|
Post by elaine on Oct 12, 2016 16:56:26 GMT
What is not accurate? That everything I've read has said she wasn't involved in hiring the PI? Or that the story that you linked that I quoted makes no mention of Hillary? I haven't read Bernstein's book. I never said that Hillary was subservient, but I can think of many reasons why people in the campaign would think it prudent not to involve her in issues around her husband screwing around, can't you? So, is the only horrible thing that Hillary has said about any of these women that we have a direct quote for is "we have to destroy her story?" shescrafty is still patiently waiting for quotes. Nothing to do with it is not accurate: "Mrs. Clinton undertook an aggressive, explicit direction of the campaign to discredit” You are making no sense, Darcy. I said "EVERYTHING I'VE READ has said that the Clinton Campaign hired the PI and that Hillary had nothing to do with it." How can you say that isn't accurate? Do you know what I've read? And that sentence you quoted isn't in the 1992 Washington Post story that you linked either. Certainly you can see that there are a lot of stories out there that don't mention Hillary having anything to do with the investigation of the mistresses, as you linked one yourself. So, again, what about what I said is inaccurate? I prefaced what I said on "what I've read." I also said that I didn't read Bernstein's book. Unless you are a mind reader, you can't just tell me I'm inaccurate or lying about what I've stated.
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Oct 12, 2016 17:07:12 GMT
|
|
|
Post by straggler on Oct 12, 2016 19:22:53 GMT
debmast...hmmm...don't recall ever saying that what Donald Trump has said and/or done was "okay". Think you have me confused with someone else. I can't stand Trump either.
andiamkristinl16...guess it all depends on what you find "creepy". Being President of the United States, secretly getting your jollies with a 20-something young woman in the Oval Office of the White House is creepy to me. If you prefer disgusting, I am ok with that too!
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Oct 12, 2016 19:35:01 GMT
Are you being purposefully obtuse or just ornery? If you made the statement "Everything I have read has said that the earth is flat" and, in fact, that is all you have read, there is nothing inaccurate about that statement. The facts may be different, and you might be open to reading more and learning more, unless someone comes in and jumps on you for sharing what you HAVE read. I'll take the time to read those other links you've provided when I'm less pissed off at you.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 4:12:35 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2016 19:43:01 GMT
Can someone just provide a quick and dirty list of which women say they were raped/assaulted by Clinton? And what Hillary (allegedly) did to just those women? Are there actual quotes of Hillary calling the (alleged) victims of rape or assault names? Is there evidence that she tried to destroy them-the victims, NOT the willing participants?
Serious question.
I know Juanita Brodderick has accused him of rape. But I also read somewhere that she denied that allegation under oath back in the early 90s (?) not sure about the date.
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Oct 12, 2016 19:56:21 GMT
Are you being purposefully obtuse or just ornery? If you made the statement "Everything I have read has said that the earth is flat" and, in fact, that is all you have read, there is nothing inaccurate about that statement. The facts may be different, and you might be open to reading more and learning more, unless someone comes in and jumps on you for sharing what you HAVE read. I'll take the time to read those other links you've provided when I'm less pissed off at you. TBH - the jumping in on me is pretty much how I felt about how you entered this thread. I have deliberately avoided this subject when @giapea and @papercraftadvocate have engaged in their multipage slingfests of she's the devil she's an angel on this subject as I don't think either are interested in real information. shescrafty seemed genuinely curious of the history and I was providing factual information to her including the historic articles and references. I thought the - Hillary knew nothing this just another red herring unwarranted particularly when tied to the emails. I do encourage you to read the articles, I actually think the politico one is really interesting in how it discusses how the experience in 1992 has impacted how she treats the media now.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 4:12:35 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2016 20:11:07 GMT
Darcy Collins, and anyone else who might provide facts, my questions are serious, and I am genuinely interested in reading factual information. I just read the first two articles you linked Darcy. My take on them is the same as most other articles I've seen-they seem very vague when referencing who Clinton was disparaging (was it the ones who had affairs with him, or the ones who accused him of assault or rape?). Every article I've seen takes a very broad approach to all of this and covers the whole umbrella of Bill's sleaze, while accusing Hillary of being complicit. I've seen multiple people claim that Hillary verbally abused and tried to destroy the rape/assault accusers when they are attempting to defend Trump. If that's the case, surely there is some source out there that lays out the facts clearly and concisely. Everything I've seen so far is based on third party claims and many times, it's speculation/conjecture/opinions. If the facts are out there where are they? Can someone point others to them?
