Originally posted by Eladar http://www.breitbart.com/live/second-presidential-debate-fact-check-livewire/fact-check-yes-hillary-clinton-laugh-successfully-defending-child-rapist/
She was 12 and he was 41. Hillary laughs about how she was able to free the rapist from jail knowing he did it.
In defense of her, she was thinking of an amusing limerick.
Originally posted by Eladar http://www.breitbart.com/live/second-presidential-debate-fact-check-livewire/fact-check-yes-hillary-clinton-laugh-successfully-defending-child-rapist/
She was 12 and he was 41. Hillary laughs about how she was able to free the rapist from jail knowing he did it.
Not quite. I actually listened to the inerview a while back. She was actually laughing at being thrown into a serious case with little to no experience. Some republicans have tried to spin this as Hillary saying "lolz, rape". That's not the case.
Originally posted by vivify Not quite. I actually listened to the inerview a while back. She was actually laughing at being thrown into a serious case with little to no experience. Some republicans have tried to spin this as Hillary saying "lolz, rape". That's not the case.
What do you think of Hillary blaming the rape on the little girl? How about the comnent of having her client take a polygraph test and no longer believing they are accurate?
I believe there were two taped conversations where she laughed about the case?
Originally posted by Eladar http://www.breitbart.com/live/second-presidential-debate-fact-check-livewire/fact-check-yes-hillary-clinton-laugh-successfully-defending-child-rapist/
She was 12 and he was 41. Hillary laughs about how she was able to free the rapist from jail knowing he did it.
This feces has already been thrown on the wall several times on this forum; she didn't laugh about any rape and she defended her client to the best of her ability (it would have been unethical not to do so).
As with so many desperate attacks by right wingers before this election, there is no substance here.
Originally posted by no1marauder This feces has already been thrown on the wall several times on this forum; she didn't laugh about any rape and she defended her client to the best of her ability (it would have been unethical not to do so).
As with so many desperate attacks by right wingers before this election, there is no substance here.
Originally posted by robbie carrobie This election is real dirty for dirty.
What else can be expected? The Right has virtually no policies that the majority of voters favor (more tax cuts for the rich? Less regulation of banks? More people without health insurance? Cuts for Social Security and Medicare? I don't think so - even on immigration substantial majorities favor a path to citizenship for illegals), so their only hope is personal mud slinging.
Originally posted by Eladar What do you think of Hillary blaming the rape on the little girl? How about the comnent of having her client take a polygraph test and no longer believing they are accurate?
I believe there were two taped conversations where she laughed about the case?
Originally posted by vivify What is the exact quote?
You can read the details here: http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-freed-child-rapist-laughed-about-it/
The salient points: 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.
Originally posted by no1marauder What else can be expected? The Right has virtually no policies that the majority of voters favor (more tax cuts for the rich? Less regulation of banks? More people without health insurance? Cuts for Social Security and Medicare? I don't think so - even on immigration substantial majorities favor a path to citizenship for illegals), so their only hope is personal mud slinging.
It would be interesting to see if Barron Trump, a so-called anchor baby, would lose his citizenship under a Trump presidency.
Originally posted by no1marauder This feces has already been thrown on the wall several times on this forum; she didn't laugh about any rape and she defended her client to the best of her ability (it would have been unethical not to do so).
As with so many desperate attacks by right wingers before this election, there is no substance here.
She defended her client with unethical practices which resulted in evidence disappearing. To do so would be unethical?
Failing to blame the 12 year old girl for the rape would be unethical?
Originally posted by no1marauder You can read the details here: http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-freed-child-rapist-laughed-about-it/
The salient points: 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.
I see you can believe anything if you wear libtard glasses.
Originally posted by Eladar She defended her client with unethical practices which resulted in evidence disappearing. To do so would be unethical?
Failing to blame the 12 year old girl for the rape would be unethical?
Libtard ethics are unethical.
The facts don't matter to you, but please tell me what evidence disappeared in that case due to HRC's "unethical practices"?
Yes it would be unethical to not defend your client to the best of your ability and in this case her client denied sexual contact. Unless you believe that every single person accused of a crime is necessarily guilty, it is hardly unethical to dispute an alleged victim's claims even if they are 12 years old.
Originally posted by no1marauder You can read the details here: http://www.snopes.com/hillary-clinton-freed-child-rapist-laughed-about-it/
The salient points: 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.
Snopes is a joke.
Without equivocation, she is derisive in her reactions to the elements of the case, including the knowledge that polygraph tests are faulty--- since she knew her client was guilty.
So, ass wipe, let's be human for fifteen seconds.
It's your 12 year old daughter/sister/cousin who was clearly raped by a 41 year old man.
Are you willing to listen to his defense attorney concoct a bogus claim that your relation 'wanted it' and therefore consented--- you know: just to make sure he had a fair shot, an "ethical" shot at things?
05 Nov '16 17:41
Hillary Laughs about defending Rapist
Back to Top