The Blue Whale in the Room No One Wants to See

I wrote the other day how the President of the United States in blaming the Texas Church Massacre on a deranged person does not want to see the Blue Whale  in the room. That is that even if the person was deranged or mentally ill, of which there is no history, the massacre could not have happened if we had common sense gun laws in the country.

No one who thinks like the president wants to accept that the conditions that existed in 1787 were totally different from they are  today. It seems to me that suggesting a blunderbuss in the hands of a citizen is the same as a machine gun is the height of naïveté or at a minimum a sign one is blind to society as it exists today. One would say a good SAT question would be a machine gun is to the blunderbuss, as a nuclear bomb is to a (a) cherry bomb; (b) hand grenade; (c) 3 sticks of TNT; or (4) land mine.

The gun decision (Heller) was written by Scalia who is no longer on the Court. He was replaced by Gorsuch. Even though he was appointed by Trump there was always hope he might have a different view on guns than Scalia. That hope was dashed last summer when he joined Justice Thomas in a  dissent from the Court’s refusal to bring the case of  Peruta v. California to it for a hearing. The issue was whether a person has a right to carry  firearms in public. The case was from California where the law  prohibits openly  carrying a firearm in public. Peruta sought a license to  carry a concealed firearm in public. The law provides he is able to do this if he shows “good  cause.

The sheriff to whom the application for a license was made interprets the phrase “good cause” to mean more than just a concern for one’s personal safety or one’s need for self-defense but  requires a particularized showing that his situation is different from that of the general public (mainstream) which causes him to be placed in harm’s way. In other words, without pointing to a particular need rather than the general desire to be able to defend oneself the license to carry will not issue

Justice Thomas suggested the scheme faced by Peruta was a denial of his right to bear arms as guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment as interpreted by Heller. To me the case is interesting because it shows Gorsuch’s disposition as well as the Supreme Court’s when it comes to  guns. The former is  a true believer in Heller while the latter is ducking the issue. Why is that?

Thomas points out that even with great disagreement among the states and federal courts over the issue, and even though over the last 7 years the Court has not heard any 2nd Amendment cases. During that time it has heard 35 cases on the First and 25 cases on the Fourth Amendment.

Thomas suggests the Court looks at the 2nd Amendment as “a disfavored right” and notes “The Constitution does not rank certain rights above the other.”  He concludes his dissent stating: “For those of us who work in marbled halls,  guarded constantly by a vigilant and dedicated police force, the guarantee of the Second Amendment might seem antiquated and superfluous. But the Framers made a clear choice. They reserved to all Americans the right to bear arms for self-defense.  I do not think we should stand by idly while a State denies its citizens that right, particularly when their very lives may depend on it.”

I asked why that is that the Court is ducking dealing with the Second Amendment. I suggest it recognizes that its decision in Heller is  wrong. None of those justices who went along with Scalia other than Thomas want to admit this.  perhaps they are hoping that Congress will do something about the mess we have ourselves in with the present gun laws. That, of course, will never happen because of the erroneous belief that the National Rifle Association holds great power over the voters.

Nor can the Court look to the present president. He just signed a bill making it easier for mentally ill people to get  guns (and he attributes a massacre to mental illness). His son-in-law is pushing regulations to make silencers legal. So that cupboard is bare.

Why isn’t it simple for the Court to say there is no way the Framers of the Second Amendment could understand the advances in firearms and had they then they would have expected reasonable limits on their use. How would it intrude upon anyone’s Second Amendment rights if all magazines that carried more than six rounds were outlawed and that to replace a magazine with another would be difficult so that at least 10 seconds would pass before it could be accomplished. The hunters, target shooters, and self-defense types could all have their guns; the future victims would have time to escape or defend selves during the time rounds were being exchanged. Isn’t that a simple step forward given that the Hellers decision exists.

52 thoughts on “The Blue Whale in the Room No One Wants to See

  1. Matt: The Founding Father knew nothing of automobiles.No reason to limit the right to travel or the speed limit to that of a horse and buggy.

    Devin Kelley escaped from a mental hospital in 2012.

    Kelley was in the church for seven minutes. With 2 six-shot pistols, he still could get off hundreds of rounds. (In fact, Kelley fired over 400 rounds.)

    The Virginia Tech shooter killed 2, then went to Norris Hall and killed 31 and wounded 17. Seiung-Cho (sp?), the shooter, spent between 10 and 12 minutes in Norris Hall. He used two handguns and reloaded multiple times. Your proposed proscriptions would not have prevented a single death.

    The facts is during the American Revolution, a musket or flintlock pistol could be fired 3 times a minute. Two maniacs could terrorize a schoolhouse or town and kill dozens of people in 7 or 10 minutes. As the Beltway sniper killed, a Revolutionary War sniper too could kill innocent civilians. The Founding Fathers were aware guns were lethal.

    An armed citizenry prevents crime.

    The U.S. is a violent country; the murder rate without guns still exceeds that of most other countries. As does the drug overdose rate. Why? Liberty and a nation of mixed nationalities, cultures, etc? Who knows.

    We already have reasonable gun control Machine guns are banned. I’ve proposed some additional reasonable measures, but not feel-good draconian measures which would do little good.

    We are not England and we don’t want to be. We want to protect each individual’s right to bear arms, and keep arms from felons and mentally ill.

    Reasonable regulations, not Draconian!

  2. Americans have a right to feel secure in their homes and on their properties. Owning guns ensure that right. You won’t feel secure if you have a six-shooter and the bad guys come into your house or home with 9mms with 16 round cartridges.
    Limit magazines to six rounds, and only the bad-guys will have 16 round magazines.

    The Constitution secures our liberties, among which is the freedom to protect ourselves against bad-guys, maniacs and an overly intrusive, threatening government.

    The abundance of guns in America checks both criminals, our government and foreign governments. As Lincoln said, “Not in a trial of a thousand years will a foreign power trek on the Blue Ridge or drink from the Ohio.” Words to that effect.

    Think! Tens of millions of Americans use guns lawfully. How do we stop a few maniacs with guns, trucks, bombs? By disarming peaceful citizens?

  3. UGH!

    In other news about 5 hour erections…..

    After Night of Drinking, F.B.I. Supervisor Wakes to Find a Prostitute Stole His Gun
    November 19,2017

    see link for full story

    WASHINGTON — An F.B.I. counterterrorism supervisor is under internal investigation after a woman stole his gun following a night of heavy drinking in a North Carolina hotel, according to documents and government officials.

    In July, Robert Manson, a unit chief in the F.B.I.’s international terrorism section, had his Glock .40-caliber handgun, a $6,000 Rolex watch and $60 in cash stolen from his room at the Westin hotel in Charlotte, N.C., according to a police report.

    Read the Police Report on an F.B.I. Supervisor’s Stolen Gun
    Robert Manson, an F.B.I. counterterrorism supervisor, reported stolen property, including a gun, in July in Charlotte, N.C. The police report, which denotes that Mr. Manson was incapacitated by alcohol, states that his gun, Rolex watch, and cash were stolen from his room at the Westin Hotel.

    Nov. 9, 2017
    The episode is an embarrassing mishap for the F.B.I. As a unit chief assigned to the bureau’s headquarters, Mr. Manson oversees all terrorism investigations in the Midwest and the Carolinas. An F.B.I. spokesman, Michael P. Kortan, said the incident was the subject of an internal investigation and declined to give additional comment.

    Mr. Manson and other senior agents were in Charlotte for training, according to a law enforcement official familiar with the episode. The agents later told the police that they had been drinking with women who said they were exotic dancers, according to a second person who was briefed on the investigation but, like the first, was not authorized to discuss it publicly.

    “Investigators determined that the victim, Robert Manson, met a woman in the hotel bar the prior night and took her back to his hotel room,” Robert Tufano, a spokesman for the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Police Department, said in a statement.

    At 6:30 the next morning, police officers for the department were called to the hotel. Mr. Manson was incapacitated because of alcohol, according to the police report, which he did not file himself. A fellow agent, Kevin Thuman, gave the report, which says the theft happened from 2 a.m. to 5 a.m. The hotel bar closes at 2 a.m.

    The gun was identified in the police report as a Glock 27, a compact model that is easy to conceal. Federal law allows agents to carry concealed weapons while off duty, but not while they are intoxicated. It is unclear where Mr. Manson kept the gun. F.B.I. rules prohibit agents from leaving their guns in unsecure places. Every room in the Westin is equipped with a safe.

    One F.B.I. agent was cited in an internal review this year after a family member accidentally shot him. Last year, an assistant special agent in charge was charged with drunken driving, and an internal review found that he had improperly carried his gun while intoxicated.

    1. Interesting that an FBI employee has the wherewithal to buy a $6,000 watch. Could be just personal quirk. Could be an indication that the FBI does not need salary increases. Being a sensitive national security position perhaps his personal finances should be give a Paul Manafort style review.

  4. Matt:

    The issues are complex. Regulations could be strengthened. The Gun-Show loophole could be eliminated. In other words, strict back-ground checks at gun shows. Plus ban the bump stocks. Concentrate on the psychos and felons, then leave the rest of the American people alone.

    1. A little discussion of Murder, Suicide and Guns:

    New York Times presented some detailed data on guns. The data, in fact, disproved the Times’ hypothesis. In France, with half the guns as US (47 guns per 100 people) the gun-murder rate is less than 10% of the US. In Italy, where there are 11 guns per 100 people (compare to US 90g/100) the gun-murder rate is almost double the US.

    The Times Chart, of course, doesn’t show Jamaica, Haiti, other Caribbean, Central-American, South-American, Central-African and Eastern European countries, where the gun possession rate is oftentimes 10% of the US rate and the gun-murder rate is oftentimes 10x the US rate.

    (Comparing guns/capita and murders/capita, there is in fact an inverse relationship in a majority of countries (although not statistically significant.) There is no relationship between gun availability and the gun-murder rate and especially no relationship between gun availability and the homicide rate. (Citation to follow.)

