Meet the Real Hillary Clinton

[Moonglow]

The Right would have been deliriously happy if the townsfolk had simply dispensed with a trial and got out their torches and pitchforks, and lynched him. That was, after all, the way things were done in the deep South when I was growing up. So sad to see the Right pineing for the good ole days....

There have been several cases of vigilante attacks on perps, castrating them..

Small potatoes in comparison to what will happen to those perps in hell.

God's special place that is used to scare little kids and feeble adults...

Hell has no terror for me. I have survived four wives, and three mother-in-laws.

Three wives for me and 5 step dads.....I'm too tired anymore to fear a cartoon character...

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

The Right would have been deliriously happy if the townsfolk had simply dispensed with a trial and got out their torches and pitchforks, and lynched him. That was, after all, the way things were done in the deep South when I was growing up. So sad to see the Right pineing for the good ole days....

There have been several cases of vigilante attacks on perps, castrating them..

Small potatoes in comparison to what will happen to those perps in hell.

God's special place that is used to scare little kids and feeble adults...

Hell has no terror for me. I have survived four wives, and three mother-in-laws.

Three wives for me and 5 step dads.....I'm too tired anymore to fear a cartoon character...

Satan isn't a cartoon character although he certainly enjoys using them incognito. No place like hiding in plain sight.......right, Bart?

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

The Right would have been deliriously happy if the townsfolk had simply dispensed with a trial and got out their torches and pitchforks, and lynched him. That was, after all, the way things were done in the deep South when I was growing up. So sad to see the Right pineing for the good ole days....

There have been several cases of vigilante attacks on perps, castrating them..

Small potatoes in comparison to what will happen to those perps in hell.

God's special place that is used to scare little kids and feeble adults...

Hell has no terror for me. I have survived four wives, and three mother-in-laws.

How do you know? You have yet to go there! My advice? Stop now and repent of your sins, call on the Lord Jesus Christ and be saved.

 

[The Professor]

What should she have done ? Throw the case ? Then you'd say she ha no integrity and betrayed her oath to represent her client .

Blame the DA . If you really care . But you don't , you just want to slander HILLARY .

Slander only happens if it is not true.

So what should she have done ?

Slandering the victim is not how an ethical attorney defends a client. Hillary accused the 12 year old victim of having a history of falsely accusing men of sexual assault, even though she had no evidence on which to base that. She even laughed about knowing the man was guilty, yet she still attacked the child's credibility.

Good point.

Lawyers are not supposed to lie to get a client acquitted and can be punished by the Bar when they do. All I can say is what I was taught in ethics class in law school. If a lawyer knows his client is guilty (let's say the client admits it) the lawyer may still represent him. However, the lawyer can not tell the jury the client is innocent, nor can the lawyer allow his client to testify and lie on the stand. The lawyer may attack the evidence anyway he can, and may strongly assert that the State has failed to prove its case; however he cannot tell the jury that his client did not commit the crime.

For example, the lawyer may say, “The evidence fails to establish the defendant had a motive for killing Mr. Brown. In fact, the evidence fails to show that the defendant was anywhere near Mr. Brown's house the night he was murdered. You have taken an oath to base your decision on the evidence regardless of how you may personally feel about the defendant, and based upon the evidence you must return a verdict of not guilty.” The attorney, however, cannot say, “The defendant did not murder Mr Brown. He had no motive for killing him and he was nowhere near Mr. Brown the night he was killed. I ask you to find the defendant not guilty.”

Attorneys are not supposed to lie for any reason and that includes getting her client acquitted. This is part of the code of ethical conduct for attorneys; however, I know that there are those attorneys who violate this code.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

The Right would have been deliriously happy if the townsfolk had simply dispensed with a trial and got out their torches and pitchforks, and lynched him. That was, after all, the way things were done in the deep South when I was growing up. So sad to see the Right pineing for the good ole days....

There have been several cases of vigilante attacks on perps, castrating them..

Small potatoes in comparison to what will happen to those perps in hell.

God's special place that is used to scare little kids and feeble adults...

