Airliners.net

luckyone wrote:

seb146 wrote:

All of you defending Moore, where were you defending Wienstien and Spacey? Why are you not slandering the accusers of them?

Because this presidency is the result of people who made Honey Boo Boo and Duck Dynasty successful. Because conservatives (and sheep-skinned "preachers") have done an excellent job of indoctrinating a large chunk their base with circular reasoning. The media is liberal, and therefore anything the liberal media says must be incorrect and is persecution of things conservative, and almost always overlapping, hardcore Evangelical Christians--it's amazing how you rarely find one without the other in these instances--never mind that the real problem is politically-biased news-sourced entertainment. They couldn't care less when someone who doesn't have an "R" next to their name is criticized. But criticize the R--that's tantamount to holy war.

Also, those of you going back and forth about pedophilia...it doesn't really matter as it's still alleged sexual (mis)conduct with a minor.

Charges or none, true or not, Roy Moore is a twice-removed elected official (if this were Hillary Clinton running, they'd be howling... but because he thumps the Bible) who has in no uncertain terms stated that his view of God trumps due process and respect for the law, and ironically calls for the impeachment of judges with whom he disagrees. THAT should be the real story about Roy Moore as he is a threat to the Constitution that Republicans are so supposedly militant about protecting.

Which will say a lot about Alabamians in general if they think this is all worth overlooking for the sake of not allowing an evil liberal socialist radical leftist Democrat to be elected, despite that Democrat having stellar credentials.

And said Alabamians will also howl on how they shouldn't be considered "deplorables" for supporting deplorable actions from deplorable people.

einsteinboricua wrote:

Which will say a lot about Alabamians in general if they think this is all worth overlooking for the sake of not allowing an evil liberal socialist radical leftist Democrat to be elected, despite that Democrat having stellar credentials.

As I originally hail from Georgia, Alabama jokes are easy and come in droves. To me one of the few things worse than being from Alabama is being from Mississippi, and not having the sense to get the hell out of either. I used to feel the same about Georgia, but the Atlanta area at least is solidly plodding toward a massive city that is too ideologically diverse for stodgy, staunch religious conservatives to hold too much sway.

And now after his "sort of but not really" denial that even the hyper-friendly Sean Hannity couldn't redirect, several Republican Senators are unequivocally pulling their endorsements, including Mitch McConnell. However, it is likely they weren't all that supportive of him to begin with. Roy Moore as Senator would be 95% liability and 5% asset, even to the Republican Party.

It's not just Alabama. After Hannity defended sexual abuse of minors over the past week Keurig Coffee dropped him from their ad spend. Hannity is now encouraging all sexual predators to smash their Keurigs and they're doing it on YouTube. It's incredible, outing yourself as pro sexual abuse just because Sean Hannity thinks teen sex is cool. These conservatives are off the hook.

wingman wrote:

It's not just Alabama. After Hannity defended sexual abuse of minors over the past week Keurig Coffee dropped him from their ad spend. Hannity is now encouraging all sexual predators to smash their Keurigs and they're doing it on YouTube. It's incredible, outing yourself as pro sexual abuse just because Sean Hannity thinks teen sex is cool. These conservatives are off the hook.

I'll go out on a limb and say that few people who listen to people like Sean Hannity--there are certainly quite a few on both sides of the ideological spectrum--aren't very interested in or capable of critical thinking to begin with. They're more interested in having their pre-existing opinions validated than having any real discussion, much like Sean Hannity himself. There's a reason he's number one in the safe confines of cable news.

And the dam further breaks:

A new accuser of Republican senate candidate Roy Moore has stepped forward on Monday with allegations that Moore assaulted her when she was a minor in Alabama.
Famed women's rights attorney Gloria Allred held a press conference in New York City with the woman to announce the accusations, who "wishes to state what she alleges Roy Moore did to her without her consent" according to a press release from Allred.
[...]
Nelson said that she and her husband supported Donald Trump for president and that her coming forwad on Monday "has nothing whatsoever to do with Republicans or Democrats."

"It has everything to do with Mr. Moore's sexual assault when I was a teenager," Nelson added.
[...]
, Moore had offered to drive Nelson home after work, during which she alleges he forced himself on Nelson and groped her in a locked car.
[...]
Nelson is "willing to testify under oath" to the statements she provides on Monday against Moore.
[...]
Allred said that Nelson kept her secret for more than 40 years out of fear of Moore and the power he had.