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Oct 12, 2016 20:13:19 GMT
Are you being purposefully obtuse or just ornery? If you made the statement "Everything I have read has said that the earth is flat" and, in fact, that is all you have read, there is nothing inaccurate about that statement. The facts may be different, and you might be open to reading more and learning more, unless someone comes in and jumps on you for sharing what you HAVE read. I'll take the time to read those other links you've provided when I'm less pissed off at you. TBH - the jumping in on me is pretty much how I felt about how you entered this thread. I have deliberately avoided this subject when @giapea and @papercraftadvocate have engaged in their multipage slingfests of she's the devil she's an angel on this subject as I don't think either are interested in real information. shescrafty seemed genuinely curious of the history and I was providing factual information to her including the historic articles and references. I thought the - Hillary knew nothing this just another red herring unwarranted particularly when tied to the emails. I do encourage you to read the articles, I actually think the politico one is really interesting in how it discusses how the experience in 1992 has impacted how she treats the media now. I'm sorry that you felt that I jumped on you. Nowhere did I make a personal comment. I only stated that the article you linked didn't have any reference to Hillary either. There is also a difference between having nothing to do with hiring the PI's and knowing nothing about the whole situation. I said that everything I read pointed to the former, but never claimed the latter. I've been working hard this week to make the most of my political discussions and not engage in fights with anyone. Differences in opinion that we can discuss and debate, but fighting, no. I am watching my words and really don't see anything that I said as an attack on you. I do still stand by my emails analogy since no one here has come up with any direct quotes of words out of Hillary's mouth in public that have trashed the mistresses and the alleged assault victims. I will read the articles you linked after I finish cooking dinner.
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Oct 12, 2016 20:15:42 GMT
Darcy Collins , and anyone else who might provide facts, my questions are serious, and I am genuinely interested in reading factual information. I just read the first two articles you linked Darcy. My take on them is the same as most other articles I've seen-they seem very vague when referencing who Clinton was disparaging (was it the ones who had affairs with him, or the ones who accused him of assault or rape?). Every article I've seen takes a very broad approach to all of this and covers the whole umbrella of Bill's sleaze, while accusing Hillary of being complicit. I've seen multiple people claim that Hillary verbally abused and tried to destroy the rape/assault accusers when they are attempting to defend Trump. If that's the case, surely there is some source out there that lays out the facts clearly and concisely. Everything I've seen so far is based on third party claims and many times, it's speculation/conjecture/opinions. If the facts are out there where are they? Can someone point others to them? Thank you, that has been my experience. Since you generally play better with others than I do , hopefully Darcy will hear this more positively from you.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Oct 12, 2016 20:28:25 GMT
These are all regarding the national enquirer and other tabloids, yes? I read that they were pushing back on those, that at that time mainstream media wasn't reporting on it. And don't be assuming or lumping me into your mold of supporters not being able to agree on negative--I've been asking for weeks now and today is the first day anyone has answered and being at work I've not been able to go read thoroughly. I see a few saying that she was trying to discredit, but I'm not finding where she actually did! I'm going to go reread links.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Oct 12, 2016 20:31:43 GMT
Ok link 1 politico-- nothing there except push back on the press to secure boundaries over reporting on their personal life.
|
|
|
Post by 2peaornot2pea on Oct 12, 2016 20:38:51 GMT
I suppose it depends on how you approach things. Betsey Wright claims 26 women came forward just in the summer of 1992 with allegations about Bill Clinton. Hillary Clinton chose to hire a private investigator to dig up discrediting stories on these women, feed it to the media, and otherwise smear them to aggressively protect Bill Clinton's presidential campaign. I'm sure many will say that they would do anything to protect their husband and his career including publicly humiliating women and if the woman lived in a trailer park she deserved it - I agree with you - it's extremely easy to discredit woman accusing men of inappropriate sexual behavior. www.judicialwatch.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/OIS_Cases_FileGate-Exhibits-13.pdf Darcy I appreciate your links and comments on this. I was younger then so I don't remember the women getting smeared publicly back then. So so far I am not seeing how people say what she (Hillary not Bill) has said that was on par with Trump, but I am also looking at the many many tapes of trump attacking women publicly over and over, not to mention what was on the recent tapes when he boasts about assaulting women. Judicial Watch pushes alt-right conspiracy theories. They are not a good resource for finding factual information.
