Roy Moore accused of sexual contact with 14-year old

[Sparko]

How can you see that you're straining at the bit to see the former in the best light possible, but charging full force at Moore?

Tassy has never been about the truth but about agenda. Anything that confirms his beliefs or agenda is believed, and anything that doesn't is not. It's that simple. Same with JimL. They don't even try to hide their bias.

At this point I tend to disbelieve the accusations about Moore because there is no actual evidence, but if it does come out he liked dating teenagers while in his 30s, then I think that is wrong by itself and makes the accusations more plausible.

If he did to it, he needs to step down from any public office.

[Cow Poke]

The Liberal Playbook....

Sexual predation is a horrible thing, and whoever does it should be humiliated, fired, stampeded, folded, stapled, mutilated and maligned (then maybe shot). (Unless, of course, it's one of our guys or gals, in which case they can just issue a lame apology)

Oh, and in the case of a Republican, there only needs to be an allegation, and they're guilty!

[Sparko]

The Liberal Playbook....

Sexual predation is a horrible thing, and whoever does it should be humiliated, fired, stampeded, folded, stapled, mutilated and maligned (then maybe shot). (Unless, of course, it's one of our guys or gals, in which case they can just issue a lame apology)

Oh, and in the case of a Republican, there only needs to be an allegation, and they're guilty!

I think both sides have their biases. We all want to believe people on our side are innocent and the people on the other side are guilty. But we need to at least recognize that bias and try to overcome it and wait for actual evidence before lynching someone in the media.

[Zymologist]

I think both sides have their biases. We all want to believe people on our side are innocent and the people on the other side are guilty. But we need to at least recognize that bias and try to overcome it and wait for actual evidence before lynching someone in the media.

It's so much easier when one doesn't have a side and simply hates everybody.

[JimL]

Weinstein is on tape groping a woman against her consent.

The accusations against Moore are suspiciously timed and just accusations without any evidence. How would you want people to treat you if some random women came forth and accused you of sexual misconduct? Would you want everyone to believe them, or wait for actual evidence?

Corroboration from multiple other women is evidence Sparko. There is no corroboration of the act itself, nor could there be, there was no one else there, thats usually how it works. But now we have another woman accusing Moore of molesting her when she was 16 in his car and she is willing to testify under oath. There may never be absolute proof, but the fact that all these women have similar stories to tell about Moore, if nothing else, testifies to the mans character, and that he is most likely guilty of the sexual abuse as well.

[Cow Poke]

I think both sides have their biases.

Absolutely, but I'm aware of mine, and try to keep that as a factor.

We all want to believe people on our side are innocent and the people on the other side are guilty. But we need to at least recognize that bias and try to overcome it and wait for actual evidence before lynching someone in the media.

Exactly - so when the liberals preach "tolerance", then do everything they can to shut up opponents, or declare them guilty before all the facts are in, it is absolute rank hypocrisy, of which Tassy seems to be running for Chief.

[Obsidian]

Two of the stories are not "similar" to the others -- nor to each other.

[Cow Poke]

Corroboration from multiple other women is evidence Sparko.

Evidence is not proof. And you obviously don't understand the word "corroboration". (Though you get points for spelling it correctly)

There is no corroboration of the act itself, nor could there be, there was no one else there, thats usually how it works.

Actually, with Clinton, there was the stained blue dress, but he's a Democrat, and all the liberals screamed "But it's JUST SEX!"

But now we have another woman accusing Moore of molesting her when she was 16 in his car and she is willing to testify under oath. There may never be absolute proof, but the fact that all these women have similar stories to tell about Moore, if nothing else, testifies to the mans character,

It's certainly not looking good for his character, I'll grant you that.

and that he is most likely guilty of the sexual abuse as well.

And, there we go .... scrap the time honored principle of "presumption of innocence until proven guilty", somebody get a rope!

[JimL]

I think both sides have their biases. We all want to believe people on our side are innocent and the people on the other side are guilty. But we need to at least recognize that bias and try to overcome it and wait for actual evidence before lynching someone in the media.

I'll bet you take that same tact when the accused is someone not on your side.

[Cow Poke]

I'll bet you take that same tact when the accused is someone not on your side.

He already addressed this...

I think both sides have their biases. We all want to believe people on our side are innocent and the people on the other side are guilty. But we need to at least recognize that bias and try to overcome it and wait for actual evidence before lynching someone in the media.

[rogue06]

Actually, with Clinton, there was the stained blue dress, but he's a Democrat, and all the liberals screamed "But it's JUST SEX!"

And he had proudly just signed legislation that declared that if someone in a position of power over a woman (such as their boss) has sex with an underling it should not be regarded as consensual.

[Sparko]

Corroboration from multiple other women is evidence Sparko. There is no corroboration of the act itself, nor could there be, there was no one else there, thats usually how it works. But now we have another woman accusing Moore of molesting her when she was 16 in his car and she is willing to testify under oath. There may never be absolute proof, but the fact that all these women have similar stories to tell about Moore, if nothing else, testifies to the mans character, and that he is most likely guilty of the sexual abuse as well.

but at this point we can't know if the accusations are true or not. But they ARE falsifiable. If he can prove he was not at a certain location during the time he was accused of this stuff for instance. Or if he can prove he didn't sign that year book.

In fact there is an article here that claims to show evidence that the yearbook signature was forged and it is not his handwriting or signature.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2017...arbook-forged/

If that can be corroborated as being faked then that is proof this woman is lying. OR if it is corroborated as being real it is evidence she is telling the truth at least partially.

All I am saying is don't convict someone merely on accusations and rumors. At this point we don't know.

I have no feelings for this guy one way or the other. I never even heard of him until this scandal. I would say the same thing if it were a democrat. In fact the Republicans don't even like this guy.

[JimL]

Evidence is not proof. And you obviously don't understand the word "corroboration". (Though you get points for spelling it correctly)

Did I say it was?

Actually, with Clinton, there was the stained blue dress, but he's a Democrat, and all the liberals screamed "But it's JUST SEX!"

No, we were screaming, it wasn't rape, it wasn't sexual abuse of a minor, it wasn't criminal, that's between him and his wife, grow up conservatives.

It's certainly not looking good for his character, I'll grant you that.

So miracles do happen!

And, there we go .... scrap the time honored principle of "presumption of innocence until proven guilty", somebody get a rope!

Nobody said get a rope, this isn't a criminal trial, we all have our opinions based on what we've so far heard. At this point if you don't have an opinion, it's because deep down you just don't want to believe the evidence. Either you believe all the women, or you believe the denials of accused.

[Sparko]

I'll bet you take that same tact when the accused is someone not on your side.

Yeah I do.

[Sparko]

Did I say it was?



No, we were screaming, it wasn't rape, it wasn't sexual abuse of a minor, it wasn't criminal, that's between him and his wife, grow up conservatives.



So miracles do happen!



Nobody said get a rope, this isn't a criminal trial, we all have our opinions based on what we've so far heard. At this point if you don't have an opinion, it's because deep down you just don't want to believe the evidence. Either you believe all the women, or you believe the denials of accused.

Jimmy, I already said that even if he was dating "legal" teenage girls (16-19) when he was 32, that alone is disgusting to me and I believe it to be immoral, regardless of the other accusations. If he has done that and admits it, then I think he should step down.

Good enough for ya?