Hell has no terror for me. I have survived four wives, and three mother-in-laws.

Three wives for me and 5 step dads.....I'm too tired anymore to fear a cartoon character...

Others have had it worse than you have, didn't hear the gospel preached for four years and they STILL called upon the LORD and were saved. When you face God? You'll have no excuse, MG. NONE!

 

[Moonglow]

There have been several cases of vigilante attacks on perps, castrating them..

Small potatoes in comparison to what will happen to those perps in hell.

God's special place that is used to scare little kids and feeble adults...

Hell has no terror for me. I have survived four wives, and three mother-in-laws.

Three wives for me and 5 step dads.....I'm too tired anymore to fear a cartoon character...

Others have had it worse than you have, didn't hear the gospel preached for four years and they STILL called upon the LORD and were saved. When you face God? You'll have no excuse, MG. NONE!

What-ever...

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

What should she have done ? Throw the case ? Then you'd say she ha no integrity and betrayed her oath to represent her client .

Blame the DA . If you really care . But you don't , you just want to slander HILLARY .

Slander only happens if it is not true.

So what should she have done ?

Slandering the victim is not how an ethical attorney defends a client. Hillary accused the 12 year old victim of having a history of falsely accusing men of sexual assault, even though she had no evidence on which to base that. She even laughed about knowing the man was guilty, yet she still attacked the child's credibility.

Good point.

Lawyers are not supposed to lie to get a client acquitted and can be punished by the Bar when they do. All I can say is what I was taught in ethics class in law school. If a lawyer knows his client is guilty (let's say the client admits it) the lawyer may still represent him. However, the lawyer can not tell the jury the client is innocent, nor can the lawyer allow his client to testify and lie on the stand. The lawyer may attack the evidence anyway he can, and may strongly assert that the State has failed to prove its case; however he cannot tell the jury that his client did not commit the crime.

For example, the lawyer may say, “The evidence fails to establish the defendant had a motive for killing Mr. Brown. In fact, the evidence fails to show that the defendant was anywhere near Mr. Brown's house the night he was murdered. You have taken an oath to base your decision on the evidence regardless of how you may personally feel about the defendant, and based upon the evidence you must return a verdict of not guilty.” The attorney, however, cannot say, “The defendant did not murder Mr Brown. He had no motive for killing him and he was nowhere near Mr. Brown the night he was killed. I ask you to find the defendant not guilty.”

Attorneys are not supposed to lie for any reason and that includes getting her client acquitted. This is part of the code of ethical conduct for attorneys; however, I know that there are those attorneys who violate this code.

Thank you, Professor. Hopefully Flopper is reading this.

 

[Book of Jeremiah]

Small potatoes in comparison to what will happen to those perps in hell.

God's special place that is used to scare little kids and feeble adults...

Hell has no terror for me. I have survived four wives, and three mother-in-laws.

Three wives for me and 5 step dads.....I'm too tired anymore to fear a cartoon character...

Others have had it worse than you have, didn't hear the gospel preached for four years and they STILL called upon the LORD and were saved. When you face God? You'll have no excuse, MG. NONE!

What-ever...

I have a feeling you'll be hearing that word throughout eternity and wishing to God you had not been so flippant about your eternal destiny, MG.

 

[rightwinger]

If there is a hotter place in hell, Hillary Clinton will be there.

You don't appreciate how our judicial system works?

 

[edthecynic]

Satan isn't a cartoon character although he certainly enjoys using them incognito. No place like hiding in plain sight.......right, Bart?

YOUR Satan exists by the hand of YOUR evil God!

 

[Moonglow]

What should she have done ? Throw the case ? Then you'd say she ha no integrity and betrayed her oath to represent her client .

Blame the DA . If you really care . But you don't , you just want to slander HILLARY .

Slander only happens if it is not true.

So what should she have done ?

Slandering the victim is not how an ethical attorney defends a client. Hillary accused the 12 year old victim of having a history of falsely accusing men of sexual assault, even though she had no evidence on which to base that. She even laughed about knowing the man was guilty, yet she still attacked the child's credibility.

