How Much Evidence Do We Need on Roy Moore?

A Moore accuser has found more evidence that yes, he knew her. This is getting tiring.

I'd much rather be writing about Masterpiece Cakeshop and His Majesty Justice Kennedy today. I think in the scheme of things, that's the more important story. But we need to revisit, one more time, Roy Moore.

If you believe that all the evidence against Moore is fabricated, that these women never knew him, that the Washington Post and AL.com have engaged in an elaborate and meticulous fraud, then by all means, vote for Moore. And stop reading here. In fact, stop reading everything except Breitbart, Infowars and the National Enquirer. That's all the news you'll need from now on.

If you believe that there's something to the stories from 35-40 years ago with Roy Moore, but he's still "a good man" and therefore deserves your absolution and your vote, then by all means, vote for him. If you believe that Moore's denials are less than believable but his vote in the Senate is more important than his character, then vote for him.

But if you are still undecided on the evidence, or perplexed by Moore's flip-flops on his story, then this should put things in perspective for you.

Debbie Wesson Gibson is one of the women who told her story to the Washington Post about dating Roy Moore. Recently, Moore denied knowing or dating any of the women, after telling Sean Hannity that he did remember Gibson and Gloria Thacker Deason.

Gibson told WaPo that she was in her attic pulling down Christmas decorations last week and came across an old storage bin that contained a scrapbook from her senior year of high school, and found a graduation card from--guess who--Roy Moore. Now, before you go off into "how convenient" and all those conspiracy theories (if you're still reading), let me tell you this is a perfectly believable story.

My own wife goes into the attic around this time of year to haul out the Christmas decorations. She also has bins of old high school stuff up there. If she was so inclined (having been the subject of a national story might incline her), she could pull out yearbooks and other items from her senior year. This is perfectly believable and in context it makes sense.

What doesn't make sense is that Moore told Hannity he remembered Gibson and Deason and called each of them "a good girl." Gibson said she dated Moore when she was 17 and he was 34 and was proud of it until the other women's accounts came out.

Moore's denials sound more like a particular Arkansas native who was president in the 1990s.

At a Nov. 29 rally at a church in the south Alabama town of Theodore, Moore said, “Let me state once again: I do not know any of these women, did not date any of these women and have not engaged in any sexual misconduct with anyone.”

Uh huh.

But the women said Moore knew them, Moore dated some of them, and Moore touched a 14 year-old inappropriately. Moore is the one who has changed his story. The women have not changed theirs. The evidence is mounting here.

“Happy graduation Debbie,” it read in slanted cursive handwriting. “I wanted to give you this card myself. I know that you’ll be a success in anything you do. Roy.”

How much evidence will it take before people start believing that something happened, and that Moore is fibbing or using sophistry to evade the truth?

It's no surprise that President Trump, and now the RNC have lent their support to Moore, after the RNC withdrew after the initial allegations. The election is in one week. Moore is losing ground again, though before today I'd have said he would still win.

I think this revelation calls Moore's truthfulness into further question by people who have given him the benefit of the doubt. But if he continues to change his story and vacillate, he will continue to lose more voters and supporters. It's a no-win situation for Roy Moore unless people in first three categories (those who believe in the big conspiracy, those who forgive Moore regardless, and those who think party politics is more important than individual candidates) all show up to vote and take the day.

But it's going to be very close, and Moore could lose. If Moore loses, those who backed him to the end have nobody to blame but themselves. The evidence has been mounting for a long time.


The flip side is that the primary-voters gave us Akin, O'Donnell, Angle, Mourdock and Trump.

Ray Moore is a gift that will keep on giving for the Democrats, for over a decade.

Roy Moore, no, matter if he wins or loses next Tuesday will be yesterday’s news and he will no longer be in the news. The news will move on to the next big race. Wherever a conservative is running ahead the news media will be there to try and stop the Republican. Just like in GA 6, Handel won had has not been mentioned in the news since. You are just like Erik, over exaggerate the effects of every race and candidate.


If something illegal occurred 40 years ago ... then file the charges, prosecute and execute judgement.


I don't see what's changed, Mr. Berman. I and others would like proof of what, if anything, happened before we condemn a man. That isn't going to change no matter how many articles you write complaining about it or us. So spare me the sermons, all right?


Anything else is just destroying a man's reputation ...