www.politifact.com/personalities/judicial-watch/statements/
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Oct 12, 2016 20:44:00 GMT
Are you being purposefully obtuse or just ornery? If you made the statement "Everything I have read has said that the earth is flat" and, in fact, that is all you have read, there is nothing inaccurate about that statement. The facts may be different, and you might be open to reading more and learning more, unless someone comes in and jumps on you for sharing what you HAVE read. I'll take the time to read those other links you've provided when I'm less pissed off at you. TBH - the jumping in on me is pretty much how I felt about how you entered this thread. I have deliberately avoided this subject when @giapea and @papercraftadvocate have engaged in their multipage slingfests of she's the devil she's an angel on this subject as I don't think either are interested in real information. shescrafty seemed genuinely curious of the history and I was providing factual information to her including the historic articles and references. I thought the - Hillary knew nothing this just another red herring unwarranted particularly when tied to the emails. I do encourage you to read the articles, I actually think the politico one is really interesting in how it discusses how the experience in 1992 has impacted how she treats the media now. I did/do really want to know. I agree, the articles are vague. I think I'm going to just ditto ilovecookies...
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Oct 12, 2016 20:44:38 GMT
Can someone just provide a quick and dirty list of which women say they were raped/assaulted by Clinton? And what Hillary (allegedly) did to just those women? Are there actual quotes of Hillary calling the (alleged) victims of rape or assault names? Is there evidence that she tried to destroy them-the victims, NOT the willing participants? Serious question. I know Juanita Brodderick has accused him of rape. But I also read somewhere that she denied that allegation under oath back in the early 90s (?) not sure about the date. Ditto this.
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Oct 12, 2016 20:46:35 GMT
It's hard to give a quick summary @ilovecookies and I want to start on the outset if you're looking for some audio where Hillary says the equivalent to grab their pussy - I'm sure it's not there. As for women who claimed non-consensual sexual contact: Juana Broderick, Kathleen Wyllie, and Paula Jones are the ones we've heard the most about. Heavy gives this summary - but some were consensual others are claiming sexual assault, but I've never heard of them before (for reference Betsey Wright claimed in 1992, 26 women had come forward about sexual contact so this doesn't even address those ones and several reported here are after 1992): heavy.com/news/2016/05/bill-clinton-sexual-sex-assault-misconduct-rape-allegations-accusers-affairs-names-list-women-mistresses-scandals-photos-pictures/I've never seen anything to indicate that Hillary Clinton personally verbally abused them - unless you consider calling someone a failed cabaret singer or a narcissistic looney toon verbal abuse. What has been widely reported was a "war room" where Betsey Wright a long time friend, advisor and aide spoke specifically about a campaign within the 1992 campaign to aggressively attack any woman who came out to say anything about sexual contact with Bill Clinton. She is the one who stated she worked with Hillary Clinton to squash the bimbo eruptions. George Stephanopoulos has also publicly discussed Hillary's involvement in discrediting women who came forward. The New York times cited another reporter who was there when one of the stories broke and discussed Hillary's involvement as well, I've forgotten her name. There are enough non-axe grinders (talking about you Dick Morris) for me to firmly believe Hillary Clinton was involved. I do not know that there was any difference between those who said he groped them on a plane versus those who said they slept with him in their operation (I've never seen anyone differentiate). The two most publicly attacked were Gennifer Flowers and Paula Jones - one claiming consensual and one claiming non-consensual. The campaign hired (with Hillary's support if you believe Carl Bernstein) a private investigating team who was extremely aggressive. In his words as reported by the New York times: "to impugn Ms. Flowers’s ‘character and veracity until she is destroyed beyond all recognition" You can read a bit about the investigator here: www.sfgate.com/magazine/article/WATCHING-THE-DETECTIVE-3491214.php Kathleen Wylie has also made multiple statements about his attempts to intimidate her. Man this is already too long and I didn't even get to the lady who was fired from her job years after an affair with Bill when it was reported on in Arkansas. I'll see if I can find that one, she's pretty bitter about what happened and was pissed as she hadn't even gone to the papers..... So I suppose the nutshell is - people have concerns about Hillary Clinton's involvement in a concerted effort to discredit and disparage women who had sexual contact with Bill Clinton (some non-consensual) and some of those women feel their lives were severely damaged by this effort - I seriously doubt there is a smoking gun of her calling any of these women pieces of ass or other vulgarities.
