He claimed he didn’t know her at all- well there is a document which indicates he did...and it was a very personal note to her. Is it a forgery? Or was it actually written to someone else and she is presenting as her own? If not, the “it was 40 years ago and I can’t remember” doesn’t cut it - if you write something that personal you would remember it and at least the person - and certainly you would after seeing it again. Then, like he did in the disastrous interview the other day, he made qualifying statements that have nothing to do with refuting allegations you sexually assaulted someone “I don’t even know where the restaurant is or was” just muddies the waters...there is no point in saying that. Whether you ate or didn’t eat at a particular restaurant has nothing to do with whether or not you sexually assaulted someone...quite a minor detail to single out and deny and it was a statement he just volunteered - not even in response to a question.
Now, Hannity has stated he needs to clear up his statements and explain the document - because unless it a forgery, he clearly not only knew her, but knew her as more than just a passing acquaintance, but he claimed to not know her at all. He has to address this document and the discrepancy of his own comments - if he has nothing to hide then there is no reason to act like he does. Getting angry at Hannity for raising a very valid and serious point is a logical and moral failing on your part and not on Hannity’s, and it is dishonest and ridiculous to suggest otherwise. Hannity nor anyone else is responsible for Moore’s responses which raise more questions than they answer and apparently are less than forthright. “It’s the GOPe!” “It’s the establishment!” etc. doesn’t address this reality. These women could all be lying but that also doesn’t explain why Moore apparently isn’t being straight with us either. Why can’t you all admit that? And why are you viciously and personally attacking any person who dares ask that these discrepancies be addressed and clarified? You should be embarrassed. This is the way the Left has historically behaved. Just scream over facts and logic hoping they will go away and then try to intimidate those who dare utter them.
And again, if these women are making all of this up, it is a smear vicious enough that they should all be personally sued - regardless of the fact he is a “public figure.” He’s threatened to sue the Washington Post - even if they paid for the stories that isn’t enough - the ones actually making the allegations of sexual assault should definitely be sued for defamation and answer for their lies in court if they are in fact making all of this up...if this is all made up it is flat out evil to smear someone so viciously and they must be held to account.
A Christmas greeting, especially one that adds the date "Christmas 1977" is about as personal as a greeting card, even one saying "sweet and beautiful" in that era. A personal note is usually not signed with one’s full name and business title, as this one was, as though to remind the addressee who the writer is. It indicates a relative stranger or new acquaintance who is being polite to a young impressionable girl who asked an important person to sign her yearbook she had with her. He added the title to impress her friends. Irrespective of whether it’s a forgery, and a good deal about it points in that direction, it does NOT indicate any personal relationship but the contrary. It’s impersonal!
It reads almost the way an author might sign his works at Christmas for fans.