Roy Moore’s Accuser Admits She’s a Fraud
Beverly Young Nelson offered a yearbook inscription as proof of Moore’s interest in her.
Now, Nelson admits to forging the message.
Attorney Gloria Allred used Nelson’s yearbook as proof of her accusations against U.S. Senate candidate Roy Moore. Weeks later, she’s back-pedaling. However, Nelson still says she will be devastated if Moore wins the election.
According to Nelson, Moore tried to assault her when she was a teenager. But, with the election only a few days away, her admission of fraud couldn’t come at a better time.
Nelson confessed on ABC news to forgery. She insisted that Moore did sign the yearbook, but she made “notes” to supplement the message.
Mainstream Media Uninterested
Do you think Cubans are fighting for healthcare or freedom from Communism?
Sadly, ABC News accepted her explanation without any further questions.
According to Breitbart:
And in yet another blow to the credibility of ABC News, the disgraced, left-wing network downplayed the bombshell by presenting this admission of forgery as adding “notes” to the inscription. Worse still, the reporter actually coaches Nelson, puts words in her mouth, downplay the enormous significance of her deceit.
“Nelson admits she did make notes to the inscription,” ABC News tells us. “But the message was all Roy Moore.”
“Beverly, he signed your yearbook,” ABC News reporter Tom Llamas says.
“He did sign it,” she replies.
“And you made some notes underneath.”
“Yes,” Nelson says.
And then, after a woman admits to forging a document used in a campaign to destroy the Republican nominee for the U.S. Senate in Alabama, ABC News quickly moves on as though it is not news of extraordinary consequence.
Llamas also fails to ask any follow-ups, such as “If the explanation is this simple, why wait all these weeks to offer it?” Or, “Why did you lie?”
Unfortunately, it’s par for the course with the leftist media. They will blow up a story about Trump having the sniffles in the winter as if a sniffle discredits the President. Meanwhile, they ignore evidence of deceit against the right.
Nelson’s fraud sparks several controversies. For example, Nelson wants to use her own handwriting expert to validate the yearbook inscription. Meanwhile, Moore is asking for an independent evaluation. Moore says he didn’t sign the yearbook. Therefore, he has a right to refute evidence against him in a fair manner. Why doesn’t Nelson want a balanced opinion on the matter?
Perhaps the answer lies in the fact that Moore ruled against Nelson in a 1999 divorce case. Certainly, her bitterness creates a motive for attacking Moore unfairly.
Nelson’s complaint prompted two other women to step forward. However, their credibility is also questionable.
Leigh Corfman claims Moore molested her as a 14-year-old child. She is the most credible of the three, but the narrative behind her story, that Moore’s abuse resulted in Corfman’s living a troubled life of “drinking, drugs, boyfriends, and a suicide attempt,” is directly contradicted by contemporaneous court records.
Moore’s final accuser is Tina Johnson, a woman who claims Moore groped her butt in his office in 1991. But, again, as was the case with Corfman and Nelson, the left-wing media outlets reporting these allegations (the Washington Post, AL.com) either failed to fully vet the accusers or withheld crucial context.
Luckily for Moore, New Media dug a little deeper into these stories to fact check the reporters.
We now know that Johnson did not tell the entire truth. She was not in Moore’s office “on business.” If she was in Moore’s office at all, it was due to a bitter custody battle where Moore represented Johnson’s mother, who was trying to gain custody of Johnson’s 12-year-old son based on the claim that Johnson was an “unfit, absent, and unstable mother.”
Obviously, if the accusers were upfront with these other facts, they would be far more credible. But hiding their previous connections to Moore certainly lends credence to the idea that these women are out to get the Senate hopeful.
Obviously, by today’s standards, a 32 year old man should never date a 16 year old girl. However, to fully understand the accusations flying around these days, we need to judge them based on the social norms of the time. Therefore, it’s important to recognize these women had reached the legal age of consent in their state. Furthermore, 4 decades ago, it wasn’t uncommon for a man to seek a much younger bride, especially in the south.
Humphrey Bogart and Lauren Bacall are a classic example: their 25 year age difference (she was 20, he was 45 and had been married three times before) didn’t stop them from falling, and staying, in love.
Loretta Lynn married at the age of 13 to her 21 year old groom.
Charlie Chaplin and his future wife Oona O’Neill first met when he was 53 and she was 17. He’d already been married three times, twice to 16-year-olds.
Times have changed, for sure. However, no one says Roy Moore tried to date a teenager last summer. It’s amazing just how desperate the democrats are to win an election.
If you like what you read here, then SIGN-UP to get our posts sent directly to your INBOX! We promise to provide information, insight, and a few chuckles. Also, YOU will be supporting a FEARLESS CONSERVATIVE WARRIOR!