|
|
AmeliaBloomer
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,842
Location: USA
Jun 26, 2014 5:01:45 GMT
|
Post by AmeliaBloomer on Oct 12, 2016 20:48:13 GMT
I was younger then so I don't remember the women getting smeared publicly back then. . I was an adult then. No, Hillary Clinton was not blameless. There seems to have been some machinations. I would be surprised if there weren't. (That's less an endorsement than just an acknowledgment of the reality of political campaigns.) However, any discussion, like this one, that tries to pin it all down gets sidetracked by a unfortunate tendency by SOME to continually pull Bill's consensual partners into the mix, and then by SOME OTHERS who sidestep the allegation of non-consensual sex. The main point I want to make, though, is that I do not share the memories that are being reported in threads here. A couple days ago, somebody posted that HRC publicly attacked these women "over and over." Wha-huh? Now I'm reading this everywhere. Some cultural background: I considered myself reasonably well-informed back then. Most of us relied on traditional media for news. Internet use/access was limited; there was no social media. Like now, partisan talk radio was almost exclusively right wing. Fox News wasn't what it is now. For me, the Whitewater/Newt Gingrich/Kenneth Starr news was relentless and overwhelming, and also troubling because it seemed partisanship was driving choices - and slowing down government - as it never had before. (And closing DOWN government. Enter Monica Lewinsky.) It was the start of the downward spiral. What I'm writing is not an attempt at whitewash; rather, it's an attempt to explain that these supposed vicious and relentless attacks of possible victims of sexual harassment or sexual abuse are just not part of my cultural history of that time. Maybe others have different memories, but I'm loathe to accept the recent internet echo chamber version of 1996 from people who may not even have been alive - or paying attention- then. ETA: Took me a while to write this and I see many new posts. Perhaps I am wordily redundant.
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Oct 12, 2016 20:49:36 GMT
Darcy I appreciate your links and comments on this. I was younger then so I don't remember the women getting smeared publicly back then. So so far I am not seeing how people say what she (Hillary not Bill) has said that was on par with Trump, but I am also looking at the many many tapes of trump attacking women publicly over and over, not to mention what was on the recent tapes when he boasts about assaulting women. Judicial Watch pushes alt-right conspiracy theories. They are not a good resource for finding factual information.
www.politifact.com/personalities/judicial-watch/statements/
It's a washington post article
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 4:12:35 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2016 21:07:22 GMT
Thanks Darcy Collins. I've read the first two articles you linked, and the Politico piece. I'm in between trying to get dinner ready, feed the dogs, etc. but I will finish them sometime tonight. I'll save my opinions for a different post after I've read all the links. Thanks for providing them.
|
|
|
Post by Darcy Collins on Oct 12, 2016 21:16:21 GMT
And I want to state again in this thread - I am in no way claiming that any of this past history makes Donald Trump okay or his words acceptable. I am not creating any kind of equivalency between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. I actually detest the whole - well your candidate said xyz justification for the unacceptable. Donald Trump needs to own his own words and actions and deflection is not effective with me.
