a Moore loss would be good because for tightening the majority in the Senate.
> 
> 51-49 will mean that nothing can pass without both Rand and Lee.
> 
> Lose one more Republavik and Rand controls the show.


Rand and Lee have never successfully blocked anything bad, and Moore would help them.. McCain and Graham are the ones blocking bills, Jones if he wins will vote with the Democrats, and occasionally the NeoCons.

----------


## timosman

> Beside weakening the populist wing of the GOP, a Moore loss would be good because for tightening the majority in the Senate.
> 
> 51-49 will mean that nothing can pass without both Rand and Lee.
> 
> Lose one more Republavik and Rand controls the show.


Did you come up with this on your own?

----------


## Zippyjuan

https://www.thedailybeast.com/could-...e-to-roy-moore




> *Could Voter Suppression Swing Alabama’s Senate Race to Roy Moore?*
> 
> Democrat Doug Jones needs strong support from black and Latino voters, but thousands of them are prevented from voting by some of the most restrictive laws in the country.





> The great unknown, which will probably determine the outcome of the race, is voter turnout. If enough moderate Republicans are disgusted by both options and sit the election out, they could hand the seat to Jones. More importantly, this race may come down to turnout among African Americans, who overwhelmingly vote Democrat but aren’t often the decisive constituency in deeply Republican Alabama.
> 
> But if the election is to be decided by black voters, that means it will be decided by Alabama’s labyrinth of “anti-fraud” voting provisions which just coincidentally happen to disproportionately hit communities of color.
> 
> 
> There are several ways in which Alabama makes it harder to vote, exacerbated by a secretary of state with some frankly bizarre ideas about how to do his job.
> 
> First, Alabama has one of the strictest voter identification laws in the country. Deuel Ross, a lawyer for the NAACP Legal Defense Fund, has been fighting the voter ID law in court, but, he told The Daily Beast, his case will not be resolved in time to impact the special election next week.





> Moreover, voter ID laws also decrease turnout among those who actually are eligible. A study cited in Ross’ case found that *turnout in majority-black counties in Alabama decreased 8 percent after the voter ID law was passed*—far higher than in majority-white counties.
> 
> “If you’re confused about what the voter ID requirements are, that also affects turnout,” Ross told The Daily Beast. “You may have acceptable ID but you may think that you don’t.”
> 
> That’s especially true in Alabama.
> 
> “Witnesses have testified about *sheriffs standing outside polling places,” Ross said, “telling people that if you have an outstanding warrant, you’re going to be arrested.”* That kind of intimidation isn’t directly related to voter ID, of course, but it creates anxiety in the minds of any voter who’s not sure of the law.





> Now, if voter fraud were a real crisis, these rules would have some justification. But *voter fraud is fake news.
> *
> In Ross’ litigation, investigators found* only two cases of fraud between 2001 and 2010* that would have been prevented by the ID law. Not two thousand, not two hundred: two.
> 
> And that is what has justified disenfranchising 118,000 voters, two-thirds of whom just happen to be black and Latino.

----------


## sparebulb

> https://www.thedailybeast.com/could-...e-to-roy-moore


I believe that Zippy has crossed the line with this one.

I think that it might be time to consider a future without Zippy on these forums.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> “Witnesses have testified about sheriffs standing outside polling places,” Ross said, “telling people that if you have an outstanding warrant, you’re going to be arrested.” That kind of intimidation isn’t directly related to voter ID, of course, but it creates anxiety in the minds of any voter who’s not sure of the law.
> 			
> 		
> 
> https://www.thedailybeast.com/could-...e-to-roy-moore


That sounds really odd, and it's a big deal if it's true. But where is that charge coming from? Is this about something that happened in a previous election? Is it just rumors? Or what?

----------


## Jamesiv1

Coming soon to Amazon Books:

"What Happened" by Luther Strange

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Rand and Lee have never successfully blocked anything bad, and Moore would help them..


That's because they can't if every other (R) votes against them.

Would Moore vote with them? I don't think so, but even if he did, a (D) would be more reliable (against GOP bills). 

Anyway, the best situation really would be 50-50 with Rand able to kill any GOP bill. 

Think about the debt ceiling. He'd force the GOP/Dems to join forces and out all other GOPer as the fake fiscal conservatives they are.

...it would be glorious.

----------


## William Tell

> Think about the debt ceiling. He'd force the GOP/Dems to join forces and out all other GOPer as the fake fiscal conservatives they are.
> 
> ...it would be glorious.


Are you actually serious? You think its in Rand's best interests for the candidate who has vowed specifically to Stand with Rand on the debt ceiling to lose to a big government Democrat?




> *LUTHER STRANGE VOTES TO RAISE THE DEBT CEILING; REJECTS CONSERVATIVE OPTION*
> 
>  *Katie Frost*
> Roy Moore for US Senate
> 
> Washington, DC- In between two special interest fundraisers hosted by Mitch McConnell and the Washington establishment yesterday, Luther Strange voted with his Senate leadership buddies to raise the debt ceiling. Not only did Strange vote to raise the debt ceiling and add $15.25 billion to our national deficit, he also voted against an amendment offered up by Senator Rand Paul that would have halted $15.25 billion of foreign aid to pay for Hurricane Harvey relief.
> 
> Paul's "America First" amendment, supported by 10 conservative Republicans (including Senators Ted Cruz - TX, Jim Inhofe - OK, Mike Lee - UT, Rand Paul - KY, Tim Scott - SC and Pat Toomey - PA), was designed as a solution to the budget crisis. It would have provided a way for the federal government to fund Hurricane Harvey aid without raising the debt ceiling.
> 
> ...


 https://www.roymoore.org/Press-Relea...RVATIVE-OPTION

----------


## timosman

> I believe that Zippy has crossed the line with this one.
> 
> I think that it might be time to consider a future without Zippy on these forums.


How can you even think about it? Zippy and his sock puppets are responsible for over 50% posts on this forum!

----------


## timosman

> That sounds really odd, and it's a big deal if it's true. But where is that charge coming from? Is this about something that happened in a previous election? Is it just rumors? Or what?


Trolling Rule #1: Never directly interact with your sock puppet. It gives creepy vibes.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Are you actually serious? You think its in Rand's best interests for the candidate who has vowed specifically to Stand with Rand on the debt ceiling to lose to a big government Democrat?


Quite, because I don't believe he'd actually do it.

I believe McConnell would offer an amendment to [insert trivial Evangelical issue] and he'd fold like a cheap Cruz.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> That sounds really odd, and it's a big deal if it's true. But where is that charge coming from? Is this about something that happened in a previous election? Is it just rumors? Or what?


