Skip to content
The Environmental Protection Agency on Thursday published two bee-related announcements, but with both, say environmental groups, the agency has failed the pollinators.
One was its “Policy to Mitigate the Acute Risk to Bees from Pesticide Products.” It states that the “policy is not a regulation or an order and, therefore, does not legally compel changes to pesticide product registrations.”
The other release was a set of draft risk assessments for three neonicotinoids, or “neonics.” They are the most widely used class of insecticides, and they have been linked to bee harm. The new assessments were for clothianidin, thiamethoxam, and dinotefuran, and an updated assessment on another, imidacloprid, was also included.
Those assessments, according to Paul Towers, policy advocate and spokesperson for Pesticide Action Network, “are full of gaps and continue to ignore many of the most significant threats from neonicotinoids, particularly when they’re used as seed coatings on common crops,” their most frequent use.
Yet “[e]ven in their limited scope, these risk assessments clearly show harm to bees and other pollinators from uses of neonics,” said Larissa Walker, program director for the Center for Food Safety’s pollinator program.
Added Lori Ann Burd, director of the Center for Biological Diversity’s environmental health program: “It’s outrageous that on the same day the EPA acknowledged these dangerous pesticides are killing bees it also reversed course on mandating restrictions on their use,” referring to the agency’s backing away from a 2015 proposal.
“This is like a doctor diagnosing your illness but then deciding to withhold the medicine you need to cure it,” Burd said.
The Center also referred to the policy’s failure to mandate restrictions as “a deep bow to the pesticide industry.”
To truly take steps to protect bees, as well as our environment, said Tiffany Finck-Haynes, food futures campaigner at Friends of the Earth, the EPA “should take bee-toxic pesticides off the market.”
The announcements came during the final days of the Obama administration, and as President-elect Donald Trump has already made clear he’ll be heading an anti-science administration, with picks like Scott Pruitt, whose record is “completely antithetical” to the mission of the EPA, which Trump wants him to lead.
“It’s shocking that the EPA’s response to the crisis of declining pollinators and the abundant science linking that decline to neonicotinoid insecticides is to meekly offer a policy encouraging industry to consider restricting pesticide use in limited situations where plants are blooming while commercial honeybees have been brought in to work the fields,” the Center for Biological Diversity’s Burd continued. “This is a rejection of science that should be deeply troubling to all Americans as we move into a Trump administration.”
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
More than 500 national, state, and local organizations on Tuesday announced their opposition to Donald Trump’s fossil-fuel soaked nominee to run the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Scott Pruitt.
In a letter (pdf) to U.S. senators sent one day before Pruitt’s confirmation hearing before the Environment and Public Works committee on Wednesday, the groups urge lawmakers “to not only vote against Pruitt’s nomination, but actively use all the power of your office and position to block it. We urge you to lobby your colleagues on both sides of the aisle to oppose his nomination, to speak out in the media highlighting his egregious environmental record, and use all procedural means at your disposal to block Scott Pruitt from becoming EPA administrator.”
Asserting that “[w]e could write a book on Pruitt’s anti-environmental views,” the signatories offer the following “highlights” of his record:
- As Attorney General of Oklahoma, Pruitt campaigned in support of a ballot measure that would have made it virtually impossible for the state to regulate pollution caused by factory farms—pollution which poisons surrounding communities’ air and drinking water. Fortunately, Oklahoma voters have the good sense to reject this measure;
- Pruitt is a climate denier who has said that the link between human activity and climate change is “far from settled.” He is part of an effort to shield Exxon and other energy companies from accountability over years of misleading the public about the science around climate change;
- Pruitt opposes the ability of the EPA to regulate carbon as a pollutant, something that is essential to combating climate change;
- Pruitt has opposed the EPA’s Waters of the U.S. rule, which strengthened regulations aimed at protecting water from runoff pollution;
- Pruitt even opposes protecting the environment around our national parks. In 2014, Pruitt unsuccessfully sued the EPA over its Regional Haze Rule, a law designed to foster cleaner air at national parks by reducing coal-fired power plant emissions;
- As earthquakes caused by fracking and waste disposal have ravaged Oklahoma, Pruitt has done nothing to protect the people of his state or hold the fossil fuel industry accountable;
- None of this should come as a surprise, given that Pruitt has accepted over $300,000 in campaign contributions from the fossil fuel industry.
