Clinton Supporters - Don't All Bill Clinton's Rapes Bother You?...

Clinton Supporters - Don't All Bill Clinton's Rapes Bother You

  • Total voters
    7
  • Poll closed .
elektra said:
NYcarbineer said:
You mean we're in danger of having to relive the Clinton years of relative peace and prosperity all over again?
Click to expand...

Peace? In 1989 Clinton bombed Iraq.

1993, Black Hawk Down in Somalia.

1st time the World Trade Center bombing in 93.

Killing of civilians by Clinton's command in Serbia.

USS Cole bombing, how many sailors dead?

Saddam gasing thousands of children dead while Clinton in command of Iraq.

Rwanda massacre, while Clinton cries afterward he should of stooped it.

NYcarbine? You are either a moron or a liar.
Click to expand...
I see you don't understand the word, "relative." There were far more Americans killed in one day on 9.11 under Bush's watch than all the events you listed under Clinton combined.

relative
 
Norman said:
Faun said:
Nor man said:
NYcarbineer said:
Clinton didn't rape anyone.
Click to expand...


850,000 settlement is a lot for something that isn't pretty serious. Reasonably, he at least had very violent, forceful sex.
Click to expand...
WTF are you vomiting now? That $850,000 settlement went to the woman's lawyers who never accused Clinton of touching her, no less "very violently," much less forcing her to have sex with him.

:cuckoo:
Click to expand...

What a moron...

"According to Jones's account, on May 8, 1991, she was escorted to Clinton's (then Governor of Arkansas) room in the Excelsior[3][4][5] (now Little Rock Marriott) Hotel in Little Rock, Arkansas, where he propositioned and exposed himself to her. She claimed she kept quiet about the incident until 1994, when a David Brock story in the American Spectator magazine printed an account. Jones filed a sexual harassment suit against Clinton on May 6, 1994, two days before the three-year statute of limitations, and sought $750,000 in damages.[6]"

Three is the subject... Clinton settled for no less than 850,000. You seem to possess a serious reality distortion field around you at all times.
Click to expand...
So, where do you see a rape in that accounting? The woman went up to his hotel room and he flashed his dick and asked for a blowjob, thinking surely, a woman visiting him alone and at night in a hotel room would know what was up. Not even remotely close to being a rape.
 
Lakhota said:
paulitician said:
Clinton supporters continue to obsess over some comments Donald Trump made about women years ago. So i think it's fair to ask them how they feel about Bill Clinton's numerous sex assaults. Is it just faux outage they're expressing over Trump's comments? Or do they really care about women?
Click to expand...

You should be much more concerned with Trump's history of sexual predation.
Click to expand...

Way to deflect and defend your rapist hero. Nice job. :cuckoo:
 
Hey, at least a couple honest Democrats have showed up. The 'No's' have it so far. While voting No is truly heinous, i give some props for honesty. Clinton Bootlickers could care less about women. That's the truth.
 
Londoner said:
emilynghiem said:
I am still disturbed that even the Ted Kennedy case involving Chappaquiddick and Mary Jo Kopechne
was never fully resolved to public satisfaction.

The problem is with our whole justice and legal system that rewards people for lying, taking the
fifth, and exploiting "reasonable doubt". If lawyers fail to use every trick in the book to defend their client,
they can be sued for malpractice. So they have to take advantage of any loophole that could get their client off,
which are used to demand mistrials over any mistake, or it's arguably malpractice.
Click to expand...

Well put!!!

Agree on Ted Kennedy 100%, also agree that the rules have created terrible incentives.

I would love a legal system that more effectively prosecuted:
  • Ted Kennedy for Chappaquiddick.
  • Ronald Reagan for Iran-Contra
  • Dick Chaney for Valerie Plame
  • Bush administration for mishandling war intelligence.
  • Donald Trump for Trump University
Here is my problem. Every time I say that I'd love to see both sides prosecuted equally, I discover that even the most elegant and well-reasoned jurists lack the required sense of detachment and neutrality. They deploy their admittedly impressive mental acuity to putting the only other side in jail.