AmericanPatriot - the reason why the GOP, the media, and swamp in DC, and the democrats fought so hard to take Moore out is because he won't just go away if he makes it to the Senate. He would be a firebrand that would be a critical vote in the Senate. This could change everything...

My guess is that Moore will squeak out a victory and then lay low for a while. We will be owing Trump for getting him over the hump and will do whatever Trump ask him to do. Why do so many political prognosticators scream gloom and doom at every opportunity in order to make their point seem to be more credible. Moore wins the Republicans maintains 52 seats in the Senate. Moore will have no effect on Senate races in 2018. People in Missouri could care less who Alabama sends to the Senate. Come down from the ledge, no need to jump, the world will not end if Moore wins. Hopefully he will pull the rinos further to the right.

The Duke lacrosse team looked pretty guilty at first, too. Until it’s tried in court, I will give Moore the benefit of a doubt. Same for any man, no matter how plausibly accused, unless he’s caught in flagrante, and even then things may not be as they seem. Has Gloria Allred filed any papers on behalf of her clients yet, or is she still using the gossip court?


@Kywrite The Duke Lacrosse team was accused by one person, and the accusation fell apart fairly quickly when overzealous prosecutors were uncovered. Totally apples to oranges. @AmericanPatriot I disagree that Moore's winning will have no effect in 2018. I think there will be significant anger over it. I think it hands the Democrats an effective talking point. And I think there might be more embarrassing details coming out after he takes his seat.

30-40 YEARS ago! Berman, do YOU want to be judged for your activities 30 years later?!? Youthful indiscretion and maturity are on opposite ends. Also, remember the adage about what a good woman does for a man? One other thing - WHAT is this man doing right now? or recent past? His opponent is very current in his voicing abortion right up to birth... Moore is an upstanding, principled conservative.

Besides the fact that what he is accused over (other than supposedly touching the 14 year old) was not against the law. Apparently, the statutes of limitations have expired on that incident, and like BiggDoggie, I hope that I'm not judged by my indiscretions of my youth. How did this man get so far in his VERY public career without these accusations ever surfacing. I guess that's my real problem here. Roy Moore has had an extremely public career. Why now? Why not 30 years ago, or even 20 years ago during the 10 Commandments fight - when Judge Moore was cast into the limelight?

@BiggDoggie are you presuming Moore did what he's accused of doing despite his denials? Are you saying it's okay for him to lie about it 40 years later or try to cover it up? If he came out and said "yes, this occurred, here's my version of it" and asked forgiveness, I think that would necessitate forgiveness by Christians. But Moore doesn't give us that option. So if it happened, he's compounded the problem by lying about it and covering it up. If I had that in my background, I'd either deal with it honestly or not run for office.

But Moore has run for office at least 4 times in the past and this didn't come out as a "big story." That's he defense. He's saying they're all lying.

To answer your question...if I did what Moore is accused of doing...if when I was in my 30's I fondled a 14-year-old, I'd expect that to matter to many people in an election, and yes, I'd expect to be judged for it even if it happened 40 years before. By your logic we should let everyone off the hook when sufficient time has passed. Legally this may be true (but not for child molestation cases in many states), but politically it should never be true.

@Kimmie2shoes I asked the same questions. First, the accusations had been floating around Gadsen (mostly as rumors, but the accusers did talk about Moore) for decades, and in fact did garner some small press attention over the years.

Second, Moore ran for Alabama Supreme Court judge twice (and won) and governor twice (never a contender). What major newspaper sends reporters to investigate every rumor about a supreme court judge race? How much attention does that get? How much press is given to minor gubernatorial candidates who don't make it past the primaries?

Herman Cain's past never surfaced until he became a contender in 2012. Not because the press was holding back but because until he rose to a prominent figure nobody looked. Same with Moore. The accusations were always there, though what woman or work associate is going to come forward against the sitting chief justice of the state supreme court? And for what reason?

The honest answer is that yes, somebody who isn't a fan of Moore clued WaPo and AL.com into the existence of the rumors and accusations. Because this is a high profile senate race, the press spent considerable resources getting the story. They also went to great lengths to determine the veracity of the story, the motives of the women, and to protect themselves from being punked.

