Discussion: Victim Speaks: Hillary Clinton 'Lied Like A Dog' In Child Rape Case

Discussion for article #224155

The other side of Bundy’s victimhood and a house or two down the street from George Will’s anger and ignorance.


I smell more GOTP desperation…


…Clinton was appointed to the case and “had an ethical and legal obligation to defend (her client) to the fullest extent of the law.”

Too many people don’t understand how our legal system operates. They think that if the defendant is probably a bad person, or even if the defense attorney thinks he might be guilty, then the attorney should just “phone it in” and present a weak defense, with a wink and a nod towards the jury.

That’s not how it’s supposed to work.




Lawyer does job. News at 11.

Can’t wait for them to start digging this same stuff about Christie. They’ll be doing that, right?


" then the attorney should just “phone it in” and present a weak defense, with a wink and a nod towards the jury."

Which besides running the very real risk of getting the attorney disbarred, opens wide the door for appeal.

The victim’s issue should be with the prosecution, who failed to present a compelling enough case. But the prosecutor isn’t running for President, so the payday for bad mouthing him/her isn’t nearly as big.


Look, what happened to this girl is awful, and I understand why she would be frustrated, but what I don’t get is why Republicans think it is a good idea to attack someone for being a criminal defense lawyer. I don’t see why the media would even interview the victim in the first place when its clear the entire purpose is to try and hold a defense attorney responsible for a criminals actions. It sounds like Clinton worked hard to do her job, which was defending a criminal. Of course that can be taken out of context and twisted around to make her look bad, but having criminal defense attorneys who actually work for their clients is an important part of our constitution and our criminal justice system.


So Hillary “lied like a dog.” What lie did she tell?


Not a fair critique of HRC, she was just doing her work.

A defence layer should defend his or her client as if the client is innocent - and let the judge pass judgement alone.

The defence layer may - or may not - believe the client is innocent, but should present the clients as innocent to the court, anything else would be a miscarriage of justice and subject to abuse.


If the GOP has to go back to 1975, they are essentially waiving the white flag on 2016.



Daily Beast. Rote Hillary insults. Undergirding belief that Hillary is evil incarnate.



There’s a typo in your phrase “criminal defense lawyer.” It should read “woman criminal defense lawyer.” Democrat may also be correct.


The percentage of the population that is completely clueless about how our criminal justice system works approximately equals the percentage of the population that votes Republican.


what I don’t get is why Republicans think it is a good idea to attack someone for being a criminal defense lawyer.

They think it’s a good idea because it could be incredibly effective against Hillary. I mean, that gloating interview she gave about it back in the day is just damning stuff to any non-lawyer. She seems really disconnected, in a clueless twentysomething of privilege way, from the consequences of her work. She’s basically glowing: “Can you believe I got a child rapist off the hook? Damn, I’m good!” And the trouble is that 1.) this nicely reinforces the GOP’s plan of attacking her as a clueless DC bubble-world insider totally out of touch with the pain real 'Murkins are feeling, and 2.) it really could blunt her appeal to women.

If I was her PR peeps, I’d have her talk about how she was really inwardly pretty traumatized by the case, felt horrible for the girl, and was papering over those emotions with her brave talk in that interview, when she was, after all, a clueless twentysomething. And that she had a job to do as a criminal defense lawyer and she did it well, but that fact is really secondary here. It’s nauseating stuff.


The defense attorney does their job. That is what they are supposed to do. How pray tell did Mrs. Clinton 'lie on her"??? She was doing what she had to do. When she took her oath she swore to defend her client to the full extent of the law. That is what she did, what any lawyer worth their weight in salt would do. The GOP is desperate if they are dragging a case out of the 70’s to dirty up Hillary Clinton. What’s next…a picture of Hillary cleaning the lint out of Bills navel??? Ridiculous.


Newsday reported in 2008 that the victim said at the time that she was “sure Hillary was just doing her job.” But in her new interview with the Daily Beast, the victim said she was misquoted and didn’t understand the full scope of Clinton’s involvement in the case.*

With no prompting from outside influences at all I’m sure. How can you go from she’s just doing her job, to she lied like a dog in eight years? Seems like your memory gets worse with time not better.


She was assigned the case as a public defender. Should she have quit her job? Everyone is allowed their day in court. The case was tried why does this person not move on? I would bet that both sides lied some.


You know who else was just doing their work!?!!?!

Hillary Clinton did her job as a defense attorney, and unfortunately, that means using tactics that most people would find repugnant. That the GOP is making a big deal out of this is not surprising. But I find it truly interesting that so many are supporting her here on criminal defense, but attack her so quickly, or worse yet giver her a pass, on her corporate legal work for Wal-Mart or Whitewater.

Hillary Clinton is the consummate politician, and always has been. She knows what the stakes are and she used this same kind of acumen to build a legal career. She is not above slinging mud at her opponents, in case any of you have forgotten the attack job she did on Obama’s minister or her comments about assassination during the primaries. If you think she would be a good presidential candidate for the Democrats, then support her, but do not whitewash her.

I do not like her, and the control she and her husband have over the Democrats is why I left the party. I am a registered Independent and have been since 2008, but frankly, unless the Dems start trying to find someone stronger than HRC for 2016 this nation is in serious trouble. We do not have dynasties in our country, yet, but between the Bushes and the Clintons there seems to be a strong drive to create them. That Hillary seems incapable of making policy decisions without her husband’s help makes her unfit for the Presidency. The fact that she is a liar, a manipulator of the worst kind, and a corporate lackey are just a few of the ways she fails to impress me. I do not think this revelation is good, but in her world, it is a minor thing and that speaks volumes about her.