Has Hillary Clinton’s ‘advocate for women’ card already been revoked?

posted at 4:41 pm on July 8, 2014 by Noah Rothman

Now, this is interesting.

In June, the Washington Free Beacon published the investigative work of reporter Alana Goodman who uncovered audio tapes featuring former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton discussing her work defending a man accused of raping a 12-year-old girl. In the tape, Clinton bragged about her ability to call the integrity of the evidence presented against her client into question.

Beyond Clinton’s distasteful display of pride in her own ability navigate the legal system and reduce the penalties this rapist faced for his actions, there was nothing untoward about her conduct. Conniving and manipulative behavior is a celebrated lawyerly trait, and the role she served in America’s system of jurisprudence is one that should be celebrated.

Deceit, however, is another matter. Weeks after the publication of these tapes by the Free Beacon, they have created the conditions whereby Hillary Clinton’s own gender-centric presidential campaign might implode.

These audio recordings are not the first revelations about Clinton – one of the most powerful and well-known political figures in the last two decades of American politics – which this upstart conservative publication has unearthed. Earlier this year, Goodman uncovered the diary of late Clinton confidante Diane Blair. Forced to begrudgingly report on that scoop, MSNBC’s Andrea Mitchell could only bring herself to refer to the Free Beacon contemptuously as an “anti-Clinton website.”

Mitchell’s tune has changed, and it is Clinton’s own statements that changed it.

Clinton told her interlocutor in those 1980s tapes that she took the controversial case as a personal favor to a friend. She did, however, seem confident about the guilt of the accused in her taped conversation. “She’s claiming at the same time that she was court-appointed, which is one thing, and the other reporting is that she did it as a favor,” Mitchell said, vexed by the incongruities in Clinton’s statements.

Mitchell’s guests speculated over the apparently misleading nature of the former secretary’s statement, but all agreed that Clinton and those charged with vetting her would have to revisit this case.

Mitchell added that the emergence of these tapes ahead of a likely 2016 presidential bid suggests that “Hillary Clinton is going to be challenged on everything, including the most basic part of her biography which is that she’s always been an advocate for women.”

Let that sit for a minute. This is not merely the most sacrosanct aspect of Clinton’s “biography” for her supporters, one so sacred that even challenging the assumptions surrounding it is tantamount to heresy, but it is the entire basis for her campaign. In fact, running as the first woman president is the only campaign she could run.

Clinton’s party is one that has become obsessed with identity politics, but it has had a difficult time reconciling the contradictions associated with the fact the identity of the president’s likely successor is so divergent from the backgrounds which Democratic voters regard as superior. Wealthy, white and privileged; Clinton shares none of the biographical elements which led Democrats to believe Barack Obama could be a transformative figure.

A prerequisite for success in modern Democratic politics is the legitimate claim to personal adversity. Whereas an earlier generation of Democratic leaders only needed to feel your pain, Democratic voters are imposing a relatively new requirement on their party’s aspirants: they must have experienced your pain. One of the rare claims to adversity Clinton can legitimately make is her identity as a woman. For what it’s worth, Mitchell’s faith in the authority of this feminine hardship has not been shaken by the appearance of mendacity in Clinton’s effort to defend her choice to malign a 12-year-old rape victim.

“I think just by virtue of being a woman, and the most successful woman, you know, female political figure in our times – in any time, in this country – that that gives her a certain edge and distinguishes herself from any male politician,” Mitchell said.

Her fellow panel guests, while agreeing, also noted that Clinton has elevated her status as a woman to the centerpiece of her nascent campaign – a total reversal from her 2008 strategy which was to emphasize competence and experience in government over identity politics.

But Clinton cannot run on experience, because her party does not value experience over identity anymore. Furthermore, the lesson many took away from the 2012 campaign was that the country may no longer value experience as highly as they do the character of the candidate. Clinton may be right, but this episode demonstrates why that is a risky strategy.

A candidate’s qualifications based on their experience and ability cannot be stripped away, whereas the authenticity of their subjectively defined identity most surely can be. Clinton’s once unassailable claim to be an “advocate for women” was always a dilapidated edifice which could collapse at the first few blows. It is fascinating that it is Clinton herself and her allies who are dismantling that façade.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Yes it has! Now she has a rapist defender card. Yikes!

coolrepublica on July 8, 2014 at 4:47 PM

She’s senile and a disastrous campaigner.

ConstantineXI on July 8, 2014 at 4:47 PM

OT – see Drudge – Israel is fired upon.

obama’s letter lasted…er…didn’t.

