It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Victim in Clinton rape case comes forward

page: 5
90
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 05:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: FIFIGI
Painful to watch. A sad world we live in. I hope Clinton never ever gets close to power.


Well she was Secretary of State, so I think it's way too late in terms of that woman getting close to power. She isn't just close to it, she is in the middle of it.

On another note, I understand that she was ostensibly doing her job but what she did to put that poor girl through the wringer was callous. Also, her comments are taken out of context, but she was very glib about the whole thing and I think that says something significant about Hillary's moral compass.
edit on 12-8-2016 by redhorse because: (no reason given)




posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 08:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: James1982

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: UnBreakable
They have their heads buried so far up her arse they only hear their own echos from her colon walls.


How many threads are there going to be on this?

She did her job.

There's nothing more to it.


You are one of the biggest hypocrites on this board. I don't care if I get warned or banned for this, you are a disgusting human being.


Why? Doesn't bother me what you call me. It really only reflects back on you.

I stated the truth.

Hillary did her job. That's a fact.

She was a Public Defender and got her clients sentenced reduced.

I guess women lawyers are under a different set of rules. They have to use emotion, not law.



Of course it's a fact that she was doing her job. That is not in dispute. What is in dispute is whether she has ethics. Clearly she does not.

Cartel members are just doing their jobs too. Smuggling sex slaves and drugs across the border. That is their job. Does that excuse them? For some reason you are being highly selective about when "doing one's job" is a valid defense and when it is not.

You ridicule comparisons to Nazis, could you try and explain what the difference is? You say you know what it's like to be a woman back then trying to get a career, well do you know what it was like for "normal" people in Nazi Germany? It was tow the party line or be exterminated. Some chose to tow the party line and some chose death (a far greater penalty than simply not being able to practice law in your preferred area)

Those who chose to tow the party line are now called war criminals, precisely because they did their job. Part of our legal system is that everybody deserves a defense, I don't disagree with this, but just because the positiions of public defenders are necessary doesn't mean that those people aren't ethically compromised. To them the system is more important than the lives of the people within it. Anyone who follows that thinking shouldn't be president or have any control over anybody.

I'm not sure why you think I'm attacking her because she's a woman, I'm attacking her because she is telling us "I want to rule you" and I'm saying "No" I also say NO to trump. And Bush. And Obama. They are all scum. I judge people by their actions not their genitals or skin color. This might be something you are not used to. BTW, Layers have had a really really crummy reputation for a long time before Hilary even became one. It's a ages old meme of the slimy lawyer. For some reason this country started putting these people in charge.

I'd like to apologize to you for my previous post, that was not needed, fair or productive. My disgust is not with you as a person but with the system and the mindset that allows it to continue, it's difficult for me to keep that straight at times, so once again I apologize. I'd remove it but the edit time has passed.
edit on 12-8-2016 by James1982 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 08:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: James1982

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: James1982

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: UnBreakable
They have their heads buried so far up her arse they only hear their own echos from her colon walls.


How many threads are there going to be on this?

She did her job.

There's nothing more to it.


You are one of the biggest hypocrites on this board. I don't care if I get warned or banned for this, you are a disgusting human being.


Why? Doesn't bother me what you call me. It really only reflects back on you.

I stated the truth.

Hillary did her job. That's a fact.

She was a Public Defender and got her clients sentenced reduced.

I guess women lawyers are under a different set of rules. They have to use emotion, not law.



Of course it's a fact that she was doing her job. That is not in dispute. What is in dispute is whether she has ethics. Clearly she does not.


Absolutely, I'd say she has ethics in doing her job right.

You can't separate personal emotion from the fact she was a Public Defender and defended her client.



posted on Aug, 12 2016 @ 08:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: redhorse
. . . but she was very glib about the whole thing and I think that says something significant about Hillary's moral compass.


I don't think she was.

No more then Emergency Room personnel refer to burn victims as Crispy Critters.

And yes I did listen to the tape and research it.



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 04:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: Annee



Absolutely, I'd say she has ethics in doing her job right.

You can't separate personal emotion from the fact she was a Public Defender and defended her client.



