CNN Host Cuts Off Interview After Guest Mentions Hillary’s Defense Of Child Rapist

So what do we have here?

In 1975 Hillary Clinton performed her legal duty and defended an accused criminal.

That individual received a reduced sentence due to the fact that the investigation had been badly, badly bungled.

Hillary Clinton, before and after, has been very clear about her role in the matter.

What difference, at this point, does this make?

originally posted by: Konduit
The last few months should scream volumes about how biased and controlled the mainstream media really is.

They completely ignore Sanders and engage in nothing but 24/7 Trump bashing while squelching any opposition to their golden goose.

If either of these candidates had as much dirt on them as Clinton or Cruz you wouldn't hear the end of it, guaranteed.

a reply to: Gryphon66

The difference is that we are not allowed to talk about it... or did you completely miss the point of this thread?

originally posted by: Konduit
a reply to: Gryphon66

The difference is that we are not allowed to talk about it... or did you completely miss the point of this thread?

No, I haven't missed any point of this thread and ... not to put too fine a point on this, of course you're "allowed" to talk about it ... aren't we on Page 5 at the moment?



This thread is about dredging up anything and everything that might seem inimical to Hillary Clinton.

She did her job in 1975. Next?

a reply to: Gryphon66

Yes, she clearly did her job in the 70's. Try going on a MSM program and explaining this. Next?

a reply to: Indigo5

Haha wow.

How am I hypocritical? She is evil.... You are not even going to try to understand people don't care about that she got a guy off from rapist charges...it's how she brags about it.

That is damn near the definition of evil.

But like I said, spin away, as you only snipped the last part of what I said because you have no rebuttal to her evilness. I understand.

a reply to: Aazadan

No... You answer the question and move on, not smile about it, chuckle, and be the devil she is.

How can one be bragadocious about this topic. And the point you made about her probably not agreeing with it... That's the thing, she doesn't seem that way. In fact the exact opposite. Is that the characteristic of a president you want to have?

That is the point of the thread...are the people here just not understanding because they don't want to? Ugh.

I don't care what side of the political spectrum a person is on, I will judge them equally.

a reply to: GraffikPleasure

It's a characteristic I don't care about. She had a job to do and she did it well. I don't see an issue with taking pride in that. It's not the only time that side of her has been on display, she did the same thing with her laughing over Gadaffi.

What I don't want is a President who runs from their past and tries to frame it in the context of modern political expectations. Times change, people change. What matters is how that event was considered when it was current.

a reply to: Aazadan

Unfortunately for Hillary, it is still current in context of her character.

I guess we shall agree to disagree.

If you think it is OK of a prospective president to laugh about getting a rapist off on a technicality and others close, as well as in her own party say she's dirty and fired her, I wonder about your character.

Hopefully she nor Trump are our country's next leader

originally posted by: Konduit
a reply to: Gryphon66

Yes, she clearly did her job in the 70's. Try going on a MSM program and explaining this. Next?

REKT

I think I am going to need to fact check this one.

Hillary Fired for Lies, Unethical Behavior from Congressional Job: Former Boss

As Hillary Clinton came under increasing scrutiny for her story about facing sniper fire in Bosnia, one question that arose was whether she has engaged in a pattern of lying.

and why was she fired...

“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

Some posts on there claim "Snopes" proved it to be false, I do not know much about that site however.

First and foremost, I don't support Clinton. To be honest, I don't like any of them and the US is going to end up with another jacked up President either way. I sure as hell don't want Trump in the WH either. But looking at this objectively, she was his lawyer and was doing her job, and if anybody here was ever accused of a crime, guilty or not, they'd want a lawyer to do the same. Calling this particular blast nothing more than political rhetoric.

a reply to: JonStone

Her doing her job is one thing. Nobody really cares about.

Laughing about it and bragging that you got a child rapist off on a technicality is what is being discussed. Her character is atrocious.

a reply to: UnBreakable

Hillary is in the lime light, there will be stories told, some true, some twisted, some completely made up.

originally posted by: Konduit
a reply to: Gryphon66

Yes, she clearly did her job in the 70's. Try going on a MSM program and explaining this. Next?

Unfortunately, this is false.
.... which shouldn't come as a surprise considering it's a meme. Lol.

originally posted by: Konduit
a reply to: Gryphon66

Yes, she clearly did her job in the 70's. Try going on a MSM program and explaining this. Next?

I am curious as you didn't provide a link to that image?

The font looks recent?

At first glance it looks like someone constructed the image to appear as a scan of an old article ...black and white image with the white tone faded to look like old newspaper print...when in fact it is a BS construction meant to fool people into believing the same?

Can you help me out and provide some context?

a reply to: Snarl

Listen, I really really dislike Hilary...but let's be clear about that tape.

She said she had him do a polygraph which he passed. So she THOUGHT she was defending an innocent man. LATER, after he got off, she realized he was guilty and her faith in polygraphs has been forever destroyed.

Further proof that the MSM fully supports and protects Hillary. Trump is nothing more than a distraction to over shadow Clinton' shameful record domestically and abroad.

Someone should locate the poor girl Clinton vilified and see if she'll provide a video testimony so the world can hear her side of the story. Might just be the final nail in that wenches coffin... or at least for her campaign.

originally posted by: BIGPoJo

originally posted by: Konduit
a reply to: Gryphon66

Yes, she clearly did her job in the 70's. Try going on a MSM program and explaining this. Next?

REKT

I think I am going to need to fact check this one.

Hillary Fired for Lies, Unethical Behavior from Congressional Job: Former Boss

As Hillary Clinton came under increasing scrutiny for her story about facing sniper fire in Bosnia, one question that arose was whether she has engaged in a pattern of lying.

and why was she fired...

“Because she was a liar,” Zeifman said in an interview last week. “She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”

Some posts on there claim "Snopes" proved it to be false, I do not know much about that site however.

Snopes is Bullsh$t! It's a couple that googles....horsesh$t!

originally posted by: jimmyx
well, if it's from Newsmax, told by a Trump political surrogate, it has to be true right?......the word gullible comes to mind, but, I digress.

Actually it's True She helped get a child rapist off and She bragged about it on a interview. If You would actually look for it You can find the recording online but then again I guess You would rather call people ignorant and stupid.

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: UnBreakable

If she's on tape, then the truth will come out.

But it won't matter to the democrats.

Hahaha that's the point She is on tape and it's been available online for a while now. I think You have to much faith in the system though because this will never come out. The people in power want presidents that can be black mailed easily and can be controlled. You will never see a honest man run and win the presidency ever again. Remember JFK He was the last honest president We had that wanted to help the American people. Reagan started out wanting to clean up the government but when someone tried to kill Him He changed His tune real quick.