Schadenfreude on July 8, 2014 at 4:47 PM

Hillary won’t run. She can’t win without obama’s endorsement and he won’t do it.

Schadenfreude on July 8, 2014 at 4:48 PM

God, she’s one ugly broad.

lostmotherland on February 26, 2014 at 4:09 PM

I have to agree with you for once mofo.

slickwillie2001 on July 8, 2014 at 4:51 PM

Yes it has! Now she has a rapist defender card. Yikes!

coolrepublica on July 8, 2014 at 4:47 PM

She already had that defending her husband.

Bitter Clinger on July 8, 2014 at 4:54 PM

She’d better put some ice on that.

CurtZHP on July 8, 2014 at 4:54 PM

Beyond Clinton’s distasteful display of pride in her own ability navigate the legal system and reduce the penalties this rapist faced for his actions, there was nothing untoward about her conduct.

-Noah Rothman

Noah, you don’t see anything “untoward” about Clinton admitting she knew her client was a child rapist and then laughing about it?

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/20/exclusive-hillary-clinton-took-me-through-hell-rape-victim-says.html

Noah, why do you always feel the need to stick up for Democrats and MSNBC hosts (whom you enjoy watching, apparently) before leveling extremely mild criticism at them?

bluegill on July 8, 2014 at 4:54 PM

Hilary has never been an advocate for anyone but Hilary..

melle1228 on July 8, 2014 at 4:58 PM

Who died and gave that sea hag the right to represent women? It is hard to believe Billy Jeff steeled himself to mount her even once, given the prime choice of fresher looking meat he used to enjoy.

Rix on July 8, 2014 at 5:00 PM

It is hard to believe Billy Jeff steeled himself to mount her even once, given the prime choice of fresher looking meat he used to enjoy.

Rix on July 8, 2014 at 5:00 PM

You have zero proof of that. Chelsea…Hubbel…he, Billy, said so.

Schadenfreude on July 8, 2014 at 5:01 PM

A pic of the Cackling Azz…nice.

ToddPA on July 8, 2014 at 5:01 PM

Beyond Clinton’s distasteful display of pride in her own ability navigate the legal system and reduce the penalties this rapist faced for his actions, there was nothing untoward about her conduct. Conniving and manipulative behavior is a celebrated lawyerly trait, and the role she served in America’s system of jurisprudence is one that should be celebrated.

You are breathtakingly wrong on so many levels.. The job of a criminal defense lawyer is to put the state to the proof which is why the defense need not prove innocence. My understanding in this case is that Clinton contacted an expert solely for the purpose of name dropping and arguing that the expert was to give an opinion which in actuality was not to be forthcoming. That’s lying and cheating, not ethical lawyering. It was a fraud on the court and sanctionable. Furthermore, most truly professional trail attorneys on both sides of a case wouldn’t be so crass and shameless as to brag about this unethical stunt. This wasn’t lawyering, it was a disgusting performamce by a clueless, classless , heartless witch with a law degree.

cthemfly on July 8, 2014 at 5:05 PM

Bimbo Eruptions

Monica Lewinsky
Paula Jones
Gennifer Flowers
Kathleen Wiley
Juanita Broderick
Elizabeth Ward

Yep, Cankles has a long history of advocating against women.

Oh, you meant advocating for women.

A women so hungry for power that she slanders and attacks those that were sexually harassed. Yeah, she should be in the feminist hall of fame.

HumpBot Salvation on July 8, 2014 at 5:18 PM

Clinton’s party is one that has become obsessed with identity politics, but it has had a difficult time reconciling the contradictions…

The Democrats are merely catching up with their comrades on the European Left

If the Islamists position on homosexuality isn’t enough to make the Left consider with whom they are in bed, perhaps, Eva Helgetun might be, as she was emblematic of the terror that Norwegian women face.

‘According to many of the rape victims, their rapists told them that their religion allowed them to rape non-Muslims.’

Islam is called the ‘religion of peace’ by its adherents and defenders, but many Norwegian women are learning that Islam, as practised by many there, is the religion of rape.

According to an incredible police report released in June 2011, every violent rape in Norway in the past 5 years, where the rapist could be identified, was committed by a male of non-western background and every solved rape in 2010 was committed by a Muslim (here, here, here, here, here, here, here). This phenomenon is not new in Scandinavia. The reported number of rapes in the Norwegian capital of Oslo is six times as high as in New York City.

A report in Aftenposten in 2001 said:

‘While 65% of those charged with rape are classed as coming from a non-western background, this segment makes up only 14.3% of Oslo’s population. Norwegian women were the victims in 80% of the cases.’

