Roy Moore Sues Super PAC For Correctly Calling Him A Mall Pervert.

And now he can't bang his own wife anymore. Distress!

Noted kiddie-botherer and failed Senate candidate Roy Moore is filing a lawsuit against Highway 31, a Super PAC that ran ads claiming that he was banned from the Gadsden Mall for constantly hitting on the teenage girls who worked there -- a claim supported by several people who worked there at the time, including at least one woman he tried to work his charms on.

The 25-page lawsuit filed by Moore's attorney, Melissa Isaak, claims that the PAC ran the ad despite "knowing" that the accusations against Moore were fictitious:

The "shopping mall" ad ran hundreds of times on network TV in Alabama during the two weeks before the election. Yet, by Monday, November 27, the day the ad began running, defendants had information available to them and known to them that the mall ban story was fictitious.

Because Moore is a public figure, in order to prove libel, they have to prove that the PAC acted with actual malice -- meaning that they said things they knew were untrue about him, and with the intent of ruining his reputation. Alas, despite their claim, there's never been any information proving that the story was "fictitious." It was denied by Moore, and by a few other people, but corroborated by far more.

Via Snopes:  

Moore has denied the allegations against him and his supporters have been quick to try and discredit them. On 16 November 2017, Breitbart.com , a right-wing media outlet that sent two writers to Alabama in a rather anti-climactic attempt to find holes in the accusers' allegations, regurgitated a local news story that reported now-86-year-old Barnes Boyle, the mall's manager in the 1980s, denied Moore was banned. But a former mall worker, Becky Gray, told ABC News she believes she got Moore banned by complaining to her manager about his "creepy" advances toward her.

Another ad mentioned in the lawsuit has more merit. That ad, which was banned by YouTube following a complaint from Alabama Secretary of State John Merrill, claimed that if people voted for a perv like Roy Moore, their vote would be public record and everyone would know that they supported a monster and judge them for it.

If you don't vote, then Roy Moore a child predator wins. Could you live with that? Your vote is public record and your community will know whether or not you helped stop Roy Moore. On Tuesday, December 12th, vote for Doug Jones for Senate.

This, obviously, is not true.

According to Law and Crime , in addition to defamation, the Moore and his wife are also seeking damages and compensation for "intentional infliction of emotional distress, wantonness and loss of consortium."

Now, I may not be a simple country lawyer of any kind, but isn't "loss of consortium" usually the kind of thing one sues for after their spouse is in an accident of some kind and can no longer have sex with their partner?

The lawsuit states:

Roy and Kayla Moore suffered a loss of the right of consortium, including their marital interest in being able to peaceably appear in public places without suffering unwarranted humiliation. The emotional anguish suffered by both spouses from the false and defamatory attacks of the defendants impaired the enjoyment of their marriage and diminished their capacity to provide the customary love, companionship, affection, society, comfort, solace, and support they had experienced prior to the defamatory attacks. Those attacks lowered their standing in the community and caused them to experience disgrace, shame, ridicule, and contempt.

Not to be cold, but I think most of that is their problem more than anyone else's. If Kayla Moore was still able to "enjoy" her marriage to Roy Moore after the Washington Post articles about how he preyed on teenage girls came out, then it stands to reason that these ads couldn't do much more to "diminish" that.

Frankly, even if this information had never become public in the first place, I would have to assume that being married to Roy Moore, or being Roy Moore, in and of itself, is indicative of having no shame to begin with.

[ Law and Crime ]

Wonkette is independent and fully funded by readers like you! Click here to tip us, and to ensure that Robyn never has to be a mall employee again.