I guess what I'm not understanding is why you think doing one's job relieves some people from the outcome of their actions but not others? All the North Korean elites are just doing their job too, administering the country, do you think they are relieved of their negative impact on their citizens because it's part of their job?

The outcome of her actions is that a man who did something horrible and ruined someone's life in one of the most awful ways basically got off. That is not a positive outcome, and she personally and purposefully worked hard to ensure that happened.

Lawyers are a necessary evil. I understand that, but they should be confined to their realm of work. Being one, she should not be put in charge of a nation of hundreds of millions of people because she values her job over justice, and the suffering of others.

You said:

" she was a Public Defender and defended her client."

How is that any different than:

"Himmler was a Nazi and enforced Nazi policies"

They both did their jobs. Both produced negative outcomes. One is good because of it. The other evil. I don't understand the thinking that leads one to that conclusion. Is it because being a Nazi is bad and being a lawyer is good? Why is being a Nazi bad? Because they produced horrible outcomes. Hillary Clinton didn't have a tough life, she doesn't have the excuse of having to do bad things for survival like some people unfortunately do.

Doing your job is never, ever and excuse for causing suffering to others. I extend that same thought to police who are tasked with violating people's liberty but do so willingly because "it's their job"



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 09:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: redhorse
. . . but she was very glib about the whole thing and I think that says something significant about Hillary's moral compass.



No more then Emergency Room personnel refer to burn victims as Crispy Critters.




No. No they don't. That would be illegal and constitute abuse of the patient that would have to be reported to the state and they would be fired. They absolutely cannot refer to patients that way. It DOES NOT matter if they are anywhere near the patient or if they think that no one but other medical personal can hear them. Emergency room personnel are NOT allowed to speak that way. It is cruel, unprofessional and as I said, illegal. Also, I will also say that if burn ward nurses heard emergency personnel referring to patients that way they would come unhinged. It is a deplorable thing to say that would not be tolerated by a hospital that is following the law. If you have heard this you should report it to a State oversight organization, if you work in a hospital and have heard this said, you are legally obligated to report it, it constitutes verbal abuse of the patient. Your comparative, supportive example was not only glib but unethical, abusive and illegal. Try again.
edit on 13-8-2016 by redhorse because: clarity

edit on 13-8-2016 by redhorse because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 10:01 AM
link   
a reply to: James1982

Ethics? Really going to go there?

If one possesses any sort of ethical/moral standard, one would never get close to becoming POTUS.

Ethics? You mean like when the federal government granted Nazis amnesty after WWII?

Ethics? Like when the federal government contemplated blowing a commercial airliner out of the sky and blaming it on Castro to invade Cuba?

Ethics? Like injecting unsuspecting and non-consenting African Americans with syphillis?

Ethics has no place in government. Never has, and never will.



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 12:35 PM
link   
a reply to: James1982

I'm not going to hyperbole all over the place with comparisons that are ridiculous.

Public Defender Defends Client - - - that's the job.

Very simple.

You don't like how the justice system is set up? That's another thread.



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 01:39 PM
link   
a reply to: redhorse

Humor and Mental Health: Using Humor to Cope with Stress



My laugh was inappropriate, and for that I apologize. But it was a necessity. I laughed, nominally, at a corny joke. It's no secret that hospital people seem to enjoy warped humor . . . we're often too morbid: burned patients become crispy critters; Vietnam casualties were Jungle-Burgers. It's not pleasant. Neither is hospital work, at times . . . www.nurseslearning.com...



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 02:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: redhorse

Humor and Mental Health: Using Humor to Cope with Stress



My laugh was inappropriate, and for that I apologize. But it was a necessity. I laughed, nominally, at a corny joke. It's no secret that hospital people seem to enjoy warped humor . . . we're often too morbid: burned patients become crispy critters; Vietnam casualties were Jungle-Burgers. It's not pleasant. Neither is hospital work, at times . . . www.nurseslearning.com...


It's still illegal and unethical, no matter how they want to justify it, or you for that matter. You are full of it and have no ethical compass what so ever.



