New Roy Moore accuser

New Roy Moore accuser, Beverly Young Nelson, claims he assaulted her when she was 16

 

An Alabama woman, Beverly Young Nelson, today accused Roy Moore of groping and assaulting her about 40 years ago when she was 16.

Nelson alleges the assault happened when Moore was a 30-something-year-old prosecutor in the Etowah County District Attorney's Office. Nelson said she met Moore while working as a waitress at the Old Hickory House, a restaurant off U.S. 431 in Gadsden. The city is about 50 miles northeast of Birmingham and has fewer than 40,000 residents.

Nelson and New York attorney Gloria Allred, speaking today at a press conference, called on the Senate Judiciary committee to investigate the allegations ahead of the Dec. 12 Alabama special Senate election. Moore, a Republican is running against Democrat Doug Jones.

 

 

http://www.al.com/news/index.s...bama_sex_claims.html

Original Post

An accusation does not mean anything.  Democrats are known liars, cheaters, and have a severe lack of morals.  The recent racist claims from air force academy cadets have already been determined that the cadets claiming to be the victims were in fact the very ones who performed the racist act.  Democrats cheated to get HRC on the ticket.  Dems/libs are natural born liars, the ends always justify their means. 

If accusations were proof of guilt, then ol Bill would have been impeached and rotting in prison at the moment.

SirWasabi posted:

Republicans are guilty of enabling several sexual predators. Trump, O'Reily, Moore.... and the list continues to grow.

Please provide evidence, proof, examples whatever with regards to your accusation and statement with specific relation to Donald Trump.  I'm not talking about the accusations that were never proven or carried forward that one woman made but actual charges or events where Trump was involved.  

That statement about enabling sexual  predators was  real  choice coming from someone of the party of the Kennedy's (remember Ted leaving one to die/drown while he got himself to safety), the party of Bill Clinton with his many examples of rape, harassment, unwanted touching and the like as well with Monica in the oval office while Hillary ran the organization and orchestrated destruction of all those women that would dare accuse Bill Clinton of what he did to them.  They are still accusing him and it's documented what how Hillary sought to destroy their credibility and their lives personally because of their accusations.  If that is not enabling I don't know what is.  Then there's Anthony Weiner and the list goes on with John Edwards and  Gary Hart and with those you have Presidents, Senators, Congressmen and Presidential candidates.

But as you alluded to some Republicans they too had their share of bad actors such as Bob Packwood and Mark Foley as well as many others as well.  If you are going to call out one you shouldn't do it from the Democratic glass house because they have far enough offenders to embarrass anyone.  Are we going to be fair about it or just point to the offenses of the party that you don't affiliate yourself with?  You are here making statements regarding our Republican forum members and hypocrisy are you going to serve as the Democratic example of hypocritical behavior?   Also with respect to your list I might also mention Bill O'Reilly is a political news person/commentator so I wouldn't put him in with the politicians or you need to include the Kevin Spacey's and Harvey Weinstein's and the like in the Entertainment business because that's where I would have put O'Reilly.   

As for Moore the verdict is still out and, unlike you, I believe a person should be considered innocent before he is convicted because frankly the media, and Democrats, running track record for accuracy in these matters is lacking badly.  Michael Brown & Freddy Gray, as well as Travon Martin all were held up (with eye witnesses) as being victims and totally innocent yet the actual evidence, as time revealed it, PROVED that all were not innocent as first reported and those who shot them or interacted with them were the actual innocent ones yet they are the ones whose careers were ruined account of the fake/false accusations and premature convictions in the media.  So with regards to Moore he may well be guilty of what he's accused of doing but as of now that is not proven or admitted to.  Those making the accusations haven't made official police reports but have used the media and attorneys to do their bidding all without personal risk to them, if they are lying or incorrect in their stories.  

So I'd rather be on the side of waiting till things are proven or admitted to rather than jumping to conclusions otherwise your actions, and yourself, will be seen to be purely politically motivated and worse  you, before, have cried like a stuck pig, calling out others who did to Democratic politicians exactly what you are doing to Republican.  What's the definition of that word again?