Looking for more information on that.  

Did find this item:  http://www.fox10tv.com/story/2781112...polling-places




> *Alabama sheriffs voice concerns over guns in polling places*
> 
> ORANGE BEACH, Ala. (WALA) - The issue at odds Monday morning in Orange Beach seemed to be one of gun rights versus voting rights. Following an opinion issued by Attorney General Luther Strange last month, the Alabama Sheriff’s Association asked what the sheriff’s authority is in regard to regulating guns in polling places.
> 
> 
> 
> “That intimidates a whole lot of people. And some of them will say they have rights and they do have rights, but on the other hand, people have other rights too at the polling places and that’s to not be intimidated when they go to vote,” Montgomery County Sheriff D.T. Marshall said.
> 
> 
> ...

----------


## William Tell

> Quite, because I don't believe he'd actually do it.
> 
> I believe McConnell would offer an amendment to [insert trivial Evangelical issue] and he'd fold like a cheap Cruz.


So you believe in the caricature of him put out by the left rather than his views he's been presenting for decades. Time will tell assuming he wins tonight.

----------


## timosman

> Looking for more information on that.  
> 
> Did find this item:  http://www.fox10tv.com/story/2781112...polling-places


Wow, two $#@!s, one cup, a few sock puppets and the forum is really busy.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> So you believe in the caricature of him put out by the left rather than his views he's been presenting for decades. Time will tell assuming he wins tonight.


I believe that when I reviewed his record, it was 99.999% focused on social issues.

He thinks spending is as unimportant relative, say, abortion as I think abortion is unimportant relative spending.

I remember Deace saying a couple years ago that he could get along with libertarians if they were just disinterested in social issues, rather than actively hostile to the Evangelical position, and that makes sense in the abstract, but in reality the difference in priorities is fatal to any meaningful cooperation. Deace endorsed Cruz and shat on Rand. ..They're not useful allies.

----------


## William Tell

> I believe that when I reviewed his record, it was 99.999% focused on social issues.


Well, anyone can look and see that's incorrect hyperbole. 




> He thinks spending is as unimportant relative, say, abortion as I think abortion is unimportant relative spending.


 Since our spending tends to fund planned parenthood you are in luck.





> I remember Deace saying a couple years ago that he could get along with  libertarians if they were just disinterested in social issues, rather  than actively hostile to the Evangelical position, and that makes sense  in the abstract, but in reality the difference in priorities is fatal to  any meaningful cooperation. Deace endorsed Cruz and shat on Rand.  ..They're not useful allies.


 Deace is just a fanboy, he has no influence on Moore. Moore was standing up before Deace was born.

----------


## Madison320

Based on the yard signs, Doug Jones is going to win. I haven't seen one Roy Moore sign and I live in Huntsville.

----------


## phill4paul

> Based on the yard signs, Doug Jones is going to win. I haven't seen one Roy Moore sign and I live in Huntsville.


  That's because Jones outspent Moore 10-1. That's a lot of yard signs. And then you have the lefts penchant for vandalism and/or threatening supporters. I do not think yard signs are an indicator.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> Looking for more information on that.  
> 
> Did find this item:  http://www.fox10tv.com/story/2781112...polling-places


That's still pretty different from sheriffs threatening to be on the look out at polling places for anyone with a warrant.

----------


## sparebulb

> Based on the yard signs, Doug Jones is going to win. I haven't seen one Roy Moore sign and I live in Huntsville.


I have no clue how this election will turn out, but there were very, very few Trump signs in my area.  Trump won my area and the state.

I think that there are a lot of people who don't want to be targeted.

Or, at least, their signs targeted.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Well, anyone can look and see that's incorrect hyperbole.


He's written many dozens of articles over the years. 

I took a random sample and found that virtually all of them were about social issues.

He has no voting record; his claim to fame is a stand against the feds for...you guessed it...religious liberty. 

His interest in the Constitution or liberty in general is limited to the effect on religious issues. 

...not unlike a lot of other GOPers (e.g. during the cake cake episode, it was all about religious liberty, not property rights). 




> Since our spending tends to fund planned parenthood you are in luck.


Perfect example.

Moore: "Mitch, I just can't vote for this bloated budget. The government needs fundamental reform."

Mitch: "I 'bout I cut the rate of increase in Planned Parenthood funding."

Moore: (heart aflutter) "Where do I sign?!"




> Deace is just a fanboy, he has no influence on Moore. Moore was standing up before Deace was born.


Just an example (of a guy obsessed with social issues like Moore and how useful [or useless] they are in practice).

----------


## Swordsmyth

> https://www.thedailybeast.com/could-...e-to-roy-moore





> Moreover, voter ID laws also decrease turnout among those who actually are eligible. A study cited in Ross’ case found that *turnout in majority-black counties in Alabama decreased 8 percent after the voter ID law was passed*—far higher than in majority-white counties.


So 8% of the votes in black majority democrat counties were fraudulent, it's a good thing they passed voter ID.

----------


## William Tell

> Moore: "Mitch, I just can't vote for this bloated budget. The government needs fundamental reform."
> 
> Mitch: "I 'bout I cut the rate of increase in Planned Parenthood funding."
> 
> Moore: (heart aflutter) "Where do I sign?!"


That's pretty funny. That's how the religious right thinks the Pauls are on weed.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> So 8% of the votes in black majority democrat counties were fraudulent, it's a good thing they passed voter ID.


Two votes in ten years were fraudulent.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Two votes in ten years were fraudulent.


8% were fraudulent.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> 8% were fraudulent.


Documentation?

----------


## Swordsmyth

> He's written many dozens of articles over the years. 
> 
> I took a random sample and found that virtually all of them were about social issues.
> 
> He has no voting record; his claim to fame is a stand against the feds for...you guessed it...religious liberty. 
> 
> His interest in the Constitution or liberty in general is limited to the effect on religious issues. 
> 
> ...not unlike a lot of other GOPers (e.g. during the cake cake episode, it was all about religious liberty, not property rights). 
> ...


Maybe it wasn’t meant that way. From the _Times’_  piece’s title,   “In Sex Crimes and Other Cases, Roy Moore Often Sided  With Defendants,”   readers may assume the implication is that Judge  Moore exhibited the   common human tendency to go soft on that of which  one is himself  guilty.  (As with seemingly everyone now, Moore currently  faces   sexual-misconduct allegations.) Instead, however, the _Times_ paints a picture of a moral, principled judge who often sided with the little guy against the powers that be.