"And stop reading here. In fact, stop reading everything except Breitbart, Infowars and the National Enquirer. That's all the news you'll need from now on." Because you want to make a protracted accusation on the Alabama citizen, being some kind of idiot and the rest of us are just hicks and hang out at places, like those you decided to deride? That's some moral authority you have. You haven't accepted the fact that when people make accusations, they are the ones who have the obligation to substantiate the claim, not the accused. Anything else is just gossip, and the Bible has enough to say about gossip, so I think the ones who are pushing this hate fest against Roy Moore just love the idea that all the woes of the last several decades of demoralizing RINO politics can be rolled up into one or two baskets and made to be good, in order to satisfy a very narrow view about one or two people. There is a correlation between Anti Trump pols and Anti Moore pols. It is just glaringly obvious. You are even taking the Bible to make your case when that is wrong. I'm not as concerned about ole Roy's soul as I am someone who would bear false witness against another, for political gain. Roy and God will have their time, but people will still have to put up with people who will twist to word of God to suit their needs. I have a problem with that. Don't worry. I will go back to infowars, just for you. I don't believe I have ever been there, so could you give me the link. Pompous!

Steve, your analysis of the Moore situation is rather disappointing. Peddling in cheap gossip without a shred of evidence. Except this isn't cheap because it is destroying a godly man's reputation, and you are a conduit for that slander. The details of the Nelson allegation (the most serious of the allegations) are turning out to be wildly inaccurate (like no record of her working for the restaurant, the forged signature in the yearbook, the initials "D.A." were never part of Moore's signature but was used by his assistant Deborah Adams' when she would sign for Moore in 1999!, there was no way to lock a car from the inside in 1977, there was no parking lot behind the restaurant and barely any room to turn a car around, the restaurant did not close at 10 pm like the accuser said). The accusation of the supposed 14-year-old victim and her mother similarly falls apart. I will not throw a godly man overboard when he is accused of impropriety just because similar (more credible) accusations were lodged on someone I opposed politically. The issue ought to be about truth, not some perceived fairness. I am not fooled into thinking that "Well, he said he didn't know her, but a long lost card shows up (miraculously, or rather suspiciously) so he must have had an inappropriate relationship with her." It is this kind of analysis that led to my no longer following The Resurgent.

I do not believe the allegations against Moore. I support him and pray that the lies about him will not keep him from serving God in the Senate. So, the following is not offered in excuse of behaviors that I do not believe ever happened. The whole Moore situation made me reflect on the nature of sin, and our response to it:

Secular humanism does not have a mechanism for the forgiveness of sins. As long as we're just now hearing about it, that allegations are 40 years old doesn't matter. He still needs to be punished. Forget that someone might have his life completely turned around, and is no longer the same. No, secular humanism demands he still pay for his sins. There is no redemption in secular humanism. If Moore did not deny these allegations, and the accusations were true, secular humanism commands his crucifixion. But, the truth does not matter here. Only the seriousness of the allegations. Unfortunately, even though he denies them, and there is no evidence of his doing any of them other than the closely scripted press conferences that were not subject to cross-examination, secular humanists and Christians who think like secular humanists demand his crucifixion, and will throw parting aspersions at those of us who do not believe a man should lose his reputation or his chance at elective office on spurious allegations.

@Steve Berman,

Steve, you are a good writer & thinker but you are conveniently forgetting several points with this argument:

Sorry - not used to this setup... 1. He has NOT been in court, he has NOT been allowed to face his accusers (the pesky Constitution, remember?) 2. There are no charges against him that I know of - just tit for tat accusations & innuendos & blather from a media & a lawyer who are NOT after the truth, but the castration of another Republican, esp. Conservative. 3. Yes, I stand by my statement of 30-40 years ago being ridiculous to judge someone from! I was a long-haired, full-bearded back to the earther at that point with the only conservative spot would be that I was at least pro-life. I did and said a lot of stupid things of which I have paid for many times over. since, I have become a conservative Christian, family man, raised 5 kids and multiple other points of maturity. 4. ANY person, especially any MAN that says he didn't have similar experiences, growing pains, lack of maturity or whatever you want to call it, and doesn't regret it and definitely doesn't want it brought in their face is a bald-faced liar or a saint.


IF Roy Moore could be convinced to SHUT UP and sit down until he feels like retiring, what you say would be the case.

The man is a 'Mouth of Doom' just like President Trump - and while the news cycle may move on from THIS scandal, they would be serve a nice fresh dish a little while later, when Moore reliably says something boneheadedly stupid about religion-and-politics, or whatever.