According to Allred's statement, Moore had allegedly told the accuser that "no one would believe her"....

https://www.cbsnews.com/live-news/new-a ... e-updates/

So who is next?

Tugg

Who is next?
Bijou Phillips!

https://pagesix.com/2017/11/13/mean-gir ... 1497360342

Congratulations. We've reached a new low.

wingman wrote:

It's not just Alabama. After Hannity defended sexual abuse of minors over the past week Keurig Coffee dropped him from their ad spend. Hannity is now encouraging all sexual predators to smash their Keurigs and they're doing it on YouTube. It's incredible, outing yourself as pro sexual abuse just because Sean Hannity thinks teen sex is cool. These conservatives are off the hook.

Thoughts 'n prayers for DIRECTFLT's coffee machine

And people wonder why these ladies, girls at the time, didn't want to come forward.

Tugg

"Because Obama may have smoked pot and Bill Clinton may have done cocaine, let's just forget this sexual predator. I mean, it is almost as bad as if he had stolen a lawn mower 40 years ago"

Says a Roy Moore supporter on TV

https://latest.com/2017/11/roy-moore-su ... awn-mower/

seb146 wrote:

All of you defending Moore, where were you defending Weinstein and Spacey? Why are you not slandering the accusers of them?

Because, I Believe Weinstein's and Spacey's accusers.

DIRECTFLT wrote:

seb146 wrote:

All of you defending Moore, where were you defending Weinstein and Spacey? Why are you not slandering the accusers of them?

Because, I Believe Weinstein's and Spacey's accusers.

and that is called confirmation bias. Trying to overcome that may vastly improve your life, and you would stop looking like someone running around with a sign "abolish statuary rape for all registered republicans".

But good to see that you believe a hand full of accusers right away, and you did from day one, but refuse to believe 4 of them, despite Moore admitting on the Hannity show that he did date three of them, and despite close to 30 people corroborating the story. .....

"Yeah, he admitted dating those teenagers, but i still don´t believe he did"....

best regards
Thomas

DIRECTFLT wrote:

MaverickM11 wrote:

seahawk wrote:

Fake media lies exposed:

http://www.breitbart.com/jerusalem/2017 ... uct-story/

The KKK's favorite website that was the cheerleader for Roy Moore's election campaign? Surely you're not that stupid. Well if you're reading Breitbart maybe you are.

I got dinged for using the word moron to describe someone.

But, I guess "stupid" is a kinder, gentler word to say the same thing.

But anything goes if words are used against a conservative site and it's readers, right??

The word "conservative" has really lost its meaning when it's applied to people who want to rewrite the constitution to make the US a White Christian theocracy, get help from Russia to do it, invent fake news while attacking real journalists, etc.

tommy1808 wrote:

DIRECTFLT wrote:

seb146 wrote:

All of you defending Moore, where were you defending Weinstein and Spacey? Why are you not slandering the accusers of them?

Because, I Believe Weinstein's and Spacey's accusers.

and that is called confirmation bias. Trying to overcome that may vastly improve your life, and you would stop looking like someone running around with a sign "abolish statuary rape for all registered republicans".

But good to see that you believe a hand full of accusers right away, and you did from day one, but refuse to believe 4 of them, despite Moore admitting on the Hannity show that he did date three of them, and despite close to 30 people corroborating the story. .....

"Yeah, he admitted dating those teenagers, but i still don´t believe he did"....

best regards
Thomas

A fifth person came forward. A mall and a YMCA unofficially banned him because he was such a slimy predator. He signed one of the accuser's high school year books...when he was 32 lol. And lez be honest, he's an evangelical, and they're always preaching one thing while sneaking around with some underage kid, hooker, male or female, live or dead.

Seems like there's a new headline everyday with this guy.

http://time.com/5022752/roy-moore-gadsden-alabama/

Still, part of me thinks he will still win.

tommy1808 wrote:

[
But good to see that you believe a hand full of accusers right away, and you did from day one, but refuse to believe 4 of them, despite Moore admitting on the Hannity show that he did date three of them, and despite close to 30 people corroborating the story. .....

"Yeah, he admitted dating those teenagers, but i still don´t believe he did"....

best regards
Thomas

What's funny are those snowflake Hannity watchers who are boycotting Keurig over their decision to pull their advertising from his show.

DIRECTFLT wrote:

seb146 wrote:

All of you defending Moore, where were you defending Weinstein and Spacey? Why are you not slandering the accusers of them?

Because, I Believe Weinstein's and Spacey's accusers.

Explain, please. Why do you believe someone who came out with an accusation years later but do not believe someone who came out with an accusation years later? That is really what we are dealing with.

Tough guys....let's see what you do if Apple or Samsung removed their advertising


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFDP4ik2vHA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqA5RqGcafE

LMP737 wrote:

Seems like there's a new headline everyday with this guy.

http://time.com/5022752/roy-moore-gadsden-alabama/

Still, part of me thinks he will still win.

I agree. Partisanship is hurting this country in a lot of ways. The Alabama GOP would rather perform mental gymnastics to justify the guy with an R next to his name, rather than vote for anyone with a D next to it. Here's a great article that poses the question, if Roy Moore isn't rock bottom for the GOP, then what is?:

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/fe ... is-w511620

You can't keep claiming moral superiority and blaming the other side for moral relativism when you're willing to overlook Roy Moore's behavior or Trump's behavior. What about Clinton is not a response, it's a deflection. Clinton is a scumbag and a sexual predator, but he's not the one running for a senate seat. The Democratic Party absolutely needs to have its own come to Jesus moment with respect to Bill Clinton, but his crimes are not carte blanche for Republicans to look the other way on the issue of sex assault. And it's not just his sexual predilections that are problematic, as awful as they appear to be. The man is a certified nutjob, who puts his god above the Constitution. A man who has repeatedly failed to honor court rulings and uphold the Constitution cannot seriously take an oath of office swearing allegiance to a document he's admitted is secondary to the bible. I'm not sure when the GOP will realize it's hit rock bottom, but I certainly hope that point comes sooner rather than later.

Withered crone Ann Coulter even tweeted "what about JFK and his affair with a 19 year old intern when he was 45" as though consensual sex between consenting adults is equivalent to going after underage girls. Kennedy was no saint, we all know that; but I'm not aware of any allegations that have ever surfaced involving affairs with underage girls. Roy Moore was a 32 year old man trolling high schools, custody hearings, and local malls for 14 year old girls. He was an assistant district attorney who knew his behavior to be illegal.

727LOVER wrote:

Tough guys....let's see what you do if Apple or Samsung removed their advertising


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NFDP4ik2vHA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqA5RqGcafE

Or the catheter company

seb146 wrote:

"Because Obama may have smoked pot and Bill Clinton may have done cocaine, let's just forget this sexual predator. I mean, it is almost as bad as if he had stolen a lawn mower 40 years ago"

Says a Roy Moore supporter on TV

https://latest.com/2017/11/roy-moore-su ... awn-mower/

Did you forget on purpose that Clinton was accused of sex crimes too? Also proved to have committed perjury? He was given a pass by the media and supported by his party. Guess women will only believed when they accuse a Republican huh?

NIKV69 wrote:

Did you forget on purpose that Clinton was accused of sex crimes too?

Please provide names of then popular main network show hosts that called those accusing Cliton liars, being paid for the accusations, defended him with Jesus and alike and stood by those claims after those stories have been corroborated by some 30 people.

Unless you just made up what ypu've just wrote, you should know exactly who those hosts where and it should be no hassle whatsoever to provide them.

Best regards
Thomas

DIRECTFLT wrote:

SNL chose their lead off skit to be about Roy Moore and a visit at the WH with VP Pence.

SNL doesn't give a sh*t about young teens being molested.... This was purely a Political slam at Moore, because Moore is not a liberal Politician.

IF SNL was just concerned about teen molestations, then the low hanging fruit would be Kevin Spacey, and the boat load of teens he's been accused by of bad acts.

But ahhhh, SNL did not go there. No, no, no, no, no.

SNL did do a "Ha-Ha" soft piece on the "We're Back" DNC that was obtuse and hardly direct.

SNL/NBC is still an arm of the DNC, and their bias for who gets slammed politically, and who gets the soft balls is clear.

Kate McKinnon as Jeff Sessions literally called both Spacey and Weinstein monsters in the Roy Moore skit, so I'm not quite sure how SNL is ignoring them. Both Spacey and Weinstein have already faced consequences for their actions, and will likely continue to do so. Meanwhile, there's a good chance Roy Moore will be Alabama's next US Senator...

