NORTON META TAG

Showing posts with label alabama gop / tea-baggers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label alabama gop / tea-baggers. Show all posts

11 December 2017

No, Roy Moore accuser didn't admit she forged his signature in her yearbook & Doug Jones launches misleading attack ad about Roy Moore's court record on sex crime cases 8&6DEZ17

Related image
HOW pathetic is it that both sides in this very contentious election have to resort to lies to make their point in the last days of campaigning. All involved with the dishonesty and deception of these campaigns should be ashamed. From PolitiFact......

No, Roy Moore accuser didn't admit she forged his signature in her yearbook


Share The Facts
The Gateway Pundit
Conspiracy-minded blog

"Gloria Allred Accuser **ADMITS** She Tampered With Roy Moore’s Yearbook 'Signature.' "
By Manuela Tobias 
A conspiracy-minded website attempted to cast doubt on evidence presented by one of eight women who accused Roy Moore of sexual misconduct in a misleading headline days ahead of the Alabama Senate race.
"WE CALLED IT! Gloria Allred Accuser **ADMITS** She Tampered With Roy Moore’s Yearbook ‘Signature’ (VIDEO)," the headline reads on The Gateway Pundit. We found similar posts on Breitbart, "Roy Moore Accuser Beverly Nelson Admits She Forged Yearbook," and on the blog Silence is Consent, "Roy Moore accuser admits she forged yearbook inscription."
Beverly Young Nelson accused Roy Moore of groping her when she was 16 years old and he, in his 30s, was the deputy district attorney of Etowah County. As evidence, Nelson presented a note she said Moore wrote in her high school yearbook before the incident took place. Nelson has been represented by celebrity lawyer Gloria Allred.
The inscription reads, "To a sweeter, more beautiful girl I could not say Merry Christmas. Christmas 1977. Love, Roy Moore, D.A."
Below the signature reads 12-22-77, Olde Hickory House.
Moore’s defenders have pointed out the date and place seem to have been written in different ink and handwriting than the note.
In a Dec. 8 Good Morning America interview with Nelson about Moore’s response to the allegations (he denies them) and her experience since taking her story public, Nelson addressed the inconsistency. Nelson said she added the date and place of the inscription.
"He signed your yearbook?" ABC News reporter Tom Llamas asked Nelson.
"He did sign it," Nelson said.
"And you made some notes underneath?" Llamas asked.
"Yes," Nelson said.
"Nelson said she did make notes to the inscription, but the message was all Roy Moore," the video voiceover says.
To summarize, Nelson says she added the time and location to the inscription. But she says the note and signature was from Moore.
That’s not what the headlines of the Gateway Pundit, Breitbart or Silence is Consent. All three say Nelson said she either tampered with Moore’s signature or forged the inscription.
There’s no evidence of that.
Yet, the Gateway Pundit wrote that "Nelson admitting that she added to Moore’s alleged signature is the final nail in the coffin," the story reads. "Allred’s accuser is nothing but a fame-seeking fraud."
Fox News made a similar misstatement in their headline and story about the ABCreport, which they later walked back.
"Roy Moore accuser admits she forged part of yearbook inscription attributed to Alabama Senate candidate," the original Fox News headline read. It was later edited to say she wrote, rather than forged, part of the inscription. The story did not include a clarification or correction when we last looked at it.
The original Fox News story also said Nelson "wrote part of the disputed note" without specifying what she wrote, whereas the edited version clarified that "she added the date and place in the inscription."
Our ruling
The Gateway Pundit’s headline reads "WE CALLED IT! Gloria Allred Accuser **ADMITS** She Tampered With Roy Moore’s Yearbook ‘Signature’ (VIDEO)."
But Nelson does not claim she tampered with Moore’s actual signature. She said she added a time and location below the signature. Nelson still attributes the note and signature to Moore.
We rate the statement Pants on Fire.
Correction (Dec. 11, 2017): We originally described the women's allegations against Roy Moore as sexual assault. We believe sexual misconduct is a more accurate phrase and have changed the story accordingly.

