Where did Roy Moore's accusers go???

[eddiew37]

You're too fucking stupid to waste time debating this point.

Look, if a subordinate could prove that they filed multiple complaints against a supervisor for unwanted advances and the company did nothing - Then yes, there could be grounds for a lawsuit against the company by that subordinate.

But a consensual relationship between employees? Any judge would reject that faster than you can whine (about everything).

But agreed - I have better things on Christmas than argue with idiots on the Internet

I could be your lead witness

 

[Lysistrata]

The law says he's innocent until proven guilty, and that certainly was never proven.

This is a legal case, it's public opinion. Look at Kevin Spacey, he was fired over the first accusations. Nobody proved anything against Spacey. Roy Moore had even more accusers, and with more credibility.

Spacey's accusers are male, moore's accusers are female. To people who are whopping idiots this makes all the difference in the world in assessing a person's credibility.

BTW: moore's participation in a cult that seeks to eliminate female Americans' participation in our political process would itself indicate that he is not fit to serve in the Senate. He did not say so in a speech, but signed off on the materials for a cult lecture course:

Roy Moore doesn’t think women should run for office.

Roy Moore Authored Course Saying Women Are Unfit for Office

This is extremely un-American. Sounds very Iranian. Saudi, perhaps?

 

[DrLove]

the ONLY credible witness to any "mall ban" would be the mall manager from that time

and he says Moore was not banned - Former mall manager doesn't recall banning Roy Moore, despite reports

No, the mall manager didn't say he wasn't banned. He said he "didn't recall" whether Creepy Roy was banned. The dude is OLD now.

But the mall cop who everyone loved and respected confirmed it.

 

[bripat9643]

You're too fucking stupid to waste time debating this point.

Look, if a subordinate could prove that they filed multiple complaints against a supervisor for unwanted advances and the company did nothing - Then yes, there could be grounds for a lawsuit against the company by that subordinate.

But a consensual relationship between employees? Any judge would reject that faster than you can whine (about everything).

But agreed - I have better things on Christmas than argue with idiots on the Internet

Hmmm, nope, not if favors were given to that employee, such as promotions, or not of he/she was penalized in anyway.

 

[WorldWatcher]

So, just to sum up, mall security is now part of the "deep state"?

you people lie so much it's astounding

the ONLY credible witness to any "mall ban" would be the mall manager from that time

and he says Moore was not banned - Former mall manager doesn't recall banning Roy Moore, despite reports

He wasn't the manager the 1970's for the time period the claims were made. Your own article says he didn't become the manager until 1981.


>>>>

 

[eddiew37]

I'm waiting for Trump to say ""I'm not a crook""

I'm telling you,some of these republicans are stark raving BONKERS.....and arguing or debating them is like debating a rock

 

[DrLove]

Hmmm, nope, not if favors were given to that employee, such as promotions, or not of he/she was penalized in anyway.

Then they would be violating company ethics policy most likely - the company could fire him or her.

 

[bripat9643]

The law says he's innocent until proven guilty, and that certainly was never proven.

This is a legal case, it's public opinion. Look at Kevin Spacey, he was fired over the first accusations. Nobody proved anything against Spacey. Roy Moore had even more accusers, and with more credibility.

Spacey's accusers are male, moore's accusers are female. To people who are whopping idiots this makes all the difference in the world in assessing a person's credibility.

BTW: moore's participation in a cult that seeks to eliminate female Americans' participation in our political process would itself indicate that he is not fit to serve in the Senate. He did not say so in a speech, but signed off on the materials for a cult lecture course:

Roy Moore doesn’t think women should run for office.

Roy Moore Authored Course Saying Women Are Unfit for Office

This is extremely un-American. Sounds very Iranian. Saudi, perhaps?

In both cases the accusations were instigated by the left. Repujblicans aren't involved in any way.

 

[bripat9643]

Hmmm, nope, not if favors were given to that employee, such as promotions, or not of he/she was penalized in anyway.

Then they would be violating company ethics policy most likely - the company could fire him or her.

No, they are violating the statutes on sexual harassment. It doesn't matter what company policy says.

 

[DrLove]

He wasn't the manager the 1970's for the time period the claims were made. Your own article says he didn't become the manager until 1981.

>>>>

Reading comprehension is neither dcbl nor bripat's forte.

 

[bripat9643]

I'm waiting for Trump to say ""I'm not a crook""

I'm telling you,some of these republicans are stark raving BONKERS.....and arguing or debating them is like debating a rock

Yeah, I'll bet dealing with logic is really frsutrating for you.

 

[DrLove]

No, they are violating the statutes on sexual harassment. It doesn't matter what company policy says.