I am however, just as frustrated with the desire now to pretend Hillary Clinton did nothing more than call her husband's mistresses bimbos - which is the new counterclaim being batted around. She needs to own her own history as well.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 4:12:35 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2016 1:05:14 GMT
Ok, I read all the articles linked. I just don't see any specifics. The Politico piece was kind of interesting on the workings of the press, but really didn't address the accusation that Hillary badmouthed or tried to destroy the women (3 of them, as far as I can tell) that claimed Bill had assaulted them or raped her (Broaddrick). The first NYT piece gave some specifics on the campaign going after Gennifer Flowers, but not on any of the assault/rape accusers. The most specific thing I saw said that the digging into pasts was "repeated with other women." That's so vague. He was accused of lots of affairs. I'm sure he had many. I just see no evidence or factual information to support the claim Hillary "tried to destroy" the rape/assault accusers. The story admits that the level of Hillary's involvement in that effort in the case of Paula Jones in 1994 is still a matter of debate. Paula Jones herself said "they sent out people to dig up trash on me." They who? I can see why people want to blame Hillary, but I don't see any evidence that she did what is now being claimed. The fact that Paula Jones' lawsuit was bankrolled by the Rutherford Institute is a problem for me, too. I didn't see anything more specific in the second NYT article. Even the WaPo article linked by Judicial Watch only mentions affairs. So, without more concrete evidence on the allegation that Hillary badmouthed assault/rape accusers over and over, or tried to destroy them, I just don't think there's enough evidence to make that assertion. It looks like she might have engaged in, or at least approved, some scorched-earth strategies wrt Gennifer Flowers. That gives me pause, but if I'm being honest, I'm far from a fan of cheaters (either participant), and I don't think that Ms. Flowers has conducted herself with any dignity since she started her accusations. To be fair, I think Bill is a sleazy horndog. On the Paula Jones thing, so far all I've seen is her claim that a vague "they" tried to dig up trash on her. Juanita Broaddrick--her rape claim is iffy to me after reading this: from this NPR articleBut even giving her the benefit of the doubt on the rape story, what kind of evidence is there that Hillary "threatened her" ? She claims that Hillary tried to intimidate her at a Bill Clinton fundraiser weeks after the alleged rape. I just can't fathom a rape victim helping with her rapist's campaign. And I'm really unclear on how Hillary knew about the alleged rape a few weeks after it happened if Broaddrick had been reluctant to tell her story, as she claims. Who would have told Hillary about the alleged rape? Bill? Juanita Broaddrick? I just haven't seen any credible accounts or sources that Hillary tried to destroy the assault/rape accusers. I may disagree with her decision to stay with a cheater, but I'm not going to brand her as evil because she stayed married to him. And until someone has something more concrete than alt-right supposition, I'm not going to believe the claims that she tried to hurt alleged assault victims.
|
|
|
Post by debmast on Oct 13, 2016 1:11:42 GMT
debmast...hmmm...don't recall ever saying that what Donald Trump has said and/or done was "okay". Think you have me confused with someone else. I can't stand Trump either. andiamkristinl16...guess it all depends on what you find "creepy". Being President of the United States, secretly getting your jollies with a 20-something young woman in the Oval Office of the White House is creepy to me. If you prefer disgusting, I am ok with that too! I was asking if you thought he was okay. Cause your original post only addressed Clinton.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 4:12:36 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2016 1:26:37 GMT
Someone was asking about a list of the women who've accused Bill Clinton. I came across this article the other day about that very subject. I generally have stopped reading political blogs, etc., unless they are from major news sources, so I am not familiar with the Daily Wire, but I am assuming the Daily Wire is a conservative site. article*As an aside, I wish it was standard practice to have footnotes on every article with the sources of all the information like we had to do on every research paper I ever wrote. It would make it a lot easier to see if the info provided in articles like these were accurate.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 4:12:35 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2016 1:35:54 GMT
Thanks for the link, @jodster. I just can't put any faith into an article that names Breitbart as its main source of info. and has a list of unnamed, unverified accusations.
ITA with you on footnotes, though.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 4:12:36 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2016 1:58:07 GMT
I hear ya, @ilovecookies. That's why I rarely read articles that aren't from a major news source.