About this statement:

Published: Friday, December 8th, 2017 at 3:26 p.m.
Researched by: Manuela Tobias
Edited by: Aaron Sharockman
Subjects: Fake news

Sources:

Tweet, Lis Power, Dec. 8, 2017
Share The Facts
Doug Jones
Democratic candidate for senator for Alabama

"In a 2014 case involving a man convicted of abusing two underage girls, Judge Roy Moore disagreed and wrote the dissenting opinion."
By Jon Greenberg 
In the Alabama Senate race, Democrat Doug Jones launched an ad to suggest Republican Roy Moore goes easy on sex offenders.
Moore called on stations airing the ad to pull it, saying it "blatantly misrepresents the facts and my judicial record."
The ad speaks of three cases from Moore’s days on the Alabama State Supreme Court. Here’s the full text from the ad, although this fact-check focuses only on the first case from 2014.
"Alabama, there's a pattern.
In a 2014 case involving a man convicted of abusing two underage girls, Judge Roy Moore disagreed and wrote the dissenting opinion.
In a 2015 case involving a man who pleaded guilty to raping an underage girl, Roy Moore dissented again.
And Roy Moore was the only Supreme Court justice who sided with a felon convicted of sexual abuse of a child at a daycare center.
Court documents, real facts.
Roy Moore's disturbing conduct."
On television, the visuals are important. Here’s what viewers saw.
In one of the most reliably Republican states, Moore has been fighting headwinds after multiple reports that he made sexual advances on young women under 18 when he was in his 30s. The Jones attack ad plays to that issue.
In the 2014 case, Jones misappropriated technical elements of the legal saga to leave voters with the wrong idea.
The 2014 case
In 2010, Sherman Fitzgerald Tate, then in his mid 30s, worked as a mentor with the Youth Advocate Program at Pointe Academy in Mobile, Ala. The court-funded program aimed to help troubled teens. A security camera recorded Tate bringing two 15-year-old girls into a conference room. He was not their assigned mentor. There was no tape of what took place inside the room. The two girls accused him of coercing them to touch him and each other sexually.
Tate was convicted on two counts of second-degree sodomy.
His lawyer wanted to bring in testimony that the two girls had a romantic relationship with each other and that Tate had told one of the girls’ mother about it. That information would, the lawyer said, give the girls a reason to invent a charge against Tate.
But under Alabama law, victims of sexual assault are shielded from any exploration of their past sexual activity, because it could bias a jury against them. This is a fundamental principle that holds in many states. The trial judge blocked the testimony and an appeals court agreed.
Tate’s lawyer brought the issue to the state supreme court. The majority of the justices, five, declined to hear the case. Moore and two other justices disagreed.
In his dissent, Moore basically argued that courts in Massachusetts, Mississippi, Colorado and elsewhere had allowed similar evidence in certain cases and there was a reasonable argument that the facts in Tate’s case "would make the proposed cross-examination relevant to show that the victims had possibly fabricated the charges against Tate."
The key line in Moore’s dissent, however, is the last one: "I believe that we should resolve this material question of first impression." In other words, Moore's dissent was about resolving the legal question for future cases.
A matter of law
We reached several experts in appellate law and all of them agreed that Moore was only arguing that the court should hear the case.
"He was saying there’s a decent legal issue in the case that the court ought to resolve," David Moran at the University of Michigan Law School. "It read like a perfectly reasonable dissent, and it would be grossly unfair to attribute anything to him based on a dissent from a denial of review."
Peter Smith at George Washington University Law School agreed, saying that at that point in the process, Moore was not challenging the case itself against Tate, but the legal issue of what testimony was admissible.
"In theory, if the court had heard the case, he could have ruled against the guy," Smith said.
Smith said Moore was telegraphing some sympathy for Tate’s position, but again, this dissent alone did not amount to disagreeing with Tate’s conviction.
The other two cases
The ad raises two other cases to show Moore’s "disturbing conduct."
The 2015 case involved second-degree rape and like the charges against Tate, the issue was whether the sexual activity of the victim should have been presented at the trial. Moore and two other justices joined in saying the court should decide the matter.
In the ad’s final example, Moore was the lone dissenter. The case involved a 17-year-old boy who performed a sexual act on a 4-year-old boy at a daycare center. The teen was convicted on two counts -- first-degree sodomy of a child under 12 and first-degree sodomy by forcible compulsion.
Moore took issue with the second count, arguing that there was no evidence of an implied threat of serious physical injury or death in the case. The matter was made more complicated because the offender was under 18, which put him in a gray zone under state law. Moore argued that the court was going beyond what lawmakers had written.
Our ruling
An ad from the Jones campaign said that Moore disagreed and dissented in a case involving the abuse of two underage girls. There is no question that Moore dissented, but the ad provides no context for what Moore disagreed with. The glaring lack of detail leaves reasonable viewers with the impression that Moore disagreed with the conviction.
That’s not what he said. He disagreed with the court’s decision not to consider a legal question of admissible evidence. Several independent law professors told us that Moore raised a valid point that was legally separate from the underlying conviction in the case.
The ad leaves out critical context that gives a highly misleading impression. We rate this claim Mostly False.

