Where's the indictment against Bill Clinton?

Runnin said:
He's a cad, but he doesn't abuse women. If he did there would be more substantial accusations, especially by now.

Cosby, on the other hand, is positively diabolical.
Click to expand...

Define 'abuse' ?

There's been plenty of accusations that Clinton has taking advantage of women.
 
Krgrecw said:
Define 'abuse' ?

There's been plenty of accusations that Clinton has taking advantage of women.
Click to expand...

Clinton is a serial perpetrator of sexual harassment. He had a power differential over all of the women he harassed and he harassed them in an egregious manner.

I think the difference between Clinton and Cosby is that Clinton never out-and-out drugged a woman (at least to my knowledge).

But Clinton's dirty laundry was displayed in public and whatever one believes about the process, he was essentially tried for his actions.
 
Runnin said:
He's a cad, but he doesn't abuse women. If he did there would be more substantial accusations, especially by now.

Cosby, on the other hand, is positively diabolical.
Click to expand...

He's been accused of abusing them. And in a rape culture, we should go out of our way to believe the alleged victims, right? Like Juanita...
 
50PoundHead said:
Clinton is a serial perpetrator of sexual harassment. He had a power differential over all of the women he harassed and he harassed them in an egregious manner.

I think the difference between Clinton and Cosby is that Clinton never out-and-out drugged a woman (at least to my knowledge).

But Clinton's dirty laundry was displayed in public and whatever one believes about the process, he was essentially tried for his actions.
Click to expand...

Why not use the word "abuse"?

Tried, and lauded as a hero by the Left or at least a huge portion of the Left. It's left to be seen how millennials, especially millennial women, will consider him and his wife. After all, unlike us older farts, they probably don't recall all the old stories...
 
BedellBrave said:
Why not use the word "abuse"?

Tried, and lauded as a hero by the Left or at least a huge portion of the Left. It's left to be seen how millennials, especially millennial women, will consider him and his wife. After all, unlike us older farts, they probably don't recall all the old stories...
Click to expand...

It is "abuse".
 
republican party, the same broken record over and over

didn't you waste enough time and money trying to kick Bill out of office for lying under oath about a blowjob?

you really have a hard on for this guy that just won't go away. you need to see a doctor for how long this hard on has lasted
 
BedellBrave said:
He's been accused of abusing them. And in a rape culture, we should go out of our way to believe the alleged victims, right? Like Juanita...
Click to expand...

That link you provided had ONE 20 yr old, unverified accusation of criminal behavior. The other was ridiculous and was recanted. If Clinton was a real rapist or "abuser" I think there would be more evidence.

That said, whether he is or isn't makes no difference as to how I would cast my presidential vote, if I chose to go through the hassle of making an absentee vote.

I think Hillary on the ticket will garner a LOT less enthusiasm and voter turnout than Bernie.
 
BedellBrave said:
Why not use the word "abuse"?

Tried, and lauded as a hero by the Left or at least a huge portion of the Left. It's left to be seen how millennials, especially millennial women, will consider him and his wife. After all, unlike us older farts, they probably don't recall all the old stories...
Click to expand...

Because "harassment" and "abuse" are different legal terms and connote different actions by the perpetrator.

I don't think Clinton was "lauded as a hero" due to his actions. Any positive reaction toward him in these matters was in a larger part due to the fact that the Republicans--many of whom were total hypocrites on the subject of indecent sexual behavior--thought they were impeachable offenses and dragged the country through an unnecessary drama.

Hillary will have trouble with the millenials, but Bill's shenanigans probably won't be the primary reason for that.
 
Again, fascinating.

Let's look at just the ones we know of:

Flowers - consensual - Lied about it. 'He just had sex with her once' - yeah right, Billy! The Clinton machine vilified her (got to always blame the woman). After she went public, Flowers claimed her house was broken into three times and ransacked. And her mother was threatened.

Lewinsky - consensual, abuse of his power over a 22 year old, who has been subsequently ground up rather nicely in the Clinton machine - oh, and he lied about it

Gracen - poor Bill, she threw herself on him - oh, and oh, Clinton campaign manager Kantor "requested" (I'm sure sweetly) that she not go public. The machine has been working for a long time.

Browning - nice little 22 year affair. Here's her testimony of how it ended:

"Our relationship ended abruptly in January of 1992 when Billy would not return my telephone call. I told his secretary, Linda, that a tabloid had the story about me and Billy. I asked her to have him call me and he refused. Instead he had my brother, who was, at that time, working in the 1992 Clinton presidential campaign, call me from Billy's New Hampshire apartment or office. My brother said that Billy was afraid to talk to me because everyone thought that I might record the conversation as Gennifer Flowers had done. He said "we" think you should deny the story. He finally said: "if you cooperate with the media we will destroy you."

Miller - Well old horn-dog has a thing for the beauty pageant gals. Would he learn not to be such an are-hole to his "bimbos?" Well, it is hard teaching an old dog new tricks:

"She told Ambrose Evans Pritchard of the London Sunday Telegraph that in 1992 she was visited by a Democratic Party staffer. "They knew that I went jogging by myself and he couldn't guarantee what would happen to my pretty little legs." (As further reported in the Wall Street Journal International, October 27, 1998.)"

"Trailerpark" Jones - oh yes, settle for $850,000. That took care of those harassment charges.

Willey - well, not so sure about that one. Did he grope her? I wouldn't be shocked either way.

Broaddrick - WaPo writes, "The nursing home administrator emerged after the impeachment trial to allege that 21 years earlier Clinton had raped her. Through an attorney, Clinton denied the claim, and there were inconsistencies in her story. However, several of her friends backed her claim. No charges were ever brought. (Here’s a link to the Dateline NBC interview with her in 1999.)"

And we all suspect the list is much longer. WaPo again writes:

Peter Baker, in “The Breach,” the definitive account of the impeachment saga, reported that House investigators later found in the files of the independent prosecutor that Jones’s lawyers had collected the names of 21 different women they suspected had had a sexual relationship with Clinton. Baker described the files as “wild allegations, sometimes based on nothing more than hearsay claims of third-party witnesses.” But there were some allegations (page 138) that suggested unwelcome advances:

“One woman was alleged to have been asked by Clinton to give him oral sex in a car while he was the state attorney general (a claim she denied). A former Arkansas state employee said that during a presentation, then-Governor Clinton walked behind her and rubbed his pelvis up against her repeatedly. A woman identified as a third cousin of Clinton’s supposedly told her drug counselor during treatment in Arkansas that she was abused by Clinton when she was baby-sitting at the Governor’s Mansion in Little Rock.”

Then there's the Lolita Express. How many times do the log books show that Horn-dog Billy flew on Epstein's funship? "Repeatedly" - more than 10 times.

And then finally, there are a few other allegations floating around out there like Wellstone (she was a teenager, he was 23), Moffet, James, Zercher - all alleged assaults. And numerous other affairs.

Hey, but he's just a cad. They are all lying. Bimbos. So, glad Hillary stood by her man. Thrilled that the machine can get back to work - that's is if old Horn-dog's ticker still works well enough.
 
50PoundHead said:
Because "harassment" and "abuse" are different legal terms and connote different actions by the perpetrator.

I don't think Clinton was "lauded as a hero" due to his actions. Any positive reaction toward him in these matters was in a larger part due to the fact that the Republicans--many of whom were total hypocrites on the subject of indecent sexual behavior--thought they were impeachable offenses and dragged the country through an unnecessary drama.

Hillary will have trouble with the millenials, but Bill's shenanigans probably won't be the primary reason for that.
Click to expand...

Yeah, this. I've found myself defending the Clintons on many occasions, not because I was a particular fan of the Clintons, but because the attacks were so often baseless, vicious, and hypocritical. You know, they murdered Vince Foster and Ron Brown, they trafficked drugs in Little Rock . . .

Let's recap: the serial adulterer Newt Gingrich was the point man. He got in hot water over ethics, so his replacement was Bob Livingston, who removed his name from contention because of an extramarital affair. IIRC, the "squeaky-clean" guy the House Republicans chose to lead them was Dennis Hastert...you know, a guy who's been paying 30 years of hush-money to a kid he molested.

That was the context. Let's not pretend it doesn't enter the equation.
 
BedellBrave said:
Again, fascinating.

Let's look at just the ones we know of:

Flowers - consensual - Lied about it. 'He just had sex with her once' - yeah right, Billy! The Clinton machine vilified her (got to always blame the woman). After she went public, Flowers claimed her house was broken into three times and ransacked. And her mother was threatened.

Lewinsky - consensual, abuse of his power over a 22 year old, who has been subsequently ground up rather nicely in the Clinton machine - oh, and he lied about it

Gracen - poor Bill, she threw herself on him - oh, and oh, Clinton campaign manager Kantor "requested" (I'm sure sweetly) that she not go public. The machine has been working for a long time.

