Hillary [allegedly] Laughs at 12-year old rape victim

[swansont]

So, the sources basically contradict the title of this thread.

!

Moderator Note

Agree. Title updated. This isn't like certain newspapers, where we sensationalize headlines.

[Ten oz]

Context does matter. And as I pointed out, how 2 different people interpret the context and the remarks is entirely up to them. I personally am not accusing her of laughing, the sites did and I simply brought it up all with them. What I AM accusing her of is falsely defending a rapist by lying.

The case in question has already been adjudicated. Like everything else involving the Clintons that keep coming up. What new information or detail exists that suddenly makes the relevant today?

[Phi for All]

I also am not Clinton's biggest fan, but when you think about all the insinuation and baseless badgering that's been done to make her look bad, all the taxpayer money that's been spent investigating her over and over and over again for the same offenses, all the effort put into hobbling anything she's involved in, it's a travesty that needs to stop. She gets accused because people are convinced she's guilty, then she's exonerated by the system, but those original people refuse the verdicts. It's un-American, it's divisive, and it's immoral, and it's all perpetuated by the folks who preach about America, making us great, and morality.

 

I read about these witch hunts and I get the same taste in my mouth as when I hear creationists repeating their misinformed, oft-refuted, deplorable lies in hopes of catching more people who don't check facts. Somehow, we HAVE to stop this War on Intelligence.

[Raider5678]

 

I believe you are mistaken. The affidavit was to request the evaluation. The request was denied. The evaluation never took place, and was never entered as evidence. The only place the quoted statements appear is in the affidavit, and not in evidence presented to a jury in court. It was never used as evidence to determine the defendant's guilt or innocence, simply to justify the exam.

You seem to be a little confused in that an affidavit requesting a psychological exam to a judge is a different document to a testimony submitted as evidence in a court. All the affidavit implies is that Clinton had been told that "that the complainant is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and to engage in fantasizing. I have also been informed that she has in the past made false accusations about persons, claiming they had attacked her body.”

The psychological exam was intended to determine if there was any factual basis to the claim. Clinton did not claim the above was fact, nor did she submit it as evidence. All she did was state that it had been said to her by parties named in the affidavit, and asked for a psychological evaluation be undertaken to determine its veracity.

All subsequent vetting of that affidavit have determined it to be a part of due diligence in providing the defendant with a just and fair trial. It was a lot more convoluted than is being presented - there were two defendants, one also a minor, and all parties involved were intoxicated. The defendant pleaded out to a lesser crime - which is not Clinton's decision, but the prosecutor's and likely based on the available (and demonstrably flawed) physical evidence. There's no wrongdoing present in her actions - all it really shows is that the job of a defense attorney is distasteful at times.

Now I'm no Clinton fanboy, but my family is full of lawyers, and this hatchet job does a major disservice to the role of the defense. If the defendant is guilty, the defense should make sure all reasonable doubt has been exhausted by the prosecution prior to conviction. If Clinton felt that the plaintiff's testimony might have represented reasonable doubt, even if she personally believed it, it's her duty to not only the defendant, but the people, to verify it.

 

Thank you for clearing that up. +1

[DrmDoc]

I also am not Clinton's biggest fan, but when you think about all the insinuation and baseless badgering that's been done to make her look bad, all the taxpayer money that's been spent investigating her over and over and over again for the same offenses, all the effort put into hobbling anything she's involved in, it's a travesty that needs to stop. She gets accused because people are convinced she's guilty, then she's exonerated by the system, but those original people refuse the verdicts. It's un-American, it's divisive, and it's immoral, and it's all perpetuated by the folks who preach about America, making us great, and morality.

 

I read about these witch hunts and I get the same taste in my mouth as when I hear creationists repeating their misinformed, oft-refuted, deplorable lies in hopes of catching more people who don't check facts. Somehow, we HAVE to stop this War on Intelligence.

 

I could not agree more.

[Ten oz]

I also am not Clinton's biggest fan, but when you think about all the insinuation and baseless badgering that's been done to make her look bad, all the taxpayer money that's been spent investigating her over and over and over again for the same offenses, all the effort put into hobbling anything she's involved in, it's a travesty that needs to stop. She gets accused because people are convinced she's guilty, then she's exonerated by the system, but those original people refuse the verdicts. It's un-American, it's divisive, and it's immoral, and it's all perpetuated by the folks who preach about America, making us great, and morality.

 

I read about these witch hunts and I get the same taste in my mouth as when I hear creationists repeating their misinformed, oft-refuted, deplorable lies in hopes of catching more people who don't check facts. Somehow, we HAVE to stop this War on Intelligence.

I see many people on social media insisting that where there is smoke there must be fire. That perhaps not all allegations are true but surely some must be. It is a dishonest and insidious way to play upon the average persons desire to to be fair. So much has been thrown at Hillary Clinton that accepting some of it is just being fair. The approach plays on ignorance/apathy and scandal fatigue.

[iNow]

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_Goebbels