Moore or Strange?

[AUDub 11,147]

 

[TitanTiger 20,472]

1 hour ago, aujeff11 said:

Who is they? Who is flipping burgers? As you mentioned, this is the court of public opinion, so what does the FBI and the police departments have to do with anything.

You said analyzing handwriting requires no expertise, just common sense, as you put it.  I simply pointed out that being a handwriting analyst is an actual profession that people go to school and get significant training for.  The FBI and police departments hire them.  THEY seem have a different opinion on whether the average Joe off the street can do proper analysis.

 

Quote

The alleged signing occurred there apparently, you think the Deputy D.A would know how to spell the establishment he is dining in. 

No, I'm asking whether you know for certain that at one time the restaurant wasn't spelling it with as "Olde" rather than the way it currently is.  Or whether Moore would be capable of simply making a mistake.

 

Quote

Think the photo said 1977. 

His signature said 1977.  I'm wondering what year the yearbook was.  For instance, could she have had her previous year's yearbook at work with her for some reason, like it being close to Christmas holidays when a lot of folks come home and getting some people she missed signing her yearbook back at the end of the previous school year to do so when they dropped by the diner?

EDIT:  I see it now in the video you posted.  The question(s) now would be, when did they get their yearbooks, and how did they date them?  For instance, if that was her yearbook from the 1976-77 school year, did her high school simply refer to it as the year of that graduating class, making that the yearbook she already had from the previous school year that she would have gotten back in May 1977?

 

Quote

When the picture is the only evidence offered and sufficient by itself, any other evidence is immaterial to the argument. I’ll replace picture with yearbook picture and show you how irrelevant your hang up is.

When you post a picture devoid of context, just arrows purporting to show some sort of handwriting discrepancy, I'm going to want more than just some anonymous photoshopper with red arrows telling me this is a professional, expert analysis.  So I went looking for the source of the photo.  Then I found it was somebody's weird uncle who has zero expertise in analyzing handwriting, with an article that had a blatantly biased and unsubstantiated claim in the headline.  I'm sorry that hurts your feelings, but contextless photos aren't sufficient.

 

Quote

On the other hand, you probably believe her when only a message in a vague word yearbook is offered as evidence. The message doesn’t even show who Roy is writing to. For all you know, she could’ve found it and kept it for herself. There are a lot of reasons to believe and to unbelieve. Nothing is verified.

I lean toward believing her, yes, but not because of some yearbook inscription.  I'm open to other possibilities.  But the stories of his creepiness toward teenage girls and now a second accusation of him trying to coerce sexual acts being to tilt the scales toward it being substantially true.  I don't want to believe it.  I have family friends who know him and have for decades.  He has taken some very public stands for Christian views on things and if this stuff is true, it leaves a black mark on Christianity in the eyes of the unbelieving public.  I do not relish that either.  

 

 

[DKW 86 7,419]

There is one and only one reason that Moore isnt cast on the ash heap of history so far. Some in the Great State of Alabama have been brainwashed into hating Democrats more than they hate sin itself. I am using those terms in a kind of mocking clarity. These people claim to be Christians, but they are ready to overlook ANY behavior, ANY expose on bad judgment and ANY intent just so they can claim to have not voted for a Democrat. Sin and Godliness have been completely overrun by their emotional repulsion to Jones being a Democrat and therefore the Son of Satan himself apparently. Jones is about as middle of the road as it gets. Electing a Democrat for what may be a part term scares you so bad that you are willing to gamble on sleaze like Moore? Really? 

Look, Roy Moore is unqualified to sit as a Senator for:

1) His Incredibly poor decisions while on the AL Supreme Court. He advised State Officers to break Federal Law. He cannot do that. His job is to UPHOLD ALL LAWS. What he did was illegal. PERIOD.

2) His incredibly outrageous and unConstitutional Statements about the Rights of Muslims and Gays.

3) His incredibly nauseating pervy tales that he admitted to Sean Hannity of dating high school girls while he was in his 30s. 

 

Dont try and Defend Moore on Christian terms, not to me. It is clear to any thinking person you have thrown away any right or claim for a Christian reason for your support. Roy Moore is without question one of the worst candidates ever for the US Senate. 

[aujeff11 6,243]

27 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

You said analyzing handwriting requires no expertise

Don’t you put words in my mouth. I said she the distinctions are that conspicuous,  experts arent needed. 

27 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

No, I'm asking whether you know for certain that at one time the restaurant wasn't spelling it with as "Olde" rather than the way it currently is.  Or whether Moore would be capable of simply making a mistake.