“Given Scott Pruitt’s long record of insulating industrial polluters from even the most basic environmental safeguards, anyone that breathes air and drinks water should be aggressively opposed to this man leading the EPA,” said Wenonah Hauter, executive director at Food & Water Watch, which spearheaded the letter. “We are putting every senator on notice: anyone who supports his nomination will have Mr. Pruitt’s dreadful history of pollution and poisoning on their own hands, and we the people will hold each of them personally responsible moving forward.”
The missive, signed by a wide-ranging coalition of environmental, civil rights, public health, and pro-democracy organizations, comes on the heels of another letter from 13 former heads of state environmental bureaus to Senate leaders, also calling for Pruitt’s rejection as head of the EPA. In addition, last week, top Senate Democrats asked federal ethics officials for more information about Pruitt’s abundant conflicts of interest, noting that “during his tenure as attorney general of Oklahoma, Mr. Pruitt has blurred the distinction between official and political actions, often at the behest of corporations he will regulate if confirmed to lead the EPA.”
All these opponents note that Pruitt spent his time as Oklahoma attorney general launching multiple legal attacks against the EPA on behalf of fossil fuel corporations. The Intercept on Tuesday delved into one such case—Pruitt’s suit, filed in coordination with Murray Energy, Peabody Energy, and Southern Power Company (“all of whom donated to Pruitt and his political action committee,” reporter Sharon Lerner writes), challenging the EPA’s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR).
The cost of not implementing that rule, which sought to limit smog emissions from coal- and oil-burning power plants, would be staggering, Lerner reports:
The U.S. Supreme Court in 2014 ruled against Pruitt and his fossil-fuel cronies, “[b]ut as head of the EPA, he would be in a position to undermine this rule and others that would save both money and lives,” Lerner writes.
And that’s why so many people are fighting his nomination.
“The political revolution relies on those who fight for economic, social, racial, and environmental justice—and there will be no environmental justice if Scott Pruitt is in charge of the EPA,” said Shannon Jackson, executive director of Our Revolution, which signed onto Tuesday’s letter. “Pruitt’s disturbing denial of science and close financial ties to the fossil fuel industry make him completely unfit to hold the position—and would put the future of our planet and the lives of future generations at risk. Our country deserves a leader who understands that we have a moral obligation to reduce emissions and invest in renewable energy—not the man who has sued the EPA over their Clean Power Plan. We will fight this appointment like our lives depend on it—because they do.”
Pruitt’s hearing begins Wednesday at 10am.
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
Click Here: geelong cats guernsey 2019
With Republicans having blocked the nomination of former President Barack Obama’s pick for the U.S. Supreme Court, Merrick Garland, President Donald Trump is now ready to offer up his choice for the seat left vacant for nearly a year since the death of conservative Justice Antonin Scalia.
Trump said on Twitter Wednesday morning that he’d make his choice on Thursday of next week, Feb. 2.
The contenders are three federal appeals court judges: Neil Gorsuch of the Denver-based 10th Circuit; Thomas Hardiman of the Philadelphia-based 3rd Circuit (where the president’s sister, Maryanne Trump Barry, serves); and William Pryor of the Atlanta-based 11th Circuit.
Pryor, the New York Times writes, “is a protégé of Senator Jeff Sessions,” Trump’s contentious pick for attorney general. CNN describes Pryor as “a dream candidate for many conservatives.”
But it’s Hardiman and Gorsuch that have emerged as the front-runners, and Bloomberg writes that they “would, in all likelihood, largely track the voting pattern of the late Antonin Scalia.” Matthew Monforton adds at The Resurgent: “for Scaliaphiles like [himself], the nomination and confirmation of a Justice Gorsuch might be the next best thing to a Lazarus-style resurrection of Justice Scalia.”
The Times writes that Gorsuch’s “best-known votes came in decisions concerning regulations under the Affordable Care Act requiring employers to provide free contraception coverage. He voted to accommodate religious objections to the regulations, a position largely upheld by the Supreme Court.”