What may surprise many, however, is that judge Moore’s principles, as    true principles will, extended to areas that his passions didn’t. As    the _Times_ reports,    “‘He consistently was more interested in the arguments of the  criminal   defendants than many of his colleagues,’ said Matt Lembke, an   appellate  lawyer in Birmingham who has argued several cases in front  of  Mr. Moore.  ‘And I think that stemmed from a distrust of government   power reflected  in his judicial philosophy.’”
 As for Moore’s empathy, the _Times_ provides some striking examples:
 When a man on death row missed a filing  deadline with a lower court,   and when most of the Alabama Supreme Court  opted not to review his   case, Mr. Moore was one of two justices who  voted the other way and   said some of the evidence used to convict him  seemed deficient.
 In another instance, Mr. Moore wrote that  a man’s “sentence of life   imprisonment without the possibility of  parole for a nonviolent,   drug-related crime reveals grave flaws in our  statutory sentencing   scheme.”
 And in another case, Mr. Moore dissented  and said a man’s unpaid meal   at a Waffle House should have led to a  theft conviction, not a 35-year   sentence for robbery. He called the  case, which the majority voted  not  to review, “a serious miscarriage of  justice.”
 Two lawyers who worked with Moore told the _Times_ that the  judge   sought to protect those wronged by the system. “‘He had no love  for   criminals, but he believed that every defendant was entitled to due    process of law,’ one of the lawyers, Matthew Clark, said in an e-mail.    ‘He saw many cases where the defendants, especially young black men,    would be convicted solely on very weak circumstantial evidence.’”
 Unsurprisingly — to those acquainted with the soul of a dutiful judge  —   Moore’s constitutionalism extended beyond social issues and to all    areas of his jurisprudence. A good example was the case of a black    17-year-old named Eric L. Higdon, who received 23 years’ incarceration    for sexually assaulting a younger boy at a daycare center. Moore    dissented from the majority opinion in Higdon’s appeal, reasoning that    “while Mr. Higdon was guilty of one form of sodomy, another sodomy law    used to convict him was never meant to apply to abuse ‘of children by    other children,’ the _Times_ informs. “Mr. Moore wrote that    ‘sodomy is an abhorrent crime and should be strictly punished’ but that    ‘I am concerned the court is stepping into the shoes of the  legislature   in this case.’”
 This dissent was used against Moore in the Republican primary by his    opponent, Luther Strange, who accused the judge of being soft on child    molesters. Yet Moore was merely exhibiting discipline, a quality    required for a judge to rule contrary to his own will, feelings, or    agenda. And without discipline there is no rule of law.

More at: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...e-on-roy-moore

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> That's pretty funny. That's how the religious right thinks the Pauls are on weed.


They'd be wrong about the Pauls, but more or less right with respect to some of our hippier, nakeder associates...

Like I've been saying ad nauseam, we need to get away from both sides of the culture war.

If they either smell like patchouli or cite the Bible when you ask them what time it is, walk away.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Documentation?





> Originally Posted by *Zippyjuan*  
> 
> https://www.thedailybeast.com/could-...e-to-roy-moore
>  			 		 	  	 		 			 			 				Moreover, voter ID laws also decrease turnout among those who actually are eligible. A study cited in Ross’ case found that *turnout in majority-black counties in Alabama decreased 8 percent after the voter ID law was passed*—far higher than in majority-white counties.


...

----------


## Madison320

> That's because Jones outspent Moore 10-1. That's a lot of yard signs. And then you have the lefts penchant for vandalism and/or threatening supporters. I do not think yard signs are an indicator.


I know but that was what struck me about the Trump/Clinton race. I didn't see one sign for Clinton and I even traveled up to NJ/NY before the election.

----------


## William Tell

> Based on the yard signs, Doug Jones is going to win. I haven't seen one Roy Moore sign and I live in Huntsville.


Interesting. One thing I've learned about yard signs from campaigns though is people don't get them of their own accord. Jones staffers clearly spent hundreds of hours canvassing your area finding supporters who would allow them to signs up. Generally campaigns like signs to boost morale and turnout. Should be interesting to see the results from your area.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> ...


Not having a government issued drivers license is not proof of voting fraudulently.  I asked for documented cases.  They only found two since 2000. 




> Now, if voter fraud were a real crisis, these rules would have some justification. But voter fraud is fake news.
> 
> In Ross’ litigation, investigators found *only two cases of fraud between 2001 and 2010* that would have been prevented by the ID law. Not two thousand, not two hundred: two.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Interesting. One thing I've learned about yard signs from campaigns though is people don't get them of their own accord. Jones staffers clearly spent hundreds of hours canvassing your area finding supporters who would allow them to signs up. Generally campaigns like signs to boost morale and turnout. Should be interesting to see the results from your area.


Ron Paul used to have lots of yard signs.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> Not having a government issued drivers license is not proof of voting fraudulently.  They only found two actual cases of voter fraud since 2000. If you want to vote absentee, you have to send in a copy of your ID.


If they don't have a drivers license, they can use another form of ID, which they can get for free.



> Valid ID at the Polls
> 
> A voter can use any of the following forms of photo ID at the polls starting June 3, 2014:
> 
> Valid Driver's License
> Valid Non-driver ID
> Valid Alabama Photo Voter ID
> Valid State Issued ID (Alabama or any other state)
> Valid Federal Issued ID
> ...


