It's interesting how this guy mis represents the Trump case.

He repeatedly says there was no evidence and that it's really hard to disprove something that someone just says about you. "He said/she said".

Of course that's not how the case went at all.

Carrol told a couple of friends about the encounter immediately after it, so she corroborating witnesses that confirmed under oath that she had talked to them about the event 30 years ago.

Trump lied and said he would never treat women badly, that he never met Carrol, and that she wasn't his type.

Carrol's team proved that they had met (pictures and people's testimony) and Trump misidentified Carrol as his ex wife in a picture which was used to show that she physically was his type. The Access Hollywood secret audio was used with other evidence to show that Trump had bragged about treating women badly.

Last but not least Carrol offered a stained dress like Monica Lewinski that could be tested if only Trump would offer his DNA. Guess what? Trump would not offer his DNA to attempt a match.

The great part about the case here is that it appears Democrats actually hold each other to the laws instead of just obstructing or using their positions to try and get high profile people off scott free.

Your video, Michaela Watkins Explained Bullying to Monica Lewinsky, has made it into the Top 15 New Videos listing. Congratulations on your achievement. For your contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

This achievement has earned you your "Pop Star" Level 4 Badge!

Lol, Hillary is scared she's gonna lose to Trump. All the intelligent liberals are scared. Obama won because the minority vote, but it's unlikely hillary will actually get them to come out. After all her hard work Monica Lewinskying the corporate member, she could lose to a ridiculous human being. I'm excited to see it. Dumb asses should have voted for Bernie.

Look @00Scud00, Lewinski's talk is about shame and cybermobbing. She experienced the latter because of her actions and as a result, when she talks about online -abuse, she views it through the prism of her own lifestory, one that is about shame. It is similar to Tyler Clementi, whom she talked about.
However, at the end of the day, her talk is about cyberbullying, online abuse and mob-behaviour.
What connects her and Sarkeesian is cyberbullying and misogyny. They both expierenced that without a doubt.
The big difference is, Lewinsky did something wrong, she enganged in adultery. It may be excusable because she was young and in a relationship with very uneven powerdynamics, it may be understandable because people do fall in love and cheat but it was wrong. The problem is that a matter that should concern only a handful of people became a media event because of the politics involved. That lead to slutshaming and embarrassing her not just online but by all media.
Her case is special because she was the first person to get such an response online and that is what she focuses on in her talk. It's not just about the media (be it print or TV), it's especially about the internet. That is why Clementi is in part so important to her.
Sarkeesian on the other side didn't do something wrong. She started to talk publically about the way the media, especially games, treat and view women from a (sane IMO) feministic point of view.
The end result is disastrous. She experienced a backlash that was not only the highest degree of misogyny, it was also a prime example of a group of people online lashing out at somebody. Cyberbullying and online abuse at its worst.
There is the connection between the two. Sarkeesian wasn't slutshamed, she just got called 'slut' and 'whore'. She didn't have private, sexual details of her life revealed online, it was just her adress and getting rape-threats.
The connection between the two women is online abuse.

Actually, Sarkeesian got it worse. She just did a job but Lewinsky sucked off a married man. Monica didn't deserve what she got, that level of humiliation and hatred. She made a stupid mistake, she made a human mistake. The price she paid was unbearably, unfairly high. I'm sorry for her.
Anita just talked about a topic she felt strongly about. People online threatened her with bodily harm. That's worse.

@dag mentioned Justine Sacco. Her case is completely different from those other two women. Somehow, Monica Lewinsky still talked about her. That's why her TED Talk is so good, she talks about a problem that exists mainly in the online world nowadays.
Cyberbullying. Mobmentality. Onlineabuse.

coincidence?

I Think Not.

>> ^NetRunner:

Fun fact, the actress they've cast as Monica Lewinsky is the same one who played Sarah Palin in Nailin' Palin.

Fun fact, the actress they've cast as Monica Lewinsky is the same one who played Sarah Palin in Nailin' Palin.

Friedman as saboteur, eh? This is actually an interesting and telling clip, considering that Freedmanites Reagan and Bush jr raised the deficit so dramatically. It makes me wonder if the attempt to force Clinton out of office had more to do with balanced budgets than the stains on Monica Lewinsky's dress.

In reply to this comment by blankfist:


You'll love this.

"The budget for the Monica Lewinski sex scandal investigation was $6.2 million and $3 million was set aside for the non independant 9/11 investigation. Crazy"

Funny.. they could carry out one of the biggest crimes of all time , and cover their tracks, yet keeping an affair secret... too hard.

Good job Charlie Sheen.

It's nice to see a 9/11 questions video that cuts through all of the conspiracy bullshit and summarizes genuine unanswered questions that should have been covered in the 9/11 report.

Regardless of the conspiracy theorists there should still be an unimpeded independant investigation. I'm not sure why anybody wouldn't expect or encourage that.

The budget for the Monica Lewinski sex scandal investigation was $6.2 million and $3 million was set aside for the non independant 9/11 investigation. Crazy

I just can't wait until he gets a blowjob from Monica Lewinsky under his desk in the Oval Office so everybody will stop talking about his policies.

Yeah, what they said... healthcare is way too specific and way too flavor of the month.

After all, we don't have a Monica Lewinsky channel.

>> ^NetRunner:
Clinton should have just declared Monica Lewinsky's mouth a Weapon of Mass Destruction. Republicans would've fallen over themselves to support Clinton's invasion of it then.


ROTFL!

Clinton should have just declared Monica Lewinsky's mouth a Weapon of Mass Destruction. Republicans would've fallen over themselves to support Clinton's invasion of it then.

Wait ... I just checked. Clinton wasn't impeached

You must not have checked very well, because Bill Clinton was formally impeached by the House of Representatives on December 19 - 1998 in HR 611 with the charges of perjury and obstruction of justice. As far as I can determine, Bill Clinton was never once charged by congress with having 'sex' with Monica Lewinsky. All charges and impeachement articles stemmed from his rather famous lies under oath.

Neolibs try to minimize the reality, but if George Bush was brought into a hearing and lied under oath about so much as whether he chewed his fingernails they would want him impeached and/or prosecuted to the full extent of the law. The whole Scooter Libby charges were the same exact thing. Libby lied under oath about the Plame thing & got convicted for perjury even though he had committed no crime. That's the thing about perjury. It doesn't matter what you lie about. It just matters that you lied under oath.

Unless you're a Democrat...

Monica Lewinsky for President!