Hardiman, Bloomberg writes, “has been a supporter of gun rights and police powers in his decade on the Philadelphia-based 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.” It continues:
The road to a confirmation for any of the men may not be smooth, as Sen. Minority Leader Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.) said Sunday. Speaking to CNN‘s Jake Tapper, Schumer said, “If the nominee is out of the mainstream, we will do our best to keep the seat open,” and vowed that in the face of such a nominee, “we will fight it tooth and nail, as long as we have to.”
Resistance is galvanizing off Capitol Hill as well, as Nan Aron, the president of the Alliance for Justice, told the Times: “We are prepared to oppose every name on Trump’s list,” and said progressive and civil rights communities would join forces to oppose a Gorsuch, Hardiman, or Pryor nomination.
Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor, who was nominated by Obama, offered her thoughts on the process Monday, telling a crowd at Arizona State University: “Any self-respecting judge who comes in with an agenda that would permit that judge to tell you how they will vote is the kind of person you don’t want as a judge.”
Rather, she said, lawmakers should ask, “Do [the prospective justices] treat others with respect and dignity? Find out whether they have ruled in ways in which they expressed a difference with their personal feelings, because a judge who can’t point to a decision that’s different from how they personally feel is not a judge who’s following the rule of law.”
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
Click Here: Cardiff Blues Store
Amid international outcry over U.S. President Donald Trump’s executive order barring citizens from seven predominantly Muslim countries, at least two of those nations are taking steps to ban U.S. citizens from their borders.
Members of the Iraqi parliament voted Monday in favor of a resolution calling on Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi to “respond in kind to the American decision in the event that the American side does not to withdraw its decision,” a parliamentary official told Agence France Presse.
While questions remain about whether that ban will extend to the U.S. military or aid organizations, Iraqi lawmakers Kamil al-Ghrairi and Mohammed Saadoun told the Associated Press that “the decision is binding for the government,” the news outlet explained.
Click Here: Cheap Chiefs Rugby Jersey 2019
“Both say the decision was passed by a majority votes in favor but couldn’t offer specific numbers,” AP reported Monday. “No further details were available on the wording of the parliament decision. It was also not immediately clear who the ban will apply to—American military personnel, non-government and aid workers, oil companies and other Americans doing business in Iraq.”
The country’s foreign affairs committee also called for a reciprocal travel ban while the foreign ministry issued a statement Monday demanding that “the new American administration reconsider this wrong decision,” referring to Trump’s executive order which bars citizens from Syria, Iran, Iraq, Yemen, Sudan, Libya, and Somalia—as well as green card holders from those nations—from entering the U.S.
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
Iran has also responded in kind. On Saturday, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued a statement blasting the temporary ban as an “imprudent decision” that will only “further promote the campaign of hatred, violence, and extremism.”
Thus, the ministry said it will “engage in a careful assessment of the short and medium-term impact of the decision…and will take proportionate legal, consular, and political action and—while respecting the American people and differentiating between them and the hostile policies of the U.S. Government—will take reciprocal measures in order to safeguard the rights of its citizens until the time of the removal of the insulting restrictions of the Government of the United States against Iranian nations.”
Sharing the statement on Twitter, Iranian foreign minister Javad Zarif wrote:
Meanwhile, the Iranian English language newspaper Financial Tribune reported Monday that the republic is “going to stop using the U.S. dollar as its currency of choice in its financial and foreign exchange reports from the new fiscal year that begins in March,” per an order from the governor of the Central Bank of Iran.
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
The White House late Monday published a list of supposedly “under-reported” terrorist attacks, following up on President Donald Trump’s claim that the media was deliberately suppressing coverage of such acts.
In addition to the fact that many of the events listed were extensively covered by the press, glaringly absent, many noted, are attacks committed by white men and those whose victims were non-Western.
The 78 examples provided span from September 2014 through December 2016. The list includes prominent events such the December 2015 shooting in San Bernardino, California (among other typos, the list misspells “Bernadino”), the Nice, France truck attack that killed 84 civilians, and the June 2016 coordinated suicide bombings at Istanbul’s Ataturk International Airport.
Putting to rest claims that the listed attacks were under-reported, the Guardian on Tuesday published the full White House list with internal links and details regarding “how they were reported.”
