United States Corrupt Twattery

[ECA]

The lady who is complaining that Hilary Clinton defended the man who raped her has actually complained that Hilary defended him. Apparently, the accused don't deserve an offence.

Anyhow:

FALSE: Hillary Clinton Freed Child Rapist

The tape is here and the audio is Hillary herself speaking, and let's just say snopes is wrong here.


Snopes says: WHAT'S FALSE: Hillary Clinton did not volunteer to be the defendant's lawyer, she did not laugh about the case's outcome, she did not assert that the complainant "made up the rape story," she did not claim she knew the defendant to be guilty, and she did not "free" the defendant.

It should really say: Hillary Clinton did not volunteer to be the defendant's lawyer.

 

[caLLous]

Trump has, after all, always been a staunch supporter of those poor women traumatised by Bill Clinton.

 

[Exioce]

Watched the debate last night. Hillary objectively won by any normal measure. Scary times indeed that the race is still as close as it is.

 

[ECA]

 

[Tom]

Part of me wants Francis Underwood to fuck them both over.

 

[Ctuchik]

What scared me most was the ammount of applause Trump recieved after some of his oh so famously brainless statements...

 

[Scouse]

Snopes says: WHAT'S FALSE: Hillary Clinton did not volunteer to be the defendant's lawyer, she did not laugh about the case's outcome, she did not assert that the complainant "made up the rape story," she did not claim she knew the defendant to be guilty, and she did not "free" the defendant.

It should really say: Hillary Clinton did not volunteer to be the defendant's lawyer.

Actually, I disagree with that. She didn't laugh about the case's outcome - she was talking about her experience, I heard nothnig about her saying the defendent "made up the rape story", she believed the defendant was guilty - but here's the rub - it doesn't matter.

She has to do her job. Which she did. Anything else is illegal.

Incompetence on the part of the crime lab for disposing of evidence? Yep. But competence in the case of Clinton there. Distasteful as it is - that's exactly how it should work. And at no point did she sound pleased about that.

But I do hate the bitch

 

[Wij]

Putting your political opponents in jail. Tinpot dictators worldwide welcome the USA round to their way of thinking.

 

[Ctuchik]

Actually, I disagree with that. She didn't laugh about the case's outcome - she was talking about her experience, I heard nothnig about her saying the defendent "made up the rape story", she believed the defendant was guilty - but here's the rub - it doesn't matter.

She has to do her job. Which she did. Anything else is illegal.

That depends on if she was appointed as a public defender or not.. A public defender appointed to the defendant by the court can generally not refuse. At best they can file a motion to withdraw if there is a conflict of interest for example. Unfortunately believing that your client is guilty is not automatically a conflict of interest..

Even if the client fires the PD the withdrawal motion still needs approval of the court..

Yes i looked that up, because i got curious..

 

[DaGaffer]

That depends on if she was appointed as a public defender or not.. A public defender appointed to the defendant by the court can generally not refuse. At best they can file a motion to withdraw if there is a conflict of interest for example. Unfortunately believing that your client is guilty is not automatically a conflict of interest..

Even if the client fires the PD the withdrawal motion still needs approval of the court..

Yes i looked that up, because i got curious..

The definition of "Public Defender" is a bit murky in the US because different states have different rules. She was appointed by the court, but that doesn't mean she was a state employee the way PDs are in federal court and in some states, and even if Arkansas has state funded PDs now, it might not have had back in 1975.

 

[ECA]

I have no issues with her defending a client, I have issues with her laughing about defending someone she believes is a child rapist, no matter the context - as well as performing a hostile cross examination of a 12 year old rape victim. There's a reason they introduced laws against that a few years after that case.

She slut shamed and victim blamed , and laughed about the case in general afterwards.
The rest doesn't really matter.

 

[Wij]

I have no issues with her defending a client, I have issues with her laughing about defending someone she believes is a child rapist, no matter the context - as well as performing a hostile cross examination of a 12 year old rape victim. There's a reason they introduced laws against that a few years after that case.