    Here’s where there is a direct relationship: Suicide rates and guns per capita rates. In countries with fewest guns in citizens hands, the highest suicide rates are recorded. Japan, South Korea. I did a study of the top 30 countries in suicide rates (averaging about 20 suicides per 100,000. (from 15 to 35 suicides per 100,00.) The average gun possession rate in those countries was 7 guns per 100,000 people.

    Top 30 suicide rates include Sri Lanka # 1 (35 suicides/100k); Mongolia #3 (28s/100k); Lithuania #8 (25s/100k); South Korea #10 (24s); Poland #15 (20s); Belgium #23 (16s); Hungary #25 (16s); and Japan #26 (15s). . . . . The US is @ # 50 out of 200 countries with 12 suicides per 100,000.

    Further research indicates that some countries with very high murder rates, like Jamaica and Honduras, have very low suicide rates.

    Japanese-Americans and Korean-Americans have suicide rates comparable to the American average rate, and less than the rate in their home countries.

    Murder is not a major US problem compared with the rest of the world. Murder is a major problem in about 2% of U.S. geographical areas, among small subsets of Americans (some inner city black (4x national rate) and Latino (2X national rate) communities.) Blacks are 13% of population and commit about 50% of murders. Hard facts but true. Blacks’ and Latinos’ suicide rates are one-third of Whites. (Blacks and Latinos commit suicide at about 6/100,000; Whites at about 19/100,00.)(One study!)

    In US, if you deduct the high homicides rate among African-Americans and Latino-Americans, you find the homicide rate among European-Americans is comparable to the combined rate of Western and Eastern Europeans. Things get fuzzy when you consider that @ 25% of African American genes are European and over 50% of Latino-American genes are European. Things get fuzzier when liberals try to compare the great hetorogeneous melting pot of the United States with homogenized European countries.

    I won’t bore you with detailed data: But on Wikipedia, you’ll see for yourself the homicide rates, suicide rates, gun homicide rates, gun suicide rates, gun possession rates per capita, etc, etc. The US leads in gun suicides, but our overall suicide rate is the same as France, and lower than Sweden, Belgium, Hungary, Poland, S.Korea, Finland and 40 other countries.

    Let the American people keep their guns. Live free or die!

    Let Poland be Poland!

    To repeat, the highest suicide rates are in countries where the citizens have no access to guns (Japan, South Korea, Lithuania, Poland); guns may confer a sense of security; lack of guns may instill a sense of powerlessness, helplessness and fears that increase the suicide rate. Who knows?

    A complex area meriting more study, more light and less heat. Let’s not be too quick on the draw!

    Since Cain slew Abel, we’ve wondered why!

  5. ugh ugh!

    in other newsys…..

    We’ve Got to Break This Mindset That Policing Is the Only Tool
    Saturday, November 04, 2017
    By Janine Jackson, FAIR | Interview

    Janine Jackson: The litany of instances of police violence and misconduct is both infuriating and almost numbing. Our guest’s new book suggests we reconsider our understanding of policing, see it less as a tool that has on some occasions been used for abuse, and more as a tool for abuse, a system that does considerable harm even when functioning as designed. That reflects more closely the history of the institution in this country, and it’s really only seeing things that radically — going to the root — that lets us see a way out, not a way back to some imagined time in which there was harmony between police and community everywhere, but forward to a time in which policies of punishment don’t distort so many societal functions, and consign huge numbers of especially black and brown people to the margins.

    The book is called The End of Policing; author Alex Vitale is professor of sociology and coordinator of the Policing and Social Justice Project at Brooklyn College. He joins us now by phone. Welcome back to CounterSpin, Alex Vitale.

    Alex Vitale: Thank you.

    People are offended, I think morally, when you suggest that the inequity of the impact of policing is not a bug but a feature. I think we tend to think of it as an institution made in a lab, you know: We need protection from criminals, so let’s create “law enforcement.” I wonder if you would tell us a little bit of the actual history of US policing that shapes the role that we see it playing today.

    Sure. There’s kind of a standard liberal narrative, academic narrative, historical narrative, about the police, that begins with the London Metropolitan Police formed in 1829. And the idea behind it, that’s propagated behind it, is that it was an improvement over the kind of semi-professional watch, that was made up of volunteers and others pressed into service that would walk around at night, on the one hand, and the use of the militia to put down riots and disorder on the other hand. And the feeling was that this would be a civilian force under the control of local authorities, and would engage in a kind of neutral enforcement of the law.

    But the reality is, is that the model for the London Metropolitan Police actually is directly tied to the British occupation of Ireland. And the person who creates the London police, Robert Peel — Robert, Bob, the Bobbies — had been in charge of the British occupation of Ireland, and it was there that he begins to develop the idea of a civilian force that could be used to put down rural uprisings more efficiently than relying on the British army, which had been tied up in the Napoleonic Wars, was overstretched and highly indebted. So he creates the Irish Peace Preservation Force, which is located in local communities, which allows for better surveillance and preemptive action to put down social unrest.

    London, during this period, is awash in this newly industrializing working class, that’s come from rural areas, and the job of the police was to micromanage the lives of this new industrial urban workforce, in a way that tried to mold them into a reliable workforce. So there were all kinds of little minor nuisance laws that were enforced, as well as proscriptions on, you know, drunk and disorderly behavior, etc., that had the purpose of getting people to go home to their families, get up in the morning and go to work and be productive, and to try to stamp out lifestyles that weren’t tied to a standard industrial work life. At the same time, they put down riots, they put down labor movements, they attacked strikers, etc.

    And we can see this in the US context as well, with the creation of forces to drive Native American populations out, to drive out Mexicans from what was becoming Texas at the time, to stamp out workers movements, to shoot miners in Pennsylvania, etc. And so the book basically argues that the origins of policing should be understood as intimately tied to three major forms of accumulation during the 19th century, and these are slavery, colonialism and the new industrial workforce.

    So it’s always been a kind of social engineering, if you will. The definition of crime itself has been very much shaped by the social control impetus of the enterprise of policing.

    It was a new way of constructing state power that was more fine-tuned than relying on the army and the militia. It was able to produce legitimacy for the state in a way that the army was not; it relied on brute power. And so this was much more efficient for the state, and the state immediately began on this kind of mythmaking, of saying that, well, of course we understand the state is legitimate, because these are liberal democracies of some form, and therefore any expression of state power is legitimate. But all of that discourse completely hides slavery, completely hides the suppression of workers movements, and so the actual tasks of this seemingly legitimate state are in fact designed to reproduce race and class inequalities, and the police are just a softer touch in carrying out that mission.

    You can certainly see a worldview at work that is fomented, I think, by media, in which you want police to have all of the weapons, and you want them to have freedom to do anything at all, because there are good and bad people in the world, and cops protect the good from the bad. When major percentages of people are going to prison for nonviolent drug offenses, for example, this idea that there are different sorts of people, bad criminals who do harm and good noncriminals, you have to challenge that.

    This is the problem with all this “thin blue line” and “war on cops” discourse that’s out there, is that it assumes that the world is divided up between good people and bad people, and that the only way to produce safety, to protect the good from the bad, is through coercive state power: the threat of arrest, the use of violence.

    And of course, when we look at middle-class, leafy suburban communities, they don’t need police to manage their social problems. They have mechanisms and resources to regulate those things themselves, and, of course, they’re beneficiaries, in large part, from the basic political and economic arrangements. And so no one feels like, oh, of course they need heavy-handed policing in those communities. It’s poor people who are perceived to be only responsive to this kind of coercive power.

  6. I’d like to take a second here to say thank you to all on here that have served in our military. I hope you have and are having a fine Veterans Day and hope you know that many of us truly appreciate the job you have done or are doing.

  7. Chief Justice Roger B. Taney in the 1857 Dred Scott v Sandford 7-2 majority decision wrote what many considered “common sense” at the time:

    “[Entitlement to the privileges and immunities of citizens] would give to persons of the negro race, who were recognized [sic] as citizens in any one State of the Union, the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, singly or in companies, without pass or passport, and without obstruction, to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased at every hour of the day or night without molestation, unless they committed some violation of law for which a white man would be punished; and it would give them the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went. And all of this would be done in the face of the subject race of the same color, both free and slaves, and inevitably producing discontent and insubordination among them, and endangering the peace and safety of the State.”

    I would like that the privileges and immunities of United States citizenship to still apply to all citizens and to me. That, to me, is “common sense”. In the meantime, we must remember 42 U.S.C. §1983:

    “Every person who, under color of any statute, ordinance, regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution and laws, shall be liable to the party injured in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper proceeding for redress ….”

    Most, if not all, “common sense” gun control legislation is blatantly unconstitutional. It is unfortunate that so many Supreme Court Justices would disagree with that assertion.

