Posted on 06/16/2014 3:50:17 PM PDT by OneVike
A scoop from the Washington Free Beacon's Alana Goodman exploded on Twitter Sunday night, raising new questions about the most significant case of Hillary Clinton's relatively brief legal career. The brewing controversy is, in some respects, ancient history -- involving a mid-80's interview about a case from 1975. In short, young attorney Hillary Rodham elected to take a case defending a man accused of brutally raping a 12-year-old girl. Goodman reports, "the recordings, which...have never before been reported, include Clinton’s suggestion that she knew Taylor was guilty at the time. She says she used a legal technicality to plead her client, who faced 30 years to life in prison, down to a lesser charge." None of this is per se scandalous. Indeed, attorneys are ethically obliged to furnish their clients, no matter how vile, with zealous legal representation. One can argue that lawyers have no such obligation to take on a case in the first place, which is true, but that doesn't strike me as a fair critique here. Hillary explains in the audio recording that she accepted the "tough" client as a favor to the local prosecutor. But her defense of the alleged rapist (whom she clearly believed to be guilty), and the manner in which she secured a very favorable plea bargain, is another story altogether -- as is her demeanor and tone in recounting the case in a previously-undisclosed interview:
(Excerpt) Read more at townhall.com ...
Democrat voters?
In the 1980s, after Gerry Studds was caught having homo sex with a young Congressional page, his popularity skyrocketed in MA. Ditto for Barney Frank after the flap about running the gay brothel out of his house.
Liberals don’t think along the same lines as Americans.
...And meet the number one reason why lawyers are despised! They can, will, and insist they must work overtime to thwart justice....
As much as I dislike Hitlery she did exactly as an good attorney would and should do.
Yes the man was despicable and guilty but she did a good job as an attorney.
She did not have to take the case. She took it only because a Democrat DA asked her to.
It was political on her part from the beginning.
Democrats have no moral that they are not willing to violate in order to have control of the America. And being amoral, there is nothing they will not do to keep power. Nothing.
Exactly.
This was released with the permission of Hitlery herself, because the people that support her are SCHMUCKS, and they will forget all about it come 2016. And if it is brought up again, they will say “old news” .
It seems her life has had more rapists in it than I realized.
The victim wasn’t Hillary’s 12 year old daughter...
The woman was fired because she didn't meet the minimum ethical standards to be a lawyer - to be a lawyer?
Who knew they even had standards...
I saved it to my HD, Which is fixed now. So I can post it on youtube in 2016. I think everyone should save it, and post it so it go viral in 2016 so she cannot run from it.
Thanks nathan.
I did a search and it never came up so I went ahead and posted it.
I thought it odd that it wasn’t.
You pointed out
‘She did not have to take the case. She took it only because a Democrat DA asked her to.
It was political on her part from the beginning.”
think about it , do you think the Dem DA expected her to win the case?
Good defense attorneys do things we might not like but our system does provide even the vilest a defense
In this case the vilest man was defended by a vile woman
bump
My whole deal is, the way she constantly uses the children to get what she wants.
Well, I would like to see this played everytime she says its for the children.
that is a good point
and she is despicable
but in this instance she did what a good attorney should do
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.