NIKV69 wrote:

Did you forget on purpose that Clinton was accused of sex crimes too? Also proved to have committed perjury? He was given a pass by the media and supported by his party. Guess women will only believed when they accuse a Republican huh?

Seriously just two posts above yours I covered why "what about Clinton?" is a crap response. He's a sexual predator and so is Roy Moore. I'd say the GOP could take the high road and not elect a sexual predator to office, but then you all voted for Trump and it's highly likely Roy Moore will win in Alabama. You can't claim moral superiority and yell "Clinton" when you're supporting people who did the same or worse.

tommy1808 wrote:

Please provide names of then popular main network show hosts that called those accusing Cliton liars, being paid for the accusations, defended him with Jesus and alike and stood by those claims after those stories have been corroborated by some 30 people.

Unless you just made up what ypu've just wrote, you should know exactly who those hosts where and it should be no hassle whatsoever to provide them.

Actually A LOT of people looked the other way, slut shamed, victim shamed, etc. when those allegations came to light. That's not to mention Gloria Steinem's hit piece in the NYT explaining why feminists still supported Clinton in spite of the allegations. As I said above, the Democratic Party really needs to come to terms with that part of its history, because it's shameful. Way too many of us, myself included, looked the other way because he had a D next to his name.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/26/opini ... einem.html

https://www.theatlantic.com/entertainme ... es/545729/

NIKV69 wrote:

Did you forget on purpose that Clinton was accused of sex crimes too? Also proved to have committed perjury? He was given a pass by the media and supported by his party. Guess women will only believed when they accuse a Republican huh?

No one forgot anything. The GOP tried to impeach Clinton for lying about consensual sex with another adult. Just 20 years later they voted in a President that freely admitted he's a sexual molester of women and are now putting forward a man accused by five women of sexual abuse and sexual assault as a replacement for the ex-Senator from Alabama who himself is under congressional scrutiny over possible collusion with a hostile foreign power. This is being defended by the largest news media channel in the world and its prime time hosts (and conservative pro sexual abusers smashing products by companies that do not share in their enthusiasm for sex with minors).

I think all we're saying is that if consensual sex deserves an impeachment trial, then it follows that Trump, Moore and Sessions and many other current administration officials should be executed for treason and non-consensual sex crimes against unwilling adult women and unwilling girls.

But let's talk about 20 years ago, it seems Republicans have elephantine memories about Clinton but get Alzheimery about meetings with Russkies just last year.

PS: do you see any liberals forgetting about HRC and the DNC, or sexual misconduct in Hollywood? Here's a clue, this shit isn't getting researched and written about by Fox or Breitbart, it's getting out there because of Fake News organizations like the NYT and other lifelong Dems like Donna Brazille. Christ NIK, have a shred of self-respect and know when your team is gargling enough bullshit to drown themselves in.

OA412 wrote:

Actually A LOT of people looked the other way, slut shamed, victim shamed, etc. when those allegations came to light.

Key point being continuing to do so, after the story has been supported by 30+ people aka you are as close to proof as you will ever get.

Best regards
Thomas

OA412 wrote:

Seriously just two posts above yours I covered why "what about Clinton?" is a crap response. He's a sexual predator and so is Roy Moore. I'd say the GOP could take the high road and not elect a sexual predator to office, but then you all voted for Trump and it's highly likely Roy Moore will win in Alabama. You can't claim moral superiority and yell "Clinton" when you're supporting people who did the same or worse.

It's a crap response because you have to accept the media and DNC didn't ask Clinton to step down from running for president and backed him. Weiner also. He was supported and even tried to pin it on Breitbart hoping hard evidence (No pun intended) never saw the light of day. Yet you think it disqualifies Moore from office the moment the first accusation comes to light.

If you want to be taken seriously you can't have bias You can't call for Trump to be removed from office just because he said he did something or Moore taken off the ballot because some women said he did something when you not only let Clinton have a pass with the same circumstance but supported him as well. It shows it for what it is. Political destruction to try to flip a senate seat.

wingman wrote:

No one forgot anything. The GOP tried to impeach Clinton for lying about consensual sex with another adult. Just 20 years later they voted in a President that freely admitted he's a sexual molester of women and are now putting forward a man accused by five women of sexual abuse and sexual assault as a replacement for the ex-Senator from Alabama who himself is under congressional scrutiny over possible collusion with a hostile foreign power. This is being defended by the largest news media channel in the world and its prime time hosts (and conservative pro sexual abusers smashing products by companies that do not share in their enthusiasm for sex with minors).