  8. THE EXCULPATION OF JUDGE ROY MOORE: (I feel free to be like Msfree)

    Before burning Judge Moore at the stake or crucifying him, think of these other cases and other facts. Remember, the Salem Witch Trials when a half-dozen young girls lied or confabulated to accuse dozens of innocents of witchcraft. Remember Tawana Brawley and the Duke Lacrosse Case. But remember, too, why we have statutes of limitations. People’s memories change over time. Facts from disparate events are blended into one imagined memory. A psychiatric process called CONFABULATION often occurs.
    Before considering anything, notice the writings on that yearbook are forged! Check it out on the Internet. (1) Two different inks used. (2) The numbers 77 are written by two different hands. (3) Beverley Nelson’s own stepson has gone on twitter video and said he doesn’t believe her. (4) Did Gadsden’s Olde Hickory House restaurant serve alcohol; if so she had be 18 to work there as a “waitress”. (5) So offended by the assault, she kept his inscription for 40 years. (6) The first “1977” is slanted up; all other writing slanted down. (7) She left her yearbook on the counter beside where he always sat; she wrote, ”He sat at the counter in the same seat night after night. I remember exactly where he sat.” (8) He signed a page about three pages inside the yearbook. Did he think she was 18 and a high school grad? (9) He wrote “To”; he didn’t write “To Beverly”; (10) His discursive ts have straight crosses in the yearbook; in other examples, his ts have slight curves and are slanted up. CONCLUSION: Too many questions!!!!
    Remember Ireland in 19th and early 20th century where average age of men marrying was early 30s and women 18. (Man had to wait to inherit farm, before he could marry.)
    Now consider this from the INTERNET “I appreciate your opinion. However, my mother was married at 18, and had me at 19 – her husband – my dad- was 15 years older than her – and he started to court when she was very late 17. My grandfather has the same story with my grandmother. I admit I’m from the south – South Philly. I don’t see how anyone can project their 2017 tastes back on 1977 – you wind up stereotyping too many good fathers and husbands. Please reconsider this part of your opinion.”
    JUDGE ROY MOORE: Beverley Nelson did not tell anyone for two years when she says she told her younger sister. (Told her what?) She told her husband 13 years ago (25 YEARS AFTER THE FACT), and mother 4 years ago (35 YEARS AFTER THE FACT.) She kept the yearbook and inscription of the man she alleges assaulted her. Wouldn’t she have erased the inscription? Thrown out the yearbook? Torn out the page? (It was only the third page in, a photo of an old building/factory.) She says she left the restaurant with Moore at 10:00 P.M., figuring she could call her boyfriend later, telling him not to pick her up, for she was getting a ride home with Moore. It was “a cold” night. She knew the boyfriend was on his way. Even if it were a 5 minute ride to her house, the boyfriend would already have left his house. She’d have left her boyfriend stranded. In fact, the boyfriend had already arrived by the time she left Moore’s car. How often did her boyfriend pick her up? How often did she get a ride home from someone else? Something’s fishy about her story? She didn’t tell her boyfriend because he had a “violent temper.” Guess he would NOT have been mad if she’d taken a ride home with someone else and left him waiting for no one?
    Here’s what else is fishy: She says he parked between the dumpster and back of the restaurant. When is trash taken to the dumpster? At the close of business! He parked where someone was likely to turn on the lights, walk out and empty the trash?
    Here’s what else is fishy: She says Moore “tried to take off my shirt.” In late December, early January (1 to 2 weeks after December 22) the average nighttime temperature in Gadsden Alabama plummets to the thirties. (In fact the “average” low is 31 degrees F on January 1, 1978.) She said it was “a cold night.” She said “I went outside to wait.” It’s 10 P.M. “My boyfriend was late”; Certainly she was wearing more than “a shirt”. Likely a heavy sweater or heavy jacket! How do you pull a shirt off over a sweater or jacket?
    Here’s what else is fishy: She says she worked at restaurant when she was 16. Most restaurants serve alcohol. Gadsden legalized the sale of alcohol at restaurants in 1972, I’ve read. She describes herself as a waitress. She’d have to be 18 to serve alcohol. Did she pass herself off as 18 to everyone? Is that why she brought a yearbook to the restaurant? To convince some she’d graduated?
    Let’s consider the “charges” against Judge Moore. Only two would be “illegal” if true. (I’m excluding the 28 year old who said he grabbed her fanny one time in 1991).
    Here’s how one person responded on the Internet: “In three instances he asked permission from the parents to take their daughter on a date and all three were above the age of consent. (One parent said no, and he went out with two.) He was a perfect gentleman that did everything above-board.” In the fourth instance, the only complaint is he kissed her “forcefully” at the end of the night.
    But in two other instances he allegedly broke character: in one, he snuck behind the mother’s back, drove out to nowhere (his house) and fondled the 14 year old; in the other, with the 16 year old, he groped her in the car behind the restaurant, held her neck, pushed her head toward his crotch. She resisted. He let go.
    The fact that he dated three teenagers (17 and 18) when he was in his early 30s isn’t proof, or even evidence, that he’s a child molester. The accusations of fondling (he touched my breast, grabbed my breast, tried to lift up my shirt) are more serious, if believed, but not capital offenses.
    Is the 14 year old’s story true? Who knows? It is 40 years old. Does she misremember? Did he act the perfect gentleman and she misremembered, imagined or fabricated certain facts? She admits as a teenager that her parents were separated, going through a tough divorce, she abused drugs, alcohol and was promiscuous. She’s stated everyone in town knew she was wayward, wild, troubled, not a saint. So who knows what really happened 40 years ago? She admits trying to commit suicide at 16, after a period of drug abuse, alcohol abuse and “boyfriends.” As an adult, she had three divorces and filed for bankruptcy three times. A troubled youth, a troubled adulthood!
    The 16 year old waitress changed high schools? Why. The schools are only five miles apart. She had a boyfriend. What was her past? We don’t know yet, except she says she competed in beauty contests and had a full figure. When she showed the judge the high school year book, did the judge assume she’d graduated and was over 18? Who knows? We know she in 1999 Judge Moore presided over her divorce case. Was she bitter at the outcome? Who knows?
    Pablo Picasso was 45 when he began a long term relationship with his 17 year old French mistress, Marie-Therese Walter
    “Princess Diana had just turned 20 when she married the 32-year-old Prince Charles. Not everyone sees this kind of age difference as a scandal.”
    Gary Newsome: “Over a decade ago, San Francisco politician Gavin Newsome dated a 17 year old while he was 38. Nothing was said. He bought her drinks at 19, and nothing was said (California’s legal drinking age is 21 year)
    Jerry Seinfeld, 38, dated a 17 year old, Soshanna Lonstein (“It wasn’t a date, I just took her to a restaurant.”) and then courted her for four straight years. “They dated for four years”. She moved from New York to LA to be with him.
    Elvis born in January 1935. His future wife Priscilla Beulieu was born in May 1945. Elvis, drafted into the army in March 1958, was stationed in Friedburg, Germany in October 1958, and in September 1959, met 14 year old Priscilla there, and began dating her (he’s 24 she’s 14.) Her parents approved. They continuously dated for 7.5 years and then were married.
    Let’s agree, too, that there are some mature and precocious teenagers. Let’s agree that there are some wild, precocious, promiscuous teenagers. Let’s agree that some young people exaggerate. And let’s face the facts: some girls can pass for young women at 16 or 17.
    Five girls posed in Playboy at 17; one at 16. In 1975, in 18 states you could be a Playboy Bunny at 18, in 11 other states at 19.
    In 1975, to work as a Playboy Bunny you had to serve liquor (be of drinking age.) In 1975 the legal drinking age throughout the South, in all New England, New York, New Jersey and most of Northeast (Wisconsin, Minnesota, Michigan, Pennsylvania) was 18 (Eighteen). Thirteen states had a minimum age 18 and 5 others at 18 you could drink (or serve) beer only. Only 11 states had a minimum age above 19. (20 or 21) That means many 18 year olds were Playboy Playmates and many dated older men. Some no doubt were 17. (using phony IDs.) Throughout the 1970s bars, clubs, lounges were crowded with 18 and 17 year olds who were courted by men in their late twenties and early thirties and older. So what?
    Now here comes Judge Roy Moore who harmlessly dated an 18 and 17 year old. Did nothing but kiss them. Acted a perfect gentlemen. So what! Before throwing stones, ask yourself again: “What if the 14 and 16 year old lied, exaggerated, misremembered, confabulated? Only two saying he did something wrong – – -touched, groped. The others describe a perfect gentleman. One describes herself as a teenage drinker, druggie, sexually promiscuous, from a broken home, parents going through a divorce, at times suicidal. What if she exaggerated?
    But even if true, it was 40 years ago, and the improper conduct stopped . . . went no further then alleged fondling or groping. He took one home. Never saw her again. The other got out of his car and into her boyfriend’s car. For these bad acts, we condemn a man for life? Disqualify him for office. Forty-year old allegations? He gets the Scarlet Letter for life? He gets burned at the stake?
    The world is more forgiving of Roman Polanski who admitted drugging and raping a 14 year old. In Europe and the US, they still give Polanski awards for his movies.
    3. The statutory age to marry in most states is 18. With parental consent, it’s 16.
    How many young women, age 17 or 18, have married men in their early thirties? How many young women have gone to dinner with older men?
    Find statistics and you’ll find it’s not uncommon.
    An example:
    “Courtney Alexis Stodden (born August 29, 1994) is an American reality show contestant, actress, model, recording artist and a national spokesperson for PETA, the animal rights activist organization.
    After competing in beauty pageants in her home state of Washington, then 16-year-old Stodden came to international attention when she married then 50-year-old actor Doug Hutchison in 2011.”
    In 2007, The CDC reports that 48% of high school students have had sexual intercourse. Some young people are sexually promiscuous, and one of Judge Moore’s accusers admits that she was!
    4. CONFABULATION (See footnote #1): Is she confabulating events from her messed-up young life? Her checkered teenage years are compounded by the fact that she subsequently had three divorces. Hardly a pillar of the community! Hardly, what we’d call, a stable personality! Hardly a reliable witness!
    Also remember, she allegedly went “out” with him “twice”; yet told her girlfriends she was “dating” him. Told her girlfriends around the same time or later? How much later? Exaggerated to girlfriends? Was the fabricated tale braggingly told to contemporaries and did it become “the truth” in her own mind?
    FALSE ACCUSATIONS: Again, remember those who were falsely accused. The Duke Lacrosse Players, for example. Remember 15 year old Tawana Brawley’s lies, . . . the cases are endless.


