I have taken Nem's logic and applied it to the Juanita Brodderick accusation of rape against Bill Clinton and concluded that, logically speaking, Nem has agreed with the accusation by proxy. How so..? Well, let me explain: A woman named Juanita Brodderick publicly accused Bill Clinton of rape. Now, according to Nem, if you weren't physically present then you are in no position to say her allegations are untrue. So none of us can call her a liar - right Nem...? After all, you weren't there. Also, according to Nem, if Clinton hasn't sued her for slander, then her statements must be true. Because, after all, if it were untrue, he would sue for slander... right Nem...? So I have logically concluded that Nem agrees with me when I say Bill Clinton committed rape again Brodderick on that fateful afternoon. And he can't disagree with any of the above logic unless he wants to admit being a complete hypocrite.