http://sos.alabama.gov/alabama-votes/voter/voter-id

When I worked the polls on a university campus in a state that has a similar voter ID law, the majority of the people we turned away for lack of ID in that state were still using ID's issued in other states where they should have been voting, and very well might have voted. Voting in two states would definitely have been fraudulent, and those votes wouldn't turn up in your implausibly low-ball estimate of 2 votes in 10 years.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Maybe it wasn’t meant that way. From the _Times’_  piece’s title,   “In Sex Crimes and Other Cases, Roy Moore Often Sided  With Defendants,”   readers may assume the implication is that Judge  Moore exhibited the   common human tendency to go soft on that of which  one is himself  guilty.  (As with seemingly everyone now, Moore currently  faces   sexual-misconduct allegations.) Instead, however, the _Times_ paints a picture of a moral, principled judge who often sided with the little guy against the powers that be.
> 
> What may surprise many, however, is that judge Moore’s principles, as    true principles will, extended to areas that his passions didn’t. As    the _Times_ reports,    “‘He consistently was more interested in the arguments of the  criminal   defendants than many of his colleagues,’ said Matt Lembke, an   appellate  lawyer in Birmingham who has argued several cases in front  of  Mr. Moore.  ‘And I think that stemmed from a distrust of government   power reflected  in his judicial philosophy.’”
>  As for Moore’s empathy, the _Times_ provides some striking examples:
>  When a man on death row missed a filing  deadline with a lower court,   and when most of the Alabama Supreme Court  opted not to review his   case, Mr. Moore was one of two justices who  voted the other way and   said some of the evidence used to convict him  seemed deficient.
>  In another instance, Mr. Moore wrote that  a man’s “sentence of life   imprisonment without the possibility of  parole for a nonviolent,   drug-related crime reveals grave flaws in our  statutory sentencing   scheme.”
>  And in another case, Mr. Moore dissented  and said a man’s unpaid meal   at a Waffle House should have led to a  theft conviction, not a 35-year   sentence for robbery. He called the  case, which the majority voted  not  to review, “a serious miscarriage of  justice.”
>  Two lawyers who worked with Moore told the _Times_ that the  judge   sought to protect those wronged by the system. “‘He had no love  for   criminals, but he believed that every defendant was entitled to due    process of law,’ one of the lawyers, Matthew Clark, said in an e-mail.    ‘He saw many cases where the defendants, especially young black men,    would be convicted solely on very weak circumstantial evidence.’”
>  Unsurprisingly — to those acquainted with the soul of a dutiful judge  —   Moore’s constitutionalism extended beyond social issues and to all    areas of his jurisprudence. A good example was the case of a black    17-year-old named Eric L. Higdon, who received 23 years’ incarceration    for sexually assaulting a younger boy at a daycare center. Moore    dissented from the majority opinion in Higdon’s appeal, reasoning that    “while Mr. Higdon was guilty of one form of sodomy, another sodomy law    used to convict him was never meant to apply to abuse ‘of children by    other children,’ the _Times_ informs. “Mr. Moore wrote that    ‘sodomy is an abhorrent crime and should be strictly punished’ but that    ‘I am concerned the court is stepping into the shoes of the  legislature   in this case.’”
> ...


That's fine, and speaks well of him as a judge, but doesn't address the issues I was talking about. 

You can find many Dems, awful on everything else, with relatively sane positions on criminal justice.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Not having a government issued drivers license is not proof of voting fraudulently.  I asked for documented cases.  They only found two since 2000.


Anybody can get ID, they need it to get welfare, if the votes disappeared they were fraudulent.

----------


## William Tell

> Ron Paul used to have lots of yard signs.


Yeah, presidential candidates with cult followings are a little different. Lots of us bought RP material, Bernie and Trump supporters are the same way. Still, if you run into a neighborhood full of signs someone's been busy.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> That's fine, and speaks well of him as a judge, but doesn't address the issues I was talking about. 
> 
> You can find many Dems, awful on everything else, with relatively sane positions on criminal justice.


Moore believes in the Constitution and has proven he will follow his principles no matter the consequence, he will follow the Constitution on ALL issues.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Moore believes in the Constitution and has proven he will follow his principles no matter the consequence, he will follow the Constitution on ALL issues.


Well we'll see (or not, depending on this evening's events).

----------


## Superfluous Man

> Moore believes in the Constitution and has proven he will follow his principles no matter the consequence, he will follow the Constitution on ALL issues.


OK. Now this is going overboard.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> OK. Now this is going overboard.




Pardon me if I prefer my judgement to yours.

----------


## Anti Federalist

Roy Moore likes Ron Paul.

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthr...96#post6563096

----------


## Madison320

> Moore believes in the Constitution and has proven he will follow his principles no matter the consequence, he will follow the Constitution on ALL issues.


Based on what? Does he have a voting history? I thought this was his first legislative position. Every politician claims they follow the constitution until they get in office.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Based on what? Does he have a voting history? I thought this was his first legislative position. Every politician claims they follow the constitution until they get in office.


His judicial history, besides the well known incidents we have this:

Maybe it wasn’t meant that way. From the _Times’_  piece’s title,    “In Sex Crimes and Other Cases, Roy Moore Often Sided  With  Defendants,”   readers may assume the implication is that Judge  Moore  exhibited the   common human tendency to go soft on that of which  one  is himself  guilty.  (As with seemingly everyone now, Moore currently   faces   sexual-misconduct allegations.) Instead, however, the _Times_ paints a picture of a moral, principled judge who often sided with the little guy against the powers that be.

What may surprise many, however, is that judge Moore’s principles, as     true principles will, extended to areas that his passions didn’t. As     the _Times_ reports,     “‘He consistently was more interested in the arguments of the   criminal   defendants than many of his colleagues,’ said Matt Lembke, an    appellate  lawyer in Birmingham who has argued several cases in front   of  Mr. Moore.  ‘And I think that stemmed from a distrust of  government   power reflected  in his judicial philosophy.’”
 As for Moore’s empathy, the _Times_ provides some striking examples:
 When a man on death row missed a filing  deadline with a lower court,    and when most of the Alabama Supreme Court  opted not to review his    case, Mr. Moore was one of two justices who  voted the other way and    said some of the evidence used to convict him  seemed deficient.
 In another instance, Mr. Moore wrote that  a man’s “sentence of life    imprisonment without the possibility of  parole for a nonviolent,    drug-related crime reveals grave flaws in our  statutory sentencing    scheme.”
 And in another case, Mr. Moore dissented  and said a man’s unpaid meal    at a Waffle House should have led to a  theft conviction, not a  35-year   sentence for robbery. He called the  case, which the majority  voted  not  to review, “a serious miscarriage of  justice.”
 Two lawyers who worked with Moore told the _Times_ that the  judge    sought to protect those wronged by the system. “‘He had no love  for    criminals, but he believed that every defendant was entitled to due     process of law,’ one of the lawyers, Matthew Clark, said in an e-mail.     ‘He saw many cases where the defendants, especially young black men,     would be convicted solely on very weak circumstantial evidence.’”
 Unsurprisingly — to those acquainted with the soul of a dutiful judge  —    Moore’s constitutionalism extended beyond social issues and to all     areas of his jurisprudence. A good example was the case of a black     17-year-old named Eric L. Higdon, who received 23 years’ incarceration     for sexually assaulting a younger boy at a daycare center. Moore     dissented from the majority opinion in Higdon’s appeal, reasoning that     “while Mr. Higdon was guilty of one form of sodomy, another sodomy law     used to convict him was never meant to apply to abuse ‘of children  by    other children,’ the _Times_ informs. “Mr. Moore wrote that     ‘sodomy is an abhorrent crime and should be strictly punished’ but  that    ‘I am concerned the court is stepping into the shoes of the   legislature   in this case.’”
 This dissent was used against Moore in the Republican primary by his     opponent, Luther Strange, who accused the judge of being soft on child     molesters. Yet Moore was merely exhibiting discipline, a quality     required for a judge to rule contrary to his own will, feelings, or     agenda. And without discipline there is no rule of law.