Good point.

Lawyers are not supposed to lie to get a client acquitted and can be punished by the Bar when they do. All I can say is what I was taught in ethics class in law school. If a lawyer knows his client is guilty (let's say the client admits it) the lawyer may still represent him. However, the lawyer can not tell the jury the client is innocent, nor can the lawyer allow his client to testify and lie on the stand. The lawyer may attack the evidence anyway he can, and may strongly assert that the State has failed to prove its case; however he cannot tell the jury that his client did not commit the crime.

For example, the lawyer may say, “The evidence fails to establish the defendant had a motive for killing Mr. Brown. In fact, the evidence fails to show that the defendant was anywhere near Mr. Brown's house the night he was murdered. You have taken an oath to base your decision on the evidence regardless of how you may personally feel about the defendant, and based upon the evidence you must return a verdict of not guilty.” The attorney, however, cannot say, “The defendant did not murder Mr Brown. He had no motive for killing him and he was nowhere near Mr. Brown the night he was killed. I ask you to find the defendant not guilty.”

Attorneys are not supposed to lie for any reason and that includes getting her client acquitted. This is part of the code of ethical conduct for attorneys; however, I know that there are those attorneys who violate this code.

No one has established that Hillary knew he was guilty before or while defending him...

 

[Flopper]

Where does Politifact deny that Hillary attacked the victim?

"
Clinton mounted a vigorous defensethat included discrediting the child victim’s story by writing in an affidavit that the girl was "emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men" and had made "false accusations" in the past. The victim told Thrush in 2008 and the Daily Beast that Clinton made that up. But investigators in the case also found inconsistencies in the victim’s story, according to Thrush’s reporting.

Those details didn’t make it into Clinton’s memoir Living History or her recollections of the case in the newly released interview. She does note that the defendant passed a lie-detector test — "which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs," she said in the 1980s — and she said the prosecution botched one of the most important pieces of evidence, Taylor’s blood-stained underwear. She called it a "terrible case.""

Did Hillary Clinton ask to be 'relieved' from representing an accused rapist in 1970s?

Looks like they did, but it also looks like it was her job to do it. It was her job to defend her client.

Defense attorneys are ethically and legally bound to zealously represent all clients, the guilty as well as the innocent. It matters not how terrible the crime nor the belief of the attorney in the guilt or innocent of the accused. As Sir Thomas Moore said before going to the scaffold, "I'd give the devil the benefit of law, for mine own safety's sake." A vigorous defense is necessary to protect the innocent and to ensure that judges and citizens and not the police have the ultimate power to decide who is guilty of a crime.

Wrong. Read up. Ethics is obviously not your forte', Flopper.

http://www.lsuc.on.ca/media/sith_colloquium_asimow_michael.pdf

So are you saying she should have refused to defend the person?

Had you read the entire article you'd know the answer to that question.

I have not only read your link but I'm familiar with the adversarial position argument. For a defense attorney not to offer his client the best defense he can provide is unethical. It is not the job of defense attorneys to decide on the guilt or innocence of their client. If he or she believes a client is guilty and offers less than a best effort defense, then the attorney is not only robbing the client of a fair trial but is taking the decision of guilt or innocent away from the jury. The only way our judicial works is if both the prosecution and the defense do their best to prosecute or defend the accused, leaving the decision of guilt or innocents to the jury.

 

[Dot Com]

The Right would have been deliriously happy if the townsfolk had simply dispensed with a trial and got out their torches and pitchforks, and lynched him. That was, after all, the way things were done in the deep South when I was growing up. So sad to see the Right pineing for the good ole days....

There have been several cases of vigilante attacks on perps, castrating them..

Small potatoes in comparison to what will happen to those perps in hell.

God's special place that is used to scare little kids and feeble adults...

Hell has no terror for me. I have survived four wives, and three mother-in-laws.

How do you know? You have yet to go there! My advice? Stop now and repent of your sins, call on the Lord Jesus Christ and be saved.