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 02:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: redhorse

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: redhorse

Humor and Mental Health: Using Humor to Cope with Stress



My laugh was inappropriate, and for that I apologize. But it was a necessity. I laughed, nominally, at a corny joke. It's no secret that hospital people seem to enjoy warped humor . . . we're often too morbid: burned patients become crispy critters; Vietnam casualties were Jungle-Burgers. It's not pleasant. Neither is hospital work, at times . . . www.nurseslearning.com...


It's still illegal and unethical, no matter how they want to justify it, or you for that matter. You are full of it and have no ethical compass what so ever.


I'm full of it because you don't like it?



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 02:55 PM
link   
The saddest part about this episode, in my view, is not Clinton laughing about it 10 years later (which is bad enough), but the reporting that she slandered this girl (at the time). Part of her defence was to try and position this 12yr old as somehow responsible.


Clinton accused Shelton of 'seeking out older men' in the case and demanded that she undergo a grueling court-ordered psychiatric examination


This is just another example of what we already know. Clinton is for no one but herself and she will do and say anything to reach her goals.
edit on 13/8/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 04:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: RomeByFire
a reply to: James1982

Ethics? Really going to go there?

If one possesses any sort of ethical/moral standard, one would never get close to becoming POTUS.

Ethics? You mean like when the federal government granted Nazis amnesty after WWII?

Ethics? Like when the federal government contemplated blowing a commercial airliner out of the sky and blaming it on Castro to invade Cuba?

Ethics? Like injecting unsuspecting and non-consenting African Americans with syphillis?

Ethics has no place in government. Never has, and never will.


Our government is scum. They have been for a long time. Probably back to the founding of the nation.

Yet you people keep defending them and wanting them in power. I just don't get it.



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 04:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: James1982

I'm not going to hyperbole all over the place with comparisons that are ridiculous.

Public Defender Defends Client - - - that's the job.

Very simple.

You don't like how the justice system is set up? That's another thread.


I have problems with the justice system but I don't disagree that all people deserve representation. What I'm saying is that people who are wiling to represent bad people are compromised, and I don't want them controlling my country.

It's very simple indeed, no hyperbole necessary. None of these issues exist in a vacuum, everything is connected and you can't just narrow your focus on singular issues or you miss the bigger picture.
edit on 13-8-2016 by James1982 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 04:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: James1982

originally posted by: Annee
a reply to: James1982

I'm not going to hyperbole all over the place with comparisons that are ridiculous.

Public Defender Defends Client - - - that's the job.

Very simple.

You don't like how the justice system is set up? That's another thread.


I have problems with the justice system but I don't disagree that all people deserve representation. What I'm saying is that people who are wiling to represent bad people are compromised, and I don't want them controlling my country.

It's very simple indeed, no hyperbole necessary. None of these issues exist in a vacuum, everything is connected and you can't just narrow your focus on singular issues or you miss the bigger picture.


I agree with this - absolving someone on the basis that 'they were just doing their job' is wrong.
Clinton could have turned this case down and left it to another person, but in this case she took it and showed she cares more about her career, money and power than the life of a child. Her tactics during the case just reveal her to be heartless at a level you rarely see in any human being.
edit on 13/8/2016 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 07:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

Clinton could have turned this case down and left it to another person, but in this case she took it and showed she cares more about her career, money and power than the life of a child.


Would you expect a male lawyer to turn it down? Someone had to defend this client. It's the law. Of course it's about career, money, and power. Duh!

Business/career is not about emotional decisions. It's about business/career decisions.

It's archaic & old fashion to expect a career woman to put compassion, because it's a female/child, ahead of her client/career.

I'm the same age as Hillary. I know how tough it's been for career women our age to have established themselves in basically a "man's world".

It would have been career suicide to turn down cases or reject cases involving females/child.

And BTW I've been raped and my daughters were molested. (Fortunately, just touching).

I stand behind Hillary defending her client. She was a Public Defender. That was her job. She did her job.


edit on 13-8-2016 by Annee because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 08:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: UKTruth

Clinton could have turned this case down and left it to another person, but in this case she took it and showed she cares more about her career, money and power than the life of a child.


Would you expect a male lawyer to turn it down? Someone had to defend this client. It's the law. Of course it's about career, money, and power. Duh!

Business/career is not about emotional decisions. It's about business/career decisions.

It's archaic & old fashion to expect a career woman to put compassion, because it's a female/child, ahead of her client/career.

