Sometimes you guys here are weird.
Hannity has more access to people who know things than you (generic you) do. And even some of you, when hearing something potentially important will say, tell Hannity. So you know other people also “tell Hannity.” I’m not a fan of his tick tock tweets but it is part of his business to keep people listening and watching, just like there are parts of your business that exist to keep your customers and clients coming back.
You all think Clinton was disgusting and the odious Franken as well. None of you love preachers or preacher types who are screwing every women they can. But if someone is on your side you will overlook ANYTHING and defend him to the death. The correct answer about Roy Moore is that he was creepy RE teens in his thirties. PERIOD. Whether we all want him to hold that R seat for us in the corrupt Senate is pretty clear: we do. He’s not actively harming teens. But those of you who think everything said about him has to be a lie are showing poor judgment.
Hannity publicly switched his opinion of Moore within hours of his interview, which was the most damning proof of Moore’s guilt. Guilt over what, we cannot know. We can’t trust every accuser, and trusting Allred is pretty spotty. But Hannity interviews people DAILY. He knows who is lying to him.
There is only one way for Hannity, and anyone else, to handle this to save his own career, and that is to toss Moore under the bus. So this is no revelation. And the Rats know this by tossing such lies at any Pube who tries to break from the GOPe crowd. Liars need to pay dearly in order to shut this crap down. Creepy for you is not necessarily creepy in another part of the country, world, or generation, for that matter.
Ah! But, do we know if he's lying to us?
His interview with Moore was extremely combative and doubt Moore was ready for that. It was more a hit job than an interview which is Sean’s style.
Moore is not guilty of anything untoward. That ball of lies is rapidly unwinding.
Moore is not guilty of anything untoward. That ball of lies is rapidly unwinding.
You are assuming a lot about Moore. Nothing has been proven. If McConnell would spend $30 million to defeat Moore in the primary, how much do you think he’s spend to obtain lies and liars to defame Moore? I have an open mind at this point and will wait before forming an opinion, but am highly skeptical about those who would convict Moore based on unsubstantiated allegations about matters that date back 40 years. I think Hannity should be ashamed of himself—I am very disappointed in him.
“Hannity publicly switched his opinion of Moore within hours of his interview, which was the most damning proof of Moore’s guilt”
Yeah, the very same Hannity who missed the significance of the ‘DA’ appended to the Moore signature in Deborah Gibson’s yearbook.
Those are the initials of Roy Moore’s secretary Delbra Adams when she would stamp Moore’s signature onto court documents. Like the divorce decree that accuser Debra Gibson received in Moore’s own court in 1999. Which she obviously used as the source when she forged Moore’s signature onto her yearbook. Not to mention the fact that the ink she used doesn’t match.
Allred isn’t about to let that yearbook be examined by anyone other than her collaborators in the press. And while her client Gibson is a liar she’s not fool enough to repeat her story under oath. But it did its job of fooling Hannity.
I think some of what they say is true. I believe the women who say they dated him. I believe the other two who are accusing him of impropriety are misleading people as to what really happened.
One of the possibilities I mentioned on another site regarding the woman claiming to be 14 at the time was that she passed herself off as older, and she probably had the figure to make it work. I've personally seen 12 year old girls that could pass for adults, and so I suspect this woman was an early developer.
I think she exaggerated her story, and I think she may have mislead him as to her age, and so she has now come back to pull this "gotcha".
Hannity publicly switched his opinion of Moore within hours of his interview, which was the most damning proof of Moore’s guilt.
Hannity's opinion doesn't prove anything. It isn't evidence.
Guilt over what, we cannot know. We can’t trust every accuser, and trusting Allred is pretty spotty. But Hannity interviews people DAILY. He knows who is lying to him.
I think what happened is people started asserting that dating teenage girls is the equivalent of sexually molesting a 14 year old. The two things were announced at the same time, and it created the appearance that if you admitted to the one, people would regard you as having done the other.
I believe Roy Moore dated teenagers when he was in his 30s, but because of the atmosphere that had been created by linking his dating with accusations of sexual molestation, Moore did not want to admit he dated teenagers. *THAT* is what caused him to feel the need to be evasive. I think he felt that he couldn't admit to either charge, because the two things had become linked in the public mind.
He should have said, "Yes, I dated teenagers when I was in my 30s, but that one accusation is complete crap. "
Now I argue on other websites as well, and on the very day of that interview, I argued with several people who equated "dating teenagers" with "child molester." They simply refused to separate the two things in their own mind, regarding the one to be the same as the other.
I think this was Moore's dilemma, and he did not know how to address it properly, and the manner in which Hanity seemingly made a big deal of him dating teenagers didn't help anything.