Woman says Roy Moore initiated sexual encounter when she was 14

originally posted by: Phoenix
...
Wanted to add this too,

Last but not least, former Secret Service agent Doug Lewis (@umpire43) has made an unsubstantiated claim that a WaPo reporter named “Beth” offered a family friend $1000 to accuse Roy Moore, and that a tape of the offer is in the hands of the DA.

DA being referenced is Etowah County, AL

I read earlier on a blog that the relative turned over evidence to local DA because they don't trust FBI or Justice Department with it.

I read that too and imo they did the right thing by not going to the FBI when the FBI has been turned into nothing but a puppet organization for Hillary and the DNC.

a reply to: DanDanDat

You still have no knowledge of how they would have voted before the revelation he may be a child molester.

Therefore, it is a problem with your post that presumed they would have voted him in!

originally posted by: Willtell
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Its not fake news that Moore defied the Alabama Supreme Court and the US Supreme Court and was kicked off the bench.

As of now, it seems most reasonable people believe the woman who accuses Moore of sexual abuse of a 14 yo girl!

Its NOT fake news

Moore is a LIAR AND CHILD MOLESTER according to the laws of Alabama.

LOL...obviously you have no idea how the law works... Being accused of something doesn't make that person guilty... More so when those who are accusing him, one is a known liar who has made false allegations in the past and has a criminal record, and the second one works for the political opposition of Moore...

Could the allegations be true? maybe... but how do you trust a source which has lied many times before and is a known criminal, and the second source seems to work for the opposition of Moore?

This seems to be an attempt at political assassination, similar to how President Trump was accused and evidence was found that debunked many of the claims made by the women accusing President Trump. All those allegations also appeared at a time when Trump was the main opposition to the puppet of the elites Shillary.

ATS member Boadicea posted the following on page 4.

ROY MOORE’S TWO ACCUSERS: LEIGH CORFMAN’S AGE WAS 17 NOT 14 & HAS HISTORY OF MAKING FALSE ALLEGATIONS, DEBORAH GIBSON A DEM VOLUNTEER FOR MOORE’S OPPONENT

Doug Lewis #MAGA

Does Jeff Bezos Need To Go To Prison?

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

With all that stuff I think it is you who is the political post not the impartial advocate.

How do you say that post is the truth.

I believe Moore is a liar based on his past acts.

What do you base your assumption on a post by someone on ATS ?

Moore has been kicked off the court by a legal process is proof he is a dam fool.

What, this woman has a bankruptcy so she is a liar ?

No, it is the reality that Moore has defied the legal courts so it is he who is the reprobate not his accuser who has no reason or motive to defame him.

a reply to: Phage

You mean like the right to employment and housing regardless of gender?

Please point out where that has been challenged by Roy Moore.

Which superior rights is Moore in favor of? How about marriage? Should heterosexuals only get that right?

I said Moore was against superior rights for special interest groups, not for. Comprehension: it does a body good.

As for marriage, there is no right to marriage. For anyone.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Willtell

You still have no knowledge of how they would have voted before the revelation he may be a child molester.

Therefore, it is a problem with your post that presumed they would have voted him in!

I think I have a pretty good insight into how the people of Alabama would vote... seeing as I am one of them. Support for Moore is massive here in rural Alabama; precious few believe the accusations. More believe her in Birmingham, but his support is still in the majority. The two most liberal areas, Montgomery and Mobile, probably have swung toward Jones, but Moore's support there was probably not a majority before.

TheRedneck

Killing time catching up on news and found this new news item...

Advertisers distance themselves from Hannity after Moore coverage

a reply to: Willtell

That post is the truth because the evidence says it is the truth. Deborah Wesson Gibson is a liberal who worked as a sign language interpreter for Joe Biden, and she volunteers for Doug Jones... Doug Jones is the political adversary of Judge Moore. The other accuser has made similar accusations of several pastors, she has had several misdemeanors, had trouble with the IRS, and in general is having monetary problems.