About this statement:

Published: Wednesday, December 6th, 2017 at 5:43 p.m.
Researched by: Jon Greenberg
Edited by: Katie Sanders
Subjects: ElectionsEthicsLegal Issues

Sources:

Doug Jones for Senate, Moore dissents ad, Nov. 30, 2017
Yellowhammernews.com, Quin Hillyer: Doug Jones’ ad crosses a line, Nov. 30, 2017
Interview, David Moran, professor of law, University of Michigan Law School, Dec. 6, 2017
Interview, Peter Smith, professor of law, George Washington University Law School, Dec. 6, 2017
Email interview, Brian Wolfman, associate professor of law, Georgetown Law School, Dec. 6, 2017

26 November 2017

Ivanka Throws Gasoline On Roy Moore's Race, Daddy Livid As Dems Capitalize With Ad 25NOV17

 :
MAYBE this is like ivanka telling on her dad without really telling on him yet. tiffany drumpf/trump, do you have anything to add to this??? Mommas, don't let your babies near NOT MY pres drumpf/trump or roy moore. From DailyKos.....
Ivanka Throws Gasoline On Roy Moore's Race, Daddy Livid As Dems Capitalize With Ad
Ivanka Trump commented to the Associated Press a few weeks ago when the Roy Moore allegations were ramping up,  “There’s a special place in Hell for people who prey on children. I’ve yet to see a valid explanation, and I have no reason to doubt the victims’ accounts.” That comment has now been made into a thirty-second campaign spot by Democrat Doug Jones, and Daddy Trump is not pleased at all. New York Times:
As Mr. Moore has rejected calls to drop out even as more women have accused him of preying on them when they were teenagers, Republicans have given up any hope that he will fold his campaign. Mr. Trump has repeatedly told his aides that he does not believe Mr. Moore would ever quit.
What the president did not foresee was that the friction would reach inside his immediate family. He vented his annoyance when his daughter Ivanka castigated Mr. Moore by saying there was “a special place in hell for people who prey on children,” according to three staff members who heard his comments.
“Do you believe this?” Mr. Trump asked several aides in the Oval Office in the hours after Ms. Trump said that Mr. Moore should exit the race. Mr. Moore’s Democratic opponent in the Alabama race, Doug Jones, quickly turned her comments into a campaign ad.
Having Ivanka Trump as part of a Democratic campaign ad has certainly done nothing to alleviate Mitch McConnell’s worries.
Mr. McConnell and his allies have believed for weeks that disaster awaits, win or lose, if Mr. Moore remains in the race: Either the Democrats will claim the seat on Dec. 12, or Mr. Moore will win and thrust the party into an agonizing months long debate over whether to expel him.
The accusations against Mr. Moore have lifted Democrats’ hopes of notching a rare victory in the Deep South in next month’s special election, which would narrow the Republican Senate majority to a single seat. Just as significantly, the president has handed the Democrats a political weapon with which to batter Republicans going into the midterm elections: that they tolerate child predation.
Right now polls have Moore and Jones running neck and neck. Interestingly, McConnell doesn’t seem to see it that way.
The Senate leader has told fellow Republicans in private that Mr. Moore’s nomination has endangered the party’s hold on the Senate, according to people who have spoken with him — his starkest acknowledgment so far that the political environment has turned sharply against his party since Mr. Trump’s election. Mr. McConnell has also reiterated his intention to move against Mr. Moore if he is elected, though Mr. McConnell has made clear that he thinks that the candidate is unlikely to win.
Here’s the ad which is giving Donald conniptions. As for Roy Moore, hey, Roy, when you’ve lost Mitch McConnell….


