The Briefing Room
General Category => Editorial/Opinion/Blogs => Topic started by: EasyAce on November 10, 2017, 05:37:46 pm
-
By Jim Geraghty
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/453629/roy-moore-and-occams-razor
The Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/woman-says-roy-moore-initiated-sexual-encounter-when-she-was-14-he-was-32/2017/11/09/1f495878-c293-11e7-afe9-4f60b5a6c4a0_story.html?hpid=hp_hp-top-table-main_moore-desktop-1pm%3Ahomepage%2Fstory&utm_term=.355bab1edbdd) quotes seven women who either describe Senate candidate Roy Moore
pursing a sexual relationship with them as teenagers, or hearing from the other girls about Moore’s actions
sometime before he became a major celebrity . . .
Most, but not all, people across the political spectrum recognize that an adult pursuing a sexual relationship
with a teenager is wrong today, and it was wrong in the late 1970s and early 1980s. We can argue what the
age of consent ought to be, and we can have a separate discussion about whether our society has a glaring
double standard, sometimes laughing off tales of adult women teachers having sexual relationships with
male students, while prosecuting adult men having sexual relationships with teenage girls. But society has
the good sense to realize that teenagers are often not the best decision-makers when it comes to sex.
Hormones and desire can easily outpace their judgment. Fully-grown adults need to be barred from exploiting
teenagers’ naiveté and inexperience in human relationships.
The lawmaker calling for the legal prosecution of the women making the claims, State Rep. Ed Henry,
declared, “If they believe this man is predatory, they are guilty of allowing him to exist for 40 years. I think
someone should prosecute and go after them. You can’t be a victim 40 years later, in my opinion.”
That claim is nonsense. At the time, Roy Moore was an assistant district attorney. How many teenage girls
could bring themselves to make such a consequential accusation against a powerful man who can prosecute
someone? Secondly, Henry is demonstrating the precise reason that victims of abuse are hesitant to come
forward: the abuser will almost certainly deny it, call the victim a liar, and the allies of the abuser will join
in to denounce the accuser. It is not the least bit surprising that a victim of inappropriate sexual behavior
would hesitate to discuss it publicly for many, many years.
-
Then why not bring it out in the primaries, or the day he announced?
Becoming a political pawn to the use such things for well timed political leverage taints your victimhood status, especially 40 years down the road.
-
Then why not bring it out in the primaries, or the day he announced?
Becoming a political pawn to the use such things for well timed political leverage taints your victimhood status, especially 40 years down the road.
IF there was a trace of validity to this it would have been used YEARS ago by one of Judge Moore's former political opponents!
-
I also note the conspicuous lack of usual "republican" suspects demanding HIS resignation!
http://dailycaller.com/2015/08/24/doj-underage-prostitution-allegations-against-robert-menendez-backed-by-corroborating-evidence/
-
There isn't a soul on this board who would defend Robert Menendez. What's your point? Why should we defend Roy Moore if these allegations are true?
-
There isn't a soul on this board who would defend Robert Menendez. What's your point? Why should we defend Roy Moore if these allegations are true?
We shouldn't defend either if the allegations against them are true.
-
The article makes some good points, the best of which is that for teenage girls to speak out against powerful older men, knowing they will be accused and maligned, is difficult at best, horrid and humiliating at worst.
I am not saying that Moore is guilty. I don't know that. But I have a question.....
Has there ever been a case where multiple women came out with claims against a predatory male, where they have all proven to be liars?
My recollection is that, most of the time, eventually, the truth comes out and the man is indeed guilty.
If people can give any examples where a group of women have all lied, I'd be interested in reading about it.
-
The article makes some good points, the best of which is that for teenage girls to speak out against powerful older men, knowing they will be accused and maligned, is difficult at best, horrid and humiliating at worst.
I am not saying that Moore is guilty. I don't know that. But I have a question.....
Has there ever been a case where multiple women came out with claims against a predatory male, where they have all proven to be liars?
My recollection is that, most of the time, eventually, the truth comes out and the man is indeed guilty.
If people can give any examples where a group of women have all lied, I'd be interested in reading about it.
The Herman Cain allegations died out real fast after he quit. Never saw anything proving they were true.
-
The Herman Cain allegations died out real fast after he quit. Never saw anything proving they were true.
As they did with those against Ted Cruz.
-
The Herman Cain allegations died out real fast after he quit. Never saw anything proving they were true.
That's true. That was clearly a political hit job (IMHO), and there's a good chance this is too.
But I think it's rare that multiple people with the same accusation are all lying (Billy Cosby, Dennis Hastert come to mind).