When you own your hypocrisy, I guess we can work on mine. Until then, how many times did you scream 'lock her up'? even after the facts said different? Even in your three paragraph essay, you condemn every Democrat you can think of, and give the Republicans the benefit of the doubt. What was that word again?

What universe are you residing in?  I never gave Republicans, other than Moore whom the verdict is still out on, a benefit of doubt.  As for Hillary, IF she is guilty then yes Lock her up as she is no better than anyone else.  Now as to some facts.  The Clintons have never really been investigated and the Clinton foundation in fact the Obama Administration and his justice department did everything they could to remove Hillary from the word investigation calling it "a matter".    Hillary has yet to answer any questions UNDER OATH and from any real justice department regarding the Clinton Foundation.  She did have the hearing before congress with respect to Benghazi but there is so much more that has not even been touched so IF Hillary is guilty then she should face judgement and penalty just as Judge Moore should if guilty.  

Not that it matters to you, I'm sure, but in today's news conference by Roy Moore's lawyer they raised some additional things that I believe very much should be considered and very much could be a reason this woman has Roy Moore targeted for destruction.  

1) She, and her lawyer, claimed they never had any additional contact with Roy Moore but proof is out there that Roy Moore had her divorce case before him in court in a verdict that did not go her way.  So the woman certainly did have contact with Roy Moore as judge of her divorce case years later, a lie on her part.

2) Regarding the Yearbook that they said Roy Moore signed they have brought up several interesting things and have ask for possession of it to have it analyzed by a professional handwriting expert and said they could do the same.  They specifically pointed to the letters D.A. that was on the yearbook signature, something Roy Moore said definitely he never did or signed.  It was revealed that an employee of his whose initials (name) was D.A. did sign documents along with Moore in official cases such as and as on the Divorce case the woman had before Judge Moore.  It was also revealed that Roy Moore was Assistant District Attorney during the time that the book was signed and not District Attorney so ADA would have been accurate if he was signing it.   

Basically, my own take on this mind you, The attorney for Moore, is leading people to wonder about the Yearbook signature and how it was signed.  He is also putting up information that could reveal a motive that the woman might have for wanting to get back at Moore due to his unfavorable ruling in her divorce case.   

Moore may well be guilty, he also may well be innocent of all the charges.  Unlike you I'm still not willing to convict him. 

Let me get this straight, because you don't agree with the decision to not prosecute Hillary, and after at least 15 years of investigating the Clintons, we need to investigate the Clintons more. AND your own words 'woman who has targeted Roy Moore for destruction.' Sounds like you've got your mind made up, as well.

Now, there are actually 5 women ,who didn't even know each other, with the same story. Records from a mall where Roy Moore was banned for harassing teen girls. Roy Moore's wife is the same age as the most recent lady who came forward. Evidence is there, if you want to see it.

SirWasabi posted:

Let me get this straight, because you don't agree with the decision to not prosecute Hillary, and after at least 15 years of investigating the Clintons, we need to investigate the Clintons more. AND your own words 'woman who has targeted Roy Moore for destruction.' Sounds like you've got your mind made up, as well.

Now, there are actually 5 women ,who didn't even know each other, with the same story. Records from a mall where Roy Moore was banned for harassing teen girls. Roy Moore's wife is the same age as the most recent lady who came forward. Evidence is there, if you want to see it.

First of all it isn't that I don't agree with any decision not to prosecute Hillary that's far too premature as she hasn't really been investigated for any potential crimes or irregularities with the Campaign with respect to DNC finances nor with respect to the Clinton (clearing) foundation.  First you have to have a finding of wrong doing, then a trial, then if convicted at that time the prosecution to like or dislike.   Hillary's Investigation never got going with respect to the Clinton Foundation and what happened with Hillary I would not call an investigation but rather a lack of it, she didn't even testify under oath or wasn't put under oath when interviewed by the FBI/Justice Department and didn't even agree to the interview until Bill Clinton (her husband) met with the top Justice dept official, Loretta Lynch, in Lynch's plane, most likely to get a heads up about what she (Hillary) could expect.  Her ONLY grilling came at the bequest of Congress and that was on the Benghazi matter.  So to say she's been investigated is in error as Obama and his administration's justice department under Loretta Lynch never would investigate her, for anything.  I do think it deserves to be looked at and at least investigated but Republicans may not go with it at this point.  So please, with respect to me and what I've said ... PLEASE get it right!