“What does the White House’s choice of ‘cases the very, very dishonest press doesn’t want to report’ tell us?” the newspaper asks, using the president’s own words.
As many pointed out, Trump’s list specifically does not include attacks perpetrated by white men or where Muslims were the majority of victims, such as last week’s deadly shooting at a Quebec City mosque.
Arguing that such exclusions are even more telling than what is included, the Washington Post‘s Katie Mettler and Derek Hawkins write: “Some of the countries most devastated by terrorism from Islamic extremists were left out entirely. Whether that suggests that the administration thinks they received adequate coverage is anyone’s guess. But it was a glaring omission either way.”
They continue:
What’s more, as CBS reported this morning, none of the attacks on Trump’s terror list “would have been prevented by his [travel] ban” on immigrants and refugees from seven Muslim-majority countries.
As for the White House’s intent, some observers, such as the Washington Post‘s Philip Bump, suggest that the whole frenzy was deliberately designed to get the press to reiterate these dozens of attacks to underscore Trump’s call for closed borders. Others point to the fact that far-right outlets like InfoWars have long sown fears about a “massive media cover-up.”
In a lengthy Twitter thread (partially sourced above), activist and entrepreneur Michael Skolnik argues that such media attacks are both a distraction and an attempt to undermine core institutions.
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
Click Here: NRL Telstra Premiership
Stoking fears of a crackdown on immigrants and civil liberties, President Donald Trump on Thursday signed three executive orders addressing crime.
“A new era of justice begins, and it begins right now,” Trump said to conclude prepared remarks at the White House. The orders were signed following Jeff Sessions’ swearing-in as U.S. attorney general.
According to McClatchy:
As the text of the memoranda trickled out, USA Today reporter Gregory Korte noted that one of the orders links crime with “illegal immigration”—echoing remarks Trump made Wednesday before a law enforcement conference, in which he blamed gang violence in Chicago on undocumented immigrants.
Attorney and immigration reform advocate David Leopold similarly warned that by putting “‘illegal immigration’ on par with drug trafficking and violent crime,” Trump is making “clear he’s about to unleash his deportation force.”
Others expressed concern that the orders would justify a law enforcement crackdown on protesters or minorities.
Meanwhile, criticism was lobbed against Sessions for parroting Trump’s lies on the U.S. crime rate during his swearing-in speech.
Yahoo! News reports:
Writing at NBC News, Jane C. Timm put the misleading claims in context:
The ACLU, which on Wednesday vowed to sue Sessions if he violates the U.S. Constitution, also responded to the orders with skepticism and concern.
“President Trump intends to build task forces to investigate and stop national trends that don’t exist,” said Jeffery Robinson, deputy legal director of the ACLU and director of its Trone Center for Justice and Equality. “We have seen historic lows in the country’s crime rate and a downward trend in killings against police officers since the 1980s. The president not only doesn’t acknowledge these facts about our nation’s safety, he persists in ignoring the all-too-real deaths of black and brown people at the hands of law enforcement.”
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
Thursday, March 2, 2017
- Following reporting from the Washington Post last night, a firestorm of criticism is being directed at U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions to either resign or at least recuse himself from any investigation into Russian meddling in last year’s election
- and tell them you believe Sessions must either fully recuse himself from ongoing probes or resign
- on Trump to tell Sessions “You’re Fired”
- If you live in DC, has been organized for noon on Thursday (3/2) outside the Department of Justice (950 Penn Ave NW). More info/RSVP .
- “If Schumer wants to show that he’s with the resistance, he needs to remove Senator Joe Manchin (D-WV), a man who proudly gives Trump standing ovations, buddies up with Breitbart News, and votes for the Republican party’s agenda of hate and corporate cronyism, from party leadership.”
- On International Women’s Day— —women and their allies across the world will act together for equity, justice and the human rights of women and all gender-oppressed people, through a one-day demonstration of economic solidarity
- Learn more on the
- Tell people what you’re fighting for, and encourage them to join the cause, by sharing your story/demand using the hashtag
What You Can Be Doing Everyday
- Check out the Indivisible Guide’s “Capitol Calendar.” See if there’s a local Indivisible group in your area. If there isn’t, start one.
