Wasn’t this lawyer for Moore the same dude who called Don Lemon ““Don Easy Peasy Lemon Squeezy” the other night during a CNN interview? That was pretty weird too.
I love Stephanie Rhule. I love both her and Ali but she had way more composure in that interview than I’ll ever be able to muster.
That’s how to be an ally. Stephanie Ruhle doesn’t accept the lawyer’s framing at all. I want to be as quick as she is when someone pulls that nonsense in front of me.
I also love Stephanie Ruhle. She doesn’t mess around. And she’s sharp as a tack.
@Magnetron Do you still interact with those men?
No, not at all anymore except FB. I went to college at 17 and it was only sporadic after that, though some of it was happening while we were in HS. Only one guy is still in that area.
My friends now are a significant upgrade, or at least I think so.
Regarding the yearbook, I think the signature is his, while she annotated it with his title (as far as she knew), the date and time. It is a girl’s writing. I did the same with some notes in my school yearbooks - made a note regarding what class or activity we had together. I think she would, back as a teen, want to note that he was not a classmate.
Is she or has she had an expert look at the signature?
I note the Alabama GOP has officially decided Moore is their guy and they’re sticking with him.
Did someone already post this letter from Roy Moore’s inept lawyer? It’s hilariously awful. Seriously, it’s unbelievably terrible. Hiring this bozo shows Moore’s contempt for education: his lawyer missed the classes on spelling, subject/verb agreement and how to avoid sentence fragments.
Gov of Alabama gave a presser and said that she believes the women but it’s more important that a Republican gets the seat than anything else so she will be voting for Moore.
Pure evil is voting for a pedophile because… party.
That’s sick - how would she feel if it were her young daughter. Where do people like that draw the line. Ugh
What Kay Ivey says sounds terrible until you imagine yourself in a similar situation. If my choice were a Democrat with Moore’s child molesting history, or Roy Moore without his child molesting history, I’d have a tough time making a decision. But not voting for either one is the coward’s way out if I know that Child Molester or Roy No-Child-Molester Moore will be my Senator. I should pick. The lesser of evils is less evil.
If pedophile isn’t the line, I don’t think there is one.
does the democrat have a child molesting history?
I absolutely would not vote for a child molester of any political party. Not ever. If we give people like that a pass then we are giving a message that what they do is OK as long as they are somehow going to do something else we want. And that is exactly what people like that are banking on. Not OK.
If I had the choice of voting for child molester 1 or child molester 2, I would vote for neither. If she has influence she could push a decent person for a write in campaign.
Saying brightly that you’d vote for the Democrat in the Moore/Jones election is meaningless if you would have already voted for the Democrat anyway. You have to imagine you think Roy Moore is good except for the minor issue of being a child molester, and the Democrat is the spawn of Satan, and then figure out how you’d vote. You have to imagine that you are making a choice between two people you think are awful, knowing that one of them is about to become your Senator.
I understand that many of you who think Roy Moore is awful in almost every respect, even if the accusations of child molestation are unfounded, would nevertheless vote for him if the alternative was voting for a child molester. I’m just saying, I don’t think that’s an easy choice.
I can’t imagine ever thinking this “Roy Moore is good except for the minor issue of being a child molester”. I really can’t.
If the choice is child molester v. Unacceptable racist, for instance, I write in something.
If it’s child molester from my party v. Regular person not my party, I vote for the not my party. I observe French elections and often voters there end up with unpalatable choices. They have a system called “to make a dam against” (faire barrage) what’s unacceptable. They forget the party and block the unacceptable (usually the national front). It often means Democrats (de gauche) vote for Republicans (de droite) candidates*. When there are two unpalatable choices (national front v. Corrupt mayor or guy who committed sexual assault) they stay home or vote with blank ballots though.
- this happens often because there may be well be five candidates on the left, who split the “left” vote.
It’s a lesser of two evils question. While I don’t side with their choice of who constitutes the “lesser”, I totally get the thinking.
I can’t see how a pedophile can be hr lesser of two evils.
Hmmm… what to do, what to do. Vote for a child molester/sexual predator or vote for a man who put a KKK murderer of four young girls in prison years after the crime was committed? I don’t know how much easier a choice could be.
The Alabama Gov has obviously made her choice even when admitting she believes the accusers. That’s beyond sickening.