@Smokin Joe
I want to step in here, just in case you're referring to the newspaper clipping. I want it on the record that I've done no "selected editing" nor have I tried to misrepresent anything.
You say that Moore should be presumed innocent on a conservative website. I think conservatives should (and most likely do, in all truth) understand that we're not in a court of law, and in such cases outside a court of law, you weigh the information you have, and you make a judgment from that. Waiting for proof is a punt. Either Moore is lying, or all of the family members, friends, the people who worked with him, the women themselves, the cop who kicked him out of the mall, etc.
Moore is a politician. We owe him nothing. And I am tired of denial based on tribalism.
Sorry, whoever posted that clipped bit of one column of that article edited the bejeebers out of the article and took that out of context. I provided the whole article to put those lines back in context, and did not mean that you, personally had done the edit. I'm just disappointed that with a few mouse clicks such things can be found and we can see what was really said, but people are too lazy to look for the whole picture.
According to articles I have seen, He was not banned from any mall. Link any statement to the contrary, please.
If there is a policeman who says he was, please link that and provide a name.
What family members have spoken against him? Link, please.
The people who worked for him rolled their eyes (if you read the ENTIRE clipping), because Moore thought people in the office were dragging things out for profit, and that he seemed to think (in their estimation) he was the only one there who wasn't corrupt. That's a work thing,
not sexual misconduct. The two do not equate. If you have information otherwise, please link it. I saw the vapid statements like "oh, I could tell you things, but won't" which amount to crap, especially in a context which relates more to job performance than personal (sexual) conduct.
That leaves two women who claim sexual contact and one who says he allegedly grabbed her ass on the way out the door. The latter seems pretty out of place for behaviour short of a strip bar, and that will get you thrown out of most of those, so I'm not seeing it. One has produced a yearbook with some sketchy possible modifications to an alleged signature. There is back and forth about how much of her divorce case he personally dealt with. And one who produced a lurid, incredibly detailed account of how he had allegedly had contact with her while she was under age.
No one else claims he acted improperly toward them.
There is a lot of imagery and set dressing trying to frame Roy Moore as some sort of sex maniac, a man who cannot restrain some sort of overwhelming urge to engage in sexual contact with unwilling ladies, and even to paint him as a "child molester". What I am seeing is a lot of innuendo, and stuff left to the lurid imaginations of the readers. But little verifiable information, which boils down to a situation where people believe what they want to believe. Most of the set dressing blows away when remarks are put back into context, full comments are read, or information is accurately disclosed.
If you believe the guy who twice lost his job for defying District Judges' orders, once to take down the Ten Commandments, and once to issue gay marriage licenses (against the Alabama Constitution) is some sort of serial "child molester" or sex maniac, That's up to you, but I'm, going to disagree. There has been plenty of time for these allegations to have surfaced, numerous opportunities to make some moral objection to Judge Moore running for an office. That just hasn't happened until it looks like he might actually have a shot (leading in the polls) at being elected as a US Senator. Then, and only then, have the long media knives come out, despite his having been embroiled in numerous political controversies.
When he had beaten Strange and had a double digit poll lead over Jones, then this happened. Sorry, but imho, that stinks on ice.