She slut shamed and victim blamed , and laughed about the case in general afterwards.
The rest doesn't really matter.

I haven't listened but by all accounts she wasn't laughing at the victim but at some of the absurdities of the process the case involved.

There's still a world of difference between Hillary defending a rapist as part of her job and Donald Trump who actually admits sexual assault and has been accused of rape.

/edit: There will also be a drip-feed of further revelations about Trump's treatment of women and girls in the next few weeks I'm sure.

 

[ECA]

And the 20+ accusers of bill?

More importantly her actions towards those women.

 

[Wij]

And the 20+ accusers of bill?

More importantly her actions towards those women.

To the best of my memory these were dealt with at the time and there was no case to answer.

 

[Scouse]

I have issues with her laughing about defending someone she believes is a child rapist, no matter the context

For a start, listening to that she's doesn't laugh about defending someone who's a child rapist - she laughs at the incompetence of a crime lab, she laughs about being asked to leave a room by a judge so he can talk to her client in isolation.

She at no point laughs about the result of the trial, defends the actions of the guy, expresses support for the guy or denigrates the victim. She's being interviewed about her job and her performance of her duties (not about the case itself, and listening to that you clearly tell she felt the horror of it).

There's not a single thing about her demeanour in that audio recording that's even mildly controversial.


The reason I highlighted that bit of your quote, btw, is that that's a bit silly. Context is hugely important in just about everything and saying something that is a bit like saying "on some subjects I just throw my brain away and function only on animal emotion".

 

[ECA]

If you look at the proven allegations against bill...

To the best of my memory these were dealt with at the time and there was no case to answer.

She called Monica Lewinsky a "narcissistic looney tune", and of Gennifer Flowers : Hillary Clinton dismissed an accusation made by Gennifer Flowers, the singer who sold her story to a supermarket tabloid after having previously denied an affair. In an ABC News interview, she called Flowers “some failed cabaret singer who doesn’t even have much of a résumé to fall back on.” She told Esquire magazine in 1992 that if she had the chance to cross-examine Flowers, “I mean, I would crucify her.”


Those are 2 publicly confirmed cases of bills, they denied the Gennifer Flowers affair publicly and attacked her character - right up until they settled a court case for $1mill+ with her and bill was forced to admit it happened.

How many other victims who didn't keep evidence are out there?

 

[ECA]

For a start, listening to that she's doesn't laugh about defending someone who's a child rapist - she laughs at the incompetence of a crime lab, she laughs about being asked to leave a room by a judge so he can talk to her client in isolation.
She at no point laughs about the result of the trial, defends the actions of the guy, expresses support for the guy or denigrates the victim. She's being interviewed about her job and her performance of her duties.
There's not a single thing about her demeanour in that audio recording that's even mildly controversial.
The reason I highlighted that bit of your quote, btw, is that that's a bit silly. Context is hugely important in just about everything and saying something that is a bit like saying "on some subjects I just throw my brain away and function only on animal emotion".

We can disagree what she was laughing about - she was the one who decided to regale the reporter with the totally hilarious story of how far she went to defend a rapist.
I'm sure you'd agree it's pretty scummy to even tell that story in any light.

 

[Scouse]

She called Monica Lewinsky a "narcissistic looney tune"

Aside from the fact that she's a woman who's husband slept with / got sucked off by these women - so you can forgive her not saying nice things about women. Monica Lewinsky sucked off the president, wanked him onto her dress and then kept that dress for five years before complaining about it (for a lot of cash).

Now Bill should have known better, but Lewinsky was also a very active participant in that episode. And Hilary is supposed to say nice things about her?

 

[Scouse]

We can disagree what she was laughing about - she was the one who decided to regale the reporter with the totally hilarious story of how far she went to defend a rapist.
I'm sure you'd agree it's pretty scummy to even tell that story in any light.

