If the yearbook claim wasn't dead before

Hence in a he said - she said, let them say it before congress, under oath, under penalty of perjury.

If you want the TRUTH to come out.
What country do you live in? Here in America an accuser goes under oath first. So let’s get there.

Of course, let the accusers give the opening statements to congress, and then let Moore have the chance to respond
 
Moore is the only one who can get the case in court and have a court ordered examination and analysis by certified experts.
well no, he has to get the yearbook released, which allred is opposing.
Allred has said the yearbook would be available to a Senate committee. If he files a claim for a lawsuit the yearbook would become available via a court-ordered analysis. A real one, not like the fake one by some blogger running as a thread here on USMB.
And how long after the election will this take place? Allred doesn't have to get it analyzed to prove it's real. She just wants to run out the clock.

Let's support a Congressional Investigation and put Judge Moore under Oath. It was supported by the right when HRC was so investigated, why not Moore. And, to be fair - even though HRC was not treated fairly - let's put the alleged victims under oath too.


Under what authority would congress investigate prior to the election?


.
They could pull a ''Terri Schiavo'' and investigate anyway.... :dunno:
 
But but but we all know a man who hangs around the mall asking teen girls out on dates, even asking their mothers for permission, and meets other teenage girls at high school events would never ever sign a high school girl's yearbook. That has to be a hoax. Couldn't happen, not in a million years.

Moore even telephoned a high school girl, who had to be taken out of math class, to ask her for a date. Moore didn't say if he called the girls mother first for permission.
Can’t make this up in here.
 
Hence in a he said - she said, let them say it before congress, under oath, under penalty of perjury.

If you want the TRUTH to come out.
What country do you live in? Here in America an accuser goes under oath first. So let’s get there.

Of course, let the accusers give the opening statements to congress, and then let Moore have the chance to respond

Meanwhile, Al Franken 'Reflects.' Y'all are such partisan weirdos. Very disingenuous.
 
well no, he has to get the yearbook released, which allred is opposing.
Allred has said the yearbook would be available to a Senate committee. If he files a claim for a lawsuit the yearbook would become available via a court-ordered analysis. A real one, not like the fake one by some blogger running as a thread here on USMB.
And how long after the election will this take place? Allred doesn't have to get it analyzed to prove it's real. She just wants to run out the clock.

Let's support a Congressional Investigation and put Judge Moore under Oath. It was supported by the right when HRC was so investigated, why not Moore. And, to be fair - even though HRC was not treated fairly - let's put the alleged victims under oath too.


Under what authority would congress investigate prior to the election?


.
They could pull a ''Terri Schiavo'' and investigate anyway.... :dunno:
They legally can’t
 
No, they were sought out and collaborated on the Post article. Thanks for proving my assessment of you.
.

Congratulations for acknowledging how the justice system works. Witnesses are sought out, and cooperate in the case.

And you acknowledge these aren't people who sought a venue to tell their stories.


Yet here they are, 40 years later. Moore has been involved in around 10 elections, at least 2 were state wide, after these supposedly happened. Timing makes all this very suspect.


.
Yes, how odd that women are now willing to talk versus the days when Moore told them not to since no one would believe them. He was a man and they were children. My how times have hardly changed.


Riddle me this batman, the gal with the year book didn't ask Moore to recuse himself when he was the judge in her divorce proceedings, because of their former relationship, can you explain why?


.
 
I'd rather it be done before, he's elected when the Ethics committee can do it or whomever....because if after the election then, if he is thrown out, it simply puts another republican in there by the Repub governor.... but, that would at least be better than never.
 
Last edited:
Meanwhile, Al Franken 'Reflects.' Y'all are such partisan weirdos. Very disingenuous.
Franken called for an ethics committee investigation....... of himself.

I know, he's 'Reflecting.' So according to Democrats, as long as you 'Reflect' afterward, it's ok to harass and molest women against their will. Pretty convenient take for y'all Democrats, no?
 
Riddle me this batman, the gal with the year book didn't ask Moore to recuse himself when he was the judge in her divorce proceedings, because of their former relationship, can you explain why?
.

Riddle me this, would you piss off the judge handling your divorce?
 
Bullshit, it would be in the accusers best interest to authenticate her purported evidence. It would lend credibility to her story.
.

She has dozens of other women for that purposse. The many women (technically girls) Moore went out with while in high school and he was in his 30's means much more than a signature in a yearbook.
That wasn’t my quote bro. Lol
 
No, they were sought out and collaborated on the Post article. Thanks for proving my assessment of you.
.

Congratulations for acknowledging how the justice system works. Witnesses are sought out, and cooperate in the case.

And you acknowledge these aren't people who sought a venue to tell their stories.


Yet here they are, 40 years later. Moore has been involved in around 10 elections, at least 2 were state wide, after these supposedly happened. Timing makes all this very suspect.


.
Yes, how odd that women are now willing to talk versus the days when Moore told them not to since no one would believe them. He was a man and they were children. My how times have hardly changed.


Riddle me this batman, the gal with the year book didn't ask Moore to recuse himself when he was the judge in her divorce proceedings, because of their former relationship, can you explain why?


.
Because she never went to court and her lawyer had handled it thus far, and most importantly she and her hubby had temporarily reconciled, so there was no need to go before the court. is what was reported in the news.
 
Meanwhile, Al Franken 'Reflects.' Y'all are such partisan weirdos. Very disingenuous.
Franken called for an ethics committee investigation....... of himself.

I know, he's 'Reflecting.' So according to Democrats, as long as you 'Reflect' afterward, it's ok to harass and molest women against their will. Pretty convenient take for y'all Democrats, no?
He's not reflecting, he's requesting a congressional investigation.
 
No, they were sought out and collaborated on the Post article. Thanks for proving my assessment of you.
.

Congratulations for acknowledging how the justice system works. Witnesses are sought out, and cooperate in the case.

And you acknowledge these aren't people who sought a venue to tell their stories.


Yet here they are, 40 years later. Moore has been involved in around 10 elections, at least 2 were state wide, after these supposedly happened. Timing makes all this very suspect.


.
No it doesn’t. Haven’t you learned a goddamn thing about how women were frightened to come forward in the past but now feel empowered to speak the truth?


Funny how political expediency can change things.


.
 
Bullshit, it would be in the accusers best interest to authenticate her purported evidence. It would lend credibility to her story.
.

She has dozens of other women for that purposse. The many women (technically girls) Moore went out with while in high school and he was in his 30's means much more than a signature in a yearbook.
That wasn’t my quote bro. Lol

Pardon if I cut around the wrong lines. It's tough when quotes are several layers deep. Again my apology.
 

Forum List

Back
Top