|The Washington Post & Its Reporters|
The article above reveals exactly how mendacious the "reporters" at the Washington Post really are. Let's presume for a second that they at least thought Leigh Corfman was credible. They accept her 40-year-old story at face value. Did they investigate before they went public? Doesn't seem so. They knew the mom was in court in the time period because they researched the court records. But didn't they read them? Breitbart apparently did which makes the Post investigation either shoddy or deliberately dishonest:
A thorough search of court documents finds one court case in February 1979—a case that took place on February 21, 1979. The Post failed to tell readers that at that February 21, 1979, court case Wells voluntarily gave up custody of Corfman to Corfman’s father, Robert R. Corfman. The two had been divorced since 1974. The custody case was amicable and involved a joint petition by both parents.
The Post further did not tell readers that as a result of the joint petition to change custody, the court ordered the 14-year-old Corfman to move to her father’s house starting on March 4, 1979. Court documents show the father’s address in Ohatchee [two hours away], and not in Gadsden, where her mother lived and where Corfman says the meetings with Moore took place.
This would mean that from the court hearing on February 21, 1979, until Corfman was ordered to move to her father’s house, Moore would only have had 12 days, including the day of the court hearing, to have repeatedly called Corfman at her mother’s Gadsden house, arrange two meetings, and attempt another. Moore has strenuously denied the accusations.
While that timeline is theoretically possible, the Moore campaign stressed in a press conference today it is unlikely....Unlikely is right!. The man would have to be like Glenn Close in Fatal Attraction. Is there any evidence Roy Moore is that kind of man? And if he is, how has he managed to hide it for 40 years since the alleged encounter? People like that don't become suddenly moral. Look at Bill Clinton. He's been a continuing, dedicated lecher throughout his career. So why did the Post fail to mention the custody change and the reason behind it? Because that wouldn't have helped "bork" Moore.
In fact, Corfman was already exhibiting serious behavioral problems. But you wouldn't know it from what the Post reported:
The Post strongly implied that the alleged encounter with Moore caused Corfman to exhibit reckless behavior in her teenage years....
The Post failed to mention that the very reason for the February 21, 1979, court hearing where Moore allegedly met Corfman was because, according to the court documents, Corfman had exhibited “certain disciplinary and behavioral problems.” In other words, Corfman evidence behavioral problems prior to the alleged encounters with Moore.
Indeed, those stated “disciplinary and behavioral problems” were cited in the joint petition to change custody as the cause for both Wells and Corfman’s father agreeing that Corfman would be better served living with her father. The parents signed a “consent decree” going along with the change in custody.
Over one year later, on May 5, 1980, which would have been after any alleged encounters with Moore, Wells filed a new petition to take back custody of her daughter. That petition stated that Corfman’s “disciplinary problem has improved greatly.” The stated change in behavior is important since Corfman’s “disciplinary and behavioral problems” were cited as the reason for the father taking custody.
The improvement in behavior described by Wells seems to conflict with Corfman’s claim to the Post that after the 1979 encounter her “life became increasingly reckless with drinking, drugs, boyfriends, and a suicide attempt when she was 16.”And one more thing. The intersection where Corfman claimed to meet Moore "around the corner" from her mom's house? It's a mile away across a major intersection. The Post couldn't even check out the basics!
For more, go here.