Did Bill Clinton sexually assault women?

ISWYDT

Fuck you, pederast.

I was only commenting on your poor spelling.

Either you're too stupid to go back and fix typos or you're too stupid to notice them in the first place.

Or you're dumber than your phone.

I just haven't spent much time here lately but often, yes, I do go back and fix the typos.

BTW it you guys in eliteforge who have been defending pederasty lately.

Interesting choice by shootER, pederast rather than the tried & true pedophile.

The road less traveled, I suppose......

I recently used the term on Anna when she defended the Afghan hobby of ass raping six year old boys. ShootER is just biting my style.

You have no style, fucknut.

I think you meant 'Well paid'...

WTF, cock sucker?

Get off the crack rocks.

I'm thinking it's bath salts myself.

A pretty fair overview of that charges against him:

http://www.vox.com/2016/1/6/10722580/bill-clinton-juanita-broaddrick

From all I've read, Broaddarick makes a credible case, but one might quibble over whether it was one of those cases where the arrogant man assumes consent that she doesn't feel, or didn't feel after it started, that she'd offered. This was in 1978 and the problem - which is still quite bad - of that sort of male assumption (i.e. rape culture) was much worse then than now. Not to excuse it AT ALL if it happened, but to say that he likely did not perceive it as rape, or himself a rapist. Just the arrogant privilege of a powerful man - just what Trump was speaking of (and has been accused of himself). However, her "Hillary threatened me" claim is much much weaker.

Willey's story has a ton of problems and lacks credibility. Particularly in that it was claimed to have occurred just as he was gearing up to run for the presidency and whatever else he is, he's not stupid. The whole claim that they murdered her husband ON THE SAME DAY that she claims to have been groped puts her in wingnut territory.

Jones is similarly difficult to believe, notably in that she described his penis differently than it actually is.

There are no other named accusers I'm aware of. So I lean towards thinking it's more likely than not that Broaddrick isn't lying - the others don't seem credible. No one can say how much may have happened that has never been uncovered so it's irrelevant to the question.

LOL, vox.com

With a recently new phone, I've developed a bit of the Dinner problem. I swear it waits until I hit the reply to thread button before it changes some of the words. And the changes are often incredibly stupid. I would turn it off, but unfortunately I'm a pretty bad speller, so I need the help when it works. I do miss the way my old phone handled it, though. which was that it underlined misspelled words without changing them. Then I would see it, could fix it, or alternatively choose not to fix it. Mewa would never end up as Mesa in that system.

Vox isn't by any means a paragon of journalism, and it seems to lean left, but I don't think that account is a whitewash for the Clinton's. It seems pretty respectful to the charges IMO

If you look at the claims of any of Cosby's accusers you can find much the same. The problem is the long line of women with similar stories, plus so many with nightmare stories about Hillary.

Vox misses the point entirely. Trump isn't pointing out that Bill Clinton raped women.

He's calling attention to the fact that Hillary threatened, smeared, and targeted the victims.

Her approach was consistent and systematic. She referred to the project as "Bimbo Eruptions." She hired PIs to harass and intimidate the bimbos. She even used state apparatus to target the families.

^Willfully misleading propaganda.

Probably, is Bill Clinton running for office?

except there's not a long line.

ONE alleged rape
ONE alleged grope (from a very low-credibility accuser)
ONE accusation of indecent exposure/attempted seduction

That's not a long line, and there's little if any objective support for the notion that Hillary threatened or harmed any of the accusers.

For which there's no evidence.

Lack of evidence doesn't mean a crime wasn't committed, just saying.

And those are just the ones who were brave enough to come forward. Given how Hillary would send PI's to threaten and intimidate Bill's victims, there are undoubtedly many, many more.

There's plenty of evidence. Were you young in the nineties? The Bimbo Eruptions campaign was reported by the MSM back then. It was compelling TV. The press was a little freer.

The problem I have with broaddrick is that her story just does not cover my doubts. First off her evidence she was forced is a fat lip. She is up for cheating on her husband, and we know this because one of the witnesses to that injury is the guy she is having an affair with. She called Bill to her room, and no one saw him in the hotel. That might be because they were both married and were going to sleep together so he was discreet in entering the hotel. She claims she invited him to her room because reporters were around, but none of them saw him. Then she claims Bill told Hillary enough about the incident that Hillary thanked her for her silence. It just does not add up. If they were not seen together why would Bill tell hillary? We know he lied about sleeping with Lewinsky so why is he going to tell hillary about this?

I do not trust the source because you could find a private place to have a chat if that was all you wanted to do. I think he had sex with her and it was consensual. I think the rape story came about because she was cheating on her husband. That makes a lot more sense than Bill just raped her in the hotel room and all she got to show for it was a swollen lip.

So I guess believing rape victims is totally out the window now. Instead we'll dissect them on the stand and teach them not to dare impugn powerful men's reputations.

You get your information from sources that are known to make shit up and twist things. Also your sources are opportunistic and dislike women so much they would gladly take advantage of them for their stories that support their narrative. No one can take these claims seriously because of your reputation and the rep of your sources. You and your sources are not credible. You will need to do better.

Yes you have to question the honesty of the accuser. Under your logic I could say you raped me and no one should doubt me at all.

Which is why Bill Cosby should never face prosecution. Unless there is something more than 200 accusers, you just know every one of them is probably working an angle.