Can we at least debunk ONE of Clinton's false accusations?

nat4900

Diamond Member
Mar 3, 2015
42,021
5,965
1,870
There are several accusations leveled at Bill Clinton's sexual proclivities and, of course, accusers by extension level them at Hillary as an enabler.....

But there is ONE accusation that is directed solely at Hillary that should be put to rest by fair-minded right wingers if they ever again want to be believed as having some measure of objectivity.

The case involves, Kathy Shelton, who was the 12-year-old victim in a rape case in Arkansas in 1975.

During last Sunday night's debate, here is what Trump stated:

“Her client she represented got him off and she is seen laughing on two occasions laughing at the girl who was raped.”

On the above Trump statement, he is either lying or severely misinformed (you choose)....Here are the facts:

In 1975, Hillary Rodham was a young attorney when a criminal court judge appointed her to defend an indigent man accused of raping a 12-year-old girl. In her memoir, Living History, Clinton wrote that she “really didn’t feel comfortable taking on such a client, but [the prosecutor] reminded me that I couldn’t very well refuse the judge’s request.”

Now, unless we abandon our system of jurisprudence, NO ONE can blame Clinton for representing someone as compelled by a judge, nor can we deny that even a scum bucket should be represented at trial.

Further, going back to Trump's accusation that she was "laughing at the girl who was raped", here again are the facts:

In the 1980s, Arkansas journalist Roy Reed interviewed Hillary Clinton about the case, recording their conversation on tapes for a magazine story than never ultimately was published. In the recordings, there are spots where Clinton chuckles — but never about the central thrust of the case, At one point, recounting that her client passed a polygraph test, she chuckles while saying that it “forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs.”

Read more: Trump is wrong: Hillary Clinton did not laugh about the rape of a 12-year-old
 
Last edited:
There are several accusations leveled at Bill Clinton's sexual proclivities and, of course, accusers by extension level them at Hillary as an enabler.....

But there is ONE accusation that is directed solely at Hillary that should be put to rest by fair-minded right wingers if they ever again want to be believed as having some measure of objectivity.

The case involves, Kathy Shelton, who was the 12-year-old victim in a rape case in Arkansas in 1975.

During last Sunday night's debate, here is what Trump stated:

“Her client she represented got him off and she is seen laughing on two occasions laughing at the girl who was raped.”

On the above Trump statement, he is either lying or severely misinformed (you choose)....Here are the facts:

In 1975, Hillary Rodham was a young attorney when a criminal court judge appointed her to defend an indigent man accused of raping a 12-year-old girl. In her memoir, Living History, Clinton wrote that she “really didn’t feel comfortable taking on such a client, but [the prosecutor] reminded me that I couldn’t very well refuse the judge’s request.”

Now, unless we abandon our system of jurisprudence, NO ONE can blame Clinton for representing someone as compelled by a judge, nor can we deny that even a scum bucket should be represented at trial.

Further, going back to Trump's accusation that she was "laughing at the girl who was raped", here again are the facts:

In the 1980s, Arkansas journalist Roy Reed interviewed Hillary Clinton about the case, recording their conversation on tapes for a magazine story than never ultimately was published. In the recordings, there are spots where Clinton chuckles — but never about the central thrust of the case, At one point, recounting that her client passed a polygraph test, she chuckles while saying that it “forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs.”

Read more: Trump is wrong: Hillary Clinton did not laugh about the rape of a 12-year-old
Follow us: @politico on Twitter | Politico on Facebook



The anti Clinton bots could care less about facts ... they interfere with the bullshit they spin or simply make up.
 


She's laughing because she said the guy took a polygraph test and passed and so she would never again believe anything that came from one of those tests.

She's laughing because the crime lab, something she has nothing to do with, cut the evidence out of the underwear and lost the pieces it cut out and gave the underwear back with holes in it to be used as evidence. You have to laugh at that. It's so inept it's funny. Underwear to be used as evidence with holes cut out?

And the guy wasn't from some famous family. Just some nobody. So where would he get the influence to somehow "fix" the trial.

I'm sorry I debunked your nonsense before you were able to get up a full head of ignorant steam.
 

Forum List

Back
Top