I'm the same age as Hillary. I know how tough it's been for career women our age to have established themselves in basically a "man's world".

It would have been career suicide to turn down cases or reject cases involving females/child.

And BTW I've been raped and my daughters were molested. (Fortunately, just touching).

I stand behind Hillary defending her client. She was a Public Defender. That was her job. She did her job.



Yes i would. If I knew the guy was guilty I would turn it down.
Sometimes doing the right thing is more important than money.
The fact that she is a woman does not give her special dispensation to do the things she did. Forget even taking the case in the first place, the fact she accused a 12 yr old girl, just raped violently, of 'seeking out older men' tells you all you need to know about Hillary Clinton.



posted on Aug, 13 2016 @ 09:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: UKTruth

Clinton could have turned this case down and left it to another person, but in this case she took it and showed she cares more about her career, money and power than the life of a child.


Would you expect a male lawyer to turn it down? Someone had to defend this client. It's the law. Of course it's about career, money, and power. Duh!

Business/career is not about emotional decisions. It's about business/career decisions.

It's archaic & old fashion to expect a career woman to put compassion, because it's a female/child, ahead of her client/career.

I'm the same age as Hillary. I know how tough it's been for career women our age to have established themselves in basically a "man's world".

It would have been career suicide to turn down cases or reject cases involving females/child.

And BTW I've been raped and my daughters were molested. (Fortunately, just touching).

I stand behind Hillary defending her client. She was a Public Defender. That was her job. She did her job.



Yes i would. If I knew the guy was guilty I would turn it down.
Sometimes doing the right thing is more important than money.
The fact that she is a woman does not give her special dispensation to do the things she did. Forget even taking the case in the first place, the fact she accused a 12 yr old girl, just raped violently, of 'seeking out older men' tells you all you need to know about Hillary Clinton.


You're a guy, right?

And no, I do not believe you would have turned it down being a woman lawyer, in the south, in 1975, trying to build your career.

I've been in plenty of real situations, that prior to, in my mind "I just knew" exactly what I would do.

REAL WORLD WON.

What you think you would do, is probably not what you would really do in the real experience.



posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 06:44 AM
link   
if i had been there and been a male lawyer offered to defend the pedo..i would have declined the offer. would not have ruined my career, nor would it have done so to any female lawyer. perhaps at the worst a minor setback if it was viewed negatively. however since it seems the clinton machine has owned the media forever, clinton would have had an avenue to have her say if it had been something that was negative for her career trajectory.
edit on 14-8-2016 by CaDreamer because: typo



posted on Aug, 14 2016 @ 07:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: UKTruth

Clinton could have turned this case down and left it to another person, but in this case she took it and showed she cares more about her career, money and power than the life of a child.


Would you expect a male lawyer to turn it down? Someone had to defend this client. It's the law. Of course it's about career, money, and power. Duh!

Business/career is not about emotional decisions. It's about business/career decisions.

It's archaic & old fashion to expect a career woman to put compassion, because it's a female/child, ahead of her client/career.

I'm the same age as Hillary. I know how tough it's been for career women our age to have established themselves in basically a "man's world".

It would have been career suicide to turn down cases or reject cases involving females/child.

And BTW I've been raped and my daughters were molested. (Fortunately, just touching).

I stand behind Hillary defending her client. She was a Public Defender. That was her job. She did her job.



Yes i would. If I knew the guy was guilty I would turn it down.
Sometimes doing the right thing is more important than money.
The fact that she is a woman does not give her special dispensation to do the things she did. Forget even taking the case in the first place, the fact she accused a 12 yr old girl, just raped violently, of 'seeking out older men' tells you all you need to know about Hillary Clinton.


You're a guy, right?

And no, I do not believe you would have turned it down being a woman lawyer, in the south, in 1975, trying to build your career.

I've been in plenty of real situations, that prior to, in my mind "I just knew" exactly what I would do.

REAL WORLD WON.

What you think you would do, is probably not what you would really do in the real experience.





Yes, I am.
The 'real' world does not, and will never, force me or persuade me to accuse a 12yr old rape victim of 'seeking out older men'. It's that simple.



new topics

top topics



 
90
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join