This leads to the biggest problem of all: a legal system that selectively prosecutes is far more dangerous than Teddy Kennedy.

So I'm with you and I appreciate your post, but I'd want extremely powerful oversight rules to guard against selective prosecution. For instance, all the New York FBI agents who have openly declared antipathy to one candidate or the other should be investigated and removed if it is demonstrated that they are not fulfilling their role as non-partisan investigators.
Click to expand...

Dear Londoner I cannot applaud your post enough!
I wish there was a Winner and Agree button as big as the Funny and Agree.

May I suggest two things:
A. that if we include All Parties so that each one gets to go after their pet issue,
I think we can make sure we "selectively enforce" ALL SUCH abuses. We just take turns
and sick each one after the issues they best specialize in anyway. And we agree to support ALL of them
in assessing each and every complaint of violation to make sure no grievance goes unresolved.

B. that we agree to adopt a consensus policy. if all leaders know that if any objections
are skirted over SOMEONE is going to keep complaining until it's resolved. We agree NOT
to discredit or toss aside such objections for political expedience, but support each party
in finishing each case until all parties agree to corrections and restitution, then this would DETER such abuses
in the first place. Clearly we cannot afford any more abuses. We have enough to police as it is!

So we agree to address and resolve the cases we have now, and not to add more,
not to elect or empower any person to office who is going to add more instead of taking responsibility.

I say we start with big cases that will pay for enough to set up a system to go after the rest.
1. corrupt war spending out of 30 trillion estimated tax dollars
2. the trillions doled out to corporate insurance interests who signed onto ACA without taxpayers being represented
3. in general, going after Democratic party promises to reform prisons in order to set up sustainable health care
and GOP promises to help Vets by reforming military and VA policies to provide health care for Vets first

The Greens can be enlisted to assess debts and damages from environmental destruction by corporate abuse of taxfunds; and Libertarians can set up Grand Jury systems and grievance/penalty system modeled after OSHA
for citizens to "petition" to pursue and correct complaints of abuse against any level of govt found violating the Code of Ethics and Constitutional duty to the public. The OSHA system is simplified and any citizen could follow it.

It's when the legal process gets so complicated and expensive that only the bigger corporate interests
can afford to pursue cases, that we lose control to these bigger collective powers with more resources than citizens.

So we need to keep it local and accessible, and I suggest setting it up through party.
That way, there is always some group that has that political angle willing to follow through as their priority.
And members and leaders of all parties can be trained in effective management of grievance and grand jury processes.
In this, by having an educated and empowered citizenry, that is a double deterrent against crime and abuse.
More citizens will be educated in laws, so that ignorance of the law does not make them vulnerable to exploitation.
And more people will be enforcing them to deter violators who will be detected and called out faster,
instead of our current system where the damage can be done long before the process ever plays out.

Thank you Londoner
I hope you will be instrumental in consulting and establishing
such a process, from local to global. It has to come from the citizens, and I believe
we can troubleshoot the problems, until we can make it work!
All the parties want to check the others, we just haven't banded together to do this yet.
It's okay and expected for each to be "selective" and if we each do our job, then all the bases are covered!
 
2aguy said:
Londoner said:
emilynghiem said:
I am still disturbed that even the Ted Kennedy case involving Chappaquiddick and Mary Jo Kopechne
was never fully resolved to public satisfaction.

The problem is with our whole justice and legal system that rewards people for lying, taking the
fifth, and exploiting "reasonable doubt". If lawyers fail to use every trick in the book to defend their client,
they can be sued for malpractice. So they have to take advantage of any loophole that could get their client off,
which are used to demand mistrials over any mistake, or it's arguably malpractice.
Click to expand...

Well put!!!

Agree on Ted Kennedy 100%, also agree that the rules have created terrible incentives.

