>>> that you apparently at least have some sort of 'gut felling' about all this and hopefully your conscience will eventually allow you to come to the conclusion that this person should not be an elected official.
>
>Were I so foolish as to confuse feelings and facts, it would mean that forever more you can take down any candidate by simply assembling accusers and it's time to burn the witch. Sadly, your insistence that you believe in due process, is not the case. You react to the emotion rather than validation of the accusations and you want to finish him. Which is exacly how a lynch mob operates.

Emotion doesn't have anything to do with if I believe 9 victims and zillions of witnesses - it's called 'common sense'. Any emotional feelings you describe are merely my disgust with your lack of understanding any of what's happening/happened here - which as I mentioned before actually makes you part of the problem for not just the victims in this case, but all victims of sexual abuse.

>>> Your squibilling about doubting one of the victims based on the rants of the child-molester's lawyer (who's paid purpose is to cast doubt and attack the victims) is clouding your judgement of the entire scope of the situation here.
>
>Did you not manage to comprehend my post at all? There are easily testable facts here. If he's a liar, he deserves to go down. If he's innocent, then people who wanted to lynch him are antidemocratic bullies.

The test factor here for the 9 victims and zillions of witnesses boils down to who you believe and why.

>>>Lastly your doubts about this because of the timing of the allegations tells me that not only do you not understand how sexual harassment and child molestation works...
>
>Except that "the way sexual harassment works" does not involve waiting until weeks before an election.

That's exactly how it works. The women have come forward now because, as I already pointed out, that an reporter heard the rumors and when down there to investigate and in the processes found some of the victims and a huge number of witnesses. IF you know how sexual harassment works then you'd know why they did come come forward sooner - or do you not and need me to explain all the reasons why? I'm thinking you do not understand because you keep saying 'why now'.

>There's zero connection! And your belligerent rudeness doesn't create one!
>
>>>which by the way is that a reporter heard the rumors and went down there to investigate, then proceeded to track down some victims and a large number of witnesses.
>
>Are you describing what happened here, or the Salem Witch Hunts? Of course the allegations could be true, which is why they need fair investigation rather than immediate declarations one way or the other.

No and this isn't 1692 either. It's disturbing that you choose to ignore 9 victims and dozens upon dozens of witnesses who have nothing to gain by lying and accept the word of a person with this history. Again - your judgement sucks.

>>>Furthermore in cases like this there is rarely going to be any physical evidence -
>
>except that this time there is some physical evidence that's being withheld. Why?

There is not going to be a trail about any of this, you know that right? So the police don't want it, there is no point or reason for them to ask for it. If he gets elected and tries to fight being expelled then congress may ask for it.

>>> and the court of law is not the same standard anyway as determining if a person should be in office - which in this case not only is he not due to these allegations but also his past actions and things he's said.
>
>In which case his fellow Alabamans will give him what he deserves. Your real objection is that your binary posture makes you want to deny the people of Alabama their rights so you can ram your version over the top of them.
>
>I don't think you even realize how awful your nation would become were such extreme thoughts to dominate. You do realize it would cut both ways- your side would not have a monopoly on lighting the pyres for every elected official?

I don't know if you realize how awful your rejection of the women's stories and the witnesses stories is.

Even if the Alabama voters are as stupid as their governor and this child molester gets elected - he will be the first senator expelled since 1862 - unless he resigns like republican Bob Packwood of Oregon. He resigned in 1995 as it became clear he would almost certainly be expelled for sexual harassment and other misconduct.