Whether or not you believe everything in the article or not, the fact of the matter is that BC has a long history of those kinds of allegations, extending over 4 decades. As someone in the thread stated, where there's that much smoke, there's usually fire.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Oct 13, 2016 2:08:12 GMT
It's hard to give a quick summary @ilovecookies and I want to start on the outset if you're looking for some audio where Hillary says the equivalent to grab their pussy - I'm sure it's not there. As for women who claimed non-consensual sexual contact: Juana Broderick, Kathleen Wyllie, and Paula Jones are the ones we've heard the most about. Heavy gives this summary - but some were consensual others are claiming sexual assault, but I've never heard of them before (for reference Betsey Wright claimed in 1992, 26 women had come forward about sexual contact so this doesn't even address those ones and several reported here are after 1992): heavy.com/news/2016/05/bill-clinton-sexual-sex-assault-misconduct-rape-allegations-accusers-affairs-names-list-women-mistresses-scandals-photos-pictures/I've never seen anything to indicate that Hillary Clinton personally verbally abused them - unless you consider calling someone a failed cabaret singer or a narcissistic looney toon verbal abuse. What has been widely reported was a "war room" where Betsey Wright a long time friend, advisor and aide spoke specifically about a campaign within the 1992 campaign to aggressively attack any woman who came out to say anything about sexual contact with Bill Clinton. She is the one who stated she worked with Hillary Clinton to squash the bimbo eruptions. George Stephanopoulos has also publicly discussed Hillary's involvement in discrediting women who came forward. The New York times cited another reporter who was there when one of the stories broke and discussed Hillary's involvement as well, I've forgotten her name. There are enough non-axe grinders (talking about you Dick Morris) for me to firmly believe Hillary Clinton was involved. I do not know that there was any difference between those who said he groped them on a plane versus those who said they slept with him in their operation (I've never seen anyone differentiate). The two most publicly attacked were Gennifer Flowers and Paula Jones - one claiming consensual and one claiming non-consensual. The campaign hired (with Hillary's support if you believe Carl Bernstein) a private investigating team who was extremely aggressive. In his words as reported by the New York times: "to impugn Ms. Flowers’s ‘character and veracity until she is destroyed beyond all recognition" You can read a bit about the investigator here: www.sfgate.com/magazine/article/WATCHING-THE-DETECTIVE-3491214.php Kathleen Wylie has also made multiple statements about his attempts to intimidate her. Man this is already too long and I didn't even get to the lady who was fired from her job years after an affair with Bill when it was reported on in Arkansas. I'll see if I can find that one, she's pretty bitter about what happened and was pissed as she hadn't even gone to the papers..... So I suppose the nutshell is - people have concerns about Hillary Clinton's involvement in a concerted effort to discredit and disparage women who had sexual contact with Bill Clinton (some non-consensual) and some of those women feel their lives were severely damaged by this effort - I seriously doubt there is a smoking gun of her calling any of these women pieces of ass or other vulgarities. Juanita Broadderick : "Telling her story- Broaddrick was reluctant to tell her story. She declined opportunities to be interviewed for years and when investigators for Paula Jones, who also accused Clinton of sexual harassment, approached, she rebuffed them. On Jan. 2, 1998, she provided those investigators with a sworn affidavit. "During the 1992 Presidential campaign there were unfounded rumors and stories circulated that Mr. Clinton had made unwelcome sexual advances toward me in the late seventies," she said. "Newspaper and tabloid reporters hounded me and my family, seeking corroboration of these tales. I repeatedly denied the allegations and requested that my family's privacy be respected. These allegations are untrue and I had hoped that they would no longer haunt me, or cause further disruption to my family." When Kenneth Starr was investigating Bill Clinton, in the late '90s, he approached Broaddrick and offered her immunity. She told BuzzFeed in an August interview that's when she decided it "was time to tell the full truth." Her story became fully public with this 1999 Dateline NBC interview: In it, she explained that she had not come forward with the story because she worried that no one would believe her. Broaddrick had no witnesses but a friend of hers told reporters Broaddrick told her about the assault at the time. Bill Clinton's lawyers' response At the time, Bill Clinton's lawyers denied the allegations. And according to the Washington Post's account, Starr decided he would not need Broaddrick's testimony because she told him that Clinton did not try to influence her. As this election season came into full swing, Broaddrick's story came back into the spotlight. And Broaddrick alleged that Hillary Clinton tried to intimidate her. Allegedly meeting Hillary Clinton In an interview given to the right-wing website Breitbart, Broaddrick said that weeks after the alleged rape, she met Hillary Clinton at a fundraiser for Bill Clinton. Hillary Clinton allegedly thanked her for "everything you are doing in Bill's campaign." As Broaddrick tells it, she tried to leave the event but Hillary Clinton grabbed her arm and told her, "Do you understand everything you do?" Broaddrick took that as a threat that implied she should keep quiet." She denied it, then said it happened. Then 25+ years later shows up beside Donald Trump (paid to be there as reports have stated) to disparage Hillary---and for what she stated Hillary said to her, I'm baffled at how that is a threat! And Bill has denied this.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 4:12:35 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2016 3:07:31 GMT
I hear ya, @ilovecookies . That's why I rarely read articles that aren't from a major news source. Whether or not you believe everything in the article or not, the fact of the matter is that BC has a long history of those kinds of allegations, extending over 4 decades. As someone in the thread stated, where there's that much smoke, there's usually fire. Completely agree on news sources. And you know, I don't disagree with you that Bill Clinton is a horrific skeeze when it comes to sexual behavior. I would not be surprised if he has made unwanted advances or even assaults. I just don't see anything credible with the attacks on Hillary re: Bill's behavior. I think it's also fair to note that Donald Trump has been accused of multiple assaults/rapes. He's (at the least) just as much of a skeeze on that front as Bill Clinton. The fact is that Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton are the candidates. Donald Trump has been accused multiple times of assault/rape. I don't think Hillary has ever been accused of assault/rape. Bill Clinton is not a candidate, and I don't see the logic in attacking Hillary for Bill's behavior. SaveSave
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 4:12:36 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2016 3:25:12 GMT
Over the last 25 years I have read multiple articles and seen multiple news reports about how Hillary tried to discredit those women. Now, (general) you may not believe that, but I personally do, because if she hadn't, it would have threatened both their political careers.