In 2005, a crime prevention study released in Sweden reported that Algerians, Libyans, Moroccans, and Tunisians ‘dominate the group of rape suspects. The same year, the newspaper Aftonbladet reported that nearly half of all rapists were immigrants.

As was observed, ‘in other words, Muslims from Africa and other benighted Third World places are targeting Western women for rape.’

Ms Unni Wikan, a ‘feminist’ and professor of social anthropology at the University of Oslo, said:

‘Norwegian women must take their share of responsibility for these rapes’ because Muslim men found their manner of dress provocative. [Her conclusion was not that Muslim men living in the West needed to adjust to Western norms, but the exact opposite] Norwegian women must realise that we live in a Multicultural society and adapt themselves to it.’

That brings us back to Eva Helgetun, a 14 year-old girl, who was gang raped on 1 May 2011 by 3 Somali Muslims in Trondheim, a beautiful area with a population of approximately 174,000. Her’s was the fifth gang rape perpetrated by Muslims in Trondheim in a month. Traumatised, battered, and unable to cope, this beautiful, young girl committed suicide on 28 May 2011. In Shari’ah law, a rape victim must have four witnesses; otherwise, she is the adulterer. In Unni Wikan’s world, Eva Helgetun ‘asked for it’ simply by being an exquisite girl in Western clothes and, I suppose, did what any ‘guilty, wanton, adulterous’ dhimmi should: She killed herself.

The contortions and contradictions of the Left are simply insane.

Resist We Much on July 8, 2014 at 5:19 PM

My understanding in this case is that Clinton contacted an expert solely for the purpose of name dropping and arguing that the expert was to give an opinion which in actuality was not to be forthcoming. That’s lying and cheating, not ethical lawyering. It was a fraud on the court and sanctionable.

This is actually what she was bragging about in the piece- winning a rapist a 2 month time-served sentence by duping the DA.

ROCnPhilly on July 8, 2014 at 5:20 PM

She’s covered for Willie so long, how anybody can see her as an advocate for women is laughable.

But the same can be said of Gloria Steinbrenner.

formwiz on July 8, 2014 at 5:20 PM

formwiz on July 8, 2014 at 5:20 PM

Steinem? Gloria Steinem.

ROCnPhilly on July 8, 2014 at 5:26 PM

The left is simply going to keep this one bookmarked, just in case Fauxahontas changes her mind and decides to enter the race. Remember, they want to run the same “War on Women” identity politics campaign as Team Clinton does. They’ dust rather do it with Liz Warren or some other candidate they see as more reliable progressive if elected.

jon1979 on July 8, 2014 at 5:27 PM

Beyond Clinton’s distasteful display of pride…there was nothing untoward about her conduct.

Noah Rothman 4:41 pm on July 8, 2014

Noah,

She laughed about getting a rapist off!

This is from, of all places, MSNBC:

An MSNBC panel slammed Hillary Clinton over the tapes uncovered by the Washington Free Beacon which record her laughing about freeing a child rapist, calling her behavior “jarring” and “disturbing.”

“She sounded boastful,” noted Joe Scarborough. “She sounded boastful on the tape that she was able to get this 41-year-old guy who raped a young girl, a minor girl, and get him off and was laughing about the evidence, laughing about the lie detector test, laughing about a lot of it. It’s disturbing to say the least, isn’t it?”

I really can’t take much more of you Noah.

pain train on July 8, 2014 at 6:01 PM

“I think just by virtue of being a woman, and the most successful woman, you know, female political figure in our times – in any time, in this country – that that gives her a certain edge and distinguishes herself from any male politician,” Mitchell said.

Yeah, that’s possible. Seeing as Obama has set the bar low enough.

GarandFan on July 8, 2014 at 6:05 PM

…I think she lost it…with that ‘come hither’ look in the picture!

JugEarsButtHurt on July 8, 2014 at 6:53 PM

Noah Rothman ‏@NoahCRothman 2m

It’s not Clinton’s flippancy but the damage she did to her claim to adversity as a woman that matters here. http://hotair.com/?p=347443

Noah Rothman ‏@NoahCRothman 3m

In private, attorneys and political professionals don’t talk like polished politics on the stump. That confuses some. http://hotair.com/?p=347443

Bmore on July 8, 2014 at 7:18 PM

Her moment has passed. She’s so 20th Century.

flataffect on July 8, 2014 at 7:28 PM

That’s a woman????

trs on July 8, 2014 at 7:41 PM