More at: https://www.thenewamerican.com/usnew...e-on-roy-moore

----------


## William Tell

Real news article from fakenews aldotcom, last minute push to stop Moore. 


> *Alabama man - citing Richard Shelby, Condoleezza Rice - votes Nick Saban for U.S. Senate*

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Real news article from fakenews aldotcom, last minute push to stop Moore.
> 
> *Alabama man - citing Richard Shelby, Condoleezza Rice - votes Nick Saban for U.S. Senate*


They found one!

----------


## Madison320

> His judicial history, besides the well known incidents we have this:


I'm just not seeing how that helps predict how he'll vote on things like SS, minimum wage, defense, health care, etc.

About the only thing I've noticed that helps predict how a politician does once in office is when they refer to themselves as libertarian.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> I'm just not seeing how that helps predict how he'll vote on things like SS, minimum wage, defense, health care, etc.
> 
> About the only thing I've noticed that helps predict how a politician does once in office is when they refer to themselves as libertarian.


It demonstrates his strict interpretation of the Constitution and a strict interpretation of the Constitution will yield correct votes on things like SS, minimum wage, defense, health care, etc.

----------


## dannno

> I'm just not seeing how that helps predict how he'll vote on things like SS, minimum wage, defense, health care, etc.
> 
> About the only thing I've noticed that helps predict how a politician does once in office is when they refer to themselves as libertarian.





> Alabama Republican US Senate nominee Roy Moore signed a resolution in 2010 that states in part, "We pledge to limit and restrain all federal government exercise of power that exceeds in any way the plain language of those few powers listed in the Constitution and to nullify all others that exceed such limit." No wonder many people in the US political establishment sought to prevent Moore’s Senate primary win.




http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/arch...isconsin-hemp/

----------


## enhanced_deficit

Media reporting  about evangelicals-Moore bond continues to be incredible:

                       Dec 11 2017, 6:28 am ET                   
*In Alabama, evangelicals weigh good, evil and Roy Moore*

                                                       by Jonathan Allen                 
               MONTGOMERY, Ala.— The race for a U.S. Senate seat here has become a battle between good and evil. 
                        For many across the country and some in this Deep South state, Republican Roy Moore is the bad guy. 
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/pol...-moore-n828091



*Chris Matthews: Trump Is Moving Capital To Jerusalem For Roy Moore*

     Chris Matthews, host of MSNBC’s Hard Ball with Chris Matthews, said  that the call from Trump’s administration to move the capital of Israel  from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem Wednesday “is related” to the Roy More  Alabama Senate race.

     “And a couple more points about this. Don’t think this isn’t related  to Alabama next week. It is related. It is the Christian evangelicals  down there with their crazy ideas about Israel, which is, I don’t know,  mythical,” Matthews stated.
 “They don’t understand the situation over there and how tricky it is  ethnically, how tricky it is tribally. They don’t care because it’s a  religious belief. Trump’s playing to that this week. You watch him,” he  continued.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/12/06/ch...for-roy-moore/


*Roy Moore Accused of anti-Semitism After Suggesting George Soros Can Only Go to Hell*

              Soros, who is a U.S. citizen, was recently the focus of a  Breitbart report that claimed the Jewish-Hungarian billionaire is  funding efforts to 'register convicted felons to vote against Moore'      
https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/1.826860

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> It demonstrates his strict interpretation of the Constitution and a strict interpretation of the Constitution will yield correct votes on things like SS, minimum wage, *defense*, health care, etc.


Dramatically increasing "defense" spending would be Constitutional, that's true..

----------


## Madison320

> [/FONT][/COLOR]http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/arch...isconsin-hemp/


"Alabama Republican US Senate nominee Roy Moore signed a resolution in 2010 that states in part, "We pledge to limit and restrain all federal government exercise of power that exceeds in any way the plain language of those few powers listed in the Constitution and to nullify all others that exceed such limit." No wonder many people in the US political establishment sought to prevent Moore’s Senate primary win."

C'mon man. They ALL say they're for state's rights and constitutional government. At least all republicans and half the democrats. It's when you get SPECIFIC that their true positions are discovered. How does Roy Moore feel about unconstitutional stuff like SS? Minimum wage? Drug laws? Etc?

----------


## dannno

> "Alabama Republican US Senate nominee Roy Moore signed a resolution in 2010 that states in part, "We pledge to limit and restrain all federal government exercise of power that exceeds in any way the plain language of those few powers listed in the Constitution and to nullify all others that exceed such limit." No wonder many people in the US political establishment sought to prevent Moore’s Senate primary win."
> 
> C'mon man. They ALL say they're for state's rights and constitutional government. At least all republicans and half the democrats. It's when you get SPECIFIC that their true positions are discovered. How does Roy Moore feel about unconstitutional stuff like SS? Minimum wage? Drug laws? Etc?


They do NOT all pledge to limit and restrain all federal government exercise of power that exceeds in any way the plain language of those few powers listed in the Constitution and to *nullify* all others that exceed such limit.. they just promise to "obey the Constitution" and claim to be for states rights (usually for abortion purposes only). This is more like a pre-Civil war view of the Constitution.

----------


## dannno

> Dramatically increasing "defense" spending would be Constitutional, that's true..


Ending our overseas wars and being non-interventionist and increasing *defense* spending is absolutely Constitutional.

You are the biggest sabatoger of liberty on this site. You twist everything around backwards and try to make people we can align with enemies.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Dramatically increasing "defense" spending would be Constitutional, that's true..


I never said he was perfect, maybe Rand can get him to see we need to withdraw the empire and use part of the savings for any necessary spending changes.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> I never said he was perfect, maybe Rand can get him to see we need to withdraw the empire and use part of the savings for any necessary spending changes.


I heard on Breitbart Trump's about to make Rand Sec. of Defense!!!!CLICKHERE!!!!

...color me skeptical

----------


## Swordsmyth

> I heard on Breitbart Trump's about to make Rand Sec. of Defense!!!!CLICKHERE!!!!
> 
> ...color me skeptical


Even if he is wrong on defense spending he is far and away better than any Senator but Rand and certainly than his Demoncrat opponent.

----------


## Madison320

> They do NOT all pledge to limit and restrain all federal government exercise of power that exceeds in any way the plain language of those few powers listed in the Constitution and to *nullify* all others that exceed such limit.. they just promise to "obey the Constitution" and claim to be for states rights (usually for abortion purposes only). This is more like a pre-Civil war view of the Constitution.


