Bill and Hillary Clinton’s Women Victims To Hit Campaign Trail

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: Annee

Your laughing just like Hillary.

Bill Clinton was impeached for lying about sex,
and he was disbarred. Actions have consequences.

What I am doing is NOT accepting these women as innocent victims.

a reply to: Annee

So your going to admit that Bill Clinton was not a victim then?

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: Annee

So your going to admit that Bill Clinton was not a victim then?

If some woman tried to pin something on you, yeah . . . . we know how that would go.

I'm not talking about Clinton.

So a man is only completely responsible for sexual assault if he first drugs the woman? That makes no sense.

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: introvert
I doubt this will come to fruition.

By definition, this super PAC would be engaging in defamation of character. They would have to be able to prove their claims or face a fury of lawsuits.

Do the Clinton really want to have a long drawn out rehashing of these many stories in a courtroom?

There are few cases that haven't already been litigated in court?

To be honest this seems like an outrageous threat from Roger Stone..who is definetly the worst rat in the political campaign gutter.

RAPE PAC...Seriously folks?

They might be able to pay some National Enquirer quality accusers...but I can't see it moving the needle any more than this..

Donald Trump denies rape of teenage girl at 'sex party with convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein'
www.mirror.co.uk...

Apart from the fact that attacking HRCs husband seems a miss IMO. More so since the rebuttal can include direct claims of rape against Trump himself.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
So a man is only completely responsible for sexual assault if he first drugs the woman? That makes no sense.

In Clinton's world, that makes perfect sense.

originally posted by: IAMTAT
So a man is only completely responsible for sexual assault if he first drugs the woman? That makes no sense.

Did someone say that?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: burntheships
a reply to: Annee

So your going to admit that Bill Clinton was not a victim then?

If some woman tried to pin something on you, yeah

No one "pinned" it on him.

Bill admitted to having sex with her, in The White House.
abcnews.go.com...

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: UnBreakable

Uh, Donald's wife retracted that.

She swore to being raped by Donald Trump under oath. She recanted years later in public, not under oath. Very suspicious. Could she have been threatened or paid off? Most likely, as she hasn't been charged with perjury for lying about such a serious accusation, under oath in a court of law.

She is also bound by the divorce agreement to not speak about the divorce or any other aspect without his permission.

Uh, she says she was never actually raped.

“As a woman, I felt violated, as the love and tenderness which he normally exhibited towards me was absent. I referred to this as a ‘rape,’ but I do not want my words to be interpreted in a literal or criminal sense.”

nypost.com...

Yes, she did say that...after she was bound by court order to not speak negatively about the marriage.

Point is, they all have skeletons in the closet and it's hypocritical to demonize one for their transgressions, while we dismiss those of others.

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: xuenchen

Who are their lawyers and what information do you have in regards to their intelligence, compared to that of the Clintons?

Dude, is it necessary to call for evidece for every single comment? He is making claim that, firstly, is subjective(smartness) and secondly likely impossible to EVER be proven. Everyone knows this. I think that you know this too. Why not stick to the issue? We get it, you love the Clintons. Unless you get paid for each line that you type..maybe you should stick to the relevant points.

I am glad that these women are getting together..Hillary does not get to have it both ways(claims that she supports women but also supports a man who at best is a philanderer and at worst a predator.

originally posted by: introvert

Point is, they all have skeletons in the closet and it's hypocritical to demonize one for their transgressions, while we dismiss those of others.

Don't we all?

a reply to: spav5

Dude, is it necessary to call for proof for every single comment?

If you are going to speak in absolutes, better prepare to prove it.

We get it, you love the Clintons. Unless you get paid for each line that you type..maybe you should stick to the relevant points.

Love? Hardly. I liked Bill. I was too young to vote during his presidency but he was a decent president and, despite his horrible personal choices, I believe is a good man.

Hillary, I am not a fan of. But I do enjoy defending her from the onslaught of ignorance around here. There are many things we could be critical of, but we spend more time on the absurd, ignorant things that she is not guilty of.

And by relevant point, you mean I should fall in line with what you believe to be relevant. No thanks. I'll think for myself.

I am glad that these women are getting together..Hillary does not get to have it both ways(claims that she supports women but also supports a man who at best is a philanderer and at worst a predator.

That is your opinion. You are welcome to it.

originally posted by: Annee

Don't we all?

Some more than others.
In Hillary's case, she has a Warehouse full.

originally posted by: IAMTAT

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: butcherguy

I cannot comment on what the Clintons would or would not want, but if one of these women said some things they could not prove, I'm sure the Clintons would not hesitate to take them to court for defamation.

These women have been individually telling their stories for quite a while. Why haven't they been sued by the Clintons already?

Because if they stir the truth from all of these women it will be like Bill Cosby situation, gone international in a couple of days.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: introvert

Point is, they all have skeletons in the closet and it's hypocritical to demonize one for their transgressions, while we dismiss those of others.

Don't we all?

Yes. I'd hate to see the skeletons these anti-Hillary people have in their closet. How many of those that blast Bill for what he has done have had women leave them because they couldn't keep their junk in their pants?

That would be a statistic worth reading.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: UnBreakable

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: windword
a reply to: UnBreakable

Uh, Donald's wife retracted that.

She swore to being raped by Donald Trump under oath. She recanted years later in public, not under oath. Very suspicious. Could she have been threatened or paid off? Most likely, as she hasn't been charged with perjury for lying about such a serious accusation, under oath in a court of law.

She is also bound by the divorce agreement to not speak about the divorce or any other aspect without his permission.

Uh, she says she was never actually raped.

“As a woman, I felt violated, as the love and tenderness which he normally exhibited towards me was absent. I referred to this as a ‘rape,’ but I do not want my words to be interpreted in a literal or criminal sense.”

nypost.com...

Yes, she did say that...after she was bound by court order to not speak negatively about the marriage.

Point is, they all have skeletons in the closet and it's hypocritical to demonize one for their transgressions, while we dismiss those of others.

Sounds great so let's lay all the cards, on the table for everyone.

Clinton's first, especially Hillary since she seeks the highest official office in the USA.


I just hope the Feds grow some nuts and indict her, problem is they are all worried she is going to become their boss. smh

a reply to: burntheships

All I see from your link is someone who claims to have been friends with Hillary and says "she said".....

I see no smoking gun.

a reply to: UnBreakable

"Flashback: Hillary Clinton Threatened Bill’s Accusers in 1998"

“I think we’re going to find some other things. And I think that when all of this is put into context, and we really look at the people involved here, look at their motivations and look at their backgrounds, look at their past behavior, some folks are going to have a lot to answer for.”

I don't see any threat there.

a reply to: Realtruth

Clinton's skeletons have been out in the open for everyone to see for a very long time. People have been dragging her through the mud since she was First Lady.

Remember Rush Limbaugh's infatuation with her during the 90's? He couldn't go a single show without talking about ole "keg legs".

It's like a reality to show, where they bring out all the participants exes to stir the pot and make things more entertaining