I think all we're saying is that if consensual sex deserves an impeachment trial, then it follows that Trump, Moore and Sessions and many other current administration officials should be executed for treason and non-consensual sex crimes against unwilling adult women and unwilling girls.

But let's talk about 20 years ago, it seems Republicans have elephantine memories about Clinton but get Alzheimery about meetings with Russkies just last year.

PS: do you see any liberals forgetting about HRC and the DNC, or sexual misconduct in Hollywood? Here's a clue, this shit isn't getting researched and written about by Fox or Breitbart, it's getting out there because of Fake News organizations like the NYT and other lifelong Dems like Donna Brazille. Christ NIK, have a shred of self-respect and know when your team is gargling enough bullshit to drown themselves in.

This is spin. Clinton was accused of sexual crimes and the media, his party and his supporters backed him all the way to white house. Now you want Trump removed from office and Moore removed from the ballot for the same thing? If you want to us to really believe you are a champion of women than you can't seriously tell us the treatment that Clinton got resembled anything other then a total joke and was a smack in the face to those women that accused him. Yet the moment Gloria Allred tells you to remove someone from the ballot he has to go? It has to be equally applied. You can't have bias. The only bullshit coming is from the party that got handed their asses last November and can't go through day to day life with Trump in the white house. We will never know what exactly Moore did but what we do know is he is getting much different treatment than Clinton did and it needs to be called out as much as possible.

Clinton was investigated 11 times and exonerated. Weiner was investigated, charged and imprisoned. Why won't you back the same process for your guys now? This is today and it's your guys in the spotlight, they are the Presidents and Senators currently in power. In the case of the President the man himself admitted live in his own voice that he grabs women's pussies because he's powerful and he can get away with it. Now your choice for AL senator is being accused for sexually assaulting minors and the best you can do is say "what about Clinton?". You can Hannity can support the sexual abuse of minors all you want, the vast majority of voters will not. I feel sorry for your daughters, nieces or younger female neighbors. I'm sure they and their parents would be scared shitless to know the kind of behavior you condone and support in our nation's leaders.

Another thought as to "why now": this is bigger than Alabama where Roy Moore and his paternalistic brand of Christian-infused politics goes a long way. I knew a lot of Roy Moore's growing up in the church and religious-affiliated schools, and though none of them to my knowledge abused people, they did awful things to other people and got away with it. Outside of Alabama this guy is taken much less seriously, and as I've already mentioned, can be viewed as a liability due to his self-serving religious grandiosity--this also makes him a lot less likely to play ball when they need him to. On the national stage he doesn't have as many cronies, and as such these women have a better chance to be believed. Also, they're older now, most of them probably no longer have kids in the house or are as vulnerable as they were in their early 20s. Things are also different, not drastically but different. Not too long ago in the South you swept anything unpleasant under the rug, smiled, and walked down the road and played along. That isn't as much the case today.

wingman wrote:

NIKV69 wrote:

year.

PS: do you see any liberals forgetting about HRC and the DNC, or sexual misconduct in Hollywood? Here's a clue, this shit isn't getting researched and written about by Fox or Breitbart, it's getting out there because of Fake News organizations like the NYT .

Neither Fox or Breitbart would know a story if it hit them in the face. Their whole thing is Hillary's e-mails, Benghazi, Hillary's e-mails, The Clinton Foundation and Hillary's e-mails. Beyond that they are utterly clueless. Quite frankly they are not equipped to do actual journalism.

Now you figure both Fox and Breitbart would have been the ones to break a story about a liberal Hollywood producer acting like a pig. In the case of Fox News they can't even uncover men acting like pigs in their own building.

NIKV69 wrote:

seb146 wrote:

"Because Obama may have smoked pot and Bill Clinton may have done cocaine, let's just forget this sexual predator. I mean, it is almost as bad as if he had stolen a lawn mower 40 years ago"

Says a Roy Moore supporter on TV

https://latest.com/2017/11/roy-moore-su ... awn-mower/

Did you forget on purpose that Clinton was accused of sex crimes too? Also proved to have committed perjury? He was given a pass by the media and supported by his party. Guess women will only believed when they accuse a Republican huh?

That was 20 years ago and was already tried in both the court of public opinion and the court of law. The rest of us have moved on.