Voices

20 November 2017

Franken isn't the target 18NOV17


IT has been know the drumpf/trump-pence administration, their White House, and the majority of republicans in the gop controlled congress have been aggressively using lies, deception and manipulation in an Orwellian propaganda campaign at the local, state and national level for years. The 2016 election of NOT MY pres drumpf/trump and NOT MY vp pence is the most stunning result of their efforts, evangelical Christians, Christians in general, union members, the working class and even the poor turned against the core beliefs and teachings of their faith, their social organizations, and their own self interest. These people actually believed the propaganda and voted for drumpf/trump-pence or did not vote at all. We are actually seeing this at work right now with Alabama republicans standing by and working to elect their pedophile candidate for the US Senate roy moore rather than elect Doug Jones, the Democratic candidate. The FEMALE republican governor of Alabama expresses this propaganda with statements like this

THIS from DailyKos.....
Franken isn't the target
franken.jpg
Karl Rove was known for his strategy of attacking his opponents strengths and trying to turn them into weaknesses. Prime examples of the GOP’s successful use of this tactic were Saxby Chambliss’ efforts to paint decorated veteran and triple-amputee Max Cleland as unpatriotic, and of course the infamous swiftboating of John Kerry in the 2004 presidential election.
Trump’s GOP is tweaking that formula — rather than attacking their opponent’s strengths, they are accusing their opponents of their own weaknesses. By creating false equivalency, they are trying to neutralize their own vulnerabilities and normalize their corrupt and sociopathic behaviors.
The political uproar around Al Franken is a continuation of this trend. The photograph he took with Leeann Tweeden was inappropriate and disrespectful to her and to all women. The facts on other allegations will presumably come out through further investigation, and will inform the question of whether he should resign his Senate seat. There has been plenty of negative speculation on this site about the timing of Tweeden’s coming forward with her story; I will not join in that — as a victim, her choice of whether and when to go public is hers and hers alone.
But make no mistake, the efforts of other republican operatives — from Fox News, to Mitch McConnell, to tweets from the Offender-in-Chief — are not intended to force Al Franken to resign, at least not as the primary objective. If he goes, he’ll be replaced by another Minnesota Democrat appointed by Governor Mark Dayton and that doesn’t change the balance of Senate power.
No, their purpose is to make it appear that both parties are equally full of sexual perpetrators, that “everyone does it”, and thus to insulate Republicans — most notably Roy Moore and Donald Trump — from attacks based on their sexual violations. They hope that if they muddy the water enough they will help GOPers like Moore slide through. Even worse, they move to normalize the harassment and sexual assault of women (or perhaps I should say, to keep it normalized and deny efforts to make needed changes, since it clearly is all too “normal”).
This is part of an ongoing tactical approach by the GOP and Trump in particular:
And of course, Trump’s entire “Crooked Hillary” schtick was the ultimate in projecting his own corruption onto his opponent.
The tactic takes advantage of two fundamental weaknesses in our system.  First — journalists have (whether due to laziness, lack of resources, or direction from corporate ownership) increasingly fallen into bothsiderism. They treat a story that gives equal weight to both sides of an issue as “balanced” news coverage, rather than actually trying to gather facts and report on what is actually true. The failure of our Fourth Estate during the 2016 election was a major part of handing the presidency to Donald Trump. Second — Democratic voters are less reliable. When turnout is depressed because many folks (egged on by the media) begin to believe that there aren’t real differences, that all candidates are corrupt, it benefits the GOP whose base will still turn out reliably even as Democratic-leaning voters stay home. The Trump projection strategy uses that first weakness to trigger and exploit the second.
In the most recent context with Franken, I see two major concerns. First — this approach has worked and may continue to work; it could help get Roy Moore elected to the US Senate, which is a sickening prospect. Second — it risks normalizing sexual harassment and assault more broadly. Franken clearly recognized that second risk in his apology statement:
And the truth is, what people think of me in light of this is far less important than what people think of women who continue to come forward to tell their stories. They deserve to be heard, and believed.
I’m not sure exactly what is the best response to this Trumpian strategy; but a starting point is recognizing it for what it is. The GOP hasn’t suddenly found an appropriate level of outrage based on Senator Franken’s wrongful acts — they are continuing their effective strategy of covering their own faults by promoting a narrative of “both sides are just as bad”. We can’t let them get away with it.