If you had, you wouldn't be starting hack threads like this

 

[Moonglow]

41 years ago today in the town of Springdale, Arkansas, a horrific crime was committed against a 12-year-old girl. But it was the injustice that followed that has defined her life. This is the true story Hillary Clinton hoped you would never hear.



This is who Hillary Clinton is. It is high time the American people found out the truth about her. Trump was right. Hillary Clinton is a "different kind of evil." Hillary Clinton's mentor was Satanist George McGovern. (for the truth about McGovern look up John Todd testimony)

Please copy this video link and mass email it to everyone you know. Thank you.

It did not happen in Springdale, Ar., but in Washington county which is 20 miles away...

 

[Moonglow]

A ‘terrible’ case

In 1975, Thomas Alfred Taylor was charged with raping a 12-year-old girl in his pickup truck off a highway in Arkansas’ Washington County. Details of that night and the subsequent court proceedings were painstakingly reconstructed in 2008 by Glenn Thrush, then a reporter for Newsday and now with Politico.

While the girl willingly went for a ride with Taylor, she said she did not consent to sex and was later admitted to a hospital with injuries consistent with rape.

At his court hearing, Taylor asked for a woman to represent him. According to Thrush’s report, the county had just a "half-dozen" female attorneys available. A judge appointed Clinton, new to the South and looking to establish the University of Arkansas’ fledgling legal aid clinic, to the task.

Clinton mounted a vigorous defense that included discrediting the child victim’s story by writing in an affidavit that the girl was "emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men" and had made "false accusations" in the past. The victim told Thrush in 2008 and the Daily Beast that Clinton made that up. But investigators in the case also found inconsistencies in the victim’s story, according to Thrush’s reporting.

Those details didn’t make it into Clinton’s memoir Living History or her recollections of the case in the newly released interview. She does note that the defendant passed a lie-detector test — "which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs," she said in the 1980s — and she said the prosecution botched one of the most important pieces of evidence, Taylor’s blood-stained underwear. She called it a "terrible case."

Taylor, charged with first-degree rape, ultimately pleaded guilty to unlawful fondling of a minor. He died in 1992.
Did Hillary Clinton ask to be 'relieved' from representing an accused rapist in 1970s?

 

[Moonglow]

Now we see that the OP's attempt at character assassination with ecclesiastical condemnation of opposing view points did not tell all of the story...

 

[Moonglow]

There have been several cases of vigilante attacks on perps, castrating them..

Small potatoes in comparison to what will happen to those perps in hell.

God's special place that is used to scare little kids and feeble adults...

Hell has no terror for me. I have survived four wives, and three mother-in-laws.

How do you know? You have yet to go there! My advice? Stop now and repent of your sins, call on the Lord Jesus Christ and be saved.

If you had, you wouldn't be starting hack threads like this

One addiction to another.....

 

[The Professor]

"
Clinton mounted a vigorous defensethat included discrediting the child victim’s story by writing in an affidavit that the girl was "emotionally unstable with a tendency to seek out older men" and had made "false accusations" in the past. The victim told Thrush in 2008 and the Daily Beast that Clinton made that up. But investigators in the case also found inconsistencies in the victim’s story, according to Thrush’s reporting.

Those details didn’t make it into Clinton’s memoir Living History or her recollections of the case in the newly released interview. She does note that the defendant passed a lie-detector test — "which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs," she said in the 1980s — and she said the prosecution botched one of the most important pieces of evidence, Taylor’s blood-stained underwear. She called it a "terrible case.""

Did Hillary Clinton ask to be 'relieved' from representing an accused rapist in 1970s?

Looks like they did, but it also looks like it was her job to do it. It was her job to defend her client.

Defense attorneys are ethically and legally bound to zealously represent all clients, the guilty as well as the innocent. It matters not how terrible the crime nor the belief of the attorney in the guilt or innocent of the accused. As Sir Thomas Moore said before going to the scaffold, "I'd give the devil the benefit of law, for mine own safety's sake." A vigorous defense is necessary to protect the innocent and to ensure that judges and citizens and not the police have the ultimate power to decide who is guilty of a crime.