    (a) Remember books and movies about the falsely accused, e.g. “To Kill a Mockingbird!”
    (b) Remember the movie “Blame it on Rio”: a 40 year old man infatuated with a 17 year old girl (a comedy; the relationship is consummated; she’s the initiator)
    (c) Remember the movie “American Beauty” 42 year old infatuated with 16 year old (no relationship; at the very end, he suddenly recognizes her innocence and stops his advances.)
    (d) Remember Gone with the Wind? Rhett Butler was 32 when he first met 17 year old Scarlet O’Hara, and was infatuated with her from the beginning!
    (e) Remember Nabokov’s “Lolita”, a story of pederasty, a lengthy predatory relationship. Judge Moore’s accusers may have been precocious and Lolita-like, or innocents, but Judge Moore did not consummate anything with them.
    (f) Remember Taxi Driver where 12 year old Jodie Foster played a 13 year old prostitute? There are prostitutes who are that young, and in real life there are promiscuous, wild, crazy girls that are young, too. No one alleges Judge Moore had sexual intercourse with anyone under 18, as far we know. He allegedly groped a 14 and 16 year old, 40 years ago.

    To re-emphasize: remember that Judge Roy Moore did not try to consummate anything with any young woman, of legal age or not. He kissed an 18 and 17 year old. For this he gets burned at the stake? For a forty-year old accusation he gets crucified?
    In “To Kill a Mockingbird”, a young country woman falsely accuses a black man who rejects her. We all know the story. She repeatedly swore to “the truth”. In the book/movie, the jury believed her. The readers, the audience and Gregory Peck know she lied. He didn’t rape her. He did kiss her; rather she kissed and hugged him, and he rejected her. Is that what happened to Judge Moore?

    5. B. CONFABULATION: (In psychiatry, confabulation (verb: confabulate) is a disturbance of memory, defined as the production of fabricated, distorted, or misinterpreted memories about oneself or the world, without the conscious intention to deceive.)
    The mind can play tricks on people, especially impressionable young women, and the Press can manipulate young minds (Review the Tawana Brawley case: 15 year old Tawana accused 4 to 6 white men of raping her. The Press reported all of it as true. It was a flat out fabrication! No forensic evidence supported any of her allegations! Forensic evidence refuted it. Multiple witnesses proved she fabricated the entire story.)
    With Judge Moore, the accuser says she told her mother “10 years after the fact”; the accuser says she told two teenage friends about it. About what? “Dating an older man?” What if she had heard Judge Moore was dating an 18 year old and she imagined or wished it were she? Did she falsely “brag” to her young friends? Do teenagers make up stories? The other accuser says she told her younger sister two years after the fact, her husband 27 years after the fact and her mother 36 years after the fact. Her story is too flimsy, too thin to force a man to walk a plank on it.

    I declare Judge Moore “Not guilty!” I say you can’t figuratively lynch someone and destroy his career based on 40 year old stories of fondling, groping. I say these accusers today are CONFABULATING!!!


    Even if Judge Moore were guilty of two instances of groping (sexual assault, sexual touching) forty years ago, what should his punishment?

    (1) THE BOB MENENDEZ CASE: Several 16 year-old Domincan girls (prostitutes) have accused Congressman Bob Menendez of having sex with them. Two have written letters to that effect. Although Obama’s Justice Department was not able to “prove” the charges, it did find incriminating, circumstantial and “corroborating” evidence, including a Pilot’s testimony that Menendez flew on private jets with “young girls” heading to parties in the Domincan Republic. “Presented with specific, corroborated allegations that defendants Menendez and Melgen had sex with underage prostitutes in the Dominican Republic, the Government responsibly and dutifully investigated those serious allegations. The indictment here, of course, charges only corruption and does not include any allegations of soliciting underage prostitution.” (Menendez lied to FBI telling them he only took 3 flights on Dr. Melgen’s private jet. One of Melgen’s pilots testified he took at least 16 flights.)
    Should we believe those girls, too, and should Bob Menendez be kicked out of Congress based on allegations?
    (“Prostitution is legal in the Dominican Republic for anyone over the age of 18, and the U.S. cannot prosecute anyone on sex tourism charges unless it can be proven that the prostitute solicited was underage and that the hypothetical perpetrator traveled with the intention of having sex with minors.”)

    Judge Moore did not have sex with minors; no one alleges he had sexual intercourse; at most, two minors allege he groped them; 40 years ago; has that been proven?
    (2) & (3) CONGRESSMEN STUDDS AND CRANE: “In 1983, Rep. Gerry Studds, 46, D-Mass., acknowledged Thursday he had a homosexual relationship with a 17-year-old page in 1973 (Studds was 36) and made sexual advances to two other pages (Studds was 40) as reported by the House ethics committee. Rep. Daniel Crane, 47, R-Ill., admitted having sex with a 17-year-old female page in 1980 (Crane was 44). . . .
    “The Committee on Standards of Official Conduct voted 11-1 in a private session to recommend reprimands and adopt the report of special counsel Joseph Califano, who has spent a year investigating charges of sexual misconduct on Capitol Hill. “House Speaker Thomas O’Neill said the report was disturbing but took comfort in the committee’s finding that sexual misconduct was not widespread (in Congress).” Disturbing to O’Neill, but no big deal!

    Both Crane and Studds admitted to multiple acts of sexual intercourse with these 17 year olds, who were decades younger. Both were subsequently censured. Neither was expelled from Congress nor prohibited from running for election. And these were employees (Congressional pages) they were having sexual intercourse with. Crane lost his re-election bid in 1984. Studds was re-elected about 10 times in Massachusetts and served until 1997.”

    No one accuses Roy Moore of having sexual intercourse with a minor, nor a sixteen year old, nor a seventeen year old. He stands accused of “groping” a 16 year old and 14 year old. One time, each! Twice in his life! Unlike Studds and Crane, he denies the charges. Unlike the contemporary complaints against Studds and Crane, the complaints against Moore are 40 years old. For 40 year old charges of groping (grabbing breasts, trying to pull up a shirt; touching a bra and panties), they want to crucify Judge Moore.


    I believe through the power of the Holy Spirit Judge Roy Moore, a West Point graduate, Vietnam Veteran, faithful husband, father and grandfather of 35 years has been restored in Christ’s name and his spirit was and is made free of any hold the vicious media, stone throwers, or other powers of evil have had or ever will have on him. He has stood tall. In the face of all the calumnies and falsehoods, he still stands tall, a humble servant of the Lord. He is vindicated!

    FOOTNOTES: Arguendo ad infinitum:
    1: CONFABULATION: In psychiatry, confabulation (verb: confabulate) is a disturbance of memory, defined as the production of fabricated, distorted, or misinterpreted memories about oneself or the world, without the conscious intention to deceive.
    2. The Washington Post reported the 14 year old received calls from Roy Moore “in her bedroom.” Her mother told another newspaper, (Breitbart, the Washington Times), that she did not have a bedroom phone.
    3. She can’t remember whether she was served alcohol on her first or second visit to Moore’s house. But from this we can infer, her memory is that she was not served alcohol twice. And from this we can infer her memory is foggy. Of course it is: She was 14; it’s 40 years ago; she’s confused, very likely confabulating! Did Judge Moore go to the bathroom, come out fully dressed, and she herself took off her own blouse and pants? Did he tell her to get dressed and drive her home? Did she concoct a story of seduction where there was none?
    4. Again, Beverly Nelson’s story has many holes. A “cold” winter night in Gadsden, temperatures average around 35 degrees F. She steps outside to wait for her boyfriend. She’s likely wearing a heavy coat or heavy sweater. She says she enters Moore’s cold car and seconds later he is pulling up her “shirt”? What happened to the heavy coat/sweater? Her boyfriend picks her up at @ 10:00 P.M.? She couldn’t wait a minute or two? How often did he fail to show? Never? Why park near a dumpster: that’s exactly where, after closing, employees empty trash? She says lights in back were off. Of course, they turn lights on when they go out back to empty trash. Her boyfriend pulls up after she walks from the back of restaurant? Notices nothing? Says nothing? Sometimes, apparently, she waits awhile for her boyfriend; knowing that she surely had a heavy coat on standing outside. B. The discrepancy in the signatures, especially the different number sevens; the two inks; the printed “e”s don’t match Moore’s on other samples. He doesn’t write “To Beverly”; the 1977 is slanted up; etc. C. Her own stepson doesn’t believe her!!!
    5. Quotes: “There have been at least seven Playboy Playmates of the Month who were under 18 years of age. Almost all appeared before 1967”. In 1964, at the age of 18, Donna Michelle became the youngest Playmate of the Year ever. “Susan Bernard said she was not quite 18 years old when she posed naked in front of a Christmas tree in 1966.” Barbi Benton began working at Playboy at age 18. Hefner fell in love at first sight and asked her for a date: “Upon being asked, she reportedly demurred to the then-42-year-old Hefner: ‘I don’t know, I’ve never dated anyone over 24 before.” To which Hefner replied, “That’s all right, neither have I.’” I have previously listed the stars who dated 17 year olds: Elvis, PIcasso, Springer, Newsome, etc.
    6. Here’s what I posted on Twitchy: (11-15-2017)
    Two young women said they dated him and he acted the perfect gentleman. A third said she dated him and he ended the night with a “forceful” kiss. That’s it! A mother said he asked her if he could date her teenage daughter and she said no. Another said he asked her out and she said no. That’s four (5) young women who said he did nothing wrong (unless you think asking is wrong). The reason he flatly denies the remaining two are because they’re the ones accusing him of groping (sexual assault.) And they’re the @40 year old stories. (from dubious sources); one admits drugs, alcohol, sex, broken family marred her early troubled teen years and subsequently had three divorce; the other her stepson disbelieves, she’s presented a forged yearbook “Ray Moore D. A.”, said she never contacted Moore again in her life (Moore was judge in her divorce) etc, etc. (35 degrees she’s standing outside in her “shirt” mentions no heavy jacket or sweater; she says Moore parks his car between the dumpster and restaurant, the one place most likely someone will dump the trash at the end of the night, etc, etc; just as she flees Moore’s car, her boyfriend’s car appears, she gets in and tells him nothing.)
    Today’s accuser Tina Johnson says in 1991 when she was 28 he grabbed her buttocks (once.) She didn’t tell anyone. Like other accusers, credibility is an issue. (Drugs, alcohol use, forging checks) a checkered past, a forged signature raises questions. Questions! Reasonable doubts about 40 year old and 25 year old stories!
    There’s reasons why we have statutes of limitations.
    Look up the psychiatric term: Confabulation!
    Folks mix memories: misremember events!
    Older men who dated 17 year olds: Elvis Presley, Pablo Picasso, Jerry Springer, Gary Newsome, etc, etc. At least three 17 year olds and one 16 year old were centerfolds in Playboy.
    In 1975, in 13 or more states, 18 year olds could drink and work as waitresses in bars and restaurants. Only 11 states had a drinking age over 19 (20 or 21).
    Lots of young women dated men in their early thirties.
    Who’s kidding whom?