- ” also has a running schedule of events and actions.
- Sign up to receive ” on your mobile device
- Every day: Make your voice heard with “5 Calls” (because calling actually works)
- Every Sunday: Join “Ready to Resist” Strategy Calls
- Every Tuesday: #ResistTrumpTuesdays (or on Twitter)
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
Click Here: camisetas de futbol baratas
While President Donald Trump was tweeting from his Mar-a-Lago resort in Palm Beach, former presidential contender Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) was doing something Trump had promised to do throughout his campaign: advocating for workers.
On Saturday, Sanders and former Ohio state senator Nina Turner, a Democrat, led hundreds of workers in a “March on Mississippi” in Canton, Miss., to demand that Nissan grant factory employees the right to hold a union vote free from fear or intimidation.
“If Mississippi Nissan workers succeed, it will send a powerful message in the south and across this country that working people are prepared to fight for justice.”
—Bernie Sanders
Also taking part in the march were NAACP president Cornell Williams Brooks, Sierra Club president Aaron Mair, and the actor Danny Glover.
Click Here: los jaguares argentina
The march culminated in the delivery of a letter to Nissan officials “demanding the company halt its ongoing harassment of African-American workers who are organizing to form a union,” the coalition of rights advocates behind the march, known as the Mississippi Alliance for Fairness at Nissan (MAFFAN), wrote in a statement.
Nissan has come under so much fire for its labor abuses of its Mississippi employees that politicians in France, where Nissan’s corporate partner Renault is headquartered, released a series of videos expressing their solidarity with the Canton workers’ fights for union rights.
“It’s empowering to see so many leaders, both here and abroad, offering their support to us as we speak out against Nissan’s attacks on our civil rights at the plant,” said Nissan employee Morris Mock, who works on the paint line at the Canton plant. “I have two daughters, and I want them to grow up in a community where they will have a real shot at a good future and a decent living. That’s why I’m going to keep fighting for good jobs at Nissan’s plant, no matter what it takes.”
Actor Danny Glover explained why the Nissan fight is important for workers all across America: “So long as we have a haven for oppressive work conditions such as Mississippi, workers are not safe anywhere in the country, because businesses and companies can seek refuge in a state like Mississippi and escape providing proper work conditions for workers throughout this country.”
“What corporations understand is if they stop workers in Mississippi from forming a union, they can keep wages down in Michigan, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania,” tweeted Sanders.
“It is time for justice for working people,” he told a gathering of workers:
“We cannot save this planet on the back of a degraded labor,” said the Sierra Club’s Mair during the rally.
“What you are fighting for is a righteous fight,” Turner told the Nissan workers. “You are not asking for too much.”
Watch Turner’s full speech here:
And watch a recording of the full rally here.
“If Mississippi Nissan workers succeed, it will send a powerful message in the south and across this country that working people are prepared to fight for justice and for a fair share of the economic pie,” Sanders wrote in a Medium article published after the march.
Participants, journalists, and supporters posted photos and videos from the day’s action under the hashtags #MarchonMississippi and #DoBetterNissan:
Tweets about #MarchOnMississippi OR #dobetternissan
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
In “the Trump era,” as Attorney General Jeff Sessions called it on Tuesday, immigration officials will undertake a harsh crackdown on undocumented migrants—a campaign one veteran federal prosecutor described as “fucking horrifying.”
In his speech at a border port of entry in Nogales, Arizona, “[t]he nation’s top law enforcement official outlined a series of changes that he said mark the start of a new push to rid American cities and the border of what he described as ‘filth’ brought on by drug cartels and criminal organizations,” the Associated Press reported.
“This is a new era,” the immigration hardliner told Customs and Border Protection personnel. “This is the Trump era. The lawlessness, the abdication of the duty to enforce our immigration laws, and the catch-and-release practices of old are over.”
Mother Jones reported:
(Politico notes that the term “filth,” which appeared in prepared remarks, was omitted from Sessions’ speech when he gave it.)
One anonymous federal prosecutor told Daily Beast reporter Betsy Woodruff the directives were generating widespread negative response: “It’s fucking horrifying. It’s totally horrifying and we’re all terrified about it, and we don’t know what to do.”
