Still highly skeptical of recent claims against Moore. Has nothing to do with my preference on the race. I'm not sold Moore would've benefited MAGA being a fundamentalist hardliner who likely views compromise as an attack on his core beliefs. Also don't buy a Dem will win the seat regardless if Moore is kept from it.
However, the timing, sources, and collective that detests this guy since the Strange battle make it extremely hard to accept on its face.
How much of a stretch is it to believe the guy had a penchant for dating legal aged teenagers back 40 years ago. As creepy as it sounds now, it wasn't that unheard of back then, which is why it never surfaced as an election attack.
So WAPO and the Dem operatives latch onto this 'now unacceptable' behavior in his past and see a golden opportunity to manipulate it into something intolerable and illegal.
Knowing those beyond the age of consent wouldn't do the trick, they drum up a very sordid person to claim she was underage and he touched her, etc. Now his dating of consent aged girls helps provide much validity to the underage claim.
Feeling that may not have done the trick, they then dig up another of age girl he probable dated a bit and have her claim forced sexual assault. And she's led by left crusader Gloria Allred of all people.
Seeing who's behind the take down (angry sworn enemies)...MSM (who endorsed the Dem), establishment (who spent millions on Strange and were embarrassed) and Allred (left crusader from hell)...there's a good chance Moore dated consent aged teens back 40 years ago, but the minor and sexual assault claims were fabricated knowing they'd be believed when viewed in unison.
If that's true, it's pretty despicable the guy will lose his career and name over his dating preferences 40 years ago that were legal, whether we approve of them now or not makes zero difference. There's a hell of a lot of grandpas out there who were many years the elder of consent age teens they married.
As I said, I wasn't a big advocate for Moore before this all went down, but I'm having trouble swallowing he was anything more than an advanced aged man who dated consent aged teens 40 years ago. If so, yes it's creepy now, frowned upon back then but not unheard of, but not illegal or grounds to remove.
This is screaming for using "cui bono" to form judgement in the face of a lack of evidence he did anything illegal. Who benefits? WAPO, McConnell and the estab, Allred...all benefit directly and massively. As much as anyone possibly could. Toss in an insane amount of both motive and opportunity to ice the hit job cake.
Last edited: Nov 14, 2017