I don’t know what Bermuda’s law was in 1979. But I am willing to bet that physical assault against your spouse was a crime, and I’m willing to bet that, had it happened, Mrs. Clinton would have been quite capable of pressing that charge.
Captain Amazing–there’s a huge difference between books attacking Bush’s policies in Iraq, the war on terrorism, the environment, etc. and books just spewing out unfounded spurious nonsense from 25 years ago. Show me the videos claiming Bush is murdering his political enemies, and then we’ll talk.
All of the (now discredited) statements from the Arkansas state troopers give the impression that it was Hilary who slapped Bill around. You can never tell what goes on in private, but she just doesn’t strike me as anybody’s victim.
I wouldn’t be surprised if their personal relationship was violent, and this violence went back and forth. Both people are known to have bad tempers and huge egos.
Terming the events in Bermuda “rape” strikes me as pure sensationalism. As Bricker pointed out, she was a lawyer and knew her rights full well. Not just a lawyer, but a super smart, super aggressive graduate of Yale Law, who had no doubt read her share of feminist philosophy in college.
But if Bill just overpowered her and forced himself upon her, there may have been no evidence of physical assault.
However, I say these allegations border on ridiculous. It isn’t that I can’t conceive that Bill would do such a thing. It is just I can’t imagine he’d be savvy enough to get elected governor of Arkansas and then go around saying “I raped my wife.” Let’s not even get into the fact the charge comes from an unnamed source, and the reporter seems to have an obvious political bias.
[Monty Python]
Say no more, say no more!
[/Monty Python]
She was a Wellesley grad, after all!
Well, there is Kitty Kelley’s book, “The First Family”, which accuses all the Bushes of various nastiness. And, for example, “House of Bush, House of Saud” doesn’t just criticize Bush’s policies…it basically says that Bush is an agent in place of the Saudi royal family.
How about Kitty Kelly’s book: The Family : The Real Story of the Bush Dynasty?
I wouldn’t trust Kitty Kelly farther than I could throw her.
Er, not to mention that her allegation alone could have ruined him, the state of Bermuda’s rape laws in 1979 aside.
AH! I see, the presence of books critical of President Bush means that the accusations in THE TRUTH ABOUT HILLARY… are somehow more viable. Thanks for clearing that up for us.
Any bets as to how long it takes before this thread gets sent to the Pit? No? Don’t like them odds, eh?
AH! I see you are adept at the art of strawman construction. Go back and follow the flow of the discussion instead of plopping in an making unsubstantiated charges.
Both books are no doubt sensationalist crap.
Yes, but was there a traffic cone? Cause it’s not a good night if you don’t wake up with a traffic cone in your bed and no memory of how it got there.
Enjoy,
Steven
Of course not, as John Mace has already said. No doubt that the claims in “The Truth about Hillary…” are bunkum and exaggeration. But it’s a failing that people all over the political spectrum. Lies and gossip have been part of politics since at least Ancient Greece (Pericles’s enemies tried to make political hay over Pericles’s mistress) People are just pointing out that both sides do it.
This little item from the The Washington Monthly might add a little light to this rapidly heating discussion.
It seems to me that there is a clear difference between attacking the President on perhaps scurrilous and unsubstantiated policy grounds eg, President Bush and his family are in the thrall of Saudi princes and seek to make the wealthy even more wealthy) and claims that the former President is a criminal abuser of women and that his wife, a US Senator seen by some as a possible Presidential candidate, is both complicit in and a victim of that abuse and that their daughter was the result of it. That sort of thing is flat reprehensible but, at the cited item says, the Republican party seems to have welcomed irresponsible and hateful wing nuts. Need I say more than The Swift Boat Veterans. Somebody made this sort of malicious and largely immaterial slander respectable. It sure hasn’t been the Democrats.
If this gets any credence, even in the under the table scandal and mud throwing forum, I be extremely disappointed. I have, however been disappointed before and I recognize that there are some people who will countenance nearly anything in order to retain a grip on power.
The REAL TRUTH of course is it was Hillary who raped Bill.
You are an absolute tool. :wally
A side note-- marital rape wasn’t even widely recognized as a crime until the 70s, and some states didn’t outlaw marital rape until the 90s. Depending on when Arkansas got around to making marital rape illegal, Bill may have been able to legally rape Hillary at the time of the alleged rape.
Well, able in a legal sense. I don’t think Hillary would have let him get away with anything like that. And Clinton has never struck me as a rapist type. Women like Clinton. I suspect that for much of his life, all he’s had to do to get laid is catch the passes women toss at him.
Plus, of course, it’s obvious wingnut bullshit.
Bermuda is not in the Bahamas. It is not even in the Caribbean.
May I get an explanation of the traffic cone reference?
Yes, I’m naive, I’ve led a sheltered life, and someday I’ll make up for it.
I promise I’ll never ask again.