Court records suggest Roy Moore dated wife while she was still married

[aligncare]

Don't think they will be hungry today!   

Ahhh...disappointed by an accused child molester that turned out to be nothing Moore* than a political hit job, just weeks before an important election that could have shifted the balance of power in the senate.

*(thanks to @corbe for the use of that literary device)

[DiogenesLamp]

Breaking news per FoxNews...
Roy Moore accuser admits she forged part of yearbook inscription attributed to Alabama senate candidate

She wrote "Moore"  so as to look like his own signature. 


That immediately says "attempt to deceive."   

Had she not been attempting to deceive people,  she would have written "Moore" in her own handwriting,  instead of  like a carbon copy of his signature on her divorce papers. 

[XenaLee]

She wrote "Moore"  so as to look like his own signature. 


That immediately says "attempt to deceive."   

Had she not been attempting to deceive people,  she would have written "Moore" in her own handwriting,  instead of  like a carbon copy of his signature on her divorce papers.

Exactly right.  If she had merely been "adding notes".... it would have been added in her own handwriting, vs. attempting to mimic Moore's. 

She is a totally discredited "witness" now.  And she did it to herself.   The irony....

[INVAR]

She wrote "Moore"  so as to look like his own signature. 


That immediately says "attempt to deceive."   

Had she not been attempting to deceive people,  she would have written "Moore" in her own handwriting,  instead of  like a carbon copy of his signature on her divorce papers.

The official narrative is now that she 'wrote notes', such as adding the date his name and D.A.

Which everyone is screaming is not 'forgery' - but note-taking,  which they maintain is still proof that her allegations are gospel.

Because everyone adds information to a signature in a yearbook to help them remember a criminal act 40 years later when it is politically convenient.

[TomSea]

But not smart enough to change ink color, oh, she certainly had questionable motives.

[TomSea]

I think all they ever said was that Moore signed the year book, no more, no less.

I don't even know if I'm for an ethics committee, but that's what they would be looking at and whatever is alleged to be written, "to a girl with such beauty" or however that went.

[TomSea]

She wrote "Moore"  so as to look like his own signature. 


That immediately says "attempt to deceive."   

Had she not been attempting to deceive people,  she would have written "Moore" in her own handwriting,  instead of  like a carbon copy of his signature on her divorce papers.

And used different colored ink.  If she was trying to truly forge, one can argue that she would have sought out black ink or whatever color would have been correct.

[DiogenesLamp]

The official narrative is now that she 'wrote notes', such as adding the date his name and D.A.

You write "notes"  in YOUR handwriting.   You do not attempt to make your notes look like the original writer's handwriting. 


Her writing his last name to look like he wrote it,  and adding the "D.A."  implies that the source for these two embellishments was her own divorce papers,   where his name looks like that,   and is followed by the "D.A."  afterwards.  (After his secretary,  Debra Adams,  indicating it is a stamped signature on her authority.)   

Which everyone is screaming is not 'forgery' - but note-taking,  which they maintain is still proof that her allegations are gospel.

What she did is not innocent note taking.   What she did was intended to make it look like he wrote it. 

Because everyone adds information to a signature in a yearbook to help them remember a criminal act 40 years later when it is politically convenient.

Her divorce was in 1999,  so the "Moore"  part of the signature is at least that new.   More like it was written in November of 2017 when she decided to use it as a political prop in an attempt to bring down Moore. 

[DiogenesLamp]

And used different colored ink.  If she was trying to truly forge, one can argue that she would have sought out black ink or whatever color would have been correct.

The thought occurred to me that as someone of her age,  perhaps she can no longer see so well,  and couldn't tell that the ink was a different color.    This explanation fits with the idea that these "notes"  were added recently.   

The color differences are noticeable but not stark.   We only found out about them as a result of a single image taken by a photographer.   You can't see the difference in the color of ink from the television broadcasts.   

I think she couldn't tell the difference when she wrote it because her eyes weren't as good as they were when she was 17.   

[Restored]

I can't believe an attorney would even stand with someone with such an obvious flaw. Allred should lose her license for this

[roamer_1]

I can't believe an attorney would even stand with someone with such an obvious flaw. Allred should lose her license for this

It was ALL hinky from the get-go... Then Allred showed up, and I knew for sure.

[Frank Cannon]

I can't believe an attorney would even stand with someone with such an obvious flaw. Allred should lose her license for this

LOL. You wrote this as a joke, right? You have seen the Lisa Bloom/Gloria Allred stage show before, right?

[Emjay]

LOL. You wrote this as a joke, right? You have seen the Lisa Bloom/Gloria Allred stage show before, right?

Okay ... this has now been put to bed.

So are we gonna still be obsessing about this after everyone involved is dead ... including us?

[edpc]

Okay ... this has now been put to bed.

Phrasing.

[sneakypete]

As for the Ten Commandments monument, I have expounded at length on the fact that those Commandments are the seminal basis for and generally oldest example of even secular law. To pick and choose, does not do them justice, and to leave them up is something I had no problem with.

Then you have no problem being wrong,both morally and legally. Ever heard of "Separation of Church and State"?

Or maybe you think the Muslims have it right when it comes to religion controlling government?

You can't have it both ways,so make up your mind if you want America to be a Religious State populated by slaves,or a Free Nation governed by laws and populated by people free to make their own decisions as long as they aren't harming anyone else?