Roy Moore is accused of molesting an underage girl and giving alcohol to another minor. He is thought of as such a creep that he was banned from a mall for stalking girls

https://www.thedailybeast.com/report-al ... uing-teens

And people in Gadsden knew about his behavior and didn't really seem to think much of it

https://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/ ... res_b.html

Also, if your go-to argument is "but, Clinton!" then you really have nothing to add nor any solid rebuttal.

Do people squawking "Clinton" have a Jeff Sessions-like memory and forget that he was impeached by the House of Representarives for his unlawful behavior?? I was all of 12 and remember it well. Incidentally I also remember being assembled around the school's flagpole with the rest of the school to pray for said impeachment. Twice-removed Roy Moore would've been so proud.

Ahhhh, if only Moore had taken the High Ground, and only gone after 18+ year olds for consensual sex !!!

DIRECTFLT wrote:

Ahhhh, if only Moore had taken the High Ground, and only gone after 18+ year olds for consensual sex !!!

Ummm...yeah? Unless you're a creep or a troll with a sick sense of humor such a concept shouldn't be a big leap.

DIRECTFLT wrote:

Ahhhh, if only Moore had taken the High Ground, and only gone after 18+ year olds for consensual sex !!!

Well yeah, that is kind of the point. This is news to you?

Adults are who adults should pursue for adult relationships, sexual relationships most obviously. At least that is my opinion (and I think most of the nation's too).

Tugg

DIRECTFLT wrote:

Ahhhh, if only Moore had taken the High Ground, and only gone after 18+ year olds for consensual sex !!!

Yes, that is what normal human beings do. You and your trumpanzees should try it.

NIKV69 wrote:

Did you forget on purpose that Clinton was accused of sex crimes too? Also proved to have committed perjury? He was given a pass by the media and supported by his party. Guess women will only believed when they accuse a Republican huh?

Did you miss the impeachment or did that part of your brain dissolve and dribble out your nose? Understandable if it's the latter--Ken Starr found all kinds of impropriety with Clinton but couldn't sniff out the good christian gang rape under his nose at Baylor. You better cool it on the perjury talk; Trump perjures himself more times each day before most of America even rolls out of bed--and it's not about consensual sex.

When I was fourteen years old, I lusted after 18- ? year old girls and women without a doubt, so for the life of me I cannot understand this Mall Creep doing the exact opposite at 30 years old. He is a Pervert and the whispers about it have been playing out for years. It seems that finally the truth will be forced out in spite of the forgiving parents of 14 year old girls who seem just as perverted. I understand forgiveness, but not for this type of creep and pervert.

Sorry....I gotta giggle









Rush Limbaugh: Roy Moore ‘Was a Democrat’ When He’s Accused of Targeting Teen Girls





Rush Limbaugh: Roy Moore ‘Was a Democrat’ When He’s Accused of Targeting Teen Girls

Rush Limbaugh floated a Hail Mary defense of Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore this week, telling viewers of his widely consumed radio show that Moore was a Democrat during the period when five women say he made sexual advances on them as teenagers.

“Did you know that before 1992, when a lot of this was going on, that Judge Moore was a Democrat,” said Limbaugh in comments published Tuesday. “While he was a Democrat, nobody said a word. When he supposedly was attracted to inappropriately aged girls, he was a Democrat.”



https://www.yahoo.com/entertainment/rus ... 19801.html

I guess in Rush Limburger's world there is a line between Perversion good, or Perversion bad. I guess when A Democrat is perverted, that is bad. When a reformed Democrat, now Republican continues the perversion, that is forgivable as the people in the area and Hannity are pushing.

seb146 wrote:

Also, if your go-to argument is "but, Clinton!" then you really have nothing to add nor any solid rebuttal.

It is also funny: even Trumps rhetorics lead right back to Russia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism

best regards
Thomas

The growing number of accusing women who are claiming as teens decades ago were victims of actual or attempted sexual assault by Moore is making it more likely that he did such disgusting acts upon them and disqualifies him from holding any public office. Its too bad that these accusations didn't come out when becoming a state judge.
I think the outing and criminal prosecutions of a number of sexual abusers has empowered women (and some men) to come out about their sexual abuse they withheld for decades.That includes by Catholic priests, Bill Cosby, male on male rape by former Rep. Dennis Hassart. and Sandusky at Penn State, the audio that came out last year of now President Trump with his disgusting sexual comments has led to much more respect for victims. For victims, the abuses upon them may have had serious psychological problems, difficulty with relationships, ability to get a decent job so economically ruined, unable to complete their education or just live a 'normal' life so now want to end their silence to seek money damages or be able to live a better life.
Of course some want to use accusations to keep certain people from public office or corporate influence for their own political reasons. You also have false accusations of rape and sexual abuse made that destroyed lives of the accused (U of Virginia and Duke U.), complicates the outing of abusers and victims willing to come out.
I suspect more sexual abusers will be outed and pay the price in the next several months then like a lot of other issues allegations of sexual abuse will die off in public interest replaced by some other scandals or very serious economic, political or other crises.