It's quite a coincidence that these claims are coming up after Moore has been having a lead against Jones.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse


Have any of the women filed formal legally-binding complaints yet? If not, don't waste your time. This will blow over for candidate Moore, just like it did for candidate Trump.

And they ALL waited until the year 2017 to report it, because...? Social media brownie points?

a reply to: TheRedneck

I said Moore was against superior rights for special interest groups, not for.

Wonderful straw man argument then.
Who's asked for "superior rights?"

As for marriage, there is no right to marriage. For anyone.

Oh? It would seem the Supreme Court would disagree with your assessment. One example, I wonder if it caught Moore's interest.

These statutes also deprive the Lovings of liberty without due process of law in violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. The freedom to marry has long been recognized as one of the vital personal rights essential to the orderly pursuit of happiness by free men.

Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival. Skinner v. Oklahoma, 316 U.S. 535, 541 (1942). See also Maynard v. Hill, 125 U.S. 190 (1888).

www.law.cornell.edu...

It's not hard to beat up on a guy like this:

Roy Moore Cast The Sole Vote In Favor Of A Man Who Raped A Four-Year-Old

Higdon’s conviction on the forcible rape charge was eventually overturned on appeal. The state, by way of prosecutor Luther Strange, appealed that decision and the Alabama Supreme Court took the case up for review.

Sounds like Alabaman's had the choice between a guy who prosecuted child molesters or a guy who defended them, and they chose the guy who defended them.

Eight of the nine justices on the panel found that the appeals court had erred. Their legal logic was such that a 17-year-old’s sexual assault of a four-year-old was enough to produce in the mind of the four-year-old, an “implied threat of serious physical injury.” The decision was reversed and remanded and Higdon’s conviction was reinstated.

Roy Moore dissented from that opinion. He wrote:

Because there was no evidence in this case of an implied threat of serious physical injury…or of an implied threat of death, Higdon cannot be convicted of sodomy in the first degree “by forcible compulsion.”

Doesn't sound like folks in Alabama had many good options...

Well, except for that one Democrat candidate...the one who convicted the 16th street baptist church bombers for life. They killed 4 young black girls in case anyone doesn't remember...

I see that this woman is a crazy anti-Trump democrat who worked for the Democrat party. Strange that.

So she makes an accusation just before an election and has ties to the Democrats and some people (especially the corrupt media) just love to push it and try and make it fact with zero proof.

Democrat tactics played once again.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

Likely guilty?... Obviously you, and many others in the left want to eat this up despite the "FAKE NEWS" that left-wing media has been known to be doing "full time" lately. Well, since at least 2016 the left-wing media "fake news" multiplied by 10 fold...

For some reason I was notified that this reply was to me... don't know what's up with that! But since I'm here and I read it I have to say I agree with you.

There are many reasons to question the story as told. There are also many reasons to question if it was legal or criminal at that time under Alabama law. I have read that it was legal in Alabama 40 years ago for adult men to "court" young girls with their mother's permission. I still find it creepy for a man of 30+ years to be fondling a teenage girl -- even if she was a willing participant -- but times were different then Forty years ago my dad was telling my brothers to "marry young" and make sure they had good "birthing hips." I didn't like that then, and I don't like this now, but the court of public opinion will decide for themselves.

Most problematic for me in this case is that IF any crime were committed, the statute of limitations has expired, so there will be no official investigation by the proper authorities. This is truly a "he-said-she-said" situation with no hope for any factual resolution. If this girl is telling the truth, okay. She had her say and her words will have to stand on their own merit and the voters will have to decide who and what they will believe. I tend to think it will not be the deciding factor for anyone. Those who support the judge will believe him and vote for him... those who don't support the judge won't believe him and wouldn't have voted for him anyway.

Most disturbing to me is that so many people are willing to throw someone under a criminal bus with absolutely no factual evidence whatsoever.

a reply to: TheRedneck

As for marriage, there is no right to marriage. For anyone.

Of course there is!!! My rights -- OUR rights -- are self-evident. I can stand before God or family (or no one) with any other consenting adult and pledge my love and commitment till death do us part with absolutely no help from anyone. And absolutely no one has the right to stop me.