This is a woman with decades of government experience, who knowingly broke the law and set up her own email server so that she could have control over who had access to it, and then lied about that repeatedly. I have a hard time believing that someone who plays political hard ball like Hillary and is willing to do that, would not try to discredit those accusers to save her husband's political career.
Now, Hillary may not have committed the acts, but in my opinion, she enabled him to continue to harass and assault women through her actions.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
May 2, 2024 4:12:36 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2016 4:24:26 GMT
Ok, I read all the articles linked. I just don't see any specifics. The Politico piece was kind of interesting on the workings of the press, but really didn't address the accusation that Hillary badmouthed or tried to destroy the women (3 of them, as far as I can tell) that claimed Bill had assaulted them or raped her (Broaddrick). The first NYT piece gave some specifics on the campaign going after Gennifer Flowers, but not on any of the assault/rape accusers. The most specific thing I saw said that the digging into pasts was "repeated with other women." That's so vague. He was accused of lots of affairs. I'm sure he had many. I just see no evidence or factual information to support the claim Hillary "tried to destroy" the rape/assault accusers. The story admits that the level of Hillary's involvement in that effort in the case of Paula Jones in 1994 is still a matter of debate. Paula Jones herself said "they sent out people to dig up trash on me." They who? I can see why people want to blame Hillary, but I don't see any evidence that she did what is now being claimed. The fact that Paula Jones' lawsuit was bankrolled by the Rutherford Institute is a problem for me, too. I didn't see anything more specific in the second NYT article. Even the WaPo article linked by Judicial Watch only mentions affairs. So, without more concrete evidence on the allegation that Hillary badmouthed assault/rape accusers over and over, or tried to destroy them, I just don't think there's enough evidence to make that assertion. It looks like she might have engaged in, or at least approved, some scorched-earth strategies wrt Gennifer Flowers. That gives me pause, but if I'm being honest, I'm far from a fan of cheaters (either participant), and I don't think that Ms. Flowers has conducted herself with any dignity since she started her accusations. To be fair, I think Bill is a sleazy horndog. On the Paula Jones thing, so far all I've seen is her claim that a vague "they" tried to dig up trash on her. Juanita Broaddrick--her rape claim is iffy to me after reading this: from this NPR articleBut even giving her the benefit of the doubt on the rape story, what kind of evidence is there that Hillary "threatened her" ? She claims that Hillary tried to intimidate her at a Bill Clinton fundraiser weeks after the alleged rape. I just can't fathom a rape victim helping with her rapist's campaign. And I'm really unclear on how Hillary knew about the alleged rape a few weeks after it happened if Broaddrick had been reluctant to tell her story, as she claims. Who would have told Hillary about the alleged rape? Bill? Juanita Broaddrick? I just haven't seen any credible accounts or sources that Hillary tried to destroy the assault/rape accusers. I may disagree with her decision to stay with a cheater, but I'm not going to brand her as evil because she stayed married to him. And until someone has something more concrete than alt-right supposition, I'm not going to believe the claims that she tried to hurt alleged assault victims. She explains why she was only there for a minute to give the donor documents and then leave. And then Hillary. And why she kept quiet.
|
|
|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Oct 13, 2016 16:35:39 GMT
She came forth at this venture because she was paid to do so.
It appears that when she had multiple opportunities to state her story, she said it wasn't true.
She reversed her story when Ken Starr offered her immunity.
No charges, no courts...
Now she's back after all these years as a paid spokesperson for Trump.
|
|