Posted on 11/29/2017 11:08:32 PM PST by Oshkalaboomboom
It is a political, tactical and moral mistake for Republicans to continue backing Judge Roy Moore for Alabama's Senate seat.
In brief, he has been accused by multiple women of, decades ago, making unwanted and inappropriate sexual advances toward them when they were teenage girls -- one as young as 14 -- and he was in his 30s. At least four women say he initiated sexual contact with them.
When asked if he thought the Moore allegations were true, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said, "I believe the women, yes. ... I think he should step aside" -- a sentiment shared, publicly and privately, by nearly all Republican senators.
President Donald Trump at first struck the right chord. After his handpicked Republican candidate lost the primary election, Trump called Moore to congratulate him. Everything was fine, until the allegations. Then Trump said, "If the allegations are true, he should drop out." When the Republican National Committee withdrew its funding for Moore, Trump went along with it.
Then Trump began to twist, and he now says that Moore is innocent until proven guilty, that these are all old claims and that we can't have a lefty in the Senate:
"(Moore) denies it," the President said last week. "Look, he denies it. I mean, if you look at what is really going on, and you look at all the things that have happened over the last 48 hours, he totally denies it. He says it didn't happen. And, you know, you have to listen to him also. You're talking about, he said 40 years ago this did not happen."
Trump then blasted Moore's Democratic opponent, Doug Jones, via Twitter: "The last thing we need in Alabama and the U.S. Senate is a Schumer/Pelosi puppet who is WEAK on Crime, WEAK on the Border, Bad for our Military and our great Vets, Bad for our 2nd Amendment, AND WANTS TO RAISES TAXES TO THE SKY. Jones would be a disaster!"
These are not good enough reasons.
Again, Moore was not Trump's guy. Luther Strange -- the incumbent appointed to complete the term of former Sen. Jeff Sessions, who became Attorney General -- was Trump's choice. But Steve Bannon, Trump's former aide, wanted Moore, presumably because the former judge supported Bannon's desire to ditch Senate leader Mitch McConnell. Yet during the Luther Strange and Roy Moore debates, the candidates fell all over themselves to argue who would be more closely linked to the Trump agenda. So, no matter who won, he figured to be an ally to the President.
Defenders of Moore ask, why now? After decades in public service, why are these allegations only now coming out? A better question, why the allegations in the first place? Are they credible? But to answer the timing question, the more likely "culprit" is not Democratic opposition, but Harvey Weinstein, whose sexual abuse and misconduct opened the door for other accusers in other fields to come forward. That these allegations are only now being taken seriously is too little too late, but the timing could not have been worse for Moore.
Of course he is "innocent until proven guilty." This is not a court of law. This is politics. Are the defenders of Moore willing to discount all of his accusers but believe the accusers against Bill Clinton?
The voluminous allegations against Harvey Weinstein, a friend and patron of the political left, have forced the Democrats to reconsider their adoration for the likes of Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy, whose resumes include credible allegations of sexual assault, allegations long ignored.
For now, Republicans occupy the high moral ground, as Democrats, already dealing with allegations of sexual misconduct by Sen. Al Franken, D-Minn., and Rep. John Conyers, D-Mich., squirm to explain how and why they ignored, downplayed or accepted the sexual behavior of party icons Clinton and Ted Kennedy.
With Moore defenders, in part, circling the wagons on Moore, many Trump voters apparently cannot answer this question: Why did you "overlook" the allegations made by some dozen women against now-President Donald Trump?
That's easy.
Trump was not running against Mother Teresa. Trump ran against Hillary Clinton, a woman against whom a credible allegation was made that she verbally intimidated Juanita Broaddrick just two weeks after Bill Clinton allegedly raped her. Conservative Barbara Olson's book "Hell to Pay" and liberal Christopher Hitchens' book "No One Left to Lie To" depict Hillary as the Toscanini of the "nuts or sluts" strategy effectively employed to malign and marginalize her husband's accusers.
This is the person against whom Donald Trump ran. So, no, Republicans need not apologize for supporting Trump against a person whose actions enabled, covered up for and therefore perpetuated her husband's misconduct.
By supporting Roy Moore, Republicans, on the issue of sexual misconduct, risk turning into the my-guy-wrong-or-wrong hypocrites from across the aisle.
1. Christian forgiveness: Pretend that the claims are 100% true and are representative of Moore’s sins. Under that assumption, Moore’s conduct 40 years ago is distasteful but also not representative of who he is today. If a man has gone three decades without repeating the sins of his youth, it’s hard to reject him today. The Bible is full of men who sinned against God and then did God’s work. Why not Judge Moore as one of those people today?
2. Pure politics: The democrat agenda is pure evil. It threatens our national security and identity. It threatens to provoke civil war through forced disarmament of the people. It threatens the lives of unborn children. Even if the worst that is said about Moore is true, he’s not anywhere near as dangerous as his opponent.
