Any commentary I have thus far made about the Roy Moore scandal has been on social media, and that has centered primarily on mocking the media’s hypocrisy while also noting my thoughts on individual aspects of the story. The big question, though, the question of whether or not the allegations add up to something serious enough to knock Moore out of Alabama’s Senate race, I have saved until now.
It may no longer be fashionable to wait for all the facts before expressing an opinion, but when it comes to something as deadly serious as a man’s reputation and allegations of child molestation, call me a fuddy-duddy.
From my vantage point, the issue comes down to four allegations:
Beverly Young Nelson claims that in 1977, when she was just 16 and Moore was 30, he attempted to assault her.
This one is easy. The yearbook she and her attorney Gloria Allred dramatically waved around as proof of the relationship is an obvious forgery. Please note that I am not couching my words about this forgery; there is no “apparent” or “probable” leaving myself some wriggle room.
I believe the yearbook is forged, and that blows all of Young’s credibility, as does the fact that once the veracity of the yearbook was called into question, after trying to talk around the obvious discrepancies, Allred disappeared; she went dark.
At best, Allred and Nelson might be trying to frame a guilty man. Regardless, this claim is not worth spit.
Tina Johnson claims that in 1991, while exiting Moore’s law office, he groped her butt.
I do not know whether or not to believe Johnson. If Moore did this, it was, of course, wrong. But the punishment needs to fit the crime, and I am not willing to destroy a man over the disputed allegation of a 26 year-old butt-grab.
Moreover, this is the freshest allegation against Moore. So far, no one has claimed Moore did anything untoward since 1991. This also matters.
Leigh Corfman alleges that in 1979, when she was just 14 years-old, a 32 year-old Moore molested her in the woods.
This allegation is the most credible. I found Ms. Corfman quite credible during her Today show appearance Monday, and said so.
But since Tuesday, a big hole has been blown in her story, which was first reported by the left-wing Washington Post. And I should add that one of the primary reasons I withheld my overall opinion on this matter was due to the fake news factory that is the Washington Post. My default position, and for good reason, is to assume anything published by the Post damaging to a Republican is a lie — because it usually is.
Corfman told the Post that her encounter with Moore “set the course for [her] doing other things that were bad.” She said this included “drinking, drugs, boyfriends, and a suicide attempt when she was 16.”
Contemporaneous court records, however, document that the exact opposite was true, that Corfman was a major discipline problem prior to her alleged encounter with Moore. Moreover, documents from 1980, the year after the alleged incident, show that her “disciplinary problem has improved greatly.”
There are some smaller discrepancies in her story, not enough for me to write Corfman off entirely, but in a very dramatic, made-for-TV fashion, Corfman is blaming all the miseries in her life on Moore when the evidence directly contradicts that.
In good conscience, there is just not enough here for me to destroy an entire man over.
- While Single and in His Early 30s,Moore Dated and Sought Dates with Teenage Girls
When my wife and I met, she was 36. I was 19. We started dating the following year and have now been together 31 years. (I pursued her, by the way — relentlessly.) Therefore, I am a bit of a hypocrite when I say that the instinct to be uncomfortable with the idea of a 30 year-old man dating 16 and 17 year-old girls is a good one. I share that discomfort.
Nevertheless, the age of consent in Alabama is and was 16. That is a decision the people of Alabama have made, which means that even if Moore did seek to date girls as young as 16, there was nothing illegal about it.
More importantly, though, is the fact that 40 years ago in the South, the idea of a 30 year-old man looking for a much younger wife was not at all uncommon. In other words, this behavior was not only legal, it was not a violation of social mores.
Again, because I share people’s discomfort in this regard, what I am about to say is not meant to be inflammatory or insulting, but I think the zeal to destroy Moore over this is based in large part on provincial ignorance (and hypocritical partisanship — which I will get to next).
The first 27 years of my life were spent in the small towns and an inner-city in the Midwest. Since then, I have lived ten years in Los Angeles and 15 years in the South. Along with my wife’s Mexican heritage, this exposure to all kinds of people has taught me that good and decent Americans have slightly different mores, and the difference in the case of Moore’s alleged dating habits is slight. If these girls were two or three years older, no one would be talking about them.
On top of that — and this is where I finally begin to engage in that awesome sport of whataboutism — to be lectured to by Democrats and media elites on this issue is beyond laughable. This legion of sick freaks feigning moral horror over a 30-year-old man legally dating a 16 year-old girl is the height of partisanship.
Never forget that these are the same people who are okay with seven-year-olds choosing and changing their gender; kindergartners losing their innocence by way of lessons about homosexuality; instructions in Teen Vogue about anal sex; and 12-year-old girls being exposed to a penis owned by a mentally ill man in a dress.
Please, you sick freaks, spare me your outrage.
Excuse me for speaking a hard truth, but all victims should NOT be automatically believed. (See: Mockingbird, To Kill a.) Yes, they should be taken seriously, but then their accusations must be fully and fairly investigated. Unfortunately, our media disagrees.
As it is with all things, when it comes to Roy Moore, our blazingly dishonest media are not seeking to inform or illuminate. Rather, they are using the Moore scandal as yet another weapon in a relentless and highly partisan campaign of emotional blackmail meant to define just who is and is not a good person.
Just as the media do with guns, abortion, homosexuality, Obamacare, and Trump, all of their coverage is geared towards pressuring you to agree with them because if you do not agree with them, that means you are an immoral and indecent person.
Well, sorry to disappoint my media betters, but I am an American, and as an American — whether it is left-wing gay activist Bryan Singer or Roy Moore — the benefit of all this reasonable doubt goes to the accused.
Good Americans do not destroy a whole person over decades-old, hotly disputed allegations released just in time to sway a crucial election, especially when those allegations do not stand up to a reasonable fact check.
More facts may become known within minutes of my publishing this. More accusers might come forward. I reserve the right to change my mind.
But as of right now, right at this very moment, there is not enough there there to justify the annihilation of a fellow human being.