Hillary Clinton MUST Apologize to Trump!

Hillary has done a lot of unethical things in her life but the most despicable thing (at least what we KNOW of) was probably when she defended the child rapist in the 70s by attacking his 12 year old victim.

[I asked SJ to provide the article he read and that inspired the remarks above.]

Take your pick.
Google

Respectfully, I realize I could have Googled and found something about the matter, but I don't want to take a pick. I want to read the one you read to ensure we both have the same information in that regard.

Thanks for the link. I will read that article and respond.
 
Hillary has done a lot of unethical things in her life but the most despicable thing (at least what we KNOW of) was probably when she defended the child rapist in the 70s by attacking his 12 year old victim.
Yeah sure, after all the lies you've told about Hillary, do you really think an honest person will believe that exaggerated bullshit?
Well yes, you probably are that stupid.

The case fell apart because of contradictory statements by the complainant and prosecutorial incompetence in bungling the case by destroying evidence.
There really is no level too low for you to stoop to defend that disgusting hag, is there?
Exclusive: ‘Hillary Clinton Took Me Through Hell,’ Rape Victim Says
There is no lie too low for the lying scum Right to stoop to about Clinton.

The girl was caught lying both in the past and in her statements as well as after the case was ended. Furthermore, nowhere in the interview that the liar claims triggered her lies in your article, does Clinton laugh at the alleged victim. Clinton laughs when she describes her client’s polygraph results and the prosecutors fucking up the case by destroying evidence.
You just keep sinking lower and lower. Let's see the evidence that the 12 year old rape victim was "caught lying" (other than Hillary saying "she was told"). She knew the accused was lying (laughed about it) but still attacked the victim and called HER the liar. I don't know who is more of a scum, Hillary or you for defending her.
 
Ai2sfQC.gif

That's another problem with her.She's a DRUNK.
 
Recent ISIS recruitment videos actually feature her rapist pervert husband. So she has been caught lying again. She's a corrupt pig. It is what it is.
 
Hillary has done a lot of unethical things in her life but the most despicable thing (at least what we KNOW of) was probably when she defended the child rapist in the 70s by attacking his 12 year old victim.
Yeah sure, after all the lies you've told about Hillary, do you really think an honest person will believe that exaggerated bullshit?
Well yes, you probably are that stupid.

The case fell apart because of contradictory statements by the complainant and prosecutorial incompetence in bungling the case by destroying evidence.
There really is no level too low for you to stoop to defend that disgusting hag, is there?
Exclusive: ‘Hillary Clinton Took Me Through Hell,’ Rape Victim Says
There is no lie too low for the lying scum Right to stoop to about Clinton.

The girl was caught lying both in the past and in her statements as well as after the case was ended. Furthermore, nowhere in the interview that the liar claims triggered her lies in your article, does Clinton laugh at the alleged victim. Clinton laughs when she describes her client’s polygraph results and the prosecutors fucking up the case by destroying evidence.
You just keep sinking lower and lower. Let's see the evidence that the 12 year old rape victim was "caught lying" (other than Hillary saying "she was told"). She knew the accused was lying (laughed about it) but still attacked the victim and called HER the liar. I don't know who is more of a scum, Hillary or you for defending her.
What further evidence did she need? Her client, who knew the victim, could have told her that.
 
He FIRED her. And she deserved it. We could put all the gory details af all the things she did to DESERVE firing. Want to hear them ???
He said he didn't fire her. Why would I believe a moron like you over him?

Jerry Zeifman said:

Oh GIVE US A BRRREAK!!! What a joke to be obsessing over one guy in Hillary Clinton’s long dirty laundry list of misdeeds, that carries over 40 years. Yammering about this one incident of hers, is like devoting pages of posting to Charles Manson having possessed pot. Have the posters in this thread forgotten (Or never saw the post # 51 further back in the thread) ? Here it is again for your convenience >>

UPDATED LINKS to HILLARY CLINTON’S (and Bill’s) LIES!

