....both of which involved consensual actions between two adults. That is completely irrelevant.
Rather, I'm just going to assume they are referring to the claims of three other women, namely Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey and Juanita Broaddrick.
As it pertains to Moore, it is blatant whataboutism and still completely irrelevant, but you know what? Fine. Let's have that conversation.
Jones, Willey and Broaddrick had allegations to make, and they made them. As anyone who has alleged to have been the victim of sexual harassment, impropriety or assault, they have a right to have their claims considered and investigated in good faith, free of initial judgment or condemnation.
That does not mean, however, that once their claims have been looked into, they can continue to be shielded from scrutiny. And that applies regardless if one is Democrat, Republican, Bill Clinton or Roy Moore.
Paula Jones made her accusations public in 1994; Wiley in 1998 and Broaddrick in 1999. Their stories have been available for years now, and all three allegations were picked up by the media once they had been reported.
There was investigations by special counsel of all three women's allegations against President Clinton. There were glaring discrepancies in testimony given by both Willey and Broaddrick to the point neither were considered reliable. In fact, Broaddrick even denied under oath ever being assaulted but then contradicted herself at a later date. Willey strangely alleged that President Clinton's unwanted touchings occurred on the same exact day her husband committed suicide.
As for Paula Jones' claims--which were slightly less severe than those of Willey or Broaddrick but if true would still be disturbing--the involvement from the very get-go of right wing organizations with a notorious record on the truth pushing her lawsuit for political purposes at the very least raises eyebrows. And the fact that all three women have continued to utilize ultra-right wing organizations to perpetuate their allegations in the years following making them should also call into question motives and veracity.
Roger Stone paid for all three women to repeat their stories in 2016 in front of cameras while sitting right next to Donald Trump, a man who openly bragged on video tape about having desires to grab women "by their pussies." Broaddrick has since attacked the women who have raised allegations against Judge Moore.
If these women were genuinely victims of sexual harassment or assault, why the lack of empathy towards other possible victims? And why the willingness to get down in the partisan political dirt rather than framing what supposedly happened to them as beyond politics?
Because sexual harassment and assault is definitely not a partisan political matter.
And further more, we are dealing with three allegations that were made no sooner than eighteen years ago. In those subsequent 18 years, there has not been further corroboration of their stories.
The women who have recently made their allegations against Judge Moore have only come out recently in their claims. Perhaps they are telling the truth. Perhaps they aren't. Perhaps they are motivated by politics. Perhaps they aren't. Like Jones, Willey and Broaddrick they deserve to have their claims taken in good faith upon the onset, but they must also not be exempt from further scrutiny as to their veracity and any possible countering motives should they come to light.
= new reply since forum marked as read