I would love a legal system that more effectively prosecuted:
  • Ted Kennedy for Chappaquiddick.
  • Ronald Reagan for Iran-Contra
  • Dick Chaney for Valerie Plame
  • Bush administration for mishandling war intelligence.
  • Donald Trump for Trump University
Here is my problem. Every time I say that I'd love to see both sides prosecuted equally, I discover that even the most elegant and well-reasoned jurists lack the required sense of detachment and neutrality. They deploy their admittedly impressive mental acuity to putting the only other side in jail.

This leads to the biggest problem of all: a legal system that selectively prosecutes is far more dangerous than Teddy Kennedy.

So I'm with you and I appreciate your post, but I'd went extremely powerful oversight rules to guard against selective prosecution. For instance, all the New York FBI agents who have openly declared antipathy to one candidate or the other should be investigated and removed if it is demonstrated that they are not fulfilling their role as non-partisan investigators.
Click to expand...


Are you really that dumb....

Dick Cheney had nothing to do with valerie plame...do you undertand that....Patrick Fitzgerald knew when he started the investigation that the person who pointed out that valerie plame worked for the CIA was Richard Armitage.....and that was it.....he worked for left wing favorite colin powell....but Fitzgerald went on a fishing expedition...

And valerie plame was not an under cover operative at the time, she was working in D.C. and parking in the CIA parking lot.....

you guys are morons....
Click to expand...
Never ceases to amaze me to see no matter how many times rightwing talking points get debunked, there's still some rightard repeating them. :eusa_doh:

As far as Plame's covert status at the time...
Patrick Fitzgerald said:
At the time of the initial unauthorized disclosure in the media of Ms. Wilson’s employment relationship with the CIA on 14 July 2003, Ms. Wilson was a covert CIA employee for whom the CIA was taking affirmative measures to conceal her intelligence relationship to the United States.”
Click to expand...
 
paulitician said:
Lakhota said:
paulitician said:
Clinton supporters continue to obsess over some comments Donald Trump made about women years ago. So i think it's fair to ask them how they feel about Bill Clinton's numerous sex assaults. Is it just faux outage they're expressing over Trump's comments? Or do they really care about women?
Click to expand...

You should be much more concerned with Trump's history of sexual predation.
Click to expand...

Way to deflect and defend your rapist hero. Nice job. :cuckoo:
Click to expand...
You are a liar, telling a whopper of a lie. You just like making a thread with the name Clinton and rape in it. You have nothing to prove your accusation. Just the same old lies told twenty years ago, regurgitated for today, but lies all the same.
 
Camp said:
paulitician said:
Lakhota said:
paulitician said:
Clinton supporters continue to obsess over some comments Donald Trump made about women years ago. So i think it's fair to ask them how they feel about Bill Clinton's numerous sex assaults. Is it just faux outage they're expressing over Trump's comments? Or do they really care about women?
Click to expand...

You should be much more concerned with Trump's history of sexual predation.
Click to expand...

Way to deflect and defend your rapist hero. Nice job. :cuckoo:
Click to expand...
You are a liar, telling a whopper of a lie. You just like making a thread with the name Clinton and rape in it. You have nothing to prove your accusation. Just the same old lies told twenty years ago, regurgitated for today, but lies all the same.
Click to expand...

He's a degenerate sex predator. Shame on you for defending and supporting him.
 
2aguy said:
sealybobo said:
paulitician said:
Clinton supporters continue to obsess over some comments Donald Trump made about women years ago. So i think it's fair to ask them how they feel about Bill Clinton's numerous sex assaults. Is it just faux outage they're expressing over Trump's comments? Or do they really care about women?
Click to expand...
What about your faux outrage over bill? We found out every Republican going after bill had mistresses.

And then you go and nominate an actual rapist? If bills cheating bothered you how do you vote for trump?

I'll tell you how. You never cared. It was all politics. So is Benghazi. Every president had 20 benghazis
Click to expand...