No I don't. I listened to a responsible legal representative doing a difficult and distasteful job that she didn't really want to the best of her abilities - which was her sworn duty.

Anything other than what she did would have been gross dereliction of duty.

Whilst it's not nice to hear - I don't have a single problem with any of it, from the point of view of how she talked about it and the actions she described.

 

[Wij]

If you look at the proven allegations against bill...


She called Monica Lewinsky a "narcissistic looney tune", and of Gennifer Flowers : Hillary Clinton dismissed an accusation made by Gennifer Flowers, the singer who sold her story to a supermarket tabloid after having previously denied an affair. In an ABC News interview, she called Flowers “some failed cabaret singer who doesn’t even have much of a résumé to fall back on.” She told Esquire magazine in 1992 that if she had the chance to cross-examine Flowers, “I mean, I would crucify her.”


Those are 2 publicly confirmed cases of bills, they denied the Gennifer Flowers affair publicly and attacked her character - right up until they settled a court case for $1mill+ with her and bill was forced to admit it happened.

How many other victims who didn't keep evidence are out there?

Victims? Of an affair?

I also wasn't aware there was any great need for wives to be understanding about women their husband had an affair with.

 

[ECA]

How bout Paula Jones then? She accused bill of sexual harassment and the clintons settled out of court for $850000.

 

[Wij]

How bout Paula Jones then? She accused bill of sexual harassment and the clintons settled out of court for $850000.

And Hillary did what?

Details of the case were?

 

[ECA]

google?

The paula jones shit is what got him impeached btw, because under discovery when he was under oath he denied ever having a sexual relationship with monica lewinsky.
It was originally dismissed but because it went public Monica went on record and told the truth ( she'd denied it for 5 years up to then ), when Clinton perjured himself it made it incredibly likely he'd lose the suit - which is why they settled.

 

[Scouse]

So, how does this reflect on Hilary @ECA?

Bill Clinton has sex with other women and that makes Hilary a twat?

As for the Paula Jones shit - can you think of a reason rich people might settle instead having their personal lives dragged through the mud in public court? Can you think of reasons a defendent might settle when the option of going to court is still open?

And can you think of a reason any of this is Hilary's fault?

 

[Tom]

How bout Paula Jones then? She accused bill of sexual harassment and the clintons settled out of court for $850000.

The first case was rejected, so she appealed. It appears the Clintons said "oh ffs will you just fuckoff, here have some money." Jones accepted the settlement, although she only got about 25% of that money.

I'd imagine that money was foremost on her mind when she accepted that. Perhaps if she hadn't settled the case, she'd have been liable for the legal bills she incurred.

 

[ECA]

The first case was rejected, so she appealed. It appears the Clintons said "oh ffs will you just fuckoff, here have some money." Jones accepted the settlement, although she only got about 25% of that money.

No, it was dismissed for lack of evidence - when it turned out bill had perjured himself regarding lewinsky it proved he lied, and there was a pattern ( more accusers ).

 

[Wij]

No, it was dismissed for lack of evidence - when it turned out bill had perjured himself regarding lewinsky it proved he lied, and there was a pattern ( more accusers ).

But no proof and at no point has Hillary grabbed some girl by the twat.

 

[Wij]

View: https://twitter.com/paulkrugman/status/785313798425116672

 

[Scouse]

No, it was dismissed for lack of evidence - when it turned out bill had perjured himself regarding lewinsky it proved he lied, and there was a pattern ( more accusers ).

And again, A) what's this got to do with Hilary?, B) accusations do not a case make and C) really, why is this Hilary's fault?

 

[Raven]

I am not sure bill's fucking everything in sight makes a lot of difference to hilary's suitability for the presidency. Some couples have that sort of relationship.

I am also surprised so many peope are taking daily mail style gossip as the truth and using that to form an opinion of her.

Having said that, it will be interesting if anything comes out over the next few weeks. If wikileaks has anything on her...which I am starting to doubt, seems like a publicity drive for the narcissistic Assange.