    1. When someone has to write up the details of a rare bird, I throw out the sighting if all they do is compare their bird to other species to confirm it.

      Back in the day…..the guy liked younger females. Now we deal with it.

    2. “Older men who dated 17 year olds: Elvis Presley, Pablo Picasso, Jerry Springer, Gary Newsome, etc, etc.”

      Jerry Lee Lewis beat them by four years. And he married the child!

  11. This is a rare bird tossed and buffeted in the vicious winds of the Democrats’ ” Pervert Storm . ” One should not attempt to defend the indefensible . Judge Roy Moore may be a libertine and a reprobate ; a man with a big hat , a Bible , a gun , the Ten Commandments outdoor pool pledging, and an inflatable teen cheerleader doll . Or , He may not be . Fusion GPS and the Oppo Research hatchet Job Hillary and Podesta and Crew did on Donald Trump , making themselves the shameless perpetrators of a dirty and disgusting hoax to take him out , should be sufficient proof that, contrary to popular perception, Perception is not Reality ! This is why we call it Point Of View. The featherheads want to lynch the guy in hearsay. As Michelle Obama would say : We’re Better Than That !

    1. It is hard to believe that none of the accusers kept diaries. Almost all the women I know kept teen diaries. A little book with an easily picked lock on a strap that closed the cover tightly. Every time a heart would go over the standard 70 beats per minute another entry was sure to be cataloged. An encounter with a grown man? Sure to make the evening’s entry. My sister still has hers going back to junior high. They are not the kind of books that people throw away.

  12. ugh ugh ugh!

    in other grope newsies

    Radio host accuses Sen. Al Franken of kissing, groping her during 2006 USO tour
    NEW YORK DAILY NEWS Updated: Thursday, November 16, 2017, 11:12 AM

    1. Ugh, ugh, ugh, you say?

      A British gentleman comes home and finds his wife in bed with three men. ”What’s this!!!!” he yells. “Hello, hello, hello!!!!!!”

      His wife says, “Aren’t you going to say hello to me, dear?”

  13. Sharon Simone lives in Belmont Mass

    Four Sisters Who Confronted Their Father and Their Pain
    Posted on September 10, 2015

    My father, was a Los Angeles Police Officer. He was a child sexual abuser, and child rapist. He used weapons on me to silence me. Edward Rodgers was a former state and federal law enforcement official. His daughter’s story is below:

    By Patricia Brennan, March 20 1994

    “At times, “Ultimate Betrayal” (a made for TV movie that was broadcast in the 1990’s) is not an easy movie to watch. Based on a true story of incest and physical abuse, it follows four adult sisters as they share their memories and decide to sue their father in civil court.

    Their precedent-setting 1990 lawsuit in a Denver court has repercussions on Capitol Hill. If Rep. Patricia Shroeder (D-Colo.) gets her legislation passed, the Child Abuse Accountability Act will establish procedures to allow child abuse victims to claim court-ordered financial restitution by garnisheeing the federal (but not military) pensions of their abusers even years after the abuse occurred. Currently, federal pensions can be garnisheed for alimony and child support.

    In the film, Marlo Thomas plays Sharon Rodgers Simone, eldest of seven children in a Colorado Springs, Colo., family. Now a middle-aged wife and mother, she is a fearful person on the edge of a nervous breakdown, a woman who sleeps in her car at night, returning at dawn to help get the children off to school. Her husband is keeping the family together.

    When Sharon’s youngest sister, Mary Rodgers LaRocque (Ally Sheedy), calls to ask if she’ll join in a lawsuit against their father, Sharon learns that her three sisters also are leading dysfunctional lives. All four have sought psychological help; three have attempted suicide.

    But unlike Sharon, who has no explanation for her undefined fears, the other sisters know why: As children, they say, they were sexually abused by their father. Sharon hears her sisters’ stories but denies that such horrors occurred — certainly, she believes, not to her. As Thomas put it, “Only Sharon had trouble connecting the dots.”

    Filled with shame, the sisters — Mary, Susan (Mel Harris) and Beth Medlicott (Kathryn Dowling) — had never confided in one another.

    “One of the things that Sue says on the stand is, ‘All my life, I thought this was my shame,’ ” said Thomas. “All of us carry little secrets that have tremendous power because they’re secrets. A secret tears you apart; it stops you. But if you let it out, it has no power. It doesn’t have to be a secret as big as theirs. The secret can be that you just weren’t loved, just the fact that your parents didn’t have time for you.”

    But Mary’s secret was a big one, one she had never told. Sheedy, in one of the most touching and unsettling scenes in the movie, recounts to her older sisters the repeated sexual abuse, including a rape that occurred when she was very young and was the only child left at home.

    Edward J. Rodgers Jr. said that never happened. Rodgers had been an FBI agent for 27 years when he retired from that career in 1967 and became a child-abuse investigator for the 4th Judicial District Attorney’s Office (El Paso County) in Colorado Springs. He also served on the board of a group that supports the rights of abused children.

    The same year he retired from the FBI, he separated from the mother of his seven children. Two years later, he married a woman with a son and two daughters.

    In 1990, long after the Rodgers children were grown, Susan Rodgers Hammond and Sharon Rodgers Simone sued their father, not only to gain money to pay for their therapy, but also hoping for a public accounting and to hear their father acknowledge what happened.

    That he would not do. Edward Rogers failed to appear in court, and in a written deposition, he denied that the sexual abuse ever occurred, although he admitted that he had been a physically rough disciplinarian with a quick temper.

    Nor would his sons Edward, Steve and John, who are seen in the film being beaten as children, participate in the lawsuit. They are seen in the film berating their sisters in the courtroom at the close of the trial. Sharon’s therapist (played by Eileen Brennan), did testify, as did Sharon’s husband, Patrick Simone.

    Without the defendant present, and with no defense counsel, a six-woman Denver jury heard the testimony, considered the evidence for 90 minutes, and awarded them $2.3 million, the largest settlement (at that time) in a case of this nature.

    Thus far, said Thomas, Rodgers has never paid a penny of that sum. Schroeder’s bill, introduced in November of 1993, would tap into Rodgers’s FBI pension. Currently, a federal employee’s pension can be garnisheed only for court-ordered child support or alimony.

    Thomas pointed out that unlike other cases that have caught public attention recently, “This isn’t a case of false memory or repressed memory,” said Thomas. “The other sisters said, ‘I’ve known this all my life,’ but Sharon wouldn’t allow herself to admit that.”

    They related all of this to producer/director Donald Wrye, writer Gregory Goodall and a therapist in an emotional two-day session before the movie went into production. Simone reviewed at least 10 drafts of Goodall’s script. Then the actors were cast.

    “The abuse psychologist we spoke to said everybody plays a different role in the family,” said Thomas. “Sue was the one who fought back and got beaten the most. Sharon was the one who tried to make her father calm down and feel loved, met him at the door, brought him a beer. She thought she was helping by helping her father feel loved. But underneath, there was the guilt of the collaborator.

    “To me, what was very touching was that she {Sharon} didn’t want to lose her father. Every girl needs her daddy. Sharon told me, ‘There’s a part of me that still loves my father.’ Her fantasy was that they would have this trial, the father would be found guilty, and then they would all go around and help other families. She said, ‘I thought maybe we’d make all this bad become good for somebody.’ ”

    Thomas said Sharon eventually came to understand that her vision of family healing was an unlikely scenario. Instead, helping make the movie and working for the Child Abuse Accountability Act have become her way of making “bad become good for somebody.”

    Thomas said after she read the script, she gave the movie a lot of thought.

    “I’ve never done an ‘abuse movie’ before,” she said. “I put {the script} down and I thought, there’s something very special here. It took a lot of courage for these women to stand up to their father. There’s something basic about having your pain acknowledged, having your reality acknowledged.

    “The father had every opportunity to acknowledge his daughters. They asked him to talk, they asked him for money for their therapy, and as a last resort, they sued him to get money for their therapy. But that doesn’t seem to be the real issue. The real issue is, if Dad won’t acknowledge what happened, maybe the jury will. That was the triumph for them.”


    THE DENVER POST – Voice of the Rocky Mountain Empire
    May 17, 1990
    Sisters win sex lawsuit vs. dad $2.3 million given for years of abuse
    By Howard Prankratz
    Denver Post Legal Affairs Writer

    1. Terrible story that I have seen in the family in one of my friends. No need to go into details of what happened. Just a sick man that refused help and maintained his denial until his death.

  14. Problem is we (mostly Msfree) bring in these extreme cases that have nothing to do with the issue. We’re not talking about rape, sexual intercourse, pre-adolescents.

    A 30 year old dates an 18 year old! Every bar in Boston in the 1970s-1980s was packed with 30 year olds and 18 year olds. (Legal drinking age: 18).

    Without parental consent, an 18 year old can marry whomever she chooses. Some 18 y.o. young women like older men!

    We all agree unwanted groping is bad.