Wasn't the mistress...it was using his office to cover up the assault on Paula Jones....and then trying to hide monica so she wouldn't be part of that case.......
Click to expand...
Paula Jones jilted lover set Monica up.

No question bill just walked up and grabbed her pussy. You can do that when you're famous. How do I know this?
 
2aguy said:
Faun said:
paulitician said:
Clinton supporters continue to obsess over some comments Donald Trump made about women years ago. So i think it's fair to ask them how they feel about Bill Clinton's numerous sex assaults. Is it just faux outage they're expressing over Trump's comments? Or do they really care about women?
Click to expand...
First and foremost, Bill Clinton is not running office.

As far as "rapes" ... only one woman ever accused him of rape and she swore under oath that he didn't.
Click to expand...


Nope....Elizabeth Ward Gracen told her friend she was raped by clinton...and Juantia Broaderick testified under oath, to FBI agents under threat of jail that he raped her....

Please....try to keep up....
Click to expand...
Elizabeth Ward Gracen never said that. Other people made that claim, not Gracen, who has always maintained she had a consensual affair with Bill.

As far as Broaddrick, she never testified Bill Clinton raped her. The one time she testified to the matter she swore...
Juanita Broaddrick said:
"During the 1992 Presidential campaign there were unfounded rumors and stories circulated that Mr. Clinton had made unwelcome sexual advances toward me in the late seventies. Newspaper and tabloid reporters hounded me and my family, seeking corroboration of these tales. I repeatedly denied the allegations and requested that my family's privacy be respected. These allegations are untrue and I had hoped that they would no longer haunt me, or cause further disruption to my family.
Click to expand...
 
The VOR said:
paulitician said:
Clinton supporters continue to obsess over some comments Donald Trump made about women years ago. So i think it's fair to ask them how they feel about Bill Clinton's numerous sex assaults. Is it just faux outage they're expressing over Trump's comments? Or do they really care about women?
Click to expand...
There is absolutely no proof --- zero, zip, zilch, nada --- that Bill Clinton raped or sexually assaulted anyone.

But, continue on with your lies if you must, you partisan hack.
Click to expand...

Dear The VOR
Even Hillary Clinton explained he came from an abusive past.
I think it is clear Bill Clinton's troubles demonstrate a "sexual addiction."

My overall impression is I would believe Clinton had those affairs,
and I do believe the testimony that he forced himself sexually on at least one woman,
before I would believe Trump would be able to do this and get away with it as the Clintons have.

I would be happy and morally obligated to admit I am wrong and to apologize
if I wrongfully accuse the Clintons for covering up rape if it were Trump who were doing so.

Do you want me to ask them personally, because I think that is my
Christian duty not to bear false witness against my neighbor.

I am supposed to address the accused in person directly in private
and try to resolve the issue of trespass between us to restore good faith relations in Christ.

I believe Trump does this when he works with people one on one.
But with the Clintons they appear to resolve things for political gain,
exchanging favors as a condition of resolving conflicts.

If I am wrong, I should apologize.

Could you find me a way to ask the Democrat leadership
am I wrong to assume that the same politics is going on at the bottom
(which I have witnessed myself all but destroy the national historic
Black church district of Freedmen's Town where I live and volunteer)
as at the top?

Boy, if I am wrong, and these Clintons are happy to help restore
Black history from developers who bought out local Democats,
I am just as happy to apologize.

It seems they only care about getting elected,
as the Democrats who collected 1.4 million and 1.6 million
to run against each other for Houston Mayor in one runoff month alone
but didn't lobby for one dime to help nonprofits and churches buy land
to preserve historic houses and landmarks.

Trump may be no different. He could be like other Republicans
who only use the Black issues to blame Democrats for destruction,
but don't help fix the problem either! All the preachers I've seen aren't
the ones doing the work to organize help to buy up and restore the district.
They wait on political leaders to do that for them, and it's not getting done.

