Deep State Rushing to Defend Sexual Allegations Against Roy Moore

11/19/2017 09:04

by Allen Williams


The deep state quills are out defending allegations against senate candidate Roy Moore in a crucial election that threatens the future of the Washington, DC swamp.  First, we have the deep state mouthpiece media claiming that Moore exhibited predatory sexual behavior at an Alabama mall.  Second Anna Claire Vollers ( defends the Post's allegations in a followup hit piece claiming Moore's behavior was well known locally..  'Gadsden locals say Moore's predatory behavior at mall, restaurants not a secret'

Really? Then let's assume Vollers’ allegations are true. Why would you suppose these women waited 40 years instead of when Moore ran for chief justice of Alabama back in the '90's?  Answer:  Because he wasn't vying for a key Senate seat the democrats need to salvage their scandal ridden party and halt the Trump agenda.  Wonder if anyone paid Vollers to write this drivel? Or are Vollers and these women just cut from the same cloth as the Anita Hill feminists who tried to block Clarence Thomas? Or perhaps the DNC is involved; you know the party that blocked Bernie Sanders from the democrat nomination and along with Hillary Clinton funded the Trump dossier?

I wonder if anyone paid these women to make such allegations?  Answer:  Well, yes someone posing as a Washington Post Reporter made a proposition to at least one of the women: The Post was quick to respond to their involvement sans evidence just as they accused the Gateway Pundit of doing: "Since The Post’s report, the fact-checking site Snopes debunked unsubstantiated rumors that The Post paid Corfman to go on the record and accuse Roy Moore of sexual misconduct. Post spokeswoman Molly Gannon Conway called the accusation “categorically false,” adding that The Post has “an explicit policy that prohibits paying sources...These stories have been going around this town for 30 years," said Blake Usry, who grew up in the area and lives in Gadsden. "Nobody could believe they hadn't come out yet. Neither Corfman nor any of the other women sought out The Post."

Excuse me while I laugh. I can't believe Roy's 'flagrante dilecto' actions hadn't seen the light of day earlier either.  The Post hasn’t debunked anything because the events described by these women never occurred. The Post's supposed 'evidence' is nothing more than a company policy statement that is worthless. WAPO has no credibility here having been caught sensationalizing fake news as in Think that falls under anybody can make a mistake?  Well then how about the Daily Wires chronicle of WAPO lies:  Still not convinced? Then try:"  Note well that Bezos is a business partner of the CIA who guessed it ..the Washington Post.  “The Post’s new owner, Jeff Bezos, is the founder and CEO of Amazon — which recently landed a $600 million contract with the CIA. But the Post’s articles about the CIA are not disclosing that the newspaper’s sole owner is the main owner of CIA business partner Amazon.”

Now isn't that just coincidental that the CIA could be involved?  The CIA is the protection arm of the deep state and Moore is a direct threat to the swamp's corruption monopoly.  Note that the Post claims the women didn't seek them out so what does that leave? What else other than the Post seeking out the women or a CIA impersonation of a WAPO reporter making contact that gives plausible denial to the paper of any direct involvement.  This lends credibility to the Gateway Pundit assertion that a WAPO reporter made a monetary offer.  The CIA has a long history of collusion with the media.

Having these women accuse Moore of 'sexual encounters' is a nice touch that puts him right in league with Bill Clinton, Juanita Broderick, Paula Jones and a host of others. It should work well to advance Moore's political career just as it did for William Jefferson Clinton.  Vollers continues: "It's just sad how these girls (who accused Moore) are getting hammered and called liars, especially Leigh (Corfman)... Legat, now 59, said an off-duty Gadsden police officer named J.D. Thomas told him about various people he should look out for when he was working. This was around 1981, and Thomas worked security at the mall. ... Legat recalled. "He said, 'If you see him, let me know. I'll take care of it.'"