    We all agree a 30 year old groping a 14 or 16 year old is very bad. (Unless the 16 year old is passing herself off as 18 and is seductive, promiscuous posing in playboy, using a fake I.D., etc., etc., and then it’s . . . . I’ll let you decide.

  15. Abe calls “facts” “pointless”. The “fact” is it’s neither against the law nor immoral to date or kiss an 18 year old.

    So focus on the two “underage” girls, 14 and 16, with 40 year old stories, of dubious credibility. (Troubled, checkered pasts; see above for details.)

    The 16 year old: Phony yearbook story; phony story about being groped and having her “shirt” pulled up.

    Here’s some more facts from Alabama.


    Gadsden is 62 miles northeast of Birmingham. It might be a tad colder in the winter.

    Alabama-Auburn game Nov. 26, 1977 Alabama Score: 48-21 Legion Field, Birmingham : high temperature: 39; low: 26; mean: 36.

    Beverley Nelsone said he signed her yearbook 12-22-77. She says “one to two weeks later” she was standing outside Olde Hickory House at 10:00 P.M. “It was cold.” How cold? What was she wearing? A heavy jacket and sweater? How could he try to pull up “her shirt”? Jacket open? Sweater off?

    Here are the low temperatures for December 26 through January 4. (Christmas and Christmas Eve, I presume she wasn’t working, or she’d have remembered that date. )
    Here are the Low Temperatures in Birmingham each night December 26 through Jan 4 (@ “one to two weeks later): 22 degrees F; 27F; 21F; 21F; 37F; 42F; 35F; 21F; 17F; 19F.

    She says she gets in Moore’s car, drives in back of restaurant. Car has no time to heat up. They’re both freezing, likely wearing heavy coats, gloves, hats, etc, . He parks “between dumpster and restaurant” where trash is always emptied at the end of the night. Where he’s most likely to be seen? How long are they there? 30 seconds? She says she’s “pushed” or “falls out of car”, gets up, walks to front and, lo and behold, there’s her boyfriend waiting and she says nothing about anything to him or anyone else; 2 years later she tells her younger sister something, “a story”?; then 10 years later she tells her mother; then 40 years later she tells the press.
    The only two days the low temp was in the low 40s was Dec. 24 & 25. (As said, the Olde Hickory House was likely closed Christmas Eve and Christmas Day.) The mean temperature for the month of January 1978 in Birmingham was 34 degrees F., as said the coldest winter in history for Birmingham.

    Beverly Nelson’s story is as phony as the yearbook signatures! She may believe it! As said, look up the psychiatric term Confabulation!


    And on 40 year old dubious allegations, some want to fry the man?

    For Congressman Dan Crane and Gerry Studds who admitted having on-going sexual intercourse with 17 year old Congressional pages (employees) on multiple occasions, they’re punishment is a “reprimand”.

    For Judge Moore who denies 40 year old charges of groping?

    Perhaps the search for “the truth” in this day and age is “pointless.”

    I cheer for the underdog. I don’t like piling on. I don’t like “mass hysteria”. Salem Witch Trials are more subtle these days and are often conducted by the MSM.

    I’ve seen what character assassins have done to honorable persons in contemporary times and throughout history.

    (Remember Zola’s pamphlet condemned the government (and Press and Public) for convicting an innocent man, Dreyfus, on flimsy evidence.

    1. Yep … Reading … substitute …. their … for … they’re .. in above : ‘ they’re punishment is a reprimand . ,’

  16. I know few care, and probably no one is listening or reading! So, I write in the hope that someone in cyberspace may comprehend and benefit; someone perhaps from some future time and place.

    Here’s the New York Times trying to be fair (with a few annotations) about Judge Roy Moore:

    NYT 11/19: “As with everything concerning Mr. Moore, accounts vary. Alice Bircheat, the longtime bookkeeper at the Y.M.C.A., said that she recalled “not one complaint” about Mr. Moore. (He was a longtime YMCA member) Terry White, 70, a former Gadsden police officer who worked security at the mall, said, “Nobody, as far as I know, ever complained.” (He was never “barred from the mall”, although some young women recall being “bothered” by him chatting them up: “too old” some said. Others would’ve said he was an older brother of five who liked to flirt, chat and tease. So what?) Myron K. Allenstein, a local lawyer who rented office space to Mr. Moore and later tried cases with him, insisted that Mr. Moore was a man of unimpeachable character. “He’s real down to earth but feels real strongly about what he believes,” he said. Mr. Allenstein noted that he was a Democrat who planned to vote for Mr. Moore in the Dec. 12 election.”

    Then the NYT talks about those “offended” by a 30 year old man flirting with young women: it was “not appropriate” according to one old lady.

    The NYT does mention that in his 1965 High School Yearbook he was voted “Most Likely to Succeed” and was elected “high school president”, then the NYT editorializes deprecatingly by saying “he was remembered more by his classmates as hard-working than sociable.” The NYT mentions he graduated in “the bottom quarter” of his West Point class. (He graduated 684 out of 800.) He apparently excelled at boxing there. He called the boxing ring “the great equalizer.” He was a fighter!!! He served in Vietnam, Later in life, after Law School and a stint as an Assistant D.A., and losing an election for a judgeship, he moved to Texas where he apparently studied and excelled at kickboxing, then spent some time working on a cattle ranch in Australia. He returned to Gadsden, resumed practicing law, and: “Mr. Allenstein remembered him as “a great orator” who was particularly gifted at closing arguments. He’d always say, “Myron you take care of the law, just get me to the jury,” Mr. Allenstein said, “Because he was a great talker.”

    The NYT continues “At a Christmas gathering in 1984, as he describes in his book, he met a 23-year-old woman named Kayla Kisor, 14 years his junior, whom he immediately recognized from a dance recital he had attended “many years before.” They married the next year.” Married at 38 to a 24-year-old woman! Perfect: for 33 years a happy marriage with 4 children; 5 granddaughters.

    We’ve all read of Moore’s fights for the Ten Commandments and against Gay Marriage. Lifelong, he’s been a fighter, who stood up for what he believed in!

    Of course, NYT closes with Kathy Sisson saying she’d heard of Moore’s alleged assault on the 14 year old, Leigh Corfman, a long time ago. CNN reports that Sisson was told in the 1990s by Corfman’s mother, her close friend; told what? the “story”; Leigh says she told her mother the story in the 1980s, ten years after the fact. In the law, that’s called triple hearsay. Ten years after X occurred, A told B; another ten years later, B told C; another 20 years later, A publicly says X occurred 40 years ago; and the proof is she told B 30 years ago, and B told C 20 years ago. (Of course A also says she told her friends she was “dating” an older man; she did not contemporaneously tell her friends any sordid details; those were first articulated (or confabulated apparently) ten years later.

    You see why we have credibility problems, hearsay evidence rules, and statutes of limitations?

    What if A was a confused adolescent, troubled, involved in sex, drugs, alcohol, who had a tendency to make up stories or exaggerate or confabulate? What if?

    Are we to crucify, condemn or throw stones at anyone based on 40 year old “what ifs?”

    What if everything happened exactly as the 14 and 16 year old said forty years ago? But there’s no “proof”! He signed a yearbook. So what? Looks like he didn’t sign it. Looks like two inks were used and part of the signature was forged. Well, he dated or asked on dates a half-dozen 18 year olds! So what? Three said no; two said he acted the perfect gentlemen and only kissed them; one said he kissed her one time only but it was forceful. So what? A 28 year old felon (check forger) says he grabbed her butt once! Never told anyone for years. So what?

    P.S. Today, 11-19, Alabama’s three largest newspapers endorsed Doug Jones over Roy Moore: “Vote for Decency” they said. (They’d all endorsed Hillary over Trump). Decency? Jones favors abortion for any reason throughout nine months of pregnancy. He publicly opposes a Congressional bill to limit abortions after 20 months. (Although he said yesterday, he supported Alabama’s law which limits abortions after 22 months.) He’s also publicly stated he’d oppose any law which “limits a woman’s right to choose . . .when the child is born, that’s when I become pro-life.” The “decent” words of Doug Jones!

  17. P.S.

    I remind myself of Franz Kafka’s “The Hunger Artist”! Or the tree felled in the wood by natural processes which no one hears; I guess I am like all men, “whose words have forked no lightning.”

    Then again, I say to myself, so what? keep punching, march on! Everybody loves a parade.

    So, Happy Thanksgiving Day, to one and all, except the Commie-Bun-Party-Dolls-and-their Droll-Masters of Deceit = socialists, liberals!!!

      1. P.S. You really shouldn’t have jumped the gun on this one. You should have said, “What do you mean by pointless?” but you don’t have the patience. Next time look before you leap. Its an old expression. I think it has something to do with creating facts that don’t exist. Like judging a man on 40 year old evidence instead of waiting for the facts to be proven.

        I’ll say it again. Pointless. And you proved my point, but only to me.
        And I also say to myself, so what? keep punching, march on! Everybody loves a parade. So put away your grenade.

  18. Charles Manson is dead. RIH, Charlie. Rest In Hell.

    And what did keeping him alive all these years accomplish? Nothing! One bullet and we are on with our lives. And all the a-holes like Tom Snyder and Charlie Rose that interviewed him suck, too. Why give a piece of shite like him a seat in front of a microphone? Why would a single word out of his mouth be worth listening to? Ratings and nothing else. Just another bit of proof that freak shows sell and there is always some carnival barker willing to compromise his craft for viewers and bucks. Pathetic!

  19. I apologize to Abe for misconstruing his point.
    I’ll debate the meaning of “pointless” no further.

    As for today’s well rehearsed spectacle on the Today Show, I say this (sticking to my guns and throwing a little TNT into the MSM’s attempt to rekindle 40-year-old unverifiable allegations):

    On NBC today’s show: Leigh Corfman misled the audience: when she was asked, Did you tell anyone immediately? She said, “Right after I told two of my good friends; and later another.” She lied later, when asked “Why did you wait (40 years, to tell): She said, “I did tell people; my family knew; family friends knew; my friends knew.”