That's what my perception is based on.
What I've seen Democrats do, focus all resources
on campaigns and elections and take it away from the
very communities left destroyed and without representation
or protection of interests, even costing debts and damages without
accountability or restitution while the tax money pays for corporate led destruction.

Let me know who to contact, who to ask.
I am very curious to know who really cares or not,
as both sides accuse the other, and nothing is done to correct or change anything.
 
Norman said:
Faun said:
Nor man said:
NYcarbineer said:
Clinton didn't rape anyone.
Click to expand...


850,000 settlement is a lot for something that isn't pretty serious. Reasonably, he at least had very violent, forceful sex.
Click to expand...
WTF are you vomiting now? That $850,000 settlement went to the woman's lawyers who never accused Clinton of touching her, no less "very violently," much less forcing her to have sex with him.

:cuckoo:
Click to expand...

What a moron...

"According to Jones's account, on May 8, 1991, she was escorted to Clinton's (then Governor of Arkansas) room in the Excelsior[3][4][5] (now Little Rock Marriott) Hotel in Little Rock, Arkansas, where he propositioned and exposed himself to her. She claimed she kept quiet about the incident until 1994, when a David Brock story in the American Spectator magazine printed an account. Jones filed a sexual harassment suit against Clinton on May 6, 1994, two days before the three-year statute of limitations, and sought $750,000 in damages.[6]"

Three is the subject... Clinton settled for no less than 850,000. You seem to possess a serious reality distortion field around you at all times.
Click to expand...
There is something seriously wrong with you. You said, and I quote, "850,000 settlement is a lot for something that isn't pretty serious. Reasonably, he at least had very violent, forceful sex."

You then project that I'm the moron for pointing out she never accused him of touching her -- to which you then post a link that says, "he propositioned and exposed himself to her.

1233796371590.gif
 
Faun said:
2aguy said:
Faun said:
paulitician said:
Clinton supporters continue to obsess over some comments Donald Trump made about women years ago. So i think it's fair to ask them how they feel about Bill Clinton's numerous sex assaults. Is it just faux outage they're expressing over Trump's comments? Or do they really care about women?
Click to expand...
First and foremost, Bill Clinton is not running office.

As far as "rapes" ... only one woman ever accused him of rape and she swore under oath that he didn't.
Click to expand...


Nope....Elizabeth Ward Gracen told her friend she was raped by clinton...and Juantia Broaderick testified under oath, to FBI agents under threat of jail that he raped her....

Please....try to keep up....
Click to expand...
Elizabeth Ward Gracen never said that. Other people made that claim, not Gracen, who has always maintained she had a consensual affair with Bill.

As far as Broaddrick, she never testified Bill Clinton raped her. The one time she testified to the matter she swore...
Juanita Broaddrick said:
"During the 1992 Presidential campaign there were unfounded rumors and stories circulated that Mr. Clinton had made unwelcome sexual advances toward me in the late seventies. Newspaper and tabloid reporters hounded me and my family, seeking corroboration of these tales. I repeatedly denied the allegations and requested that my family's privacy be respected. These allegations are untrue and I had hoped that they would no longer haunt me, or cause further disruption to my family.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Dear Faun the last I read, she did admit the stories were true. I read in an article that she came back out and went public. is this correct? I looked it up and found this: Juanita Broaddrick - Wikipedia


Juanita Broaddrick (born December 13, 1942)[citation needed] is an American former nursing home administrator. She alleged in 1999 that United States President Bill Clinton raped her in April 1978 when she was 35 years old and he was Arkansas Attorney General. President Clinton's attorney, David Kendall, denied the allegations on his client's behalf. Clinton declined to comment further on the issue.

