Reading through the entire Snopes write-up, it is pretty clear that the gist of the claims about Hillary Clinton representing the rapist in this case are correct. She did her job to vigorously defend her client; however she was not interested at all in getting justice for the young victim.
Tremors through the Republican Party
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
Reading through the entire Snopes write-up, it is pretty clear that the gist of the claims about Hillary Clinton representing the rapist in this case are correct. She did her job to vigorously defend her client; however she was not interested at all in getting justice for the young victim.
That was the prosecutor's job. It's how our system works.
If you prefer facts I can use that word. I don't believe in the rapist assertion but I am in no position to have an opinion one way or the other. But I believe a man in this country is given the benefit of the doubt, and certainly due process. I do believe that Trump has had legally actionable criminal behavior. As I have said in no uncertain terms: you can say pretty much whatever you want as a person in a free society. What you can't do is act on it in an illegal manner. Once it was shown factually that Trump has crossed that line, that was his undoing including by his own peers!
I don't understand these assertions against JFK and Clinton. Both of them showed extremely poor judgement in their actions, and both of them paid for them politically for their actions once it was shown to the public. But none of it is criminal behavior. Trump has shown criminal behavior, and I would not be surprised if he faces jail time. I couldn't give two shits that he prefers women with big tits. Or that he has threesomes or any of these other things. Whatever floats your boat. However, any decent human being objects to men walking into a room full of women half undressed contestants because he is abusing his status. It isn't just creepy, it is criminal. Every decent man objects to men forcing themselves on a woman - again, these actions are not the actions of a playboy, they are criminal!
I think you are missing an important perspective imo. What Democrats do is their own business. What Republicans do is your own business. I am often baffled by all the religious freaks that the republican party seems to attract. None of my business - run your house any way you want - until it crosses into my side of the fence. Otherwise these are party politics and they are resolved within the respective parties as they adapt to the needs of people and the country. So how you resolve what you want from your own party is within your own conscious and those that represent you. What is going on in this case is beyond party - people are showing is that Trump is a dangerous human being, and that he is within a stones throw of the most powerful position on the planet. As I said, if the situation were reversed and it was a Democrat that was being shown to have these personality disorders that are actionable criminally, I would be horrified and I would do everything in my power to prevent such a person from being POTUS. You guys keep arguing that HRC also has show criminal behavior in Benghazi and in the emails. The difference is she was given due process, and the result is, not guilty. You just don't like the result.
But even within just the political sphere, the Republican party is fractured within themselves. You need to start there and look for answers within yourselves. The way the current system is set up (which I don't agree with), once you have a cohesive message for what you guys stand for, then you have to sell that to the other half of the country because as it stands now, the Republican party isn't just shrinking, it is fractured. So republicans win when Democrats don't turn out in elections. Do I like this system? Not really because it encourages division rather than coming together, and then the resentment spills over to the other branches of government resulting in a pathetic paralyzed nation.
I will say this, Occupy Wall Street and now Bernie Sanders has shown that the Democratic party is maybe one election cycle from the same fracturing that the republicans are seeing. I guarantee you, African Americans are watching the next four years very carefully. Latinos are watching very carefully. Millenials and the new mass of young voters are watching very carefully. In 2020, you may see the same kind of fracturing in the Democratic party as the Republicans in the last few years.
And imo, that is a good thing because the status quo is horribly broken.
Last edited:
I will give you an example of a Democratic Law that is crossing the line and imposing will on other people. The bathroom law is insane imo. I vehemently disagree with it.
It is one thing if you have sliced your dick and balls and are now a "woman." But just to identify with the other sex but you still have your balls, you can walk into a woman's bathroom - seriously?
No.
It is one thing if you have sliced your dick and balls and are now a "woman." But just to identify with the other sex but you still have your balls, you can walk into a woman's bathroom - seriously?
No.
Last edited:
On the other hand, if the country passes a law that says two people can love each other and marry regardless of sex, not baking a cake for their wedding based on your own religious beliefs is crossing the line the other way.
To me this is obvious. But the bathroom law is insane. How is that I can agree and disagree with people that I identify within my party?
To me this is obvious. But the bathroom law is insane. How is that I can agree and disagree with people that I identify within my party?
Last edited:
Actually the problem that many people here have with HB-2 is not the bathroom part of the law. Only the first two pages of HB-2 deal with bathrooms. The rest of the bill rolls back civil rights by 100 years ; it does not allow you to sue for discrimination in state court, does not allow towns to pass basic civil ordinances, forcefully takes over commissions for water, airports, etc. by the state, does not allow local increases in minimum wage, and a long list of other items that represent severe overreach by state government (so much for conservative small government, eh?)
Of course the national media is all wrapped up in the bathroom part of the law in their coverage.
I'm not convinced that you did.
Well in that case I would urge you to read the Snopes write-up again and focus on the facts & timeline while also thinking about Hillary's personal integrity regarding helping the youngest victims of crimes. So much for her purported value of having a "community" taking care of children.
Parallel universe much?
Clinton didn't want to take the case; she was ordered to take it. She tried unsuccessfully to get the judge to remove her from the case. In any event, under Clinton's handling of the case, the defendant pled guilty rather than going to trial.
Seriously, what's the matter with you?