We go into the next phase of this race: if Moore wins, does the Senate expel him? They can't refuse to seat him since he would have won a clean race (certified by AL's SoS). But they can make sure his tenure is shorter than Planck's time.

And what would or should Democrats do? At first I thought I would side with establishment Republicans and vote to expel him, but then I thought about the liability he posed for the majority and how their disarray is Democrats' gain (after all, Democrats aren't the governing faction in Congress and Republicans aren't eager to include them unless it's to support whatever crud they come out with). The only reason I would still vote to expel Moore (if I were a Senator) if it happened is due to the respect I have for the Senate (even though every day it gets harder to respect a body where the majority has no respect for rules and decorum), but then again, Moore isn't a Democrat so he's not Democrats' problem.

einsteinboricua wrote:

At first I thought I would side with establishment Republicans and vote to expel him, but then I thought about the liability he posed for the majority and how their disarray is Democrats' gain (after all, Democrats aren't the governing faction in Congress and Republicans aren't eager to include them unless it's to support whatever crud they come out with).

Absolutely not. The last thing the Democrats should do is lower themselves to the level of pettiness of the GOP and vote to hurt the country and its institutions for some form of political vendetta. Moore is a liability for the entire nation, not just the GOP.

The Dems might not be governing but they still have a duty to represent the interests of their constituents and to act in a way that they believe would be beneficial for the country at large. It's their job.

Not to mention that chaos, scandals, lies and general heinous and divisive behavior haven't seemed to hurt the GOP much so far...

Francoflier wrote:

The Dems might not be governing but they still have a duty to represent the interests of their constituents and to act in a way that they believe would be beneficial for the country at large. It's their job.

See, this argument is a double-edged sword because if Alabama voters chose someone, despite the qualifications of said person (or lack thereof), the Senate has a duty to seat them, especially if there were no irregularities on how that person was chosen.

If there's one thing we've learned from the GOP is that they can put two conflicting messages at the same time and people cherrypick what they want to hear:
1. In 2014, Sen. Pat Roberts released ads on how Kansans were hurting (thanks Obama) while Sam Brownback spoke of how "the sun is shining in Kansas".
2. Republicans have criticized how unemployment and the stock market in the Obama years were fake, all to be celebrating everything because they control the White House.
3. The budget was VERY important and we need a balanced budget...oh wait, that was during the Obama years. They've gone quiet now and are pushing for more debt because it works.

What's to stop the GOP from being elated that Moore wasn't seated only to then pin the blame on Democrats for denying Alabamians their full Senate delegation (i.e. "it was Democrats, not us who were the deciding votes")? I can see the RNC and NRSC attacking red-state Democrats for having voted to expel Moore, depicting them as radical, anti-democratic, and not in tune with the concept of what a democracy is.

For as much damage that Moore can cause the nation, he's 1/100. If his Republican counterparts have any ounce of respect for the country and the laws, they'll neutralize him, but a dutifully elected Senator shouldn't be denied his seat unless further allegations or behavior convinces the Senate membership that he should be expelled.

I'm not a Roy Moore fan by any means and I side with the women; however, if after all that, Alabama voters still want him as a Senator, it's not up to me or my Senators to deny him membership, and (unfortunately) until concrete evidence surfaces that reveals the allegations are true or Moore begins to violate his oath of office, he'll be a dutifully elected Senator.

einsteinboricua wrote:

I'm not a Roy Moore fan by any means and I side with the women; however, if after all that, Alabama voters still want him as a Senator, it's not up to me or my Senators to deny him membership, and (unfortunately) until concrete evidence surfaces that reveals the allegations are true or Moore begins to violate his oath of office, he'll be a dutifully elected Senator.