Rumors circulated about Broaddrick's allegations for many years, but she refused to speak to the media. In a sworn statement in 1997 with the placeholder name "Jane Doe #5,"[1] Broaddrick filed an affidavit with Paula Jones' lawyers stating there were unfounded rumors and stories circulating "that Mr. Clinton had made unwelcome sexual advances toward me in the late seventies... These allegations are untrue".[2]

Nevertheless, speculation that Broaddrick had more to say on the matter persisted. Finally, in an interview with Dateline NBC that aired on February 24, 1999, Broaddrick told her story in public in full for the first time, this time stating that she had indeed been raped by Clinton.[3] It is the most serious of the allegations among the Bill Clinton sexual misconduct allegations that emerged during the 1990s.
 
Last edited:
Faun said:
Norman said:
Faun said:
Nor man said:
NYcarbineer said:
Clinton didn't rape anyone.
Click to expand...


850,000 settlement is a lot for something that isn't pretty serious. Reasonably, he at least had very violent, forceful sex.
Click to expand...
WTF are you vomiting now? That $850,000 settlement went to the woman's lawyers who never accused Clinton of touching her, no less "very violently," much less forcing her to have sex with him.

:cuckoo:
Click to expand...

What a moron...

"According to Jones's account, on May 8, 1991, she was escorted to Clinton's (then Governor of Arkansas) room in the Excelsior[3][4][5] (now Little Rock Marriott) Hotel in Little Rock, Arkansas, where he propositioned and exposed himself to her. She claimed she kept quiet about the incident until 1994, when a David Brock story in the American Spectator magazine printed an account. Jones filed a sexual harassment suit against Clinton on May 6, 1994, two days before the three-year statute of limitations, and sought $750,000 in damages.[6]"

Three is the subject... Clinton settled for no less than 850,000. You seem to possess a serious reality distortion field around you at all times.
Click to expand...
There is something seriously wrong with you. You said, and I quote, "850,000 settlement is a lot for something that isn't pretty serious. Reasonably, he at least had very violent, forceful sex."

You then project that I'm the moron for pointing out she never accused him of touching her -- to which you then post a link that says, "he propositioned and exposed himself to her.

1233796371590.gif
Click to expand...

It's serious, he has a history of violent sex also. duh...

If Trump had settles for 850,000 over sexual harassment, we would hear no end to it. Even a tape where he merely utters words is considered outrage worthy.
 
Odium said:
paulitician said:
Clinton supporters continue to obsess over some comments Donald Trump made about women years ago. So i think it's fair to ask them how they feel about Bill Clinton's numerous sex assaults. Is it just faux outage they're expressing over Trump's comments? Or do they really care about women?
Click to expand...
Not a Clinton supporter here but what bothers me more than Bills rapes is Hillary not only defending a child rapist,but claiming that child was a liar and liked what happened and then laughing about and saying the child rapist passing the polygraph forever destroyed her trust in polygraphs. That is absolutely DISGUSTING and how the fuck can ANY female especially young females look up to someone who did that?
Click to expand...
More dementia. She was assigned to the case by a judge and tried to get out of it.
 
emilynghiem said:
Faun said:
2aguy said:
Faun said:
paulitician said:
Clinton supporters continue to obsess over some comments Donald Trump made about women years ago. So i think it's fair to ask them how they feel about Bill Clinton's numerous sex assaults. Is it just faux outage they're expressing over Trump's comments? Or do they really care about women?
Click to expand...
First and foremost, Bill Clinton is not running office.

As far as "rapes" ... only one woman ever accused him of rape and she swore under oath that he didn't.
Click to expand...


Nope....Elizabeth Ward Gracen told her friend she was raped by clinton...and Juantia Broaderick testified under oath, to FBI agents under threat of jail that he raped her....

Please....try to keep up....
Click to expand...
Elizabeth Ward Gracen never said that. Other people made that claim, not Gracen, who has always maintained she had a consensual affair with Bill.