Well we'll see, as long as my "yard sign" theory proves inaccurate.

----------


## dannno

> I never said he was perfect, maybe Rand can get him to see we need to withdraw the empire and use part of the savings for any necessary spending changes.


Uh, pretty sure he is already mostly convinced. Except maybe ISIS.

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Even if he is wrong on defense spending he is far and away better than any Senator but Rand and certainly than his Demoncrat opponent.


I see no reason to believe that, for reasons explained.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Uh, pretty sure he is already convinced.


I am simply being cautious since he is quoted as saying he wants to INCREASE defense spending.

----------


## specsaregood

> I never said he was perfect, maybe Rand can get him to see we need to withdraw the empire and use part of the savings for any necessary spending changes.


Randal is the only senator that didn't rescind his endorsement after the media started its smear campaign of lies.    I suspect that Moore will remember that.

----------


## dannno

> I am simply being cautious since he is quoted as saying he wants to INCREASE defense spending.


Even Ron Paul has made statements that he is ok with increasing defense spending, in fact I think he has even said we should increase defense spending.. but with the caviet that we significantly reduce or eliminate our *offense* spending which is pretty much like 98% of the "defense" budget. 

It's semantics.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Even Ron Paul has made statements that he is ok with increasing defense spending, in fact I think he has even said we should increase defense spending.. but with the caviet that we significantly reduce or eliminate our *offense* spending which is pretty much like 98% of the "defense" budget. 
> 
> It's semantics.


I hope that is what Moore means, I just don't want to give his detractors an opening to claim I am saying he is for one thing and they can "prove" he is for the other with his quote.

----------


## Superfluous Man

> Even Ron Paul has made statements that he is ok with increasing defense spending, in fact I think he has even said we should increase defense spending.


I doubt that.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Even Ron Paul has made statements that he is ok with increasing defense spending, in fact I think he has even said we should increase defense spending.. but with the caviet that we significantly reduce or eliminate our *offense* spending which is pretty much like 98% of the "defense" budget. 
> 
> It's semantics.


What is considered "Defensive spending" vs "offensive spending"?  Is a weapon "defense" until it is fired at somebody?  What if they fired first?

----------


## Swordsmyth

> What is considered "Defensive spending" vs "offensive spending"?


Protecting American soil = "Defensive spending"

Meddling in other countries = "offensive spending"

----------


## specsaregood

> I doubt that.


I'm pretty sure both him and Randal have said they would increase defense spending in relation to the percentage of the budget.  meaning it could actually go down, but still be an "increase" percentage wise.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> I doubt that.


https://www.usnews.com/debate-club/a...-strengthen-us




> *Cutting Military Spending Does Not Mean Cutting Defense*
> 
> By Ron Paul, Contributor
> 
> When asked about my intention to cut the U.S. defense budget, I am always quick to clarify that I want to *cut military spending, not defense. I want America to be the most strongly defended nation in the world,* but I oppose our current foreign policy that stretches our troops thin across the globe so we can play world policeman. This foolish endeavor costs us dearly in lives, and it has become far too expensive to sustain.
> 
> In the past 10 years, overall military spending has more than doubled, which should be extremely troubling for those claiming to be fiscally conservative. Frankly, it is impossible that government does not waste any of the hundreds of billions we spend on defense yearly.
> 
> We cannot control government's growth without reining in the expansion of the military industrial complex. If we are really serious about balancing the budget and addressing our unsustainable debt, nothing can be off the table.
> ...

----------


## dannno

> I doubt that.


Ron Paul has advocated for increases in defense spending because the amount we currently spend on defense is almost zero.. Because it is instead spent on offense.




> Protecting American soil = "Defensive spending"
> 
> Meddling in other countries = "offensive spending"

----------


## RJB

> You are the biggest sabatoger of liberty on this site. You twist everything around backwards and try to make people we can align with enemies.


+rep.  Everything he posts is straight from the DNC's talking points.

One thing I will hand to Zippy is that he never claims to be a libertarian or anti-socialist.  Rev on the other hand will claim to be a libertarian on one thread and then defend the SPLC labeling conservative and libertarian groups as terrorists in another.

----------


## Swordsmyth

*Roy Moore Rides A Horse To The Polls In Alabama Special Election*http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/moore-horse-polls

----------


## r3volution 3.0

> Ron Paul has advocated for increases in defense spending because the amount we currently spend on defense is almost zero.. Because it is instead spent on offense.


Ron meant that DoD spending should be dramatically reduced, to what is necessary for defense.

Moore is proposing that DoD spending be increased (like Trump, who just signed a $150 billion increase). 

Those positions are diametrically opposed.

----------


## timosman



----------


## dannno

> Ron meant that DoD spending should be dramatically reduced, to what is necessary for defense.
> 
> Moore is proposing that DoD spending be increased (like Trump, who just signed a $150 billion increase). 
> 
> Those positions are diametrically opposed.



Yes, but both Trump and Moore are opposed to the wars we are in and if they were able to end them, and of course not start them in the first place, then the budget requirements would be far smaller than if ANYBODY else in DC were running things, besides Rand and Massie and a couple others.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Yes, but both Trump and Moore are opposed to the wars we are in and if they were able to end them, and of course not start them in the first place, then the budget requirements would be far smaller than if ANYBODY else in DC were running things, besides Rand and Massie and a couple others.


Trump likes war.  They help his "tough guy" image. He has expanded bombing in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya.  Threatened military action against Iran, North Korea, Venezuela.  Supported sending more troops to Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan.

----------


## dannno

> Trump likes war.  They help his "tough guy" image. He has expanded bombing in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen, Libya.  Threatened military action against Iran, North Korea, Venezuela.  Supported sending more troops to Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan.


Trump doesn't like war, war costs money, he just likes using the threat of war to make deals. That means he can't look weak on war either, which sorta makes things difficult.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Trump doesn't like war, war costs money, he just likes using the threat of war to make deals. That means he can't look weak on war either, which sorta makes things difficult.


If it is not using his own money, he doesn't mind. He did just request $700 billion in military spending- $150 billion over last year.  What deals has he made with Libya, Yemen, Iran, Afghanistan, North Korea, Venezuela? He has even used the biggest non-nuclear weapon in our forces.

----------


## euphemia

Moore rode his horse Sassy to the polls.  Cute.

----------


## Zippyjuan

> Moore rode his horse Sassy to the polls.  Cute.


He wants to return to the 1800's.

----------


## William Tell

> He wants to return to the 1800's.


Muh freeways.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> He wants to return to the 1800's.


Not too bad an idea.