Let’s Be Friends

White House says Clinton did not heed e-mail policy

Unease at Clinton Foundation Over Finances and Ambitions

Clinton charities will refile tax returns, audit for other errors

Hillary Clinton fired from Judiciary Committee Investigating Watergate

Many Clinton charity donors also got State Department awards under Hillary

Despite Hillary Clinton promise, charity did not disclose donors

For Clinton’s, speech income shows how their wealth is intertwined with charity

Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation as Russians Pressed for Control of Uranium Company

The Disastrous Clinton Post-Presidency

Do Hillary’s Fair-Pay Talking Points Apply to Her Own Family?

Clinton Foundation Quietly Revises Mexican Billionaire’s Donation

The Spy Satellite Secrets in Hillary’s Emails

Senate committee seeks email facts from Clinton’s tech company

Hilliary Servers Kept in Bathroom Closet of Loft Apartment

Hillary Clinton’s Computer Company Wasn’t Cleared for Classified Material

The Time Hillary Clinton Networked from a Funeral

Hillary Clinton’s Million Little Lies
 
What further evidence did she need? Her client, who knew the victim, could have told her that.
Give it up. For cryin out loud. She's a lying, despicable criminal, and has been for 40+ years, and you ought to be ashamed of yourself do defending her.
 
And which of those accusations became actual convictions?
Are you saying you don't believe this long list has any truth in it. You don't want to be laughed out of the forum now do you ? And it'snot just a matter of convictions. It's a matter of honesty/integrity vs being the lying scum that she is.

She would be convicted RIGHT NOW, for a whole nother long list of crimes, if only she didn't have the Obamans covering for her.
 
What further evidence did she need? Her client, who knew the victim, could have told her that.
Give it up. For cryin out loud. She's a lying, despicable criminal, and has been for 40+ years, and you ought to be ashamed of yourself do defending her.
Give what up? You haven't proven shit. :cuckoo: Earlier, you said she had done plenty of things to warrant her being fired from her role in the Watergate Commission -- yet you won't say what those things were, even though you were challenged to do so.
 
And which of those accusations became actual convictions?
Are you saying you don't believe this long list has any truth in it. You don't want to be laughed out of the forum now do you ? And it'snot just a matter of convictions. It's a matter of honesty/integrity vs being the lying scum that she is.
I'm saying you haven't proven shit.

And you haven't.

You're under the delusion that posting a list of accusations is tantamount to an indictment. But we've been through this shit already when the brain-dead right dragged the country through six years of endless investigations trying to find dirt on the Clintons.
 
Hillary has done a lot of unethical things in her life but the most despicable thing (at least what we KNOW of) was probably when she defended the child rapist in the 70s by attacking his 12 year old victim.
Yeah sure, after all the lies you've told about Hillary, do you really think an honest person will believe that exaggerated bullshit?
Well yes, you probably are that stupid.

The case fell apart because of contradictory statements by the complainant and prosecutorial incompetence in bungling the case by destroying evidence.
There really is no level too low for you to stoop to defend that disgusting hag, is there?
Exclusive: ‘Hillary Clinton Took Me Through Hell,’ Rape Victim Says
There is no lie too low for the lying scum Right to stoop to about Clinton.

The girl was caught lying both in the past and in her statements as well as after the case was ended. Furthermore, nowhere in the interview that the liar claims triggered her lies in your article, does Clinton laugh at the alleged victim. Clinton laughs when she describes her client’s polygraph results and the prosecutors fucking up the case by destroying evidence.
You just keep sinking lower and lower. Let's see the evidence that the 12 year old rape victim was "caught lying" (other than Hillary saying "she was told"). She knew the accused was lying (laughed about it) but still attacked the victim and called HER the liar. I don't know who is more of a scum, Hillary or you for defending her.
What further evidence did she need? Her client, who knew the victim, could have told her that.
Are you fucking serious??? You're saying her client (the rapist who she admitted was guilty) TOLD her the victim was lying, and that's your evidence???
 
Take your pick.
Google

Respectfully, I realize I could have Googled and found something about the matter, but I don't want to take a pick. I want to read the one you read to ensure we both have the same information in that regard.
I posted one of them in #128. Here it is again.
Exclusive: ‘Hillary Clinton Took Me Through Hell,’ Rape Victim Says

Having read the article to which you provided the link, I have determined that the central question is one not of what Mrs. Clinton did or said, but rather one of ethics. I don't have a problem with Mrs. Clinton's efforts to effect the best possible outcome she could, ideally a not guilty verdict, for her client.