 

I was told it wasn’t spelled that way. Maybe it was. 

27 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

His signature said 1977.  I'm wondering what year the yearbook was

I gave you a link and told you to look at the video starting around the 21 minute mark. It’s obvious it was a 1977 yearbook.

27 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

When you post a picture devoid of context, just arrows purporting to show some sort of handwriting discrepancy, I'm going to want more than just some anonymous photoshopper with red arrows telling me this is a professional, expert analysis.

I can lead you to the river but I cannot make you drink. If you’re fine with minimizing the irregularities, over a source that wasn’t even relevant because said picture is everywhere else, so be it. I didn’t even get said picture from the article. If I showed you the picture of the yearbook message by itself from the direct source and asked you to spot the irregularities, I wouldn’t expect critique of the phantom article that was never in question. 

 

[TitanTiger 20,472]

3 minutes ago, aujeff11 said:

Don’t you put words in my mouth. I said she the distinctions are that conspicuous,  experts arent needed. 

A distinction without a difference.  But then, splitting hairs and picking meaningless nits seems to be a stock in trade for you and another unnamed individual with a history here.

 

Quote

I was told it wasn’t spelled that way. Maybe it was. 

It's something worth looking into.  A minor point perhaps, but a small piece of the overall picture.

 

Quote

I gave you a link and told you to look at the video starting around the 21 minute mark. It’s obvious it was a 1977 yearbook.

I edited my post to reflect this, but it doesn't really change anything.  The 1977 yearbook would likely have been received in May 1977.  The yearbook for the school year she was actually in during December 1977 would have a 1978 date since that's the year of the graduating class.

 

Quote

I can lead you to the river but I cannot make you drink. If I showed you the picture of the yearbook message by itself from the direct source and asked you to spot the irregularities, I wouldn’t expect critique of the phantom article that was never in question. 

It was bonus material.  The picture alone wasn't sufficient so I went digging for more information and who was asserting these 'irregularities' are significant from a professional analyst's view.

[aujeff11 6,243]

1 minute ago, TitanTiger said:

But then, splitting hairs and picking meaningless nits

It’s pretty apparent that you’re ok with minimizing the potential that the signature is fake, so just go with that. You might as well continue talking about Raptor; he is as relevant as any of your rebuttals to this point.

7 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

edited my post to reflect this, but it doesn't really change anything.  The 1977 yearbook would likely have been received in May 1977.  The yearbook for the school year she was actually in during December 1977 would have a 1978 date since that's the year of the graduating class.

Because girls keep their yearbooks on their person year around amirite? Sounds so believable. 

[TitanTiger 20,472]

Just now, aujeff11 said:

It’s pretty apparent that you’re ok with minimizing the potential that the signature is fake, so just go with that. You might as well continue talking about Raptor; he is as relevant as any of your rebuttals to this point.

I'm not minimizing it.  I'm just not taking the word of some author no one knows that the 'irregularities' are actually meaningful, nor am I taking the word of your armchair amateur analysis of it.

 

Just now, aujeff11 said:

Because girls keep their yearbooks on their person year around amirite? Sounds so believable. 

Or, like I said, she could have had it on her for some other reason - such as people being home for the holidays and trying to get some of her classmates who'd graduated to sign it if/when they came through.  I'm not saying the questions about it aren't reasonable to ask.  I'm saying that it's hardly a smoking gun to discredit her with.

[TitanTiger 20,472]

1 hour ago, aujeff11 said:

I was told it wasn’t spelled that way. Maybe it was. 

Apparently, it was spelled with an "e" on the end, as in "Olde"

https://twitter.com/billineastala/status/930480416364158976/

 

[homersapien 11,362]

If "pathologically argumentative" isn't a thing, it should be.   

[homersapien 11,362]

The "court of public opinion" weighs in:

Latest Roy Moore poll: 60 percent think Moore should drop out of Senate race

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/11/latest_roy_moore_poll_60_perce.html

[alexava 6,973]

Titan. i can't....i just don't know why you do this. I get nauceous reading it.

[AUDub 11,147]

 

[AUDub 11,147]

4 minutes ago, alexava said:

Titan. i can't....i just don't know why you do this. I get nauceous reading it.

Ad nauseam does mean "to the point of nausea."

[alexava 6,973]

1 minute ago, Bigbens42 said:

Ad nauseam does mean "to the point of nausea."