“The things they want us to do are so horrifying—they want to do harboring cases of three or more people,” the prosecutor continued. “So if you’re illegal and you bring your family over, then you’re harboring your kid and your wife, and you can go to jail.”
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
Others blasted Sessions’ inflammatory rhetoric.
“Attorney General Sessions is grandstanding at the border in an attempt to look tough and scare immigrants,” said Frank Sharry, executive director of the immigration reform advocacy group America’s Voice Education Fund. “It’s yet another example of the Trump administration treating all immigrants as threats and as criminals. This is the smokescreen they use to justify their efforts to deport millions, to keep people out of the country, and, ultimately, to try and remake the racial and ethnic composition of America.”
Gregory Z. Chen, director of government relations for the American Immigration Lawyers Association, added to the AP: “Once again, Attorney General Sessions is scaring the public by linking immigrants to criminals despite studies showing that immigrants commit crimes at lower rates than the native born.”
Meanwhile, CNN reports Wednesday that the Trump administration’s latest immigration appointees are affiliated with far-right, anti-immigration organizations.
According to CNN:
National Immigration Law Center executive director Marielena Hincapié said the hirings “are more evidence that white supremacists are now running our country’s immigration agenda.”
Click Here: Putters
“These groups have spent 20 years looking for ways that they could hurt immigrants,” Lynn Tramonte, deputy director of pro-immigration advocacy group America’s Voice, told CNN, “and now they’ve been given the keys to the kingdom.”
Our work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. Feel free to republish and share widely.
MSNBC host Joy Reid tore into a pastor supporting Alabama GOP Senate candidate Roy MooreRoy Stewart MooreSessions goes after Tuberville’s coaching record in challenging him to debate The 10 Senate seats most likely to flip Sessions fires back at Trump over recusal: ‘I did my duty & you’re damn fortunate I did” MORE on Saturday, questioning the pastor’s moral leadership over accusations of sexual misconduct against Moore involving teenage girls.
On MSNBC’s “AM Joy,” Reid confronted Moore supporter Pastor Mark Burns after Burns defended Moore by saying morality wasn’t “the only quality that makes a good leader.”
Click Here: camiseta rosario centralADVERTISEMENT
“Hold on just a second. One moment, hold on, hold on,” Reid responded. “I’m going to let you back in. You’re not a lawyer, you’re not a judge. You’re not here to judge whether or not in a court of law Roy Moore would be found guilty after nine women accused him of sexually molesting children.”
She then questioned whether Burns was providing the “moral leadership” expected of a spiritual leader.
“We have you on because you’re a pastor. What your job is, in theory, is to provide a moral framework for the people who go to your church and listen to you. How can you say that in your moral framework, you’re not here to adjudicate the case, but you’re saying that morality is not the only important thing. Aren’t you a moral leader? Like isn’t that what you’re supposed to be advocating for, for moral leadership?” Reid asked.
Burns fired back, calling the timing of the allegations against Moore “suspicious.”
Moore is set to face Democrat Doug Jones in a special Senate election next month, but has faced calls from national Republicans to drop out since the allegations emerged last week.
“I do find the fact that Roy Moore has served faithfully for over 40 years publicly in public office and these women had plenty of opportunity, plenty of opportunities, Joy, to come out and it is suspicious,” Burns said.
“I think the great people of Alabama are realizing that, which is why the majority of Alabamians are still going to vote for Roy Moore, even the governor, even the women that stepped up and said ‘we’re still supporting Roy Moore,’ because their understanding, it is extremely suspicious that this is all coming out after he’s become the candidate,” he added.
Moore has vocally denied the accusations, one of which is that he initiated a sexual encounter with a 14-year-old girl in 1979, when he was 32.
The former Alabama Supreme Court justice says the allegations are a joint effort between the media and Democrats to discredit him.
“If you look at this situation, you’ll see that, because I’m 11 ahead, or 10 and 11 points ahead — this race just being 28 days off, this is a political maneuver. It has nothing to do with reality, it is all about politics,” Moore said at a press conference beside his wife earlier this week.
Multiple polls released this week showed Jones with a lead in the race.