Sure it does. I don't know of any company with more than 20 employees that currently wouldn't have agreements that would cover this sort of thing which one would have to sign to work there.

You seem to be suggesting that if I promise my secretary a promotion for sex, then that employee could successfully sue the company after agreeing to my offer.

That's just stupid - but no surprise there!

 

[eddiew37]

I'm waiting for Trump to say ""I'm not a crook""

I'm telling you,some of these republicans are stark raving BONKERS.....and arguing or debating them is like debating a rock

Yeah, I'll bet dealing with logic is really frsutrating for you.

Well like trump entering the presidency ,,this is new to me too

 

[dcbl]

That is false, another Judge was handling the Divoce. The couple decided to reconcile (at the time) and Moore signed and administrative dismissal. He was not the Judge assigned to the case nor was he the Judge that handled the divorce. She never appeared before him in the Divorce case, he just signed administrative paperwork upon the request of the couples lawyers when they asked the case to be dismissed.

I will give you that point

but the signature in her yearbook is an exact match from his stamped signature from her case dismissal

all the way down to his assistant's initials - that is more than enough to prove the yearbook accusation is fallacious

 

[dcbl]

The law says he's innocent until proven guilty, and that certainly was never proven.

This is a legal case, it's public opinion. Look at Kevin Spacey, he was fired over the first accusations. Nobody proved anything against Spacey. Roy Moore had even more accusers, and with more credibility.

Spacey's accusers are male, moore's accusers are female. To people who are whopping idiots this makes all the difference in the world in assessing a person's credibility.

BTW: moore's participation in a cult that seeks to eliminate female Americans' participation in our political process would itself indicate that he is not fit to serve in the Senate. He did not say so in a speech, but signed off on the materials for a cult lecture course:

Roy Moore doesn’t think women should run for office.

Roy Moore Authored Course Saying Women Are Unfit for Office

This is extremely un-American. Sounds very Iranian. Saudi, perhaps?

excellent point

I look forward to your enthusiastic support of future travel bans

 

[bripat9643]

No, they are violating the statutes on sexual harassment. It doesn't matter what company policy says.

Sure it does. I don't know of any company with more than 20 employees that currently wouldn't have agreements that would cover this sort of thing which one would have to sign to work there.

You seem to be suggesting that if I promise my secretary a promotion for sex, then that employee could successfully sue the company after agreeing to my offer.

That's just stupid - but no surprise there!

Even if they have no such agreements, they company can still be sued. In fact, it's more likely that it will be sued.

And, yes, she could sue the company, as could other employees who didn't receive the promotion.

 

[dcbl]

He wasn't the manager the 1970's for the time period the claims were made. Your own article says he didn't become the manager until 1981.

>>>>

Reading comprehension is neither dcbl nor bripat's forte.

but the claim was that he was banned from the mall

1977 to 1981 is not that lomg of a period - had he been banned it would still have been in effect

the ban never happened, at least according to the only person who would have actually known about it and been charged with enforcing it...

 

[eddiew37]

No, they are violating the statutes on sexual harassment. It doesn't matter what company policy says.

Sure it does. I don't know of any company with more than 20 employees that currently wouldn't have agreements that would cover this sort of thing which one would have to sign to work there.

You seem to be suggesting that if I promise my secretary a promotion for sex, then that employee could successfully sue the company after agreeing to my offer.

That's just stupid - but no surprise there!

Even if they have no such agreements, they company can still be sued. In fact, it's more likely that it will be sued.

And, yes, she could sue the company, as could other employees who didn't receive the promotion.

BRI since you're a great supporter of the truth can you tell us why so many in trumps group lied about meetings with Russians Are they ALL brain dead?...or just maybe trying to hide stuff?

 

[WorldWatcher]

He wasn't the manager the 1970's for the time period the claims were made. Your own article says he didn't become the manager until 1981.

>>>>

Reading comprehension is neither dcbl nor bripat's forte.

but the claim was that he was banned from the mall

1977 to 1981 is not that lomg of a period - had he been banned it would still have been in effect

the ban never happened, at least according to the only person who would have actually known about it and been charged with enforcing it...

He didn't say the ban didn't happen, said he didn't recall. The mall changed ownership and he wasn't the manager at the time.


>>>>

 

[jillian]

I'm waiting for Trump to say ""I'm not a crook""

I'm telling you,some of these republicans are stark raving BONKERS.....and arguing or debating them is like debating a rock

Yeah, I'll bet dealing with logic is really frsutrating for you.

No. Dealing with your lies and insanity is the problem. Logic is not.

Now quiet loon