3. Plausibility: The idea that these charges are true and there was a pattern of behavior for decades, but that the rumors never got out despite an extended and high-profile effort to remove the Judge is absurd. Even disregarding the inconsistencies, these claims are simply not believable.
What's this nonsense about a "moral high ground?" I gave that up years ago. I hold homeless street bums to higher moral and ethical standards than our leaders in Washington.
IIRC: He took money from the Bush43 criminal gang to boost No Child Left Alone.
Here’s the difference, none of Weinstein’s friends deny the acts. I don’t believe any of Moore’s friends have supported them.
Establishment Republicans aren't. The voters of Alabama are. Moore will win.
Hey Larry, my sister has a friend who knows a girl who claims you exposed yourself to her back in 1992 - maybe you better close up shop until this can be cleared up....pervert.
Something suspicious here.
Good Old Larry is based in Los Angeles.....hmmm.
Wonder what’s motivating him. Is he trying to divert attention from himself???
Luther Strange swamp corruptocrat. That’s what New York and DC want... I think there is enough Corruptocracy, thanks. Go Moore! #RollTide!
Tell them that New York and DC don’t represent you.
We have to make a stand against these last minute charges. If you kept your mouth shut for 40 yrs you are not serious....I’m sorry folks...this is bullish!t....there is a reason for the statute of limitations....this is it!!!!
I think that what voters will see is that the nature of the sexual abuses that led to these firings is so egregious, that nothing that Roy Moore is accused of doing even compares.
Therefore, expelling Moore is not supported by the severity of the claims against him when stood against the actual abuses that all these liberals engaged in. The more liberal terminations there are, the safer Roy Moore will be.
I liken it to the Civil War statue removers.
Should we condemn the people who erected statues to the slave-holding southern leaders of a rebellion against the United States, or should we acknowledge that they were acting out a societal norm of the time when they chose to honor their heritage that they were much closer to in time than we are today?
By that same thinking, do we condemn the dating actions of someone 40 years ago using the judgements of today, or do we acknowledge what was common back then that is less so today? I might even stipulate that Moore was on the outer bubble of that acceptable practice that might have been more commonplace to his parents and grandparents than to his contemporaries.
If we condemn Roy Moore today, must we also demand that all Civil War statues be removed, too, because the people would never erect those statues today?
-PJ
Surprised this is from Larry Elder. Should we support Moore’s opponent? Most elections come down to the lesser of two evils. Better Moore, who possibly could be 100% squeaky clean, than Jones. We KNOW he wants to murder babies and disarm the citizens.
To say I’m disappointed by Elder would be an understatement! Larry! We hardly knew ye!
Leigh Corfman, Roy Moore Accuser, retained a law firm, before WP obtained their “scoop”. The firm is headed by Edgar Gentle who happens to also be the Treasurer for the Alabama Democrat Party. 100% political hit job. There’s your answer who gave them “victims”.
https://twitter.com/btreinhardt/status/935334740885954560
(By the way, I looked this up and it’s true that the firm representing Corfman is headed by the Alabama Democrat Party treasurer.)
Leigh Corfman, Roy Moore Accuser, retained a law firm, before WP obtained their “scoop”. The firm is headed by Edgar Gentle who happens to also be the Treasurer for the Alabama Democrat Party. 100% political hit job. There’s your answer who gave them “victims”.
https://twitter.com/btreinhardt/status/935334740885954560
(By the way, I looked this up and it’s true that the firm representing Corfman is headed by the Alabama Democrat Party treasurer.)
It is far better to support a win for Moore in the election now. If it really turns out that he is a child molester, throw him out after he's become a senator. The Republican governor of Alabama can then nominate a replacement. To do anything else means simply another shot in the foot for Republicans.
I happen to believe that the charges against Moore are not valid. There are only two women whose charges lie outside the norms of Southern dating in the early 70s. Of these two, one is demonstratively lying with a fake yearbook signature, and many holes in her story. The other simply has many holes in her story. Testimony under oath, with the threat of perjury charges for lying might resolve these questions.
Either that or someone has hacked into his account... has anyone actually seen him say something to this effect? Or has it only been in his writing?
The writer, on this issue is full of $%^t. If Moore wins, the POTUS wins. Even if the senate finds a way to boot him the pubbie Ala. governor will appoint a Trump supporter to the seat. If the RAT wins we’re stuck with him for six years. There was never a complaint against Moore for 40+ years, no criminal charges, purely a witch hunt.
This group of poorly formed allegations without any evidence has the MO of a political hit, and doesn't pass any other test that I can see.
Elect Roy Moore, and we have a potentially great, unshakable advocate on the right. Worst case, if real evidence came forth and he is actually guilty (which I doubt), he gets removed and a Republican governor appoints a decent senator.
Let’s say the allegations are true.
40 years ago.
Better a reformed groped than an actual baby killer.
Murder, mass mirder, genocide, infanticide vs. groping.
I’ll take the groper. That said the accusations are likely false.
“Kathleen Willey... She was a recent widow when Clinton mashed on her.”
Many, including Willey, believe that Clintons were responsible for her husband’s death.
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.