Hillary Clinton, does she REALLY support Women's issues or is she just another Progressive Pretender? Exclusive: ‘Hillary Clinton Took Me Through Hell,’ Rape Victim Says

2seaoat wrote:Yes, she did her job....she placed the blame on the victim, a 12 year old girl, a child raped by two men. Her problem was boasting and chuckling about the case.



Please show the interview, or admit you are giving fifth hand interpretations which mean nothing.

2seaoat wrote:If I were facing a major charge... I'd sure as hell rather have hillary represent me than obama.


Both of them were neither trained for criminal law or had any experience in the same, but their intelligence and drive would certainly make up for their lack of knowledge.......they would have been good on anything they chose to do......intelligence has become a rare commodity today when pop culture numbs brain cells.

ZVUGKTUBM wrote:However, who among us would believe something Mr. Markle posted?

Someone who believes in fairy-tales and unicorns....

Ti wrote:Hillary wasn't FORCED to take this case.

lawyers refuse cases all the time based on their own personal morals.

So if her goal in life is to present herself as a advocate for women taking this case and defending a person she knows did it, as her comment clearly shows that she knew he did it. Then she put her profession over her morals. it really is that simple.

And I don't know about Arkansas, but a license is not suspended when you put it on hold as if you are no longer practicing. The word "suspension" is usually reserved for not abiding by some regulation.

Gunz wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

Gunz wrote:

Thousands of people disagree especially all the one's who gave her all those awards. Nice try idiots.

Gunz wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

Gunz wrote:

Thousands of people disagree especially all the one's who gave her all those awards. Nice try idiots.

LMFAO!!   You mean those "awards" from has been,low circulation magazines that nobody has heard of and you listed that as her accomplishments in another thread?   Pretty much nothing but scratch my back and good citizenship awards.

Dreamsglore wrote:

Gunz wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

Gunz wrote:

Thousands of people disagree especially all the one's who gave her all those awards. Nice try idiots.

LMFAO!!   You mean those "awards" from has been,low circulation magazines that nobody has heard of and you listed that as her accomplishments in another thread?   Pretty much nothing but scratch my back and good citizenship awards.

I'm  LMAO at you trying to minimize her. It makes you look very foolish. You can't minimize Hillary and that's a fact.

Dreamsglore wrote:

Ti wrote:Hillary wasn't FORCED to take this case.

lawyers refuse cases all the time based on their own personal morals.

So if her goal in life is to present herself as a advocate for women taking this case and defending a person she knows did it, as her comment clearly shows that she knew he did it. Then she put her profession over her morals. it really is that simple.

And I don't know about Arkansas, but a license is not suspended when you put it on hold as if you are no longer practicing. The word "suspension" is usually reserved for not abiding by some regulation.

Hillary never got her license suspended. Most lawyers who defend clients know they are guilty. It is their job and profession. You cannot withdraw from a case w/o the permission of a judge and it is moronic and ignorant to try and diss this woman for defending a case.End of story.

Dreamsglore wrote:

Ti wrote:Hillary wasn't FORCED to take this case.

lawyers refuse cases all the time based on their own personal morals.

So if her goal in life is to present herself as a advocate for women taking this case and defending a person she knows did it, as her comment clearly shows that she knew he did it. Then she put her profession over her morals. it really is that simple.

And I don't know about Arkansas, but a license is not suspended when you put it on hold as if you are no longer practicing. The word "suspension" is usually reserved for not abiding by some regulation.

Hillary never got her license suspended. Most lawyers who defend clients know they are guilty. It is their job and profession. You cannot withdraw from a case w/o the permission of a judge and it is moronic and ignorant to try and diss this woman for defending a case.End of story.

Markle wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:Hillary laughed about the tactics she used in the trial not at the victim. She was appointed to the case.

Hillary Clinton also lied about the victim using some of the same tactics she now she deplores.  In other words, the girl was asking for it.

Joanimaroni wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

Ti wrote:Hillary wasn't FORCED to take this case.

lawyers refuse cases all the time based on their own personal morals.

So if her goal in life is to present herself as a advocate for women taking this case and defending a person she knows did it, as her comment clearly shows that she knew he did it. Then she put her profession over her morals. it really is that simple.

And I don't know about Arkansas, but a license is not suspended when you put it on hold as if you are no longer practicing. The word "suspension" is usually reserved for not abiding by some regulation.

Hillary never got her license suspended. Most lawyers who defend clients know they are guilty. It is their job and profession. You cannot withdraw from a case w/o the permission of a judge and it is moronic and ignorant to try and diss this woman for defending a case.End of story.

