People who like Bill Clinton, or who find him convenient for their own goals, have a long history of underplaying the multiple allegations of sexual harassment and violence that he faces from at least four women. They say that Paula Jones, the former Arkansas state employee who sued Bill Clinton for sexual harassment after the then governor brought her to his hotel room, propositioned her and exposed himself, is lying – even though Jones has multiple corroborating witnesses, and even though her story has not changed in more than 30 years.
They say that Juanita Broaddrick, the woman who says that Clinton raped her in a hotel room in 1978, when he was Arkansas attorney general, is lying, too – even though Broaddrick, like Jones, told multiple people of Clinton’s attack at the time.
They say that Monica Lewinsky, the 22-year-old unpaid intern whom Clinton carried on an affair with in the White House when he was 49 and the most powerful person in the world, technically consented to the sex acts that Clinton asked her to do – an insistence that betrays a startlingly simple-minded and willfully obtuse understanding of sexual ethics.
…
because he’s never actually been guilty of anything, despite what the right wing media wants you to believe.
also why is this article quoting juanita broaddrick when she’s literally a far right trump supporting lunatic?
because he’s never actually been guilty of anything
He’s never been found guilty because he’s never been prosecuted… That’s why the “alleged” is in the title
That’s not the same as not being guilty, unless you think every guilty person has been prosecuted for every crime and been found guilty.
I realize the 90s weren’t yesterday, so some people might not understand what people are talking about, so here:
https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/heres-a-look-at-bill-clintons-alleged-sexual-misconduct/
law and crime is a mediaite/dan abrams right wing tabloid, which is proving my point.
He’s never been found guilty because he’s never been prosecuted
because he literally committed no crime to prosecute someone for…
Perjury?
falls under official acts apparently.
It’s right in the title of your dumb article.
ikr; same reason why i ask why alleged journalists the guardian are still taken seriously.
This is an opinion piece, which is separate from their journalism.
Thank you for revealing that you are a fascist so I can block you
Well you seem to disagree with the concept of “innocent until proven guilty” soooo if the shoe fits…
Politics aside, how can you use this image with a misquote? Have you even seen TPB?
Google “adjudicated in a court of law” and then get back to us.
Why does the headline have to use ‘alleged’?
Because it’s never been proven. Only alleged. Like Vance’s couch fucking or Lindsay Graham’s ladybugs.
But isn’t it guilty until proven innocent?
Plus can you really look at JayDeeVee and honestly think that’s a guy who doesn’t fuck couches?
Technically I think it was a misunderstanding of the term loveseat. “No J.D! Not like that!”
Lazyboy wonder.
On the off chance you aren’t joking, no, it’s innocent until proven guilty.
Bill brought in the neoliberal movement that still controls the DNC. His people are Hillary’s people, and the same as Biden’s people.
Probably the biggest dropped ball of Obama’s presidency was his decision to just ignore the DNC instead of replacing leadership and pointing it in the right direction.
I believe his reasoning was after he beat Hillary they tried to hang him out to dry, so he didn’t pay them any attention the next 8 years.
Because he’s not a progressive.
The Guardian - News Source Context (Click to view Full Report)
Information for The Guardian:
MBFC: Left-Center - Credibility: Medium - Factual Reporting: Mixed - United Kingdom
Wikipedia about this sourceSearch topics on Ground.News
Because the DNC has no principles. It’s nothing more than a money-making machine, and the Clintons are enormously successful money-makers, and nothing else really matters.