So why didn't the mall flatfoot call his police friend?  Moore had to hang around the mall often enough for the event to be common knowledge around Gadsden.  Why weren't there any statutory rape allegations or charges filed about Moore molesting young girls? Why didn't Moore wind up on a sexual predators list?  Perhaps these women weren’t offended by Moore’s actions at the time. Why weren't there any ethics complaints filed as he was working in the D.A.’s office?  Now contrast the allegations against Moore with the hard evidence of then Kansas Attorney General Paul Morrison’s sexual antics in the Topeka courthouse. And, if Moore's escapades were such common knowledge in Gadsden why didn't the AL paper report on him?  Because it's just 'mall' talk dirty tricks.

Then there is attorney Gloria Allred whose client Beverly Young Nelson claims that Moore signed her school yearbook in 1977 when she was only 14.  “Beverly Young Nelson accused Judge Roy Moore of attempted rape in 1977.Allred refuses to release the yearbook for forensic analysis because Moore’s alleged signature appears strikingly similar to his signature as circuit judge on Nelson’s 1999 divorce documents which includes the D.A. abbreviation of his clerk.  Allred didn’t bother to ask her client if she saw Moore sign the yearbook.  “Allred was a Hillary delegate at the DNC in 2016” and is under two investigations for misconduct. But remember the Clinton years have conditioned us to believe that ‘Women and children’ don’t lie.

And now last but not least SNOPES who claims that the Gateway Pundit's article facts are ‘false’ because among other things the D.A. who supposedly was given a copy of the film encounter with the WAPO reporter hasn't responded yet and despite the website caveat that “UPDATE: We have not been able to confirm these allegations by Doug Lewis.”  Even if the Gateway Pundit article turns out to be a total fraud it does nothing to convict Moore of any wrong doing or relieve the Post’s culpability in fostering fake news.

The 'Truth Detector' has put its own share of fake news out back in the 1990’s claiming the American Family Association’s notice on how hate crime laws will adversely affect Christian liberty was false.  Front Page Magazine says it about as well as it can be said: "But Snopes has always been a scam. Its people have no idea what they're doing. They couldn't find a fact in a fact storm. And their research usually involves 5 minutes in Google. Furthermore Snopes is particularly notorious for the obnoxious habit of "debunking" an extreme claim to discredit a real once. Thus, for example, Snopes will "debunk" a claim that Soros was a Nazi officer, which is not a claim that anyone is actually making, to silence debate about his anti-Semitic issues and behavior during the Holocaust." Then there is Forbes observations on fact checking the fact checkers  concerning a Daily Mail article about SNOPES.

The media specializes in innuendo and bullshit while accusing others of the same tactics.   MEDIA: Our Job’ Is to Control ‘Exactly What People Think’ Here's a 'news flash' for the press: 'He said...she said' is not evidence of anything other than gossip. Vollers has no hard evidence of Moore's indiscretions otherwise we would have already read it in a newspaper.  This places the Washington Post and its cohorts solidly in the company of Anderson Cooper and a bevy of CNN fake news commentators.  There are many other instances of SNOPES falsifying stories. And now..wait for it.. Snopes has CIA connections according to Wayne Madsen.  SNOPES is a CIA disinformation and propaganda website.  Beginning to see the combined effort by the deep state to discredit and destroy Roy Moore's candidacy?

The piece the Washington Post and its cronies wrote is nothing but a cheap smear campaign against judge Moore intended to deny the people's choice just as was done to Donald Trump earlier in the Post’s claim of Russian hacking of the 2016 election.  The Post now shares the same notoriety as Dan Rather’s falsification of G.W. Bush’s Texas Air National Guard service.  Similar dirty trick techniques used against Bush were also employed against Moore.  All that's changed here are the perpetrators.

The timing of these 'hit pieces' just 30 days out from the special election to replace Jeff Sessions betrays the paper’s intent.  The absence of evidence really doesn’t matter; it’s the same old ‘seriousness of the charge’ ploy that’s expected to disenfranchise voters.

This is collusion and rag journalism at best and weaponized jouralism at worst.