Steve Bannon finally found his man: Disgraced Alabama Senate wannabe Roy Moore

For the former Trump operative, the Alabama Senate candidate’s tattered credibility is a feature, not a bug. If Moore had well-considered political and legal views, good judgment and a sterling reputation, he’d almost by definition be part of the establishment that Bannon so loathes. Since Moore has none of those things, he’s nearly an ideal representative of the Bannon insurgency.

Events in Alabama make it clear that Bannon’s dime-store Leninism — burn everything down, including perhaps the Republican Senate majority — comes at a considerable cost. In this project, the truth doesn’t matter, ethics don’t matter, and standards don’t matter. Being anti-establishment is an escape clause from personal responsibility, and #war means proudly defending the indefensible.

Once you’ve devoted time and energy building up the career of white nationalist fellow traveler Milo Yiannopoulos the way Bannon did at Breitbart, there’s nothing that you aren’t willing to do.

It’s no accident Bannon ended up joined at the hip to the one Republican in the state of Alabama who might be capable of losing a Senate race.

Even before the latest revelations, Moore was, at best, Sharron Angle — the accidental GOP candidate who lost to Harry Reid in 2010 — except running in what appeared to be an un-losable seat. The revelations of financial improprieties (Moore took an undisclosed salary from a nonprofit, despite denials) and accusations of sexual misconduct suggest he is wholly Angle’s inferior.

Here's an excerpt from Rush Limbaugh's Radio Show:

The Swamp Demands Conformity Nov 15, 2017 ... RUSH: Here’s Mark in Port Townsend — where’s Port Townsend ? Port Townsend what? CALLER: That’s a little bit west of Seattle. RUSH: In Washington. Okay. Great to have you with us. How you doing, sir ? CALLER: I’m doing great, sir. I hope you’re doing well yourself. RUSH: I am under siege today, Mark. I’m under siege. The Drive-By Media is after me because I dared to point out that Roy Moore used to be a Democrat. CALLER: That’s why you get paid the big bucks. I’m envious of you. RUSH: (laughing). CALLER: So the comment I wanted to make was that as a retired law enforcement officer, Jeff Sessions — I’m speaking as a retired law enforcement officer — Jeff Sessions says he doesn’t see any reason to doubt these girls’ word. Well, I see a really good reason. None of these girls have been put under oath and made a sworn statement under penalty of perjury. And Gloria Allred should be able to tell you that is the first thing you do when you get a client, you depose them and you get their statement on the record, and then you go from there. And if they’re not willing to make a sworn statement, that sounds really fishy to me. RUSH: I take it you don’t believe the women or you just don’t have enough information yet to make a determination ? CALLER: You don’t have enough information to make a determination, but speaking as an ex-cop, I find it fishy that nobody has made a sworn statement. And about that yearbook thing,you know, when I was in uniform at a certain time of year you’d get kids walking up to you all the time wanting you to sign their yearbook.“Hey, Officer Mark, sign my yearbook.” And I was only a cop. Can you imagine how politicians get kids wanting — doesn’t mean you remember all of them. RUSH: Hang on. On the yearbook stuff, folks, for those of you who may not be up to speed on this —and I doubt there are very many of you — there are allegations that some of these autographs in yearbooks are forged. There are conservative blog sites claiming to have evidence by virtue of side-by-side comparison that somebody other than Judge Moore signed some of these things. This is the first I’ve mentioned that. I’m just reacting to you bringing up the yearbooks. You’re upset with Jeff Sessions. He’s the attorney general, and he is going ahead and acknowledging thathe believes witnesses before anybody’s been put under oath, and you think that’s a little unprofessional, right ? CALLER: It sounds to me like he’s just trying to tread carefully. RUSH: Well, look, this is politics. It has its own court, and it’s not a court of law. CALLER: But these girls are making public statements — RUSH: They are women. They are women. CALLER: Okay, they’re making public statements impugning somebody’s honor. And somebody with responsibility needs to explain to them,if you’re gonna besmirch somebody, you gotta put it on the record. RUSH: No, you don’t. Only in court. And this is not in court. This is in politics. CALLER: I understand it’s politics, but Gloria Allred should know what the law is. RUSH: I’m sure she does. That’s why she’s not in court and is instead on TV. CALLER: I just want to make that point, Rush. Thank you. RUSH: I’m glad you called, Mark. Folks, I have to tell you,I’m having a little fun with this. No, don’t misunderstand here, but he’s exactly right, but of course that doesn’t —there’s a whole different inertia and movement now that is taking place in the world of politics, and there is no room for doubt. I mean,the guy did it, you don’t disbelieve the women. I mean, that’s something you must subscribe to now.The women don’t lie,except if you’re Juanita Broaddrick, then of course… that’s the point. BREAK TRANSCRIPT RUSH: I was having fun with the caller and his obvious consternationby confusing what happens in politics with what happens in the law,which is ironic, because the laws are written by these people. But what happens thereapparently the law doesn’t matter first and foremost. Find it funny. BREAK TRANSCRIPT RUSH: Steve in Rochester, Minnesota. Great to have you with us, sir. How are you ? CALLER: Hey, good. Thanks, Rush. Dittos. I’ve been listening since 1991. So I was reading through a Fox News story on the various senators,Republican senators and their comments about this whole situation, and I read read ’em one after another; there were many. And I was thinking as I got most of the way through it,this sounds a lot like your media montages, vis-a-vis gravitas, that I often hear on your show. The similarities were striking in what they said. And it was an observation that led me to think thatthis is really a coordinated attack. And I think that should be the focus, not the “he said, she said,” but the fact thatthis guy’s being attacked by the establishment, big time. RUSH: Let me put it to you another way in the form of a question. Interesting observation, by the way, that you,in reading and listening to all of the different people opposing Judge Moore, they’re all saying the same thing, is that your point ? Just like when Cheney was mentioned as the potential vice presidential nominee for George W. Bush, about 85 media people all said,“That’s gravitas. This is to provide gravitas.” They all had that word. You think the same thing’s happening here with the response to Judge Moore ? CALLER: Yes. Exactly. RUSH: Okay. So do you think —let me just ask you point-blank — do you think that, whether he did it or not, he’s being railroaded ? CALLER: Yes. RUSH: Interesting. CALLER: Yep. I think this is a coordinated attack, and what spurred me to think thiswas your comments yesterday about Mitch McConnell attacking Bannon’s choice. And I thoughthow else could you do this ? Here we are a month away from the election. RUSH: Let me tell you something. I don’t think there’s any doubt here. When Bannon went public and said thatJudge Moore was the first of many candidates they’re gonna support in order to oust the Republican leadership, I don’t think there’s any question here that McConnell’s reacting to that. Let me just ask you this.Have any of you ever, do you ever remember Mitch McConnell or the Republican leadership ever going after a Democrat the way they’re going after — (interruption) You don’t remember. You don’t remember McConnell ever going after a Democrat the way they’re going after …