You are just like Seaoat.....it's not about her being asked to take the case,  it's not about her defending her client, it about what she wrote in her book, it's about what she said in her interview, and it's about how she defended her client.

There re unprofessional and unethical attorney's along with the professional ethical attorney's.......you figure it out.

Markle wrote:From the Inquisitr:

The victim’s allegation that Clinton smeared her following her rape is based on a May 1975 court affidavit written by Clinton on behalf of Thomas Alfred Taylor, one of the two alleged attackers, whom Clinton was appointed to defend.

“I have been informed that the complainant is emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men and engage in fantasizing,” Clinton, then named Hillary D. Rodham, wrote in the affidavit. “I have also been informed that she has in the past made false accusations about persons, claiming they had attacked her body. Also that she exhibits an unusual stubbornness and temper when she does not get her way.”

Clinton also wrote that a child psychologist told her that children in early adolescence “tend to exaggerate or romanticize sexual experiences,” especially when they come from “disorganized families, such as the complainant.”

The victim vigorously denied Clinton’s accusations and said there has never been any explanation of what Clinton was referring to in that affidavit. She claims she never accused anyone of attacking her before her rape.

“I’ve never said that about anyone. I don’t know why she said that. I have never made false allegations. I know she was lying,” she said. “I definitely didn’t see older men. I don’t know why Hillary put that in there and it makes me plumb mad.”

Read more:  http://www.inquisitr.com/1302758/did-hillary-clinton-use-blame-the-victim-defense-against-12-year-old-rape-victim/

Dreamsglore wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

Ti wrote:Hillary wasn't FORCED to take this case.

lawyers refuse cases all the time based on their own personal morals.

So if her goal in life is to present herself as a advocate for women taking this case and defending a person she knows did it, as her comment clearly shows that she knew he did it. Then she put her profession over her morals. it really is that simple.

And I don't know about Arkansas, but a license is not suspended when you put it on hold as if you are no longer practicing. The word "suspension" is usually reserved for not abiding by some regulation.

Hillary never got her license suspended. Most lawyers who defend clients know they are guilty. It is their job and profession. You cannot withdraw from a case w/o the permission of a judge and it is moronic and ignorant to try and diss this woman for defending a case.End of story.

You are just like Seaoat.....it's not about her being asked to take the case,  it's not about her defending her client, it about what she wrote in her book, it's about what she said in her interview, and it's about how she defended her client.

There re unprofessional and unethical attorney's along with the professional ethical attorney's.......you figure it out.

We've already proven what she said in her interview and it was not what was reported. There was nothing unethical or unprofessional about defending your client to the best of your ability. It's what they're sworn to do because under our judicial system you have the right to the best defense you can get. I understand the disgust of this case but I also understand a lawyer doing what he has to do. When I had a case of a 3 month old baby getting beat up by the father and I mean broken legs,arms, fractured skull etc the defense lawyer tried to tear me apart on the stand. After the hearing he came up to me and said "it's terrible what happened to that baby and I hope you don't hold it against me for defending my client. My wife is even mad at me for defending him. I'm just doing my job." I was mad but I understood.

2seaoat wrote:This was posted to try to show Hillary did something wrong after my blathering showed what a lie the thread was from the git go.   It is the predisposition which many on this forum approach any subject.   It is comical.  Hillary has faults.  Hell, I was her biggest detractor on the PNJ eight years ago taking all kinds of crap as being a NEOCON who was attacking her on her false resume from high school, but what I posted was true, and what was posted here was a well planned propoganda technique to dupe the weak of mind.  It certainly succeeded.

Joanimaroni wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

Ti wrote:Hillary wasn't FORCED to take this case.

lawyers refuse cases all the time based on their own personal morals.

So if her goal in life is to present herself as a advocate for women taking this case and defending a person she knows did it, as her comment clearly shows that she knew he did it. Then she put her profession over her morals. it really is that simple.

And I don't know about Arkansas, but a license is not suspended when you put it on hold as if you are no longer practicing. The word "suspension" is usually reserved for not abiding by some regulation.

Hillary never got her license suspended. Most lawyers who defend clients know they are guilty. It is their job and profession. You cannot withdraw from a case w/o the permission of a judge and it is moronic and ignorant to try and diss this woman for defending a case.End of story.

You are just like Seaoat.....it's not about her being asked to take the case,  it's not about her defending her client, it about what she wrote in her book, it's about what she said in her interview, and it's about how she defended her client.