There is no statute of limitation for senate ethics complains. If he gets expelled, that would be by the book and to the letter. Complaining about that would be complaining about the rule of law and at that point you can pretty much close shop as a nation state.

Best regards
Thomas

While ugly to look at and think about, the Republican's would be best off if Moore does get elected, and then steps downs/resigns/is expelled/removed from his seat because then the Republican Governor of Alabama will get to appoint a new person of her choosing. That would be the best outcome for Republican's in the Senate.

The worst fear of the Republican's is if he stays and keeps running and a write campaign is also done as this will split the Republican vote and lead to Doug Jones being elected properly and unable to be unseated and replaced by other political machinations.

The Republican's are in a very ugly situation. One of their own (well Alabama Republican voters) making.

Tugg

NIKV69 wrote:

Did you forget on purpose that Clinton was accused of sex crimes too? Also proved to have committed perjury? He was given a pass by the media and supported by his party. Guess women will only believed when they accuse a Republican huh?

Either you believe this guy is guilty or you don't- your answer should not depend on what the Democrats have or haven't done. If you believe he's innocent, I think you're probably wrong based on the preponderance of evidence, but I can at least understand your position. If you believe he's guilty, why on earth are you defending him? If no Democrat had ever been accused of sex crimes would Moore be more guilty in your eyes?

MaverickM11 wrote:

Or the catheter company

If they have the decency to pull the plug on Hannity, I might just be tempted to switch my supplier...

NIKV69 wrote:

Clinton was accused of sexual crimes and the media, his party and his supporters backed him all the way to white house. Now you want Trump removed from office and Moore removed from the ballot for the same thing?

I do not want Moore removed from the ballot at all. I want that scumbag on the ballot for the December 12th election. I want to see how deplorable the Alabama electorate really is.

What is it with this pervasive obsession with the Clintons? They're not relevant to this discussion. But if you really want to compare, consensual sexual activities with an intern who is over the age of consent versus being a 30+ year old dude molesting girls half his age, below the age of consent. Hmm. Let's see here. One is statutory rape and sexual assault. The other is adultery. Which is worse?

I don't expect any of you people with testicles hanging off your crotches know what it's like to be sexually assaulted, especially when you're 13. I do. It's very scary, especially when the guy is older, taller, and weighs 100 pounds more. It's a complete violation of everything - and in my circumstance, there was nothing I could have done to prevent it. His filthy hands were on me, and I was pressed against a wall. I fought him off and immediately went to the teachers/staff to report what had happened. And the same thing happened to me that happened to all the others who publicly came out re: Moore ... I got blamed for his actions against me, and he wasn't even disciplined that I know of. Which is a symptom of a larger pervasive problem in society...

Point is: Moore should serve prison time for what he's done. Anthony Weiner just spent 20something months in prison for sexting! .... but IOKIYAR....

Siren wrote:

One is statutory rape and sexual assault. The other is adultery. Which is worse?

Bible and law disagree on that one, rape and sexual assault are basically celebrated in the bible, adultery is bad, unless you are king Don... ah.. David).

I don't expect any of you people with testicles hanging off your crotches know what it's like to be sexually assaulted, especially when you're 13.

We can only truely understand what we've experienced ourselves. I don't think that a woman that hasn't been sexually assaulted understands it any more than a man, and I think a man that got raped will know exactly how that feels.
To late for you sadly, but at least California got SB 813, the hammer can now drop decades later.

Best regards
Thomas

I see that the Bill Clinton defense is not an argument out of thin air, it's the official Fox/GOP rebuttal of the Roy Moore story.

Aesma wrote:

I see that the Bill Clinton defense is not an argument out of thin air, it's the official Fox/GOP rebuttal of the Roy Moore story.

Reminds me of the discussions I've had with many Trump supporters who, when I say he needs to be investigated to the fullest, come back with "yeah but what about Hillary?"...to which I respond "Absolutely, anyone who does something wrong, no matter what party or belief, should be held accountable...so investigate away!"

Always silence after that.

Aesma wrote:

I see that the Bill Clinton defense is not an argument out of thin air, it's the official Fox/GOP rebuttal of the Roy Moore story.

Not just Roy Moore--they use that for everyone: Roy Moore, Bill O'Reilly, Roger Ailes, Donald Trump, Eric Bolling, just about any megachurch pastor, and that's just over the last few months. Can't wait to see what the Grand Ole' Pedo party rationalizes next--sex slavery?