If that was mentioned i skipped it and took some pepto.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Perhaps the best scenario right now is for Gov. Ivey to call off the Dec. election and let Strange serve out his term. I think she can do this since she called the special election in the first place. That would solve a lot of problems including the foaming at the mouth and diarhrrea some people are experiencing., including some here.

[AUDub 11,147]

 

[TitanTiger 20,472]

Hmm.  "Being concerned that a likely sex predator may be elected a United States Senator" = "diarrhea."  Interesting.   

[homersapien 11,362]

10 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

Hmm.  "Being concerned that a likely sex predator may be elected a United States Senator" = "diarrhea."  Interesting.   

Another perspective from Raptorworld.  

[TitanTiger 20,472]

Funny how often an accusation ends up being a form of confession.

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Let me ask a question. How many here can truthfully say they have never so much as touched an underage girl in an inappropriate way. And to make things clear for Titan, et. al., I am NOT condoning what Roy Moore may have done.

[AUDub 11,147]

Just now, Proud Tiger said:

Let me ask a question. How many here can truthfully say they have never so much as touched an underage girl in an inappropriate way. And to make things clear for Titan, et. al., I am NOT condoning what Roy Moore may have done.

WHAT THE ****

[aubiefifty 16,754]

cops are now speaking out on roy and giving their names. they know. other people are speaking out about all this mess and quite a few of them are republicans. this mess did happen and only the totally clueless had no idea. roy liking young girls was widely known. few secrets in a small town. and i remember folks had a kind of fear of speaking out against roy because of the perceived power he had. my memory is not that sharp now so i cannot really tell you why the fear. and it was said the little 14 year olds family came out and were threatened. not saying roy did or did'nt but it was dropped and quick. if that is the case i do not understand why it was not brought up in all the new allegations. i do know roy printed a list of fifty preachers and pastors that was used before the primaries and claimed they support him after the allegations. now many on the list are upset because it is deceitful to claim they backed roy when that was not the reason they signed it to begin with. just another lie from roy and his campaign. people are too easy to believe that everything they do not like is false news.

[homersapien 11,362]

4 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Let me ask a question. How many here can truthfully say they have never so much as touched an underage girl in an inappropriate way. And to make things clear for Titan, et. al., I am NOT condoning what Roy Moore may have done.

Seriously? 

1 hour ago, TitanTiger said:

Funny how often an accusation ends up being a form of confession.

 

[aubiefifty 16,754]

2 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Let me ask a question. How many here can truthfully say they have never so much as touched an underage girl in an inappropriate way. And to make things clear for Titan, et. al., I am NOT condoning what Roy Moore may have done.

i have never touched a fourteen year old girl as an adult. yes i have been with young girls but i was about the same age. i believe it happens a lot these days but i do not believe that was the norm back then.

[homersapien 11,362]

NEWS & POLITICS

That Time Roy Moore Refused to Convict a Child Molester Who Abused a 4-Year-Old

The Alabama Republican has made no secret of his views on sexual assault.

 

Roy Moore has had a month or so to forget. Last week, the Washington Post broke the news that he sexually pursued a 14-year-old girl back when he was in his 30s. Since then, a total of five women have accused the Alabama senatorial candidate of harassment and abuse.

The allegations speak for themselves, although one case Moore recently heard as a state judge—when he refused to convict a child molester who abused a 4-year-old—sheds light on his backward views of sexual assault.

In 2015 when Moore was chief justice of the Alabama Supreme Court, he and eight other judges heard the case of Eric Lemont Higdon, a 17-year-old childcare worker accused of raping a four-year-old boy in his care. A local court convicted Higdon on two counts of sodomy, one for statutory rape and another for forcible rape. An appeals court later overturned the forcible rape charge, and the case eventually reached the state Supreme Court.

Eight of the justices in Montgomery ruled that the appeals court had erred and voted to leave the two convictions as originally ruled. The one judge who dissented? Roy Moore.

Alabama’s archaic definition of “forcible rape” requires that the victim fear for his or her life or suffer severe injury, and Moore, a strict constructionist in the tradition of Antonin Scalia, saw no evidence of this in the Higdon case. He wrote, “because there was no evidence in this case of an implied threat of serious physical injury…or of an implied threat of death, Higdon cannot be convicted of sodomy in the first degree ‘by forcible compulsion.’”

In Moore's view, the child was not injured in the course of the assault (at least not according to Alabama’s narrow definition, which ignores the psychological damage and trauma sexual assault victims can suffer), and because the 4-year-old trusted Higdon, he was not afraid for his life......

Read the rest at: https://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/time-roy-moore-refused-convict-child-molester-who-abused-4-year-old