There re unprofessional and unethical attorney's along with the professional ethical attorney's.......you figure it out.

We've already proven what she said in her interview and it was not what was reported. There was nothing unethical or unprofessional about defending your client to the best of your ability. It's what they're sworn to do because under our judicial system you have the right to the best defense you can get. I understand the disgust of this case but I also understand a lawyer doing what he has to do. When I had a case of a 3 month old baby getting beat up by the father and I mean broken legs,arms, fractured skull etc the defense lawyer tried to tear me apart on the stand. After the hearing he came up to me and said "it's terrible what happened to that baby and I hope you don't hold it against me for defending my client. My wife is even mad at me for defending him. I'm just doing my job." I was mad but I understood.

Who said defending her client was unethical and  unprofessional?

Floridatexan wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

Ti wrote:Hillary wasn't FORCED to take this case.

lawyers refuse cases all the time based on their own personal morals.

So if her goal in life is to present herself as a advocate for women taking this case and defending a person she knows did it, as her comment clearly shows that she knew he did it. Then she put her profession over her morals. it really is that simple.

And I don't know about Arkansas, but a license is not suspended when you put it on hold as if you are no longer practicing. The word "suspension" is usually reserved for not abiding by some regulation.

Hillary never got her license suspended. Most lawyers who defend clients know they are guilty. It is their job and profession. You cannot withdraw from a case w/o the permission of a judge and it is moronic and ignorant to try and diss this woman for defending a case.End of story.

You are just like Seaoat.....it's not about her being asked to take the case,  it's not about her defending her client, it about what she wrote in her book, it's about what she said in her interview, and it's about how she defended her client.

There re unprofessional and unethical attorney's along with the professional ethical attorney's.......you figure it out.

We've already proven what she said in her interview and it was not what was reported. There was nothing unethical or unprofessional about defending your client to the best of your ability. It's what they're sworn to do because under our judicial system you have the right to the best defense you can get. I understand the disgust of this case but I also understand a lawyer doing what he has to do. When I had a case of a 3 month old baby getting beat up by the father and I mean broken legs,arms, fractured skull etc the defense lawyer tried to tear me apart on the stand. After the hearing he came up to me and said "it's terrible what happened to that baby and I hope you don't hold it against me for defending my client. My wife is even mad at me for defending him. I'm just doing my job." I was mad but I understood.

Who said defending her client was unethical and  unprofessional?

Everyone here who is buying into the latest BS post from Markle is either insinuating or outright saying that Mrs. Clinton's conduct was both unethical and unprofessional, when in fact she was providing a vigorous defense, which is what attorneys are supposed to do.

Floridatexan wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

Joanimaroni wrote:

Dreamsglore wrote:

Ti wrote:Hillary wasn't FORCED to take this case.

lawyers refuse cases all the time based on their own personal morals.

So if her goal in life is to present herself as a advocate for women taking this case and defending a person she knows did it, as her comment clearly shows that she knew he did it. Then she put her profession over her morals. it really is that simple.

And I don't know about Arkansas, but a license is not suspended when you put it on hold as if you are no longer practicing. The word "suspension" is usually reserved for not abiding by some regulation.

Hillary never got her license suspended. Most lawyers who defend clients know they are guilty. It is their job and profession. You cannot withdraw from a case w/o the permission of a judge and it is moronic and ignorant to try and diss this woman for defending a case.End of story.

You are just like Seaoat.....it's not about her being asked to take the case,  it's not about her defending her client, it about what she wrote in her book, it's about what she said in her interview, and it's about how she defended her client.

There re unprofessional and unethical attorney's along with the professional ethical attorney's.......you figure it out.

We've already proven what she said in her interview and it was not what was reported. There was nothing unethical or unprofessional about defending your client to the best of your ability. It's what they're sworn to do because under our judicial system you have the right to the best defense you can get. I understand the disgust of this case but I also understand a lawyer doing what he has to do. When I had a case of a 3 month old baby getting beat up by the father and I mean broken legs,arms, fractured skull etc the defense lawyer tried to tear me apart on the stand. After the hearing he came up to me and said "it's terrible what happened to that baby and I hope you don't hold it against me for defending my client. My wife is even mad at me for defending him. I'm just doing my job." I was mad but I understood.

Who said defending her client was unethical and  unprofessional?

Everyone here who is buying into the latest BS post from Markle is either insinuating or outright saying that Mrs. Clinton's conduct was both unethical and unprofessional, when in fact she was providing a vigorous defense, which is what attorneys are supposed to do.

nadalfan wrote:What courtroom behavior?  There was no trial