I do not have a right to demand anyone perform the ceremony or otherwise be a participant. I do not have the right to demand any special government entitlements or privileges. I do not have any right to demand anything of anyone for any reason...

But I sure have a right to make any commitment I choose with any other consenting adult who also so chooses.

a reply to: Boadicea

Sorry, but there isn't.

You do not have the right to get married. Marriage takes at least one and often more than one other person to agree in order for you to be married.

What if no one out there is willing to marry you, even if you desire to be married? Has your "right" been violated then? You claim it's a right to be married? How does your right get satisfied if no one wants to marry you? Does the state have an obligation to provide you with a partner you find agreeable?

What if they don't find that arrangement agreeable? Has their right to marriage been violated by the satisfying your right to marriage?

Do you see why *no one* has a right to be married?

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: Boadicea

Sorry, but there isn't.

Yes, there is. And the very fact that one would have to use FORCE to stop me says it all.

You do not have the right to get married. Marriage takes at least one and often more than one other person to agree in order for you to be married.

Hence the "any other consenting adult" part.

What if no one out there is willing to marry you, even if you desire to be married?

I and my consenting adult partner don't need anyone's help to pledge our eternal love and commitment to each other... we don't need anyone's help... and we sure as hell don't need anyone's PERMISSION to do so.

Has your "right" been violated then?

Nope. As I stated, I have no right to demand anyone else participate...

You claim it's a right to be married?

Uh... duh.

How does your right get satisfied if no one wants to marry you?

Not a problem.

Does the state have an obligation to provide you with a partner you find agreeable?

See above... I have no right to demand anything of anyone. I have every right to do what I will with other consenting adults.

More important, however, is that my rights come from nature and Nature's God... not government.

What if they don't find that arrangement agreeable? Has their right to marriage been violated by the satisfying your right to marriage?

That doesn't even make sense -- and especially not in the context in which I spoke. Who doesn't find that arrangement agreeable? Government? Then we have a fight on our hands. The other consenting adult? Then I guess they won't consent. Easy peasy.

Rights are self-evident. If I can do it for myself and by myself with or without other consenting adults, then it is my right. Any effort to impede my efforts are a violation of my rights.

Do you see why *no one* has a right to be married?

Nope. Not at all.

a reply to: Phage

Wonderful straw man argument then.
Who's asked for "superior rights?"

When you try to twist my statement 180 degrees and then, when called on it, try to twist it around again... nice talking to you, Phage.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Boadicea

You're missing my point. You only have a right to something intrinsic. Self-defense is intrinsic. Your property you can intrinsically provide.

Marriage is a social contract involving you and at least one other person. That's a social privilege. You need their agreement before you can be married. Your partner had to agree to be married to you.

By yourself, you cannot be married. There is no inherent right for anyone to be married. If there was, I could go up to any other person, ask them marry me, and if they said "no," I could claim my rights violated because I have a right to be married.

This is the same problem with thinking health care is a right. It is a service others must still provide to you, and when you start thinking you have a right to what others provide, you start verging on enslaving those who provide that service to your "right" to have it.

a reply to: Boadicea

Of course there is!!! My rights -- OUR rights -- are self-evident. I can stand before God or family (or no one) with any other consenting adult and pledge my love and commitment till death do us part with absolutely no help from anyone. And absolutely no one has the right to stop me.

That's the right to free speech, which requires no one other than you to exercise. You can affirm your undying commitment to a racoon if you want... it does not mean you are married to the racoon.

I do not have a right to demand anyone perform the ceremony or otherwise be a participant. I do not have the right to demand any special government entitlements or privileges. I do not have any right to demand anything of anyone for any reason...

Exactly, and a marriage requires more people than you to perform an action. See above.

But I sure have a right to make any commitment I choose with any other consenting adult who also so chooses.

Really? So you have the right to sell yourself as an indentured servant? You have the right to sell yourself sexually? The right to execute a suicide pact?

TheRedneck