Guilty."

Any other white man accused of raping any woman, and all we hear is "we haven't heard the whole story yet." Innocent until proven guilty.

A person of color gets shot or strangled by a white man, and even if we have a video showing what happened, all we hear is "The video doesn't show the whole story." Innocent until proven guilty.

It's very interesting.

make it more difficult for those who have truly been hurt..they do more harm to women..but then, drumpf could care less...and his walking dead fan base...

I cannot watch - I will rely on DU to provide input..I have all the faith in Hillary - just refuse to allow that pig in my home..his face and voice make me sick..

Be well...

Hillary has prepared for this very well, as her campaign team is pretty clutch.

But she, and Democrats/progressives in general, need to clear up how they talk about machismo culture (and I won't use the term "rape culture" because many times I ask individual people what it means, they can't answer. That kind of obfuscation leads to situations like Hillary's tweet, which was to please the base, and led to what Trump just did).

I think Hillary probably knows that the tweet from last year was a mistake, given this, but she should've seen it coming and should've deleted that initial tweet; it was Broaddrick's road to the spotlight again!

Even for as much as I support feminism, the school of feminist thought that believes in auto-trust is wrong. And dangerous. See Scottsboro Boys, many other Jim Crow cases, Duke lacrosse, Alexander Pantages, and enough others. Realize that men who are accused of rape get vigilantes out to mutilate and/or kill them, and cold blooded killers in prison think they're somehow better than the rapists; that's why one must admit false allegations happen. Or potentially had helped Trump by hurting Hillary with millennials.

But yea, Broaddrick, Jones, etc. are liars and have already been heard and listened to, and there is no reason to believe them.

This post is wrong and disgusting. Broaddrick's accusations certainly haven't been substantiated, and hence Clinton deserves the benefit of the doubt, but nor have they been falsified.

Yes, if he did rape her, then she lied about his not having done so. But given what rape victims who testify have to go through, that would be neither unbelievable nor unforgivable.

by her side, like the entire GOP, as moral support, Ken Starr, and they STILL couldn't come up with anything.

Maybe, its time to drop the dogma of that anyone should be autobelieved. That's why Hillary took that off her site.

One can and should deal with rape/SA that neither has a built-in skepticism or a built-in conviction. BOTH are wrong and can have dangerous consequences.

False rape allegations were common in the Jim Crow South too.