In the process of examining the ethical dilemma associated with the (not new) matter of how lawyers can bring themselves to defend folks like the accused rapist Mrs. Clinton did, I came across the following information that you may find useful in developing a more comprehensive understanding and view of the matter and considerations involved.
I realize the plaintiff claims that Mrs. Clinton lied in order to obtain the results she sought on behalf of her client, but one must realize that the accusation is also that Mrs. Clinton lied to the court. Were that in fact true, or believed by the court, or Arkansas' Attorney General, or the plaintiff's attorney(s), to be plausibly true, and investigation would have ensued, and Mrs. Clinton could have been disbarred for doing so. Indeed, perjury is a possible outcome. None of those things happened; she was not only not disbarred, and not charged with perjury, but also not censured, or anything else, aside from having to endure the accusations that have of late surfaced, in connection with that trial.

I also happen to think the plaintiff in that case is today being used as a pawn in the effort to smear Mrs. Clinton's reputation. I think that in part because of what was presented in the article you referenced.
[T]he victim now claims she was misquoted. She didn’t even know Clinton was the lawyer who defended her attacker until Thrush showed her Clinton’s book and she had no other information about what had happened behind closed doors in that courtroom when Thrush approached her, she said. Thrush declined to comment.

After [the plaintiff in the rape case] was released from prison in 2008, [she] read more about Clinton’s involvement in her case, but she never planned to confront Clinton about it.
The article you referenced states that:
[A]fter hearing the newly revealed tapes of Clinton boasting about the case, the victim said she couldn’t hold her tongue any longer and wanted to tell her side of the story to the public.

“When I heard that tape I was pretty upset, I went back to the room and was talking to my two cousins and I cried a little bit. I ain’t gonna lie, some of this has got me pretty down,” she said. “But I thought to myself, ‘I’m going to stand up to her. I’m going to stand up for what I’ve got to stand up for, you know?”
Well, I listened to the tape. Mrs. Clinton hardly sounds boastful. In fact it seems pretty clear to me that what she was laughing about was the perfunctory handling the forensics team exercised with a critical piece of evidence in a rape trial. I think the humor expressed in Mrs. Clinton's chuckles is not of the jocular sort, but rather of the bittersweet variety. Mrs. Clinton's other remarks in the interview do not at all suggest she gloated with glee over the outcome. In total, it appears that Mrs. Clinton realized the opportunity before her and, on behalf of her client, availed herself of it.

 
Hillary Clinton's lying is well known all around the world. Long lists of her lies have been published. Everything from her 1973 Watergate days, when she was kicked off a committee, to her recent lies about not having classified information on her emails (which are undoubtedly now in the hands of Russia, China, Iran, ISIS, etc).

So it's no surprise that she would lie again in connection with her current run for the presidency. It is a bit surprising though that with very high unfavorable ratings and low trustworthiness ratings, she would undertake such a foolish lie (that a video of Trump was given to ISIS), that could easily be refuted.

In order for Hillary to display an ounce of decency, and show even a modicum of trustworthiness, and not have her trust numbers sink even lower, she MUST now apologize to Donald Trump, and to the entire Republican Party, for spreading yet another video lie (while we're still reeling from the Benghazi one). If she doesn't do that, she openly admits her lack of integrity, and the stark contrast between her deceitfulness, and the clear honesty and forthrightfulness of Donald Trump.

th
th


Hillary Clinton should be THANKING Donald Trump and his supporters, not apologizing to them. LOL

Because of Trump & his supporters, another 17% of the population (Hispanics) are now solidly in her column. This when the GOP nominee, since Reagan has to capture at least 40% of the Hispanic vote to win the White House.
GOP Win Will Need More Than 40 Percent Of Latino 2016 Vote, Says Study

It's not like Trump didn't know this before he declared war on Hispanics. He did.
2012 FLASHBACK: Donald Trump Said GOP Was Too ‘Mean-Spirited’ Towards Illegal Immigrants

Of course the right wing of the party drove women off in 2012. In 2016 it's Hispanics.
The GOP's woman problem goes beyond Trump
Gender Gap in 2012 Vote Is Largest in Gallup's History