-
As they did with those against Ted Cruz.
Ah, but those accusations against Cruz continue to burn hotly in the minds of a few Trump loyalists on this forum. ^-^
-
I thought in the Cain and Cruz cases, it was third parties accusing them, and not the actual people that the alleged misconduct/abuses had happen to them.
Am I forgetting something?
-
I thought in the Cain and Cruz cases, it was third parties accusing them, and not the actual people that the alleged misconduct/abuses had happen to them.
Am I forgetting something?
Does anyone, other than the WaPo "reporter", know who these alleged victims are or anything about them?
-
Does anyone, other than the WaPo "reporter", know who these alleged victims are or anything about them?
I couldn't say.
I haven't read the WaPo story to know whether the reporter spoke with the accusers or not.
-
Then why not bring it out in the primaries, or the day he announced?
Becoming a political pawn to the use such things for well timed political leverage taints your victimhood status, especially 40 years down the road.
Because he wasn't much threat to the dems and/or swamp things until he became a candidate for Senate. Saving it for now means it has the maximum harmful impact to a GOP majority in the Senate.
-
IF there was a trace of validity to this it would have been used YEARS ago by one of Judge Moore's former political opponents!
Yep. How many years did Clarence Thomas serve as a civil servant and judge until Anita Hill came forward?
It was only the threat of a black man sitting on the Supreme Court did the libs concoct the lie they spread about him.
-
Yep. How many years did Clarence Thomas serve as a civil servant and judge until Anita Hill came forward?
It was only the threat of a black man sitting on the Supreme Court did the libs concoct the lie they spread about him.
And a conservative black man to boot!
-
IF there was a trace of validity to this it would have been used YEARS ago by one of Judge Moore's former political opponents!
That's not necessarily true.
Given today's renewed horror at old men taking advantage of gullible teenagers, it's more likely to be brought out now than before.
I wouldn't say that the passage of time proves that the accusations are not true.
(Again, not believing either that they ARE true until more facts are revealed).
-
(Again, not believing either that they ARE true until more facts are revealed).
@musiclady
In which light, it's rather intriguing that Donaldus Minimus himself has said on the record (http://www.newsmax.com/Politics/US-Alabama-Senate-Moore-The-Latest/2017/11/10/id/825302/) that
if the accusations are true he thinks Moore will withdraw.
What a time we live in.
If it's a Democratic sex criminal, actual or merely alleged: Run his ass out of town and preferably to jail, we can't have
any more of that ill ilk poisoning our country!!!
If it's a Republican sex criminal, actual or merely alleged: Sure he's an amoral sex pervert, but he's our amoral
sex pervert! After all, the most simon-pure Democrat is so much more dangerous to what's left of the Republic!
-
If people can give any examples where a group of women have all lied, I'd be interested in reading about it.
Clarence Thomas.
-
Clarence Thomas.
A group? I just remember one......
-
A group? I just remember one......
No, there were a gaggle of office rumor mongers substantiating her case...
-
We shouldn't defend either if the allegations against them are true.
That's the stupidest comment I have read all week here. Do you know if the allegations are true? Are there criminal charges against Moore? Nope, yet you keep on with the slam pieces on him. If no one is allowed to defend him if it is true, then you should stop convicting him before the evidence of wrong doing is presented.
I haven't seen one shred of evidence these allegations are true. I do know that the woman who wrote the story worked for the Clintoon campaign and is currently working for the Rat AL Senate candidate. I do know that the paper she wrote it in is an open hater of Moore and is owned by an open Marxist Socialist named Bezos. I do know that the writer of these allegations has a criminal history and has written proven lies in the paper for political gain. These are actual facts on the table.
-
That's the stupidest comment I have read all week here. Do you know if the allegations are true? Are there criminal charges against Moore? Nope, yet you keep on with the slam pieces on him. If no one is allowed to defend him if it is true, then you should stop convicting him before the evidence of wrong doing is presented.
I, and the pieces I've been quoting or posting, have said if. Which isn't the same thing as
saying, yes, he did them. If they prove false, I'll be the first one to say so---even as I had (and have)
objections to Moore that have nothing to do with his actual or alleged sexual proclivities and everything to
do with his potential to flout if not abrogate Article VI, Section 3 of the Constitution. If they prove true,
I would think there's no reason to refrain from condemning him the same as we'd condemn (as we have,
appropriately) a Democrat proven to have behaved comparably.
Or does it now depend on what one's definition of if is?
