|
jlf1961 -> RE: Trump's pussy-groping comments (10/14/2016 10:03:48 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Greta75
This is such typical left wing spinning. I laughed at the parents for deserving the punishment for abusing a child. Why don't you go after Hillary for laughing at a 12 yr old girl rape, who was raped so badly, and beaten up so badly, she went into coma for 5 days, and cannot give birth for life because her womb was so badly damaged. The most heinous crime happened to a 12 yr old girl. And Hillary decided her professional duty is more important, and to help this Rapist get off at all cost! And then laugh about it. She also accused this 12 yr old to be going after mature men and claim that young girls are prone to making up stories! Who is the Queen of victim-blaming here?
I am happy to be associated with Team deplorable because at least Team deplorable ain't hypocrites.
Cuz Team Left Wing, Supports Islam that abuses women! And Supports Hillary that took down a 12 yr old who was brutally raped and abused and stood by her sexual predator husband and defended him against the women who accused him.
Jesus Christ, if you ever, just once, actually got your facts straight about anything, I would consider it a sign the world was going to end.
First, Hillary Clinton, contrary to everything you said, did not volunteer to defend this person of the rape charge, she was the court appointed attorney.
Let me explain that in such a way that even a rock could understand.
The defendent could not afford an attorney, and unlike some countries, the US constitution does state everyone must have an attorney.
The court appointed Hillary Clinton as defense attorney, which by the way she admits that she had problems with and tried to get out of the case (the court records back this up as well) and was flatly told she could not refuse the case.
The points she laughed at was that while this individual demanded an attorney, he plead guilty to the crime not for a lighter sentence, and the fact that the defendant passed a lie detector test which, although is not admissible in court, pretty much destroyed the prosecutor's case, but proved to Clinton the technology was flawed.
She did not get him off, he plead guilty, with her support to making that plea.
She did not approach the prosecutor with the deal, the prosecutor made the deal, the judge suspended the sentence, and then gave him credit for time served.
It must also be pointed out that the reason she was selected for the case in the first place is that both the prosecutor and the judge handling the case figured the jury would be less hostile toward a rape defendant with a woman attorney.
All of this is a matter of record in the court in which the case was heard.
And if you had half a brain and even less knowledge of the workings of an internet search engine, you could have found this out all for yourself.
So instead of blasting Hilary Clinton, you might consider the following questions:
1) why would a judge and prosecutor want a woman to represent a accused rapist so the jury would be less hostile toward the defendant.
2) Why, when she said she did not want the case, she was reminded that she could not very well refuse a JUDGE'S ORDER, meaning the judge had already ordered her to represent the man, to do so would put her in contempt of court and land her in jail.
3) Why is it a matter of record the judge had a list of women lawyers that he could appoint to represent male clients in such cases?
4) Why did the judge find it necessary to issue a court order to have women represent rapists in the first place?
As for the rape allegations against Bill Clinton, first it has not ever been proved or disproved that it happened, second while the circumstantial evidence was there, no formal charges were brought (the victim has given differing reasons over the years, including when she was interviewed by congressional investigators during the Clinton impeachment procedures) and even after that.
Considering I am not a fan of either Bill or Hillary, I would have loved to see his ass in court on rape charges, he would have been finished politically even if the were found not guilty.
But more to the point, why do you find it necessary to continue with the inaccurate and down right false bullshit when it is so easily proven to be bullshit?
as for the democrats being muslim loving etc, again it is bullshit.
The only pro Muslim statement from the democrats is that you cannot judge every member of an entire religion on the actions of a very small minority.
Furthermore, when you consider the most prolific anti democrat conservative talking head fruit loop Glen Beck has denounced Trump for his statements against women, against fellow republicans, you really have to stop and think that Trump is just too fucking crazy for even the most crazy republicans.
Greta, do yourself a favor, before spouting off any more nonsense, learn to use google and check the facts.
|
|
|
|