Browning - nice little 22 year affair. Here's her testimony of how it ended:

"Our relationship ended abruptly in January of 1992 when Billy would not return my telephone call. I told his secretary, Linda, that a tabloid had the story about me and Billy. I asked her to have him call me and he refused. Instead he had my brother, who was, at that time, working in the 1992 Clinton presidential campaign, call me from Billy's New Hampshire apartment or office. My brother said that Billy was afraid to talk to me because everyone thought that I might record the conversation as Gennifer Flowers had done. He said "we" think you should deny the story. He finally said: "if you cooperate with the media we will destroy you."

Miller - Well old horn-dog has a thing for the beauty pageant gals. Would he learn not to be such an are-hole to his "bimbos?" Well, it is hard teaching an old dog new tricks:

"She told Ambrose Evans Pritchard of the London Sunday Telegraph that in 1992 she was visited by a Democratic Party staffer. "They knew that I went jogging by myself and he couldn't guarantee what would happen to my pretty little legs." (As further reported in the Wall Street Journal International, October 27, 1998.)"

"Trailerpark" Jones - oh yes, settle for $850,000. That took care of those harassment charges.

Willey - well, not so sure about that one. Did he grope her? I wouldn't be shocked either way.

Broaddrick - WaPo writes, "The nursing home administrator emerged after the impeachment trial to allege that 21 years earlier Clinton had raped her. Through an attorney, Clinton denied the claim, and there were inconsistencies in her story. However, several of her friends backed her claim. No charges were ever brought. (Here’s a link to the Dateline NBC interview with her in 1999.)"

And we all suspect the list is much longer. WaPo again writes:

Peter Baker, in “The Breach,” the definitive account of the impeachment saga, reported that House investigators later found in the files of the independent prosecutor that Jones’s lawyers had collected the names of 21 different women they suspected had had a sexual relationship with Clinton. Baker described the files as “wild allegations, sometimes based on nothing more than hearsay claims of third-party witnesses.” But there were some allegations (page 138) that suggested unwelcome advances:

“One woman was alleged to have been asked by Clinton to give him oral sex in a car while he was the state attorney general (a claim she denied). A former Arkansas state employee said that during a presentation, then-Governor Clinton walked behind her and rubbed his pelvis up against her repeatedly. A woman identified as a third cousin of Clinton’s supposedly told her drug counselor during treatment in Arkansas that she was abused by Clinton when she was baby-sitting at the Governor’s Mansion in Little Rock.”

Then there's the Lolita Express. How many times do the log books show that Horn-dog Billy flew on Epstein's funship? "Repeatedly" - more than 10 times.

And then finally, there are a few other allegations floating around out there like Wellstone (she was a teenager, he was 23), Moffet, James, Zercher - all alleged assaults. And numerous other affairs.

Hey, but he's just a cad. They are all lying. Bimbos. So, glad Hillary stood by her man. Thrilled that the machine can get back to work - that's is if old Horn-dog's ticker still works well enough.
Click to expand...

talk about stretching things to believe what you want to believe

even crazier to compare these claims to Cosby
 
Julio3000 said:
Yeah, this. I've found myself defending the Clintons on many occasions, not because I was a particular fan of the Clintons, but because the attacks were so often baseless, vicious, and hypocritical. You know, they murdered Vince Foster and Ron Brown, they trafficked drugs in Little Rock . . .

Let's recap: the serial adulterer Newt Gingrich was the point man. He got in hot water over ethics, so his replacement was Bob Livingston, who removed his name from contention because of an extramarital affair. IIRC, the "squeaky-clean" guy the House Republicans chose to lead them was Dennis Hastert...you know, a guy who's been paying 30 years of hush-money to a kid he molested.

That was the context. Let's not pretend it doesn't enter the equation.
Click to expand...

Yeah, like scumbag hypocritical opponents make his actions defendable. Again, fascinating in the extreme, that the Left keeps up defending the serial predator, abuser, and adulterer, aiding Hillary and his machine to this day.

Hey how about this - let's say they all are unworthy of our support and all are worthy of our opposition, instead of defending our jersey.
 
Why does anyone ride the Lolita Express over 10 times exactly? Oh, that's right, humanitarian missions to Africa or some such nonsense.
 
I don't know. We need to think of something really clever and with a nice ring to it.

Listen, I'm a fallen sinner who falls so far short of the glory of God. I've got plenty of logs to pull out of my own eye. But why so many decent (I'll assume such) guys around here defend the Clintons, turn a blind-eye, give then the least bit of cover or excuse, over what is clearly abusive, sexist, serial, behavior, is beyond me. I get pulling for your team and all, but after awhile, you just need to back up and look at what you are doing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top