As far as Broaddrick, she never testified Bill Clinton raped her. The one time she testified to the matter she swore...
Juanita Broaddrick said:
"During the 1992 Presidential campaign there were unfounded rumors and stories circulated that Mr. Clinton had made unwelcome sexual advances toward me in the late seventies. Newspaper and tabloid reporters hounded me and my family, seeking corroboration of these tales. I repeatedly denied the allegations and requested that my family's privacy be respected. These allegations are untrue and I had hoped that they would no longer haunt me, or cause further disruption to my family.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Dear Faun the last I read, she did admit the stories were true. I read in an article that she came back out and went public. is this correct? I looked it up and found this: Juanita Broaddrick - Wikipedia


Juanita Broaddrick (born December 13, 1942)[citation needed] is an American former nursing home administrator. She alleged in 1999 that United States President Bill Clinton raped her in April 1978 when she was 35 years old and he was Arkansas Attorney General. President Clinton's attorney, David Kendall, denied the allegations on his client's behalf. Clinton declined to comment further on the issue.

Rumors circulated about Broaddrick's allegations for many years, but she refused to speak to the media. In a sworn statement in 1997 with the placeholder name "Jane Doe #5,"[1] Broaddrick filed an affidavit with Paula Jones' lawyers stating there were unfounded rumors and stories circulating "that Mr. Clinton had made unwelcome sexual advances toward me in the late seventies... These allegations are untrue".[2]

Nevertheless, speculation that Broaddrick had more to say on the matter persisted. Finally, in an interview with Dateline NBC that aired on February 24, 1999, Broaddrick told her story in public in full for the first time, this time stating that she had indeed been raped by Clinton.[3] It is the most serious of the allegations among the Bill Clinton sexual misconduct allegations that emerged during the 1990s.
Click to expand...
So? She swore under oath that he didn't. So she said he did and swore he didn't. Both cannot be true, so she proves she's a liar. And her claim is that he raped her while she herself was cheating on her husband at the time. She also claims she lied under oath to protect her family and to remain private -- but then goes on world-wide TV to parade herself at the debates in front of 100,000,000 people. Sorry if I don't find her the paragon of virtue the right holds her up to be.
 
Norman said:
Faun said:
Norman said:
Faun said:
Nor man said:
NYcarbineer said:
Clinton didn't rape anyone.
Click to expand...


850,000 settlement is a lot for something that isn't pretty serious. Reasonably, he at least had very violent, forceful sex.
Click to expand...
WTF are you vomiting now? That $850,000 settlement went to the woman's lawyers who never accused Clinton of touching her, no less "very violently," much less forcing her to have sex with him.

:cuckoo:
Click to expand...

What a moron...

"According to Jones's account, on May 8, 1991, she was escorted to Clinton's (then Governor of Arkansas) room in the Excelsior[3][4][5] (now Little Rock Marriott) Hotel in Little Rock, Arkansas, where he propositioned and exposed himself to her. She claimed she kept quiet about the incident until 1994, when a David Brock story in the American Spectator magazine printed an account. Jones filed a sexual harassment suit against Clinton on May 6, 1994, two days before the three-year statute of limitations, and sought $750,000 in damages.[6]"

Three is the subject... Clinton settled for no less than 850,000. You seem to possess a serious reality distortion field around you at all times.
Click to expand...
There is something seriously wrong with you. You said, and I quote, "850,000 settlement is a lot for something that isn't pretty serious. Reasonably, he at least had very violent, forceful sex."

You then project that I'm the moron for pointing out she never accused him of touching her -- to which you then post a link that says, "he propositioned and exposed himself to her.

1233796371590.gif
Click to expand...

It's serious, he has a history of violent sex also. duh...

If Trump had settles for 850,000 over sexual harassment, we would hear no end to it. Even a tape where he merely utters words is considered outrage worthy.
Click to expand...
What he has is nothing more than a parade of women with unproven and unprovable allegations -- same as Donald Trump.
 
Last edited:
Norman said:
Faun said:
Norman said:
Faun said:
Nor man said:
NYcarbineer said:
Clinton didn't rape anyone.
Click to expand...