-
I, and the pieces I've been quoting or posting, have said if. Which isn't the same thing as
saying, yes, he did them. If they prove false, I'll be the first one to say so---even as I had (and have)
objections to Moore that have nothing to do with his actual or alleged sexual proclivities and everything to
do with his potential to flout if not abrogate Article VI, Section 3 of the Constitution. If they prove true,
I would think there's no reason to refrain from condemning him the same as we'd condemn (as we have,
appropriately) a Democrat proven to have behaved comparably.
Or does it now depend on what one's definition of if is?
Thanks for the bullshit answer to prove I am totally right. You have nothing but hate for the guy and that motives you just like all your other shit about Donny. You speak of "proven". I showed with actual evidence this is a hit job. Notice you have nothing to prove otherwise. Keep on with your jihad though. I love watching people fail.
-
Thanks for the bullshit answer to prove I am totally right. You have nothing but hate for the guy and that motives you just like all your other shit about Donny. You speak of "proven". I showed with actual evidence this is a hit job. Notice you have nothing to prove otherwise. Keep on with your jihad though. I love watching people fail.
Gosh, Frank.
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-muFNZ47Q5VQ/VBTqjW-kUuI/AAAAAAAAEPc/ehWv51Xq-Ec/s1600/bloody-wolf-2.jpg)
-
The article makes some good points, the best of which is that for teenage girls to speak out against powerful older men, knowing they will be accused and maligned, is difficult at best, horrid and humiliating at worst.
I am not saying that Moore is guilty. I don't know that. But I have a question.....
Has there ever been a case where multiple women came out with claims against a predatory male, where they have all proven to be liars?
My recollection is that, most of the time, eventually, the truth comes out and the man is indeed guilty.
If people can give any examples where a group of women have all lied, I'd be interested in reading about it.
I doubt it, because it is usually so hard to prove these things as false. If two people are alone, it's pretty much he-said she-said. Maybe Mike Pence is on to something.
-
Then why not bring it out in the primaries, or the day he announced?
Becoming a political pawn to the use such things for well timed political leverage taints your victimhood status, especially 40 years down the road.
I don't remember, did the Weinstein et al stuff start during or after the primaries? If after, it could be anything from people seeing the allegations actually being taken seriously and one victim speaking out to the left seeing something that works and pouncing on it.
What I'm always suspicious of is "Bush Lied". I think the left would have pushed that mantra about anything they could find. Their guy had been busted for lying, so they just had to pin it on Bush, you know, Republicans do it too so it's not a big deal. And then the "People Died" allowed them to attempt to make the case that what WJC is not even worth mentioning.
-
Gosh, Frank.
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-muFNZ47Q5VQ/VBTqjW-kUuI/AAAAAAAAEPc/ehWv51Xq-Ec/s1600/bloody-wolf-2.jpg)
Clearly he believes that only a "hater" could possibly oppose someone on purely constitutional
ground, which has been the cause of my opposition to Moore outside and regardless of whether
the sex crime accusations against him prove true or false. Though it's sadly disgraceful to see
Republicans compelled to defend (elect?) candidates accused of the kind of thing for which they'd
demand public executions without trial if the candidates in question were Democrats because, after
all, Democrats are so much more dangerous.
Either that or (considering he sees little enough distinction between a newspaper reporter who
once passed a few bad checks before she became a reporter or joined the Washington Post,
the information I looked up wasn't exactly clear on the point, and a former judge who is accused
of committing a sexual crime with an underage girl at the time he was a district attorney) he really
could be ticketed for posting under the influence.
-
Gosh, Frank.
Frank is................ummmmm.............................moody! ****slapping
-
No, there were a gaggle of office rumor mongers substantiating her case...
Oh, that's right. But did they say he also molested them?
If not, it's just a single case with multiple people backing up the lie.
I only remember one actual accuser.
-
Oh, that's right. But did they say he also molested them?
If not, it's just a single case with multiple people backing up the lie.
I only remember one actual accuser.
This is likewise - One case of impropriety (the 14yo), propped up with several cases where no impropriety is alleged.
-
IF there was a trace of validity to this it would have been used YEARS ago by one of Judge Moore's former political opponents!
@Bigun
Like Dennis Hastert?
-
Sanguine exclaimed:
"Gosh, Frank."
This is how the democrat-communists behave:
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-muFNZ47Q5VQ/VBTqjW-kUuI/AAAAAAAAEPc/ehWv51Xq-Ec/s1600/bloody-wolf-2.jpg)
This is how WE should behave in return:
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-muFNZ47Q5VQ/VBTqjW-kUuI/AAAAAAAAEPc/ehWv51Xq-Ec/s1600/bloody-wolf-2.jpg)