But those are the so-called 'laws' he defied: A judge ruling contrary to the State Constitution, and defied another ruling to remove a monument to a set of fundamental laws which have endured for millennia.

State Constitutions don't overpower the US Constitution. You know that,even though you choose to ignore that uncomfortable fact.

IMHO, the judges who ordered actions contrary to the Alabama Constitution (LAW) and the removal of a monument to LAW  are the ones who are LAWless.

In other words,"Praise MY version of de Lawd,and to HELL with the US Constitution!"
 

[DiogenesLamp]

Then you have no problem being wrong,both morally and legally. Ever heard of "Separation of Church and State"?

Yes I have.   It is the made up lie that the Roosevelt Appointed Kooks on the Supreme Court cobbled together from an old letter to explain why their own personal preferences were the new law of the land.   


There is no actual basis for this claim in history or in law prior to the 1940s.   

You can't have it both ways,so make up your mind if you want America to be a Religious State populated by slaves,or a Free Nation governed by laws and populated by people free to make their own decisions as long as they aren't harming anyone else?

That is not the choice we face.   You are putting forth the "fallacy of false choice."   We can have a religious society as well as a free society.   We have had exactly this for most of this nation's history.   

State Constitutions don't overpower the US Constitution. You know that,even though you choose to ignore that uncomfortable fact.

The constitution dictates separation of powers.   The States have the ability to exercise their own powers within complete compliance with the Constitution.   The two sources of authority are not in conflict.   

IMHO, the judges who ordered actions contrary to the Alabama Constitution (LAW) and the removal of a monument to LAW  are the ones who are LAWless.

In other words,"Praise MY version of de Lawd,and to HELL with the US Constitution!"

States have always had the authority to designate an official religion.   It wasn't until 1830 something that the last state did away with their official religion.   The stuff people are taught nowadays is a modern fiction.   

[Hoodat]

Then you have no problem being wrong,both morally and legally. Ever heard of "Separation of Church and State"?

I haven't heard it mentioned in the Constitution of the United States of America.  Can you show me where it can be found?

Or maybe you think the Muslims have it right when it comes to religion controlling government?

Strawman.  No one is advocating religion controlling government.  No one.

State Constitutions don't overpower the US Constitution. You know that,even though you choose to ignore that uncomfortable fact.

Exactly what part of the US Constitution do you think is being overpowered here?  Please be specific.

[Hoodat]

States have always had the authority to designate an official religion.

Correctamundo.  Not that any state is trying to do it here now.

It always amazes me how ignorant some people are of what the Constitution actually says.

[Emjay]

Phrasing.

Ooops.  Bad choice of words.

This has now been completely proven to be utterly false and a travesty that too many people fell for.

[DCPatriot]

Okay ... this has now been put to bed.

So are we gonna still be obsessing about this after everyone involved is dead ... including us?

This is a perfect post, @Emjay for me to say that I laughed out loud seeing the actual title of the thread....and that it's ten pages and counting.

Probably 75% of 2nd marriages started with a courtship of a married partner.

Does it make right?   No.

Does it matter in the coming election?    In a State which sets 16 as the age of consent?

[Silver Pines]

Y'all might want to get it right.  Fox News was forced to retract that false headline.  Breitbart is still running with it, which isn't quite surprising.

[url]http://thehill.com/homenews/media/363990-fox-news-issues-correction-on-roy-moore-accuser-yearbook-forgery-headline[/url

[roamer_1]

Y'all might want to get it right.  Fox News was forced to retract that false headline.  Breitbart is still running with it, which isn't quite surprising.

@CatherineofAragon

You are mincing words. It is false witness regardless, even if only by omission (which I highly doubt is the case).

[Silver Pines]

@CatherineofAragon

You are mincing words. It is false witness regardless, even if only by omission (which I highly doubt is the case).

@roamer_1

Lol, no I'm not.

[jmyrlefuller]

Ole Miss One-Note is still clinging to a rapidly collapsing story.

Nelson—who, I will remind you, is friends with "Roy Moore groped me at 14" Leigh Corfman, indicating possible collusion—now admits she wrote part of the note she previously attributed to Moore. She previously claimed it was all Moore's handwriting until now, meaning that Breitbart (for once) is right—at least in part, the note was indeed forged, as we suspected all along. The fact that she took such care to make part of her note look like Moore's signature, using a current signature as a sample, implies she may still be lying.

The poster in question will still cling to false and unprovable rumors like the canard that he was somehow banned from a mall. It's becoming quickly clear that such posters may not even believe the nonsense they spout and are at this point are doing this just to troll other posters. Well, I'm calling it out.

[Silver Pines]

Ole Miss One-Note is still clinging to a rapidly collapsing story.

Nelson—who, I will remind you, is friends with "Roy Moore groped me at 14" Leigh Corfman, indicating possible collusion—now admits she wrote part of the note she previously attributed to Moore. She previously claimed it was all Moore's handwriting until now, meaning that Breitbart (for once) is right—at least in part, the note was indeed forged, as we suspected all along. The fact that she took such care to make part of her note look like Moore's signature, using a current signature as a sample, implies she may still be lying.

The poster in question will still cling to false and unprovable rumors like the canard that he was somehow banned from a mall. It's becoming quickly clear that such posters may not even believe the nonsense they spout and are at this point are doing this just to troll other posters. Well, I'm calling it out.

@jmyrlefuller

That's Mrs. One Note to you.  I was able to find a spouse.   ^-^