As for the woman and the targeted for destruction I meant regarding his campaign.  There really is no other reason to come forward at this point in time unless it's to insure he doesn't get elected.  IF HE IS GUILTY then he deserves to lose and suffer account of it.  Also, regarding the women, it is a possibly that she is right and a possibility she is not but until we know more we just don't know.  All of these women have targeted Moore in hopes he would not get elected and if they are telling the truth which I can say potentially they are, then he deserves to lose.  That's a lot different than what you are alleging I was saying.  If you don't see that then you are flying blind through here with nothing but your agenda and bias leading you.

Kraven posted:

The signed yearbook has been discredited...

As the liberal would say, #%$& @!!&*....
I know, I know.. chill time old man, you might should find a hobby

Really? When was it discredited and by whom? I've read that Moore's attorney says it's a fake...not sure where he learned handwriting/ink analysis.

gbrk posted:
SirWasabi posted:

Let me get this straight, because you don't agree with the decision to not prosecute Hillary, and after at least 15 years of investigating the Clintons, we need to investigate the Clintons more. AND your own words 'woman who has targeted Roy Moore for destruction.' Sounds like you've got your mind made up, as well.

Now, there are actually 5 women ,who didn't even know each other, with the same story. Records from a mall where Roy Moore was banned for harassing teen girls. Roy Moore's wife is the same age as the most recent lady who came forward. Evidence is there, if you want to see it.

First of all it isn't that I don't agree with any decision not to prosecute Hillary that's far too premature as she hasn't really been investigated for any potential crimes or irregularities with the Campaign with respect to DNC finances nor with respect to the Clinton (clearing) foundation.  First you have to have a finding of wrong doing, then a trial, then if convicted at that time the prosecution to like or dislike.   Hillary's Investigation never got going with respect to the Clinton Foundation and what happened with Hillary I would not call an investigation but rather a lack of it, she didn't even testify under oath or wasn't put under oath when interviewed by the FBI/Justice Department and didn't even agree to the interview until Bill Clinton (her husband) met with the top Justice dept official, Loretta Lynch, in Lynch's plane, most likely to get a heads up about what she (Hillary) could expect.  Her ONLY grilling came at the bequest of Congress and that was on the Benghazi matter.  So to say she's been investigated is in error as Obama and his administration's justice department under Loretta Lynch never would investigate her, for anything.  I do think it deserves to be looked at and at least investigated but Republicans may not go with it at this point.  So please, with respect to me and what I've said ... PLEASE get it right!

As for the woman and the targeted for destruction I meant regarding his campaign.  There really is no other reason to come forward at this point in time unless it's to insure he doesn't get elected.  IF HE IS GUILTY then he deserves to lose and suffer account of it.  Also, regarding the women, it is a possibly that she is right and a possibility she is not but until we know more we just don't know.  All of these women have targeted Moore in hopes he would not get elected and if they are telling the truth which I can say potentially they are, then he deserves to lose.  That's a lot different than what you are alleging I was saying.  If you don't see that then you are flying blind through here with nothing but your agenda and bias leading you.

Again, you've shown your bias while railing about my bias. I obviously 'got it right'. Your bias is leading you, it's obvious to anyone outside the Republican party.Tell me what that word was, one more time?

As far as Hillary goes, I'd say 20+ years of investigations, by the Republicans, should be enough. Republicans wasted MILLIONS OF DOLLARS investigating Hillary to no avail. But, I'm sure it's not over,  yet.

Satan is a liberal, it's not the conservative that pushes for murder
of infants, legalizing all gender restrooms for perversion access,
flood the country with terrorist for the ruin of the country,
aid admitted enemies of this country with weapons and money,
The list goes on and on, but it paints a very ugly picture of Liberals.
SirWasabi posted:

National Republicans weighed in already. Alabama Republicans would vote for Satan as long as he wasn't a Democrat.

This question is for those of you who have already pre-assumed that Roy Moore, even with his denials, is totally guilty of all the things he is accused of.