----------


## parocks

> He wants to return to the 1800's.


Age of consent in Alabama in 1880 was 10.  In 1880, all US states had age of consents ranging from 7 in Delaware to 12 in a number of places.

Currently (or 2007),  it's 14 in Canada, Germany, Italy and a number of other countries.  It's 13 in Spain and Argentina.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Age of consent in Alabama in 1880 was 10.  In 1880, all US states had age of consents ranging from 7 in Delaware to 12 in a number of places.
> 
> Currently (or 2007),  it's 14 in Canada, Germany, Italy and a number of other countries.  It's 13 in Spain and Argentina.


Irrelevant.

----------


## nikcers

Before DNA tests there was only one way a man could guarantee he was not raising someone else's kid.

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> I can't help but wonder - what did he _actually say_ about "reds and yellows?" Something kind? Something hateful? What? 
> 
> IOW: Why can't Zippy, HuffPo or the LA Times be bothered to tell us why we are supposed to be upset about this?
> 
> And if we are supposed to be upset at the assumed "insensitivity" of the mere use of the terms themselves (regardless of what was actually said about the people those terms were used to denote), then I also have to wonder how often Zippy, HuffPo, the LA Times, _et al._ have blithely (not to mention hypocritically) referred to Caucasians as "whites" ...





> He basically quoted the Sunday School song 'Jesus Loves the Little Children of the World' If you haven't heard it it goes "Red and yellow black and white they are precious in his sight" actually a very inclusive and warm hearted song from a simpler time. He was just saying that we should all get along and in his opinion that happens when we find God instead of trusting in government.





> The way the Democrats spin stuff like this is the reason why that jackass Trump won.  I guess the one silver lining is that they can't automatically win a debate by calling someone a racist anymore (especially if they aren't racist).  Unfortunately for them, it looks like (as demonstrated by some on this forum) it may be a decade before they figure out that card not only doesn't work, but backfires.





> _Jesus H. Christ._
> 
> When I was composing my reply to Zippy (post #40), I thought about including some song lyrics or something in which "red" and "white" and "yellow" and "black" were used in an innocuous context to promote the idea of our commonly humanity. I figured there had be something like that out there somewhere (especially from the '60s or '70s). So I did a Google search on "song lyrics red yellow black white," like so:
> 
> https://www.google.com/search?q=song...ow+black+white
> Guess what the top result was?
> 
> For the sake of brevity and concision, though, I decided to just let my point stand "as is" without extraneous references to any songs or what-have-you.
> 
> ...


"There is a yellow one that won't
Accept the black one
That won't accept the red one
That won't accept the white one"

- Sly & The Family Stone

----------


## Swordsmyth

© Getty

Roy Moore's  campaign announced Friday that it is seeking donations for an "election  integrity fund" following the former judge's unsuccessful bid for an  Alabama Senate seat.
Moore has refused to concede the race, which went to his Democratic opponent Doug Jones with 50 percent of the vote compared to Moore's 48 percent. 
The  campaign is seeking to meet a deadline to report cases of voter fraud  before Alabama's secretary of state certifies the vote. The election  will be certified between Dec. 26 and Jan. 3.




In  a letter sent out to supporters, the campaign said its budget "ran  through" on Tuesday, the night of the Alabama special election, and  asked supporters to help raise another $75,000 to collect reports of  "voter fraud and other irregularities at polling locations throughout  the state." 

"My campaign team is busy collecting numerous  reported cases of voter fraud and irregularities for the Secretary of  State's office," the statement said. 

More at: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...integrity-fund

----------


## Swordsmyth

For those with the means and the desire: https://www.roymoore.org/Support-Judge-Moore/

----------


## nikcers

> For those with the means and the desire: https://www.roymoore.org/Support-Judge-Moore/


See this is why we can't have nice things.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> See this is why we can't have nice things.

----------


## William Tell

> *Former Roy Moore staffer: Happy birthday, judge*_(Maggie Ford was the scheduler for Judge Roy Moore’s campaign for Senate in 2017.)_
> 
> Happy Birthday, Judge Roy Moore.
> 
> Every man dies, but not every man truly lives.
> 
> Few have gone from a rustic house in the backwoods of Alabama to the highest judicial office in the State of Alabama.
> 
> Few have gone from bagging groceries at Piggly Wiggly to graduating from the United States Military Academy at West Point.
> ...


 http://yellowhammernews.com/uncatego...irthday-judge/

----------


## phill4paul

Haven't seen one woman come out against him now that the election is over. Surely there are at least a dozen more.

----------


## William Tell

Meant to post this before, the Libertarian Party claimed credit along with McConnell and Dick Shelby for electing Doug Jones the Democrat Lindsey Graham to the Senate from Alabama. Lol what a joke that party is. Thankful we have Republicans like Rand Paul and Roy Moore who still believe in the Constitution. Nick Sarwark is worse than a RINO.



> *Relieved by Roy Moore’s defeat? Thank a Libertarian*
> 
> 
> Republican candidate Roy Moore lost to Democrat Doug Jones in the  Dec. 12 special election for U.S. Senate. The Moore campaign was plagued  by allegations of sexual impropriety, and voters turned away in droves  from what was once considered a safe GOP seat. The race was so close,  though, that Jones won by a margin of only 1.5 percent — less than the  1.7 percent of votes for write-in candidates, including Libertarian Ron  Bishop.
> 
> 
>  “If you’re happy that Roy Moore was not elected to the Senate, thank  write-in candidates like Libertarian Ron Bishop,” said Libertarian  National Committee Chair Nicholas Sarwark.
> 
> 
> ...

----------


## Swordsmyth

> Meant to post this before, the Libertarian Party claimed credit along with McConnell and Dick Shelby for electing Doug Jones the Democrat Lindsey Graham to the Senate from Alabama. Lol what a joke that party is. Thankful we have Republicans like Rand Paul and Roy Moore who still believe in the Constitution. Nick Sarwark is worse than a RINO.


Further proof the LP is an enemy of the liberty movement.

----------


## phill4paul

> Further proof the LP is an enemy of the liberty movement.


   They may be against liberty but in this specific instance they have the opportunity to show the benefit of a party that controls the middle ground. And they are correct to "cluck" about it. I've been saying this on this forums for years. All you have to do is look at the Temperance movement to see how a specific group created the political environment to get make the sale and manufacture of alcoholic drinks illegal. They didn't side with either Dems. or Reps. they just swung the vote to the candidate that best supported their position. When it comes to expenditures the best route for political gain lies in the middle ground of hotly contested seats.