Another Liberal Fascist hit piece.

” Bear in mind that several in the Senate are now saying that even if Alabama DOES elect Moore, THEY WILL REFUSE TO SEAT HIM.

Think what that means.

Let it sink in, what that MEANS.

It means, in the America of the future, that if ANY legislative body simply DOES NOT LIKE the person the CONSTITUENCY of any given area VOTED IN, they will SIMPLY REFUSE TO RECOGNIZE THAT PERSON AS ACTUALLY HAVING WON THE ELECTION.

There will then, BE NO FURTHER conservatives allowed to take an office they have FAIRLY WON in an election.

Ditto for any OTHER “non-politically correct” group-——Christians, constitutionalists, whites, what-have-you.

In fact, under this new paradigm, if Donald Trump were re-elected, the SENATE and CONGRESS would SIMPLY REFUSE TO ACKNOWLEDGE HIM AS THE PRESIDENT!!!

THIS is what the REAL battle is about-—and if we let the liberals win this one-—

take down all the flags, boys.

The country’s gone. “

That’s Liberal Fascism.It has now insinuated itself into the GOP. And it started with Obama:

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2009/05/barack_obama_the_quintessentia_1.html

If you do not like a law, do not enforce it. Its called selective enforcement or selective observation of the law. We have seen this with immigration law,environmental law, ethics violations by Hillary Clinton, and now some queers in Congress want to expel Moore before he arrives, because his politics are anti gay marriage , as a Christian? We are at the brink of another civil war.

How dare they?

McConnell detests Moore because he is against gay marriage and is vocal about it. Some say McConnell is a closet queer, having been discharged from the US Army for apprehended sodomy.

Its almost as if Southern politicians who are Christian, male, and white are the new “niggers” of America.

Insane!

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.