(reprise from Aug. 2000) Katherine Prudhomme speech at Hillary Clinton rape protest in New York

Speech written and given by Katherine Prudhomme

Saturday August 19, 2000

Good afternoon. My name is Katherine Prudhomme. I am a wife, a mother, the first female graduate of my trade high schools machine shop program and I am a rape survivor. As such I am wearing a dark green ribbon today to tell the world "I am a rape survivor and I will not be ashamed!" I thank all who have chosen to wear light purple ribbons showing that they believe and support Juanita Broaddrick. Thank you also to the many generous volunteers who helped make this happen today.

Last December during the New Hampshire primary I asked V.P Al Gore during a live, televised town hall meeting at WNDS TV studios not far from my Derry home if he believed Juanita Broaddrick. She is the woman who made the highly credible claim of rape against a sitting president, William Clinton.

Juanita Broaddrick was a volunteer on the "Clinton for Governor" campaign when she says she was raped in a Little Rock, Arkansas hotel room. Broaddrick, a successful nursing home owner with nothing but peace of mind to gain from telling her story was interviewed by Lisa Myers in January 1999. The interview aired February 24 of the same year on the Dateline NBC program.

Most people who saw the interview believed Mrs. Broaddrick. President Clinton, responding through his lawyer, has said this claim is false. Haven’t we been down this road before with Clinton? And haven’t we found out what his word is worth? His word is worth nothing. To not believe Mrs. Broaddrick, to think Bill Clinton is not a rapist is to make a liar out of Mrs. Broaddrick. I won’t do that! I thank all of you who came out here today for saying with me – I believe Juanita Broaddrick!

Al Gore told me he did not see the interview and didn’t know how to evaluate all the charges. I wonder what made the Anita Hill case so much easier for him to evaluate? Gore went on to tell me how he thought the American people were tired of all these charges and wanted to move on.

That last statement really made me mad. What is he saying to me? That if I don’t "want to move on" then I am not one of the American people? Or is he telling those who still think that rape is a crime in this country and believe their president may be a rapist that they are out of touch with everybody else? Are we out of touch ? I say no! We are in fact in touch! WE are in touch with truth, we are in touch with justice, we are in touch with kindness and we are in touch with doing the right thing! And I won’t be manipulated by anyone who may try to tell me otherwise!

Gore has an undeniable record of believing women when they make a serious charge of sexual mistreatment by powerful Republican men. He stood up for and defended Anita Hill when she said she was sexually harassed by now Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas. Why then did he just dismiss Juanita Broaddrick? One would think such a "caring" person as Gore would have at least watched the interview Mrs. Broaddrick gave to Lisa Myers.

But he did not. Mrs. Broaddrick is simply to inconvenient for him to acknowledge. It takes a strong person to stand up for what is right when it is inconvenient and I learned that day last December that Gore is not a strong person.

Let’s move on to a women who has been at the forefront of the women’s and human rights crusade for decades. Hillary Clinton is someone that rape survivors such a myself or Mrs. Broaddrick or the brave green ribbon wearers among us should be able to turn to and depend on. But we cannot. Hillary Clinton has betrayed us.

She has words – thousands of them – that say she is on our side, but is she really? Consider these examples:

The printed words don't quite do justice to the words as spoken by Katherine.

I can think of no comment other than letting you see her words.

bump

"Rape enabler" grossly understates missus clinton's role in the rapes.
"Co-rapist" is the accurate description.
Thus, when we ask missus clinton, "Do you believe Juanita?" we are asking the wrong question.

What we should be asking her, rather, is this: "Why did you participate for 30 years in the rapes and predations?"
We used to execute rapists and traitors.

Today we elect them president?

Are we nuts?

the principal being more worthless even than its phantom proxy, both alike unsubstantial, and the former shapeless to boot

--Samuel Taylor Coleridge

... And then we have the Susan Estrich proxy.

Susan Estrich is the Democrat political operative who put Dukakis in a tank and would put hillary in the White House. Amazon.com sales rank suggests another tank for Susan: Following her sales pitch on Hannity and Colmes the other night, her book, The Case for Hillary Clinton went from bad to worse, (It instantly sustained a 10% decline to #8517. As I type this, it is #12,244.)

Ms. Estrich also wrote Real Rape, a book about the clinton-clinton-Broaddrick kind of rape. But that was before she was tapped by the clinton machine to cover for... and revise the predatory history of... a couple of real rapists.

'Simple rape' is what the system calls this clinton kind of rape... Simple as opposed to aggravated. 'Simple rape,' a horrendous misnomer that only perpetuates the injustice. 'Real Rape' is what Ms. Estrich called it. But, as I said, that was before she was tapped by the clintons.

In the cases on which this book focuses, the man is not the armed stranger jumping from the bushes--nor yet the black man jumping the white woman, the case that was most likely to result in the death penalty prior to 1977, and the stereotype that may explain in part the seriousness with which a white male criminal justice system has addressed "stranger" rape. Instead the man is a neighbor, an acquaintance, or a date. The man and the woman are both white, or both black, or both Hispanic. He is a respected bachelor, a student, a businessman, or a professional. He may have been offered a ride home or invited in. He does not have a weapon. He acted alone. It is, in short, a simple rape.

Susan Estrich, Real Rape

In 'simple rape,' the system invariably revictimizes the victim and protects the rapist.

This horrible perversion of justice was the impetus for her book, so, of course, Ms Estrich knows exactly what is going on here between the clintons and Broaddrick. (To be expanded upon in future posts.)

Worse still, Ms. Estrich uses the horror of her own purported rape to obfuscate the casuistry and rapelies required to spin yet another rapist presidency. Estrich is contemptible.

This is the usual clinton rube arrogance rooted in stupidity (of which this interview tonight is but another example).

The clintons figured that Estrich in their corner would make clinton serial rape and predation just disappear, not understanding that her presence would only intensify the scrutiny and that her 'expertise' and prior utterances would be used against them... and her.

Indeed, by twisting her own scholarship, Estrich indicts the clintons just as surely as the twisting double helix on that blue Gap dress.

Estrich's reaction to Juanita Broaddrick is the typical opportunistic, dishonest feminist reaction. (See article, Salon.com.)

While most, if not all of the women who contributed to the salon.com piece believed Juanita, (liberals as well as conservatives), some feminists were in denial; they conveniently relied on false premises to assuage the cognitive dissonance.

One recurring false premise (a premise that Estrich relies on): although Juanita was credible, clinton couldn't be a rapist because he never raped before (or since).

Notwithstanding the fact that not all rapists are serial rapists, did they never hear of Eileen Wellstone et al?

Shame on them.

"Who is Juanita Broaddrick? I've never heard of her!" cried Betty Friedan, the founder of modern feminism. Friedan's outburst came at last Friday's conference, entitled "The Legacy and Future of Hillary Rodham Clinton." Held at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington. D.C., the event offered a chilling microcosm of an angry, divided America.

For nearly an hour, a five-woman panel had been debating whether Hillary qualified as a "feminist heroine." I thought Broaddrick's claim of having been raped by Hillary's husband had some bearing on this point, so I broached the subject during the question-and-answer period. Friedan's dyspeptic denial followed.
Was Friedan telling the truth? Maybe. And maybe all those millions of Germans who professed ignorance of the death camps were telling the truth too. The problem is, having admitted her ignorance, Friedan showed no interest in exploring the matter further. And that was the problem with the Germans too.
Totalitarian impulses flourished at the conference. Taking a page from Soviet psychiatry, some Clintonites suggested that Hillary hating might be a mental illness.

Richard Poe
The Hillary Conspiracy

HANNITY'S ESTRICH INTERVIEW: THE CLINTONS' RAPE OF BROADDRICK

While Sean Hannity correctly zeroed in on the clinton rape of Juanita Broaddrick, one of the issues that should automatically disqualify missus clinton for any position of power, he sabotaged his own line of attack.

Hannity's setup question, whether hillary 'believed' bill, was a dodge. And a not very artful one, at that. As Sean Hannity knows well, the issue isn't whether hillary 'believed' bill; the issue