June 20 2014
Quote of the Day (oh, make it the year):
“Hillary Clinton took me through Hell,” the victim said. The Daily Beast agreed to withhold her name out of concern for her privacy as a victim of sexual assault.
The victim said if she saw Clinton today, she would call her out for what she sees as the hypocrisy of Clinton’s current campaign to fight for women’s rights compared to her actions regarding this rape case so long ago.
“I would say [to Clinton], ‘You took a case of mine in ’75, you lied on me… I realize the truth now, the heart of what you’ve done to me. And you are supposed to be for women? You call that [being] for women, what you done to me? And I hear you on tape laughing.”
--Rape Victim, as quoted in the Daily Beast
The rape victim was a 12-year-old girl when Hillary Rodham, then 27 and the future champion of women and girls, defended the girl’s rapist, getting him a strikingly lenient sentence.
The rape victim came forward and granted an exclusive interview to the Daily Beast after the Free Beacon’s ace reporter Alana Goodman, in an amazing scoop, found a disturbing tape of Mrs. Clinton chortling with journalist Roy Reed over getting the guy off:
“He took a lie detector test. I had him take a polygraph, which he passed, which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs,” Clinton says on the recording, failing to hold back some chuckles.
Anyone accused of a crime deserves a defense. Even this guy.
But Mrs. Clinton’s bragging about getting time served for this guy with a defense that allegedly included smearing a 12-year-old victim is shocking.
Mrs. Clinton reportedly claimed the girl was unstable with a habit of seeking out older men and fantasizing about them, which the victim says was never the case. Clinton said that the victim came from a “disorganized” family and that children from such families “tend to exaggerate or romanticize sexual experiences.”
The tapes of Mrs. Clinton talking to Reed prove, according to the victim, that Mrs. Clinton was dishonest and willing to smear a young victim to get a good outcome for her client:
For the victim, the tapes prove that while Clinton was arguing in the affidavit that the victim could have some culpability in her own attack, she actually believed that her client was guilty. Taylor’s light sentence was a miscarriage of justice, the victim said.
“It’s proven fact, with all the tapes [now revealed], she lied like a dog on me. I think she was trying to do whatever she could do to make herself look good at the time…. She wanted it to look good, she didn’t care if those guys did it or not,” she said. “Them two guys should have got a lot longer time. I do not think justice was served at all.”
Matt Continetti of the Free Beacon notes the media blackout on the story since 1975 and explains why the story matters, even if we all agree that the accused had rights, too:
Let’s even concede that Clinton was just doing her job. What makes that job exempt from inquiry and skepticism and criticism? Yes, Mumia, Bill Ayers, and child rapists have the right to legal representation. But that does not give the lawyers who represent them the right—the entitlement—to public office. If it is fair to attack a candidate because he used to travel with the family dog on the roof of his car, because he may have forcibly subjected a fellow student to a haircut, then it is entirely fair, it is more than fair, to attack a candidate for defending the rapist of a 12-year-old girl, and for laughing about it a decade later.
Yes, it was in 1975, but Mrs. Clinton owes an explanation (if there possibly could be an explanation).
Meanwhile, the University of Arkansas has taken away the Free Beacon’s library privileges.