So besides themselves, I sure don't know who's going to vote for Republicans anymore. Trump is polling at a NEGATIVE 75% with Hispanics and he's losing women by 2 to 1. In fact, these numbers are soooo bad now, it wouldn't surprise me to see Republicans lose the Senate and a ton of seats in the house.
Poll: 75% of Latinos Have Negative View of Donald Trump

But there is one HAPPY Gal in all of this and she wants to give all you Tea Party/anti-establishment groupies a shout out for your continued support. With these numbers it appears that your "raining men" platform has already collapsed. This year you did it record time-- before the 1st primary vote was even cast--LOL Because of you Hillary Clinton is going to paint this country blue from sea to shining sea.

images
 
Last edited:
Take your pick.
Google

Respectfully, I realize I could have Googled and found something about the matter, but I don't want to take a pick. I want to read the one you read to ensure we both have the same information in that regard.
I posted one of them in #128. Here it is again.
Exclusive: ‘Hillary Clinton Took Me Through Hell,’ Rape Victim Says

Having read the article to which you provided the link, I have determined that the central question is one not of what Mrs. Clinton did or said, but rather one of ethics. I don't have a problem with Mrs. Clinton's efforts to effect the best possible outcome she could, ideally a not guilty verdict, for her client.

In the process of examining the ethical dilemma associated with the (not new) matter of how lawyers can bring themselves to defend folks like the accused rapist Mrs. Clinton did, I came across the following information that you may find useful in developing a more comprehensive understanding and view of the matter and considerations involved.
I realize the plaintiff claims that Mrs. Clinton lied in order to obtain the results she sought on behalf of her client, but one must realize that the accusation is also that Mrs. Clinton lied to the court. Were that in fact true, or believed by the court, or Arkansas' Attorney General, or the plaintiff's attorney(s), to be plausibly true, and investigation would have ensued, and Mrs. Clinton could have been disbarred for doing so. Indeed, perjury is a possible outcome. None of those things happened; she was not only not disbarred, and not charged with perjury, but also not censured, or anything else, aside from having to endure the accusations that have of late surfaced, in connection with that trial.

I also happen to think the plaintiff in that case is today being used as a pawn in the effort to smear Mrs. Clinton's reputation. I think that in part because of what was presented in the article you referenced.
[T]he victim now claims she was misquoted. She didn’t even know Clinton was the lawyer who defended her attacker until Thrush showed her Clinton’s book and she had no other information about what had happened behind closed doors in that courtroom when Thrush approached her, she said. Thrush declined to comment.

After [the plaintiff in the rape case] was released from prison in 2008, [she] read more about Clinton’s involvement in her case, but she never planned to confront Clinton about it.
The article you referenced states that:
[A]fter hearing the newly revealed tapes of Clinton boasting about the case, the victim said she couldn’t hold her tongue any longer and wanted to tell her side of the story to the public.

“When I heard that tape I was pretty upset, I went back to the room and was talking to my two cousins and I cried a little bit. I ain’t gonna lie, some of this has got me pretty down,” she said. “But I thought to myself, ‘I’m going to stand up to her. I’m going to stand up for what I’ve got to stand up for, you know?”
Well, I listened to the tape. Mrs. Clinton hardly sounds boastful. In fact it seems pretty clear to me that what she was laughing about was the perfunctory handling the forensics team exercised with a critical piece of evidence in a rape trial. I think the humor expressed in Mrs. Clinton's chuckles is not of the jocular sort, but rather of the bittersweet variety. Mrs. Clinton's other remarks in the interview do not at all suggest she gloated with glee over the outcome. In total, it appears that Mrs. Clinton realized the opportunity before her and, on behalf of her client, availed herself of it.


That's a lengthy post and I won't try to go line by line responding but Clinton provided no evidence that the victim had a history of either fantasizing about older men or accusing men of attacking her body. She stated it was brought to her attention or something like that, yet she didn't provide any witnesses to back it up. If that was a lie, how would you prove it was, especially if you're 12 years old?
As far as her defending someone she admittedly knew was guilty, it's not illegal for her to do that but there are more ethical attorneys who won't submit a not guilty plea but will instead try to make a deal for leniency.
You can excuse Hillary based on legal technicalities but the fact still remains that she put the victim on trial and accused her of inviting the crime or lying about it when she knew her client was guilty. It may be legal but it is unethical and I think you know that.
 

Forum List

Back
Top