----------


## Zippyjuan

Lawsuit was filed by one accuser after the election.  https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN1EU03Q

Another had her home burned down- suspected arson.  https://www.aol.com/article/news/201...down/23325563/

----------


## phill4paul

> Lawsuit was filed by one accuser after the election.  https://www.reuters.com/article/us-u...-idUSKBN1EU03Q
> 
> Another had her home burned down- suspected arson.  https://www.aol.com/article/news/201...down/23325563/


  So full of $#@!. Did you read the article? She filed a lawsuit after he accused her of defamation for her accusation BEFORE the election.

  The second is just bull$#@! and has no bearing on the conversation.

  I used to support you for giving logical counter points. These days you are just ridiculous. You don't even try anymore. Just spam bull$#@!.

----------


## Danke

> So full of $#@!. Did you read the article? She filed a lawsuit after he accused her of defamation for her accusation BEFORE the election.
> 
>   The second is just bull$#@! and has no bearing on the conversation.
> 
>   I used to support you for giving logical counter points. These days you are just ridiculous. You don't even try anymore. Just spam bull$#@!.


Could it be a different Zippy....nah.

----------


## phill4paul

> Could it be a different Zippy....nah.


  Seems to be. Maybe the first Zippy grew a conscience and quit.

----------


## Danke

> Seems to be. Maybe the first Zippy grew a conscience and quit.



When was that? 2009?

----------


## phill4paul

> When was that? 2009?


  Guess that could have been and I was just behind the times.

----------


## William Tell

> They may be against liberty but in this specific instance they have the opportunity to show the benefit of a party that controls the middle ground. And they are correct to "cluck" about it. I've been saying this on this forums for years. All you have to do is look at the Temperance movement to see how a specific group created the political environment to get make the sale and manufacture of alcoholic drinks illegal. They didn't side with either Dems. or Reps. they just swung the vote to the candidate that best supported their position. When it comes to expenditures the best route for political gain lies in the middle ground of hotly contested seats.


Maybe I'm missing your point, but the way I see it the LP just basically said they are nothing but a 'spoiler' like the 2 major parties have been saying for decades. This is just the kind of thing that they've been trying to push back against in the past. When I vote for a 3rd party candidate it is because I agree with the 3rd party candidate, if voting for an LP = a vote for the dems after all I simply would not do it.

They claimed credit for one thing, making Roy Moore lose, and the simple fact is Doug Jones won, and the LP is happy with the end result.

----------


## Danke

> Guess that could have been and I was just behind the times.



I think we are at least on Zippy 5.0 by now.

----------


## TheCount

I wonder how the secret recount is going...

----------


## Zippyjuan

> So full of $#@!. Did you read the article? She* filed a lawsuit after he accused her of defamation for her accusation BEFORE the election.
> *
>   The second is just bull$#@! and has no bearing on the conversation.
> 
>   I used to support you for giving logical counter points. These days you are just ridiculous. You don't even try anymore. Just spam bull$#@!.


The election was in December.  Lawsuit filed in January.  Check the dates at the link.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> The election was in December.  Lawsuit filed in January.  Check the dates at the link.


It doesn't matter, the women were all liars and your attempt to ignore the evidence of that and imply that it must be true because she is suing is insulting to our intelligence.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> I think we are at least on Zippy 5.0 by now.


I think the mods should change zippy's avatar back to his "Monsters Inc." avatar and his moniker to "Trolls Inc."

----------


## phill4paul

> Haven't seen one woman come out against him now that the election is over. Surely there are at least a dozen more.


  Elections over. But the search for Justice ain't. Gotaa love the CNN intro. "FAILED" candidate. Not "aggrieved." Not "maligned." Lol.

   Roy Moore files lawsuit against 3 women, alleging 'political conspiracy'




> (CNN)Failed Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore says the women who accused him of sexual assault were part of a political conspiracy, according to a lawsuit filed Monday.
> 
> The suit was jointly filed with his wife, Kayla, about an hour before the two held a news conference. It was Moore's first public appearance since election night in December, when Moore, a Republican, was upset by Democrat Doug Jones. The defendants include three women who made accusations against Moore as well as two other people.
> 
> "This was filed because the people of Alabama deserve to know the truth," said Melissa Isaak, an attorney representing Moore. "The accusations made against Judge Moore during the US Senate campaign arose from a political conspiracy to destroy his personal reputation and defeat him in the special Senate election for United States Senate."
> 
> The suit is asking for compensatory damages from all defendants listed along with interest from the date of the injuries and the court costs. The suit is also asking for punitive damages "in an amount that will adequately reflect the enormity of the defendants' wrongful, outrageous acts" and an amount that will prevent similar acts.


 https://www.cnn.com/2018/04/30/us/ro...uit/index.html

----------


## William Tell

Good, hope the truth comes out in court.

----------


## William Tell

Moore's lawsuit, pretty detailed and damning stuff.  https://www.scribd.com/document/3778...018#from_embed

----------


## Brian4Liberty

> Haven't seen one woman come out against him now that the election is over. Surely there are at least a dozen more.





> It doesn't matter, the women were all liars and your attempt to ignore the evidence of that and imply that it must be true because she is suing is insulting to our intelligence.


What ever came of all of those oh so important and terrible allegations against Roy Moore?

----------


## Zippyjuan

> What ever came of all of those oh so important and terrible allegations against Roy Moore?


As best I can find, still waiting for trials.   https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politic...ainst-accusers




> *Local judges recuse themselves in Roy Moore lawsuit against accusers
> *
> 
> GADSDEN, Ala. —* All six judges* in an Alabama county have* recused themselves* from presiding over the lawsuit filed by failed U.S. Senate candidate Roy Moore against some of the women who accused him of sexual misconduct.
> 
> News outlets report Etowah County’s four circuit judges and two district judges filed recusals with interim Alabama Chief Justice Lyn Stuart on Monday, a week after Moore filed a political conspiracy lawsuit.
> 
> The judges’ recusals cite two reasons. Circuit Judge David Kimberley is a member of the state Judicial Inquiry Commission that suspended Moore as Alabama chief justice in 2016, effectively removing him from the high court over his refusal to adhere to a federal court ruling permitting same-sex marriage. The other reason concerns Moore’s former position as a Sixteenth Judicial Circuit judge in Etowah County.


(Article from May)

----------


## Anti Federalist

> What ever came of all of those oh so important and terrible allegations against Roy Moore?


Mission Accomplished.

----------


## timosman

> Mission Accomplished.


At we learned women would never lie. Lying is definitely a white male privilege.

----------


## Swordsmyth

> What ever came of all of those oh so important and terrible allegations against Roy Moore?


A Demoncrat Senator.

----------