    The first person in her family to “know” was her mother, told 13-15 years later, when Moore became “prominent” as a judge. She says she told her own children some 30-35 years after the fact. Told what? She dated Judge Moore? In the Washing Post, she said she only contemporaneously told her friends that she was “seeing” an older man; she mentioned “seeing” Moore to one. They recall being told this “as teenagers”! (14, 15, 17, 18 year olds?) Told what? They say she said she was “seeing” him or “dating” “an older man.” She never said she mentioned the sordid details to her teenage friends, nor do her teenage friends say she mentioned the sordid details to them.

    She mentioned the sordid details to no-one for nearly 15 years!!!! That’s the fact!!!
    She’s fabricating!!!!!

    Wash Post: She “went to Courthouse in February 1979. . . Moore called a few days later. Moore was appointed a Judge in (late) 1992; didn’t run for office until 1994; didn’t achieve “prominence” until probably sometime between 1992 and 1994 (13 to 15 years after the February 1979 allegation; which she told no one about until probably 1994.)

    Wash Post: “A friend named Betsy Davis says she talked to Corfman about her seeing an “older man” named Roy Moore when they were teenagers. A second friend of Corfman’s anonymously confirmed that she remembered Corfman talking about seeing an older man when she was a teenager. Wells, the mother, said Corfman told her the story more than 10 years after it happened when Moore was a judge.”

    On NBC Today’s Show, Leigh Corfman says she’s received “no money”, but she’s received “support” from “all over the country.”

    She knows, she admits she’s a thrice-divorced mother of two, from a broken family, a troubled teenager (drugs, alcohol, “boyfriends”, suicide attempt all by age 16); she knows that the Dems/Libs will take very good care of her for the rest of her life if she helps knock off Judge Moore. She’s not naive! Why wouldn’t she fib a bit? She’s seen the pot of gold (plus fame, popularity) awaiting her. Powerful motives to confabulate?

    I rest my case, but reserve the right of rebuttal!

  20. Conclusion: Ms. Corfman continues to fabricate and confabulate.

    1. Wash. Post: “( Corfman’s mother) Wells says her daughter told her about the encounter more than a decade later, as Moore was becoming more prominent as a local judge.” More like 15 years later! (See above.)

    2. On NBC she says she was “going to confront him . . This was in 2000, 2001. I wanted to walk into his office and say, ‘Hey, remember me? You need to knock this stuff off. I need to go public.’ My children were small, so I didn’t do it.”
    Knock what stuff off? She had no knowledge that he did any “stuff” with anyone else in 2000, 20001!

    3. On NBC, Corfman says, the difference in 2017 is “The Washington Post sought me out. I didn’t go looking for this; this fell in my lap.” The Post convinced her he’d done the same to others. He hadn’t. (Remember, Gloria Allred’s story came out weeks after the original Post story.) “Corfman says she agreed to share details only after The Washington Post sought her out and gave her assurances she wasn’t the only one accusing Moore of misconduct.” The original Post story mentioned two 18 year olds (one said she was 17-18; the other 18) who dated Moore; he kissed them; acted a perfect gentleman; a third, aged 16, said, in the presence of her mother, he asked her out (did he know her age? Was he teasing?) the mother said, “No!” she’s too young. That’s it!
    But the Washington Post told Leigh Corfman that they’d “found” other accusers. The Post conned her, lied to her, gave credibility to her confabulation. How do we know this? Here’s the end of the Post’s original (11-9) article: ”Corfman is the only one who said she had ‘sexual contact’ with Moore.”

    4. Even today, NBC reports 9 women have come forward and accused Moore of “pursuing” them. How about chatting them up, asking them out, dating them? How about 2 women have accused him of sexual assault 40 years ago. One’s got a phony yearbook, who’s standing outside in “a shirt” in 20 degree weather! The other is Leigh Corfman.

    Now again, when did Leigh Corfman first tell anyone that this old man, allegedly Roy Moore, touched her sexually? Fifteen years after the fact! “When Moore was becoming more prominent as a district judge.”)

    I again rest my case, pending rebuttal on appeal, signed, The Hunger Artist


    also see

    In my 40+ years on the front lines, I’ve been interviewed countless times, in endless venues. But I’ve yet to be asked this question: “What do you consider the most important issue in American child protection today?” My answer would be: Closing the (deliberately inserted) loophole in the Federal Child Prevention and Treatment Act which permits states to allow “representation” of children in abuse/neglect cases by lay volunteers [such as “CASA” or non-lawyer “Guardian ad Litem”]. That’s right: those accused of abuse are guaranteed lawyers; those alleged to be victims of abuse are not. That is fundamentally and foundationally wrong. Morally and ethically unacceptable. Devoid of logic. Guaranteed to produce the worst results. And the LAW in (far too) many states. Changing that law is the current task of the Legislative Drafting Institute for Child Protection. And I don’t know of more important work. Before you decide to support us (or not) look at the facts:

    The difference between representation by attorneys and “representation” by lay volunteers.

    The damage that results.

    Where I stand on this issue.

    Where do you stand?

    1. Where do I stand?
      On the side of truth, justice and the American way, and against today’s liberalism, against socialism, against Orwellian Big Government, against abortion (except in very rare medical circumstances to save lives, such as ectopic pregnancies), in favor of a strong military, but against military imperialism, against excessive interventionism, against bullies and brow-beaters, and for free speech, free association, free exercise of religion and other constitutional freedoms, for equal protection under the law, and for traditional marriage.
      Strike up the band!

  22. In 2011, when she’s 35, Leigh Corfman says she parked in the court’s parking lot and was about to confront Judge Moore: “I wanted to walk into his office and say, ‘Hey, remember me? You need to knock this stuff off. I need to go public.’ My children were small so I didn’t do it,” she said.”

    As I asked above, “Knock what stuff off?” She knew nothing about any another “stuff” Judge Moore had allegedly done. No one in public or secret had ever told her that Moore had done or was continuing to do stuff he had to “knock off.” No one in 2001 had accused Moore of any impropriety. What the hell was she talking about? Judge Moore was married with four children in 2001. Knock what stuff off?

    Her very story, broadcast live on NBC’s Today Show, proves she’s a fabricator, a confabulator. She has somehow imagined and convinced herself that she was on the verge of going into his office in 2001 and telling him to knock off “stuff” she knew nothing about. What stuff? “Hey, Judge, it’s 2001; stop doing what you did in 1979. Knock off the stuff you did 20 years ago, if you did any stuff!” She’s fabricating on live T.V.? She’s making up stories, telling tall tales, inventing a fable. She’s a fabulist. She’s a proven confabulator.

    (2) Inconsistencies with her Washington Post story. The Post said they grilled her 6 times and she stuck to her story. The Post said she told two contemporaries (one named, one anonymous) that she was dating “an older man”. On live T.V. her story changes slightly and she adds that she told “a third” later on. She implies on live T.V. she told the whole sordid story. The Post story seems to say two “teenagers” confirm she “told them” only that she “was seeing” an “older man”, “Moore”, said one.

    (3) In the original Post story she told no one the sordid details; only that she was “seeing” an older man. She says she first confided the sordid details to her mom, “over ten years later.” Turns out it was more like 12 to 15 years later when Judge Moore became “prominent.” But on live T. V. she conveniently omits any mention of the timeline and acts as if contemporaneously she had told “family, friends, and family friends.” She’s confabulating and she and NBC are colluding to pull the wool over the American audience’s eyes.

    CONCLUSION: She’s fabricating right before our eyes! NBC is colluding in her fabrications; NBC is aiding and abetting her confabulations.


    Billy C., a Hunger Artist

    “Blessed are those who hunger and thirst for justice’s sake . . . . .”

    1. Anytime you play the confabulation card you risk sounding like a … confabulater . This is a risky assemblage of cards in a high stakes bluff to beat a Royal Flush of female accusers of Judge Moore . He deserves his day in court . A frantic defense that ignores a certain moral force more likely to compel his accusers than any tenuous crap about an eleventh hour political sabotage is utterly … Confabulating !

  23. Confounded confabulators and triple-hear-sayers perpetuating 40 year old “horror” stories. Worse than the Salem Witch Trials’ accusers: at least those Seventeen-Century teens were describing contemporary delusions and mass hysteria!

  24. If you had to bet your life … That the larger than life Judge Roy Moore …was innocent of a historical propensity for teenage carnal conquest … Or guilty …. I am really curious how quickly you would vote Judge Roy Moore off the island .

  25. 1. First to answer the question at hand: Would I vote Roy off the Island? No!

    A man who dated three or four 18 year-olds and did nothing more than kiss them. I’d vote not guilty. President of his high school class; voted “Most Likely to Succeed”; West Point Grad; Vietnam Veteran; 30 years in public limelight; lawyer, assistant D.A., judge for 20 years; married a 24 year-old at age 38, 4 children, 5 granddaughters. Two accusations of “groping” 40 years ago, when he was 30-32! WITHOUT A SHRED OF DOUBT I VOTE “NOT GUILTY”! Did he like attractive young women (@18-24)? What heterosexual man doesn’t? Thousands attest to his lifelong integrity!

    2. Now back to the case at hand.

    THE PLOT THICKENS; (the media sickens and sleazily sinks into slime)

    Now here this: A new Witness for the Prosecution steps forward; she’s no impostor, but hardly credible.

    Patti Spradlin, a friend of Leigh, says that another friend of Leigh told her the story “37 years ago”. Now that’s triple-hearsay, heard one-year after the fact (1980), as recalled 37 years after the fact. (Leigh’s “story” occurred in February 1979, which will be 39 years ago this February 2018; so not to nitpick, but if Patti heard “the story” “37 years ago” it was closer to 2 years after the fact; but let’s not quibble.)