850,000 settlement is a lot for something that isn't pretty serious. Reasonably, he at least had very violent, forceful sex.
Click to expand...
WTF are you vomiting now? That $850,000 settlement went to the woman's lawyers who never accused Clinton of touching her, no less "very violently," much less forcing her to have sex with him.

:cuckoo:
Click to expand...

What a moron...

"According to Jones's account, on May 8, 1991, she was escorted to Clinton's (then Governor of Arkansas) room in the Excelsior[3][4][5] (now Little Rock Marriott) Hotel in Little Rock, Arkansas, where he propositioned and exposed himself to her. She claimed she kept quiet about the incident until 1994, when a David Brock story in the American Spectator magazine printed an account. Jones filed a sexual harassment suit against Clinton on May 6, 1994, two days before the three-year statute of limitations, and sought $750,000 in damages.[6]"

Three is the subject... Clinton settled for no less than 850,000. You seem to possess a serious reality distortion field around you at all times.
Click to expand...
There is something seriously wrong with you. You said, and I quote, "850,000 settlement is a lot for something that isn't pretty serious. Reasonably, he at least had very violent, forceful sex."

You then project that I'm the moron for pointing out she never accused him of touching her -- to which you then post a link that says, "he propositioned and exposed himself to her.

1233796371590.gif
Click to expand...

It's serious, he has a history of violent sex also. duh...
Click to expand...
He does not, you lying, partisan hack piece of shit.
 
Faun said:
Odium said:
paulitician said:
Clinton supporters continue to obsess over some comments Donald Trump made about women years ago. So i think it's fair to ask them how they feel about Bill Clinton's numerous sex assaults. Is it just faux outage they're expressing over Trump's comments? Or do they really care about women?
Click to expand...
Not a Clinton supporter here but what bothers me more than Bills rapes is Hillary not only defending a child rapist,but claiming that child was a liar and liked what happened and then laughing about and saying the child rapist passing the polygraph forever destroyed her trust in polygraphs. That is absolutely DISGUSTING and how the fuck can ANY female especially young females look up to someone who did that?
Click to expand...
More dementia. She was assigned to the case by a judge and tried to get out of it.
Click to expand...
And? That means she gets to say the girl WANTED it to happen? That means she gets to LAUGH about it? I have seen ZERO evidence she tried to get out of it. She probably enjoyed torturing the girl because that's the kind of sadistic shit Clinton is into. Take your "dementia comment" and shove it up your dumbocrap rapist loving ass. :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Clinton corruption real not imagined

< Previous Thread

Final Predictions

Next Thread >

Similar threads

ChemEngineer
How Bad Al Goe Is - 20 pages
5 6 7
Replies
133
Views
3K
Frankeneinstein
Frankeneinstein
Not That Guy
If you were trying to destroy a country, what would you do differently?
2 3
Replies
51
Views
2K
The Duke
The Duke
Weatherman2020
Dave Barry’s 2023 Year in Review: Yes, the situation is hopeless
Replies
14
Views
1K
August West
A
P
Why do some women have rape fantasys?
5 6 7
Replies
125
Views
3K
Persuader
P
Baron Von Murderpaws
My Names Joe........ you know, the guy
Replies
1
Views
582
Confederate Soldier
Confederate Soldier

Latest Discussions

Crick
Trump is suffering serious dementia.
11 12 13
Replies
257
Views
3K
Dragonlady
Dragonlady
pknopp
James Monroe was only 18 when he signed the Declaration of Independence. Aaron Burr only 20.
Replies
11
Views
35
pknopp
pknopp
IM2
So Lets Examine This.
2 3
Replies
44
Views
231
CrusaderFrank
CrusaderFrank
Road Runner
This Is Proof That Joe Biden Doesn't Like Black People
Replies
6
Views
53
Boo Radley
Boo Radley
H
Do these Black democrat voters know the history of Planned Parenthood AND they are the largest users?
5 6 7
Replies
125
Views
855
Superbadbrutha
Superbadbrutha
View more…

Forum List

Back
Top