Poll: Judge Roy Moore leads competitors in runoff

[spudea]

I agree, this is way above partisan politics. If they take Moore down, then they will use this same strategy to take down any threat to the establishment.

 

[nobody's_hero]

I agree, this is way above partisan politics. If they take Moore down, then they will use this same strategy to take down any threat to the establishment.

Indeed, no real republican will be safe from women coming out of the woodwork claiming they were raped/fondled 200 years ago but just didn't feel like reporting it to anyone until it was politically convenient.

 

[William Tell]

Wow. Allred on MSNBC, not sure she's even convinced herself it's his signature. She seems extremely uncomfortable and defensive, maybe hedging so Roy doesn't sue her.

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/katy-tu...accusers-claim-that-doesnt-really-make-sense/

 

[William Tell]

MSNBC girl even says their demands of going before the senate committee doesn't make sense to her.

 

[donnay]

Wow. Allred on MSNBC, not sure she's even convinced herself it's his signature. She seems extremely uncomfortable and defensive, maybe hedging so Roy doesn't sue her.

https://www.mediaite.com/tv/katy-tu...accusers-claim-that-doesnt-really-make-sense/

If I were a fake feminists I would cringe every time Gloria Allred takes the stage to defend some woman. SMDH.

 

[Madison320]

Moore hits McConnell over handling of Franken groping allegation

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/16/roy-moore-al-franken-accusations-mcconnell-245195

I made the mistake of reading the comments. Most of the liberals say what Franken did was not nearly as bad because it was an adult but Moore raped a child. WTF???

Personally I try to be consistent. I don't think either should be barred from office unless they get convicted. Also I'd be willing to put up with a lot of bad behavior if I knew the guy was voting for libertarian positions.

 

[dannno]

I made the mistake of reading the comments. Most of the liberals say what Franken did was not nearly as bad because it was an adult but Moore raped a child. WTF???

Personally I try to be consistent. I don't think either should be barred from office unless they get convicted. Also I'd be willing to put up with a lot of bad behavior if I knew the guy was voting for libertarian positions.

No conviction needed for Franken, the photographic evidence is right there.

The only hard evidence they have on Moore was that forged yearbook signing.

 

[Valli6]

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?

“He had a tremendous amount of money. And he threatened to drop an A-bomb on us... He threatened to destroy forever the name “Ron Paul” by producing commercials and advertising that would destroy his name and reputation.”

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


Did a search to see if Wead had made any comments about Moore and found this brief interview with Neil Cavuto from the fox business channel. He says he has a source from within the establishment that " tells me the republican establishment themselves popped this whole Judge Moore thing."

https://twitter.com/DougWead/status/930489487410507776

 

[Zippyjuan]

The calls were fake or the story reporting them was fake?

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

 

[Swordsmyth]

I made the mistake of reading the comments. Most of the liberals say what Franken did was not nearly as bad because it was an adult but Moore raped a child. WTF???

Personally I try to be consistent. I don't think either should be barred from office unless they get convicted. Also I'd be willing to put up with a lot of bad behavior if I knew the guy was voting for libertarian positions.

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.

 

[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 fucking asleep, you asshole.. 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 shit 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 [MENTION=407]specsaregood[/MENTION] 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 shit 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 [MENTION=37914]Madison320[/MENTION] 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


Did a search to see if Wead had made any comments about Moore and found this brief interview with Neil Cavuto from the fox business channel. He says he has a source from within the establishment that " tells me the republican establishment themselves popped this whole Judge Moore thing."

https://twitter.com/DougWead/status/930489487410507776

This is a good reminder of how politics are played, and I'm thankful Mr. Wead shared this information. With this Moore debacle, we may be seeing a glimpse of what it would have been like if RP would have gone after Romney hard. The threat was issued to RP, so he backed down, and focused most attacks on Santorum. Similar threats may have been issued to Moore, but he has said screw it and is all in. He will have a tarnished reputation in the eyes of msm watching zombies, regardless of the legitimacy of the allegations or the outcome of the election for the rest of his life.

 

[dannno]

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

I called you an asshole because you defended him by saying it was a joke, even though she was asleep and obviously not in on said joke..

Look it up in the dictionary, that's the definition of asshole.

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.

Groping women consensualy while they are awake is perfectly acceptable, groping women while they are asleep is NOT.. obviously.. Stop being an asshole.

AGAIN as @Madison320 pointed out:

Ya, that was one of the dumbest things I've ever read.. Let's see here.. You got one guy who assaulted a woman while she was asleep and there is photo evidence..

Another guy has worse accusations going against him that were fabricated.. And that is a "wash"?? What the fuck kind of definition of a "wash" is that??? The guy who is ACTUALLY innocent has worse accusations about him than the guy who is guilty?? Please explain this new definition of the word "wash"

 

[Swordsmyth]

[h=2]Shocker: New York Times Writes Positive Article on Roy Moore[/h]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/usne...rk-times-writes-positive-article-on-roy-moore


Tell me again what a "statist" "law and order" type he is.

 

[dannno]

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/usne...rk-times-writes-positive-article-on-roy-moore


Tell me again what a "statist" "law and order" type he is.

Ok, fuck it, I may donate to his campaign now...