    And sure enough, Patti believes Leigh because, she says, someone else molested Patti herself when she was young, too, and she never told anyone for 50 years, either. This is what Patti said on NBC and CNN T. V., just today!

    Plus, Patti says that she remembers it all like it was yesterday: Whenever all the young teen girls (her friends) were at the Mall and they saw Roy Moore, they ran and hid “in a safe place” and “never looked him in the eye” for fear of being . . . sort of drawn in, hypnotized and put under some sort of spell – words to that effect. No kidding! The 14 year old girls were terrified of him; they found him “creepy” and “icky” in Patti’s words. And she knew then, at 14, that he was gunning for 14 year olds.

    Well, you know the rest of that teen Horror Story, don’t you?

    Was it Friday the 13th, or Whatever Happened on Elm Street, or the Maniac at the Mall, or The Little Mall of Horrors or Psycho-Hysteria? Something like that! Screenplay by Stephen King or Flannery O’Connor or William Faulkner or Harper Lee or Patricia Highsmith!


    Billy C., The Hunger Artist,

    Waiting for Godot, gol darnit! Waiting for the Media’s gol darn Rumor Mills to whip up some more Southern-fried Whoppers!

    Stay tuned! You won’t believe what’s coming next; you won’t believe “what really happened” forty years ago on Mulberry Street!

    P.S. It’s funny because Leigh told Wash Post that she only told 2 friends that she was “seeing” an older man, Roy Moore. I guess she withheld the fact that she told some other friends “the whole story” back then, who then told Patti “the whole story” a year or two later. The Wash Post said that after 6 cross-examinations (6 interviews) Leigh always told the same story, which was this: She only told the whole story to her mother more than ten years later. (12-15 years later, actually) Or maybe, something else happened? Maybe her story morphed, or the Wash Post missed something, or we got a case of mass hysterical histrionics? Or maybe, these “stories” just ain’t jiving!

    I’m going to call in Agatha Christie and Lawrence Block and Alfred Hitchcock to put the finishing touches on this mysterious psycho-drama horror story, that’s spinnin’ OUTTA sight into the Twilight Zone.

    THE END (for now)


      1. That’s exactly what I was going to say.

        In the atmosphere of today, he is screwed. I can’t wait to see some of the post mortem charges that will be laid on the graves of prominent men (and maybe women?) in the coming months. I just hope that Captain Kangaroo stays clean.

        What I meant by pointless, Bill C., is that no amount of details you come up with are going to change anyone’s mind at this time. The sides have been split and the die is cast. The details in your posts are commendable but the time it takes to do the research and bring it forth will never outweigh the charges. Not everyone can be as lucky as Clarence Thomas. And there again when Miss Hill first spoke at the hearings I assumed incorrectly that a woman in her position would certainly have kept a diary of some kind documenting the advances made by Thomas.

        Men have been grabbing asses since men and asses have existed. Some of the advances that have been made have been inappropriate and some have been cast aside as absolutely nothing by the grabees. But now we have this wave of shame sweeping the land and there are a lot of people saying, “Ya know what? Mister Rodgers once brushed by me in the WGBH parking lot and I am sure his erect penis made contact with the fender of my AMC Gremlin.” And off we go.

        And now we see that both left and right leaning men are on trial. This is a gender thing, not a political thing, in many cases.

        My wife lived in Rome for most of her teen years and from her accounts every Italian man would be on trial if this happened over there. Every buttocks a bull’s eye to them.

  26. True, gentlemen, true . . . Italy’s a good example. And yes, coveting and courting are birds of different feathers.

    The 1970s Commandment was “Thou shall not covet anyone under 16 (age of consent); modified lawfully to thou shalt not covet employees; modified socially (by some) to “old guys” over 25 like Elvis and Springer should have stayed away from 17 year old girls.”

    But, yes, the sides are set; the votes (the die) will be cast; and off we’ll all go into another sunset and sunrise.

    And, yes, in four hundred years historians will likely recall the year (or years) of Salem-like mass hysteria when reputations and careers crumbled because a man allegedly “forcibly” kissed a woman or groped a teen decades earlier.

    And in time, it’ll all be Ancient History! Till then read the next post:

  27. Additional refutation of accuser Beverly Nelson (the girl with the dubious yearbook (likely forged): Note this information was presented to “multiple news outlets. The outlets have failed to report.” Note: Some outlets did report, but sparingly. Here’s some quotes from below which raise more doubts.

    “According to a former waitress, Olde Hickory House required employees to be 16 years old. Nelson claims she was 15 when she started.
    “According to two former employees, the dumpsters were on the side of the building. Nelson claimed that they were in the back. (Nelson also claimed Moore parked between dumpsters and restaurant; employees said there was no room for a car between side-dumpsters and restaurant.)
    “Olde Hickory House sat right off of the four-lane highway and had a wrap-around porch with lights all around it. Nelson claimed that the surroundings were “dark and isolated.”
    “Rhonda Ledbetter, who worked at Olde Hickory House for almost 3 years (1977-79), states that the earliest it closed was at 11 p.m. but she believes it was open until midnight. She is certain it did not close at 10:00 because Goodyear was next door, and employees came to eat when their shift ended at 10 p.m. Nelson claims her story occurred after the restaurant closed at 10 p.m.
    “Multiple sources have claimed that everyone parked on the sides of the building because there wasn’t much room behind the restaurant, according to Rhonda not enough room to turn around.
    “Nelson claimed that Judge Roy Moore came in almost every night and sat at the counter, but . . . two former waitresses and two former patrons state they never saw Judge Moore come into the restaurant.”

    A cop, a regular customer, said he never saw Moore there.

    “These witnesses have shared their testimony with multiple news outlets. The outlets have failed to report.” Note: some outlets have reported sparingly, one disparagingly saying Rhonda was a former “actress” and the employment records of the Olde Hickory House could not be confirmed. They didn’t say that about Beverly.

    A quote from that cop: “Johnny Belyeu, Sr. is a former police officer with over two decades of experience with the Etowah County Sheriff’s Department and the Gadsden Police Department. He said in a statement, “I was an officer with the Etowah County Sheriff’s Department in the 1970s which means I worked in the courthouse and knew who Roy Moore was since he was the Deputy District Attorney at the time. I was a regular customer at Olde Hickory House, and I never once saw Judge Moore come in there. If he had I would have immediately recognized him. I also never met Beverly Nelson during any of the many times I frequented the restaurant, and I can’t say that she even worked there.”

    All’s well that ends well, I suppose!

  28. Yes. Msfreeh, I see the pot boiling. I see the witches’ brew!

    1. Know how many grown men go to high school football games? Tons!
    Did Moore “harass” or “tease” or “chat up” the cheerleaders? Did the cop file a complaint? Does he have it in writing?
    Contradictory evidence? The Manager of the Mall said he’d never received a complaint about Roy Moore. Never! Not one! Thousands attest to Moore’s integrity and also attest to his “talkativeness”.
    (NTDN’s EE is totally untrustworthy as is almost everything printed in the leftist NY Daily Newss? But I will read reluctantly her column: to cover all the bases.)

    2. Now answer me this:
    The Washington Post says Leigh Corfman told the exact same story 6 times; In its first Big Breaking Story (Nov. 9) the Post says she ONLY told her friends “she was dating an older man” Two friends confirmed this; one said it was Moore. But in that Big Breaking Story, there’s no mention that she told her friends she was assaulted and neither friend says she told them then that she was assaulted.

    If I’m reading everything correctly, the first time she mentions the assault was in the mid-1990s (when Judge Moore was gaining “prominence”) then she told her Mom; her Mom tells that “story” to some of her friends? Why? The sin of bearing false witness . . . the fun of blabbing, the fun of tearing down someone’s character, character assassination, who knows? It’s @15 years after the fact that the “sexual assault” part of the story is first told. (According to the Washington Post’s original exhaustively researched Big Breaking News.) Then on TV yesterday, Leigh Corfman pretends she told everyone all along; then on NBC & CNN a new “friend” comes along who says she heard the “touching” “clothing removal” story 37 years ago, (one to two years after the fact) from a friend of Leigh, when Leigh told the Post and Leigh’s friends told the Post she only told them she was “dating” or “seeing” “an older man.” Even that was a fib, as she only saw him twice; but in her confabulations, twice was “seeing”.

    You see how things get curiouser and curiouser?

    The point is: If she told the same story to the Post six times and they printed it, her original story is she ONLY told her friends she was seeing an “older man”?

    Why would a teen, over the years, confabulate? It happens! Especially to troubled teens. She admits a troubled youth. By 1995 Leigh was 35 (how many divorces had she had by then?); why did she feel a need to tear down Judge Moore? Because he rejected her (in her mind)? Because she hated men? Why the need to fabricate a relationship with Judge Moore when she was 14? Because she was desperate for attention from contemporaries, so she bragged; because her mother and father were going through a tough divorce which left her devoid of attention and affection?

    Remember, the CONFABULATOR is not “lying”: they believe their confabulations, they believe their fabrications. It’s a PSYCHIATRIC problem.

    3. You believe he assaulted a 14 year old because he chatted up teen cheerleaders and kissed three 18 year olds, two of whom described him as a harmless, perfect gentlemen; the third said he kissed her “forcefully”?

    Finally, remember the end of the Wash Post’s original hyperventilating, hyperfalutin, disingenous article: “None of the other girls accused him of any sexual impropriety.” When after 40 paragraphs they had implied the opposite!

    We’ve got his female law school contemporaries describing him as a tease and goof, always chatting, turning around in class; we’ve got his law partner describing his as a “great talker”; he’s elected “class president”; he’s the oldest brother of five and likes to tease and “chat up” the teens; and for this we convict him of what?

    There are just two accusers of sexual assault; both their stories are 40 years old and both are highly dubious.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *