Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
She can say she voted for anyone. We don't know if she really did.Since she is a registered republican I would say she did. Well that and the fact she mentioned she supports Drumpf. You repubs eating your own over a child molester.Maybe she did, maybe she didn't.Well she voted for Drumpf so there is no telling if she was actually "thinking".She didn't think people would be dumb enough to think the printed section, was the same as the script section.I honestly dont remember her saying anything about the added note until now.
Why would Moore write the date TWICE?
She admits notes were added. She never says she forged what Moore wrote. When did adding notes become forgery?Who told you she added DA? Did she say she added it?Yeah but the interview doesnt show her claiming she forged anything...hence my asking for a link. Do you have one?The original link in this OP references an ABC News interview with the lady. It's all there. All Breitbart did was reprint parts of the interview.
She added the "D.A." in the notes. Found that on some court documents. The stupid ass press THOUGHT Moore was claiming to be a D.A. before he WAS D.A. ---- but those are just the initials of his office mgr who noted the filings. It's part of the deception. Biggest issue IS -- WHEN were those notes added.
She also very likely added his last name.
Moore accuser says she added notes to yearbook message
You need to start reading the stuff you're avoiding because you can't handle the dissonance with your preconceived verdict... She ADMITS -- NOTES WERE ADDED. Which had been SUSPECT by analysts who said earlier that everything below "ROY" was suspect.
The D.A. that was added was an attempt to make this look "more legit" than just a mere "Roy". But it was obviously wrong. He was not a D.A. at the time. Wouldn't have done that. It was COPIED from court docs that existed later on. D.A. was his office mgr while he WAS a D.A. And of course - would have been another hand writing it.
She probably copied it from her divorce court documents where she got ACTUALLY screwed in Roy Moore's court. Even if he wasn't presiding the day she was in court, his name would appear on the divorce decree.
I hate them with a passion. But until proven, particularly with conflicting information, I will not judge someone, until proven guilty. It can ruin someone’s life.
Thought you were always for innocence of those accused of crime, unless proven, Asclepius, or is that only for Blacks?There is nothing partisan about this. The accuser is on your side of the aisle. In your attempt to excuse your being an easily duped alt right you seem to have forgotten that very important fact.Everyone, take off your partisan hats for a moment. If someone on your side of the aisle had had proven fake accusers come forward, and what appears to be the only possibly legit case has to admit she wasn’t truthful about everything, and all you have is her word, would you not question it, considering they all came out of the woodwork at the same time? And your candidate, or whatever had been in public office for over 40 years with nary a word before?
And this candidate happens to represent everything you hate and stand for.
Yes I hate child molesters. Sue me.
Shes a registered republican. Of course she voted for Drumpf.She can say she voted for anyone. We don't know if she really did.Since she is a registered republican I would say she did. Well that and the fact she mentioned she supports Drumpf. You repubs eating your own over a child molester.Maybe she did, maybe she didn't.Well she voted for Drumpf so there is no telling if she was actually "thinking".She didn't think people would be dumb enough to think the printed section, was the same as the script section.I honestly dont remember her saying anything about the added note until now.
Why would Moore write the date TWICE?
I hate them with a passion. But until proven, particularly with conflicting information, I will not judge someone, until proven guilty. It can ruin someone’s life.
Thought you were always for innocence of those accused of crime, unless proven, Asclepius, or is that only for Blacks?There is nothing partisan about this. The accuser is on your side of the aisle. In your attempt to excuse your being an easily duped alt right you seem to have forgotten that very important fact.Everyone, take off your partisan hats for a moment. If someone on your side of the aisle had had proven fake accusers come forward, and what appears to be the only possibly legit case has to admit she wasn’t truthful about everything, and all you have is her word, would you not question it, considering they all came out of the woodwork at the same time? And your candidate, or whatever had been in public office for over 40 years with nary a word before?
And this candidate happens to represent everything you hate and stand for.
Yes I hate child molesters. Sue me.
I never asked you to judge anyone. I said the accuser was on your side and you were duped into forgetting that.
Honestly she could have added them right before she went public and it wouldnt change a thing. The point is that he signed her yearbook and she added notes to it. Him lying about it and being too frightened to take her to court over it speaks in loud contrast to his lack of action.She admits notes were added. She never says she forged what Moore wrote. When did adding notes become forgery?Who told you she added DA? Did she say she added it?Yeah but the interview doesnt show her claiming she forged anything...hence my asking for a link. Do you have one?
She added the "D.A." in the notes. Found that on some court documents. The stupid ass press THOUGHT Moore was claiming to be a D.A. before he WAS D.A. ---- but those are just the initials of his office mgr who noted the filings. It's part of the deception. Biggest issue IS -- WHEN were those notes added.
She also very likely added his last name.
Moore accuser says she added notes to yearbook message
You need to start reading the stuff you're avoiding because you can't handle the dissonance with your preconceived verdict... She ADMITS -- NOTES WERE ADDED. Which had been SUSPECT by analysts who said earlier that everything below "ROY" was suspect.
The D.A. that was added was an attempt to make this look "more legit" than just a mere "Roy". But it was obviously wrong. He was not a D.A. at the time. Wouldn't have done that. It was COPIED from court docs that existed later on. D.A. was his office mgr while he WAS a D.A. And of course - would have been another hand writing it.
She probably copied it from her divorce court documents where she got ACTUALLY screwed in Roy Moore's court. Even if he wasn't presiding the day she was in court, his name would appear on the divorce decree.