Wrong. Read up. Ethics is obviously not your forte', Flopper.

http://www.lsuc.on.ca/media/sith_colloquium_asimow_michael.pdf

So are you saying she should have refused to defend the person?

Had you read the entire article you'd know the answer to that question.

I have not only read your link but I'm familiar with the adversarial position argument. For a defense attorney not to offer his client the best defense he can provide is unethical. It is not the job of defense attorneys to decide on the guilt or innocence of their client. If he or she believes a client is guilty and offers less than a best effort defense, then the attorney is not only robbing the client of a fair trial but is taking the decision of guilt or innocent away from the jury. The only way our judicial works is if both the prosecution and the defense do their best to prosecute or defend the accused, leaving the decision of guilt or innocents to the jury.

Everything you assume is wrong. I have a Juris Doctorate from one of the best law schools in the State of Florida and what I told you is what I was taught, which is: The duty to aggressively defend a client does not include lying in court. Lying in court is a violation of the Code of Ethical Conduct for attorneys and judges and can result in punishment. Most attorneys get away with lying because no one finds out about it. Hillary was just plain stupid for admitting she knew her client was guilty.

PS: Here is a link for you. I gave you the first one I found because I don't have that much sand at the top of the hourglass and am not going to waste my time convincing you of what I know to be true.

Lawyer Thinks Client is Guilty: Does It Matter? Criminal Law Process | Nolo.com

 

[Vandalshandle]

The Right would have been deliriously happy if the townsfolk had simply dispensed with a trial and got out their torches and pitchforks, and lynched him. That was, after all, the way things were done in the deep South when I was growing up. So sad to see the Right pineing for the good ole days....

There have been several cases of vigilante attacks on perps, castrating them..

Small potatoes in comparison to what will happen to those perps in hell.

God's special place that is used to scare little kids and feeble adults...

Hell has no terror for me. I have survived four wives, and three mother-in-laws.

How do you know? You have yet to go there! My advice? Stop now and repent of your sins, call on the Lord Jesus Christ and be saved.

I sincerely attempt to restrain myself from personal remarks to you, in spite of the fact that I consider your faith repugnant. Please don't make that any harder than it already is by giving me sermons on hell.

 

[S.J.]

What should she have done ? Throw the case ? Then you'd say she ha no integrity and betrayed her oath to represent her client .

Blame the DA . If you really care . But you don't , you just want to slander HILLARY .

Slander only happens if it is not true.

So what should she have done ?

Slandering the victim is not how an ethical attorney defends a client. Hillary accused the 12 year old victim of having a history of falsely accusing men of sexual assault, even though she had no evidence on which to base that. She even laughed about knowing the man was guilty, yet she still attacked the child's credibility.

Good point.

Lawyers are not supposed to lie to get a client acquitted and can be punished by the Bar when they do. All I can say is what I was taught in ethics class in law school. If a lawyer knows his client is guilty (let's say the client admits it) the lawyer may still represent him. However, the lawyer can not tell the jury the client is innocent, nor can the lawyer allow his client to testify and lie on the stand. The lawyer may attack the evidence anyway he can, and may strongly assert that the State has failed to prove its case; however he cannot tell the jury that his client did not commit the crime.

For example, the lawyer may say, “The evidence fails to establish the defendant had a motive for killing Mr. Brown. In fact, the evidence fails to show that the defendant was anywhere near Mr. Brown's house the night he was murdered. You have taken an oath to base your decision on the evidence regardless of how you may personally feel about the defendant, and based upon the evidence you must return a verdict of not guilty.” The attorney, however, cannot say, “The defendant did not murder Mr Brown. He had no motive for killing him and he was nowhere near Mr. Brown the night he was killed. I ask you to find the defendant not guilty.”

Attorneys are not supposed to lie for any reason and that includes getting her client acquitted. This is part of the code of ethical conduct for attorneys; however, I know that there are those attorneys who violate this code.

No one has established that Hillary knew he was guilty before or while defending him...

She SAID she knew he was guilty, stupid.