Just a few facts about Roy Moore:

These events, he is accused of, happened when Roy Moore was Assistant District Attorney of Etowah County, Alabama back in the 1970's.

I don't suppose that the fact that these things may have happened over 40 years ago matters.  (nor should it).

What do ya think?  Did you know and realize that Roy Moore, Assistant District Attorney, rumored to be womanizer and young girl chaser, was DEFINITLY and without any doubt  ***** A DEMOCRAT ****** during these times.

That's right Roy Moore was a Democrat during and while all these accusations were said to have happened so IF THEY DID HAPPEN then it was Roy Moore, The DEMOCRAT that did the offenses.   Roy, over the years, changed his affiliation to the Republican party but that was after all these things had happened so if the political party he is affiliated with is to bear the brunt of his actions then it should be the Democratic party that bears that responsibility for Roy Moore WAS a Democrat.    Know something else ...  the Alabama Democratic party had nothing to say or no condemnation of Roy Moore the Democratic Assistant District Attorney of Etowah County, Alabama.  Why was that, since apparently it was known by so many back then, or was rumored to have been known of Roy Moore, the "powerful (Democratic) politician"?  Knowing that Roy Moore WAS a Democrat during these years in the 1970's I wonder if that would cause some more of the Republicans to question his total innocence?   So many curious new questions, and information.

Any comments?     

 

SirWasabi posted:

So, now you think he's guilty?

NOPE!  I still want to want and see and let the facts or information come out before I make that decision.  IF I had to vote today I don't know that I could vote for Roy but I, unlike many, haven't convicted him and want to send him to the (political) gallows.  Imagine that though .... potential sexual offender Roy Moore ... a Democrat while all this was supposedly to have happened.

SirWasabi posted:

Roy changed parties because Democrats didn't fit with his beliefs any longer. Plain and simple.

We ARE in Agreement on that.  Roy Moore changed his (Rumored) womanizing ways and was no longer a "hound" running around after all the skirts, he was more religious and conservative, something that surely didn't fit in with the Democrats. 

I'm just messing with you ... just too much fun and I couldn't pass it up with that kind of set up.

Keeping the senate a republican majority is more important than
unproven accusations, I'd vote for Moore for that reason only,
the dems started it attempting to close the gap for controlling
the senate and lock out Trump. Now isn't the time to go stupid..
 

Moore, if guilty, does not need to be in Congress but we do need more men like Roy Moore (if he is innocent of these charges regarding the underage girls).  Mitch McConnell and many of the Establishment Republicans (and Democrats) are a plague upon our Nation and each is toxic toward the other.  Democrats are obstructionist to Republicans and visa versa when Democrats are in power.  What we need is more people that rub them wrong and might just have the people's concerns in mind rather than the professional politicians (of both parties).  

What gets me is the amount and level of toxicity with people when it comes to Donald Trump.  Frankly I don't see what's so bad with Trump and I think he's doing a great job so far.  I think if the Republicans were to get on board and actually pass some of the things Trump stood for and didn't delay a promised corporate tax cut then the Nation would see such immediate growth that it would be something amazing to see.  

I think many of the professional politicians are afraid Trump just might succeed and it scares them more than anything.  

I still say keep Moore, he's not a rino and we need the seat, the
scum the Dems have voted in office over the years makes Moore
look just fine. Repubs. need to fight the Dems on their level,
in the cutter, the GOP isn't known for doing that in the past 
and is reason enough why they get their azz kicked more than not...

At least if Moore is elected and is guilty of being a sex predator, he will be rebuked by Republicans and probably expelled, which should have happened in a Demonrattick DA's office. Mitch McConnell was instrumental in getting Sen. Packwood to resign, but if Packwood switched sides, he probably should have been a celebrated senator like Ted Kennedy and revered as much as 'Lolita Express' Bill Clinton.

http://www.nytimes.com/1995/09....html?pagewanted=all

  

One day, the so-called republicans on this forum will have something positive to say about their party.  I can feel it.  I hurt for you guys.  You shouldn't have to point your fingers at democrats, the liberal media, so on and so forth, just to feel good about yourselves.

Add Reply

Likes (0)

×
×
×
×