Question about Neal Boortz referring to Clinton as a rapist

[leftist.]

For anyone that doesn't know, Boortz is a reactionary hate radio entertainer.

Anyway, could someone explain why Bill Clinton couldn't sue him for defamation. When he accuses Clinton of being a rapist he never uses the word "allegedly" and that's what has me so confused.

Thanks for the help!

[brentspeak]

1. Neil Boortz -- he's the "Libertarian" who never seems to advocate for Libertarian candidates, right?

[leftist.]

Re: Neil Boortz -- he's the "Libertarian" who never seems

Hehe, thats the one.

[Bucky]

2. Juanita Broderick (possibly bad spelling) made an accusation, sort of.

Around the same time as her husband, an FOB, committed suicide (possibly that same day, but I'd have to look it up) Ms Broderick alleges that Clinton tried to assault her. She has since remained silent on the topic, but obviously she was under a great deal of stress at the time and may not be remembering thing as they were.

The Paula Jones allegations may have also been construed as a "rape", altho again you have some pretty shaky testimony there.

[leftist.]

4. Thank you, I understand all of that, but ...

All she did was accuse, and the accusation was pretty weak imo (re: 60 Minutes et al). So he isn't a convicted rapist or even a rapist at all that I can see.

[MonkeyFunk]

5. No

you're conflating two stories: Kathleen Willey and Juanita Broderick.

[Bucky]

7. Oh yeah. My fault for not paying attention to unsubstantiated drivel

All the lies kinda blur together as time goes by and I have to shift my focus to actual crimes. Thanks. :hi:

[jefferson_dem]

3. The standard for proving slander is much higher for public figures

and you can't find a much more *public figure* than Bill Clinton. Pretty much, hate radio slimers like Boortz can say anything they want about Bill and not be held legally liable. The best we can do is just turn the fucker off, eh.

[leftist.]

6. Jefferson_Dem, great reply ...

Is it the same though even for saying a public figure (Clinton) committed an act of rape? Is it all in the way Boortz delivers the accusation that gets him off the hook? Like saying "Clinton is a rapist" instead of saying "Clinton, who by the way is guilty of rape".

Thanks again!

[Orangepeel]

12. As I understand it, Clinton would have to prove Boortz knew the statement to be false

because Clinton is a public figure.

Of course, Boortz does know that it's false, but because someone made the accusation, it would be pretty much impossible to prove that he does.

[AlCzervik]

8. Sean Hannity calls him as well on teevee.

hannity never said "Allegedly" either and i don't understand why they get away with. Actually since Hannity is on Faux i understand how it happens but i don't why they aren't called on it. If i were Hillary Clinton i wouldn't take any money at all from Murdoch, not a dime.

[blm]

9. There are alot of smears that TeamClinton never took on - this is another leftover

smear that helped strengthen the RW grip all over the red states. It was a trumped up charge that went undisputed for the most part, and now it has become part of the legend the GOPs bring out for exploiting.

[AlGore-08.com]

10. If you've every known anybody who was raped and tried to get justice through the legal system

You'd know it's almost impossible to prove rape unless you have a witness who saw the rape or a video tape. Even then, a "good" lawyer can make it seem as if it was actually a consensual sex act, and the victim is mentally unstable and/or out to get revenge and/or out to get "jackpot justice".

When somebody is accused of rape, there is the reverse problem. How does he prove that he never raped his accuser? If t could be proven that he had some kind of sex with the accuser (a witness, physical evidence, he confesses, etc.) it is his word against the accuser whether it was consensual sex or rape.

The only way Clinton could prove he did not commit rape would be for the accuser to say the rape took place at a specific time and place where Clinton had an air tight alibi. (For example, if the accuser claims Clinton raped her in Little Rock on a day when he was actually in Tokyo.)

If the case is at least plausible - - if Clinton knew the accuser at all and if they were ever alone together (or even if there was a period of time where nobody could prove whether they were alone or with other people) - - Clinton couldn't prove that he never raped his accuser.

Then the question for Bill Clinton becomes how damaging would a trial be on it's own? How much dirt about his private life would be made public? How long would the press obsess over each new bit of testimony or gossip? How many women would be brought to the stand to claim they had committed adultery with Clinton? How many would claim that some of the sex was not consensual? How humiliating would that be to Clinton and his family? How badly would that hurt Hillary Clinton's career?

That's why he's never sued, IMNSHO.

[DrDan]

11. neal boob is also a lawyer

a Texas A&M law grad - a pathetic excuse of a human - a waste of space

[leftist.]

13. All great replies, especially blm, AlGore08, and orangepeel68

Thanks guys. I think I understand it a little better now! :)

[Jack Rabbit]

14. Clinton is a public personality

People like Boortz and Hannity can say just about anything about him and get away with it. Clinton would have to prove not only that the statement is false, as any plainiff in a libel suit would have to do, but that the defendant knows it is false.

I can't say Leftist murdered his mother without opening myself up to a lawsuit, but I can say Clinton murdered Vince Foster and get away with it.

[Doctor_J]

15. I know. I wish our people would start calling * a drunken coke-head

they never do though :-(

If our meida are ever going to have the impact that the GOP media machine does, they'll have to get way more agressive than they are.