They are an attempt to deceive. The next step is to get her to tell WHEN those notes were added, WHO added them, and how the D.A. annotation got in there. It's the same process that WOULD be done in discovery if there WAS an actual legal proceeding. If they were added RECENTLY to a document with prime evidence stature in a court case ------ THAT WOULD BE FORGERY...
All Moore has to do is take her to court. Why is he stalling?You'll never get her to answer those questions with powder puff interviews with ABC, NBC. If she was under oath -- we'd have the 3 answers.
You were duped and yes I hate child molesters. You should hate them too instead of supporting them.I was not duped, but you sure are because he is someone you hate with a passion.I hate them with a passion. But until proven, particularly with conflicting information, I will not judge someone, until proven guilty. It can ruin someone’s life.
Thought you were always for innocence of those accused of crime, unless proven, Asclepius, or is that only for Blacks?There is nothing partisan about this. The accuser is on your side of the aisle. In your attempt to excuse your being an easily duped alt right you seem to have forgotten that very important fact.Everyone, take off your partisan hats for a moment. If someone on your side of the aisle had had proven fake accusers come forward, and what appears to be the only possibly legit case has to admit she wasn’t truthful about everything, and all you have is her word, would you not question it, considering they all came out of the woodwork at the same time? And your candidate, or whatever had been in public office for over 40 years with nary a word before?
And this candidate happens to represent everything you hate and stand for.
Yes I hate child molesters. Sue me.
I never asked you to judge anyone. I said the accuser was on your side and you were duped into forgetting that.
How is proving they are lying stupid? So youre claiming its smart to let people slander and commit libel against you?That's just stupid...We will see what happens after he is seated in the senate...Why is punking out? I would think he had a spine if he stood up for the truth. Why would exposing them as liars be stupid?
There is no way for it to be settled in court before the election. He may very well end up taking her to court, but right now the effect all this has on the election is what matter's most to Moore.All Moore has to do is take her to court. Why is he stalling?You'll never get her to answer those questions with powder puff interviews with ABC, NBC. If she was under oath -- we'd have the 3 answers.
Who said it had to be settled before the election? He has wasted a lot of time since this came out and he hasnt even filed. I would have told my attorneys to file immediately and dealt with it when I got a court date.There is no way for it to be settled in court before the election. He may very well end up taking her to court, but right now the effect all this has on the election is what matter's most to Moore.All Moore has to do is take her to court. Why is he stalling?You'll never get her to answer those questions with powder puff interviews with ABC, NBC. If she was under oath -- we'd have the 3 answers.
You really are an idiot if you don't understand the importance of the timing.Who said it had to be settled before the election?There is no way for it to be settled in court before the election. He may very well end up taking her to court, but right now the effect all this has on the election is what matter's most to Moore.All Moore has to do is take her to court. Why is he stalling?You'll never get her to answer those questions with powder puff interviews with ABC, NBC. If she was under oath -- we'd have the 3 answers.
You really are an idiot if you think timing has anything to do with Moore being afraid to testify. He will never file suit just like Drumpf never filed suit.You really are an idiot if you don't understand the importance of the timing.Who said it had to be settled before the election?There is no way for it to be settled in court before the election. He may very well end up taking her to court, but right now the effect all this has on the election is what matter's most to Moore.All Moore has to do is take her to court. Why is he stalling?You'll never get her to answer those questions with powder puff interviews with ABC, NBC. If she was under oath -- we'd have the 3 answers.
They are an attempt to deceive. The next step is to get her to tell WHEN those notes were added, WHO added them, and how the D.A. annotation got in there. It's the same process that WOULD be done in discovery if there WAS an actual legal proceeding. If they were added RECENTLY to a document with prime evidence stature in a court case ------ THAT WOULD BE FORGERY...
sure he did. yep, and how you prove that? come on man. be fking honest that that's just stupid. She just wrote it in. Too funny, look at the ink. we've all been vindicated along with Roy.Moore still wrote in it, and nobody denies he was a pervert who trolled for high school pussy at the mall and highschool dances...
But his base will eat this up. Alas.
look at the ink
What about it, dope?
View attachment 164981
It's about how it effects the election you Stupid!You really are an idiot if you think timing has anything to do with Moore being afraid to testify. He will never file suit just like Drumpf never filed suit.You really are an idiot if you don't understand the importance of the timing.Who said it had to be settled before the election?There is no way for it to be settled in court before the election. He may very well end up taking her to court, but right now the effect all this has on the election is what matter's most to Moore.All Moore has to do is take her to court. Why is he stalling?You'll never get her to answer those questions with powder puff interviews with ABC, NBC. If she was under oath -- we'd have the 3 answers.
The added probably note hurts the value of the autographed photo.They are an attempt to deceive. The next step is to get her to tell WHEN those notes were added, WHO added them, and how the D.A. annotation got in there. It's the same process that WOULD be done in discovery if there WAS an actual legal proceeding. If they were added RECENTLY to a document with prime evidence stature in a court case ------ THAT WOULD BE FORGERY...
7
The signature is Gretsky's the "four time stanley cup champ" was added.
That's what people do, they add notes. I only wish my old family photographs had the names and places of the people in them.
It would be stupid to take action before the election...it's really not that tough to understand...I know you are a prog but this is a no brainier...How is proving they are lying stupid? So youre claiming its smart to let people slander and commit libel against you?
