Victimhood not a good thing for a Candidate. People want Superman (or Superwoman in this case). Can see a mis-step here if the Newsweek guy thinks he is helping her. Besides, I would bet on Hillary in a fight with Bill.

Alleging that a person has committed a felony (rape is a felony, even if one is married to the victim) is defamation (libel in this case). The most common defense to a charge of libel involving a public figure is that the information is true or that the publisher did not entertain serious doubts about its truthfulness. The public figure has the burden of proving that the libel is false – admittedly difficult in this case, or that the item was published with reckless disregard of its truth. We can presume that the publisher is well aware of the law concerning libel.
I share your suspicions about this Drudge story. My thoughts are that Hillary’s advisors are trying for victim status in order to defuse other revelations in the book that are not quite so sympathetic. The old “pack of lies” defense. So far the lefty reactions I have seen have attempted to characterize this story as a heartless attack on Chelsea – morphing that premise into lauding the parental skills of the Clintons. How they get there from a simple hotel room trashing story (ala rock band members) I don’t know.

Be absolutely certain to read Dean Esmay's take on this. His style! And I agree with him.

I admire Dean
For marrying the Queen.

I admire the Queen
For marrying Dean.

Funny how this (unprovable and un-disprovable) accusation comes up just as people are starting to talk seriously about Hillary as Democratic nominee for President. I guess someone on the right actually suspects she can win.

(And no, the Brodderick story is NOT credible. Special Prosecutor and Clinton-Basher Pursuivant Ken Starr hisself passed it up.)

Only elite liberals use words like Pursuivant

I've said more than once that her presidency is inevitable.

Elite liberals? I got it from "Blackadder."

Sarcasm and irony are hard to detect on internet comments.

Just go and read Dean Esmay. His style.

Dean Esmay is spot on. But the commenters who tried to compare this "rape" charge to anything Miclael Moore said, and to defensively point out that "everybody else does it," were utterly despicable cowards.

Incidentally, speaking of dragging Chelsea into this, Rush Limbaugh once called her a "dog" on the air, and he's still working, so this low level of "discourse" isn't exactly new on the far right. (Note to Rush: it's okay, Clelsea doesn't want to shag you either.)

I've never forgiven Rush Limbaugh for that comment about Chelsea. But I must confess that I find that John Derbyshire had more style when he tearfully confessed "I hate Chelsea Clinton", then said something about her bad behavior in a restaurant and some other things he didn't like about her, and then, citing precedents from ancient China and from Stalin's Russia, advocated the execution of the entire Clinton family.

Quite a character John Derbyshire is. Andrew Sullivan named one of his most prestigious "awards" after John Derbyshire. My brother tells me he wrote a book on mathematics. He has always had an interesting style. I suppose I really should get back to reading him. His style John Derbyshire once said that he always laughed whenever he saw the word "Lesbian" and assumed everybody else did so, too. Myself, I always have that reaction whenever I see the name "John Derbyshire".

Couple of thoughts....

Rape being a crime, even in a marriage -- this is relatively new law, isn't it -- from the '80s? Would this actually have been a crime? (see, for example, here)

Establishing her as a victim seems a dubious motive -- but perhaps a tough, but dignified, response to these scurrilous accusations might make her appear more presidential (above the mudslinging).

For those looking for "vast rightwing..." motives here, please remember that the author (Klein) is a well-accredited part of the liberal mainstream. If he's taking his marching orders from Karl Rove...