Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Is Hillary Clinton’s conduct as a young attorney fair game?
The Volokh Conspiracy ^ | June 20, 2014 | Jonathan H. Adler

Posted on 06/22/2014 8:54:57 AM PDT by right-wing agnostic

Successfully defending a criminal defendant is nothing for Clinton to be ashamed of, so long as her conduct was ethical.

(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...


TOPICS: History
KEYWORDS: noob
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 last
To: right-wing agnostic

Blame the 13 year old girl for being a slut and provoking the rape and beating. While it has been used by other lawyers in other rape cases, this is the first recorded use of “Feminist” H Clinton’s “sluts and nuts” strategy. Establishes a pattern of HC’s behavior. Hell yes its fair game.


41 posted on 06/22/2014 10:26:44 AM PDT by Pete from Shawnee Mission
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: right-wing agnostic
The same huma-hummer who claimed she and her daughter were sniped at in Bosnia.

Where "Stolen Valor" is concerned, everything is fair game.

42 posted on 06/22/2014 10:53:45 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: right-wing agnostic

Does anybody believe that if any prospective Pubbie candidate had done similar things, the media wouldn’t be headlining it every day? Of course she’s fair game. People should know what a radical Hillary was. Of course, they didn’t care that Obama was a bigtime radical, so I doubt it will change too many people’s minds.


43 posted on 06/22/2014 10:56:21 AM PDT by driftless2 (For long term happiness, learn how to play the accordion.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: leprechaun9
https://twitter.com/LessGovMoreFun/status/459498975880830976/photo/1

44 posted on 06/22/2014 11:19:49 AM PDT by Uri’el-2012 (Psalm 119:174 I long for Your salvation, YHvH, Your teaching is my delight.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: mortal19440

If the head of the Watergate team had followed up by doing the right thing and gotten clinton disbarred, maybe she wouldn’t have been in a position to rape the victim a second time.


45 posted on 06/22/2014 11:55:03 AM PDT by DPMD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: SamAdams76

Hillary’s backers are, much like her:

Burned Out Warthogs for the War On Women (BOWWOW).


46 posted on 06/22/2014 11:57:21 AM PDT by DPMD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Rides_A_Red_Horse

She wasn’t supposed to be a good pick.

I agree, and believe that McCain worked to undermine her by insisting on the Couric and Gibson interviews.

McCain was obama’s best secret weapon.


47 posted on 06/22/2014 12:00:24 PM PDT by DPMD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: DPMD

McCain is the one who said “We have nothing to fear from an Obama presidency.”


48 posted on 06/22/2014 12:13:28 PM PDT by Rides_A_Red_Horse (Why do you need a fire extinguisher when you can call the fire department?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: right-wing agnostic

Was George W Bushs Dental Records from the Texas National Guard relevant when he ran against the Lunatic Algore?


49 posted on 06/22/2014 12:18:00 PM PDT by ballplayer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
A successful defense of someone who is guilty? One can adhere to “ethics” while getting the lowlife off the hook? The Sixth Amendment makes no allowance for that, oh no.
50 posted on 06/22/2014 1:21:06 PM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: yldstrk
......obama and wife were both either disbarred or turned in their licenses, why can’t we know why?

we do know a lot. What we don't know is why it is never mentioned, especially in the media.

Michelle was ordered off the bar when a client she was representing committed fraud. She has the opportunity to be readmitted after establishing her ignorance of the client's action in a Bar Hearing and updating her Continuing Education credits. She has not chosen to do so.

Barry is another kettle of legal fish. He was offered a deal by the Illinois Bar: resign permanently or face Disciplinary Hearings. He resigned, with NO chance of reinstatement. In exchange for his resignation, the Bar sealed all records of the affair. Fairly standard deal in such cases. It is also technically correct to say that he surrendered his law license voluntarily!

Background: Until 2008, his Illinois Bar Application (as was Michelle's) was on line. In his application, many answers he gave are at variance with personal data found in the "autobiography," or legend created for him by Bill Ayers.
E.G., On the app, Barry denied ever using an "alias." In the book, several are mentioned. On the app, he denied drug use. In the book, it is spelled out in detail. He denied any violation of the law, including traffic misdemeanors. He had many which had gone unanswered. (They were paid off during the campaign.) It is my speculation that during the only matter ever handled by Barry before the courts, an opposing attorney noted these discrepancies and brought them to the court's attention. Apparently, Barack never read his own 'autobiography.'

Even more mysterious is why America's first legal family has escaped media scrutiny over these lapses in professional conduct. Neither of the Obamas was known for legal skill, and except for the single cases that led to their downfall in the profession, neither was ever entrusted by their firms with sole responsibility for a client in any legal case.

We know. Few others do ... or refuse to admit it.

51 posted on 06/22/2014 2:23:18 PM PDT by Kenny Bunk (The GOP is dying. What do we do now?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
A successful defense of someone who is guilty? One can adhere to “ethics” while getting the lowlife off the hook? The Sixth Amendment makes no allowance for that, oh no.

There are countless ways to ethically represent some one who is guilty. The prosecution has the burden of proving the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, and there are many ethical ways to persuade a jury to have a reasonable doubt, from moving to suppress illegally-seized evidence, to cross-examining the eyewitness to ask if they were wearing their glasses at the time of the incident.

52 posted on 06/22/2014 3:44:17 PM PDT by Lurking Libertarian (Non sub homine, sed sub Deo et lege)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian

Moral relativism here means the end of a society. Don’t ever think otherwise.


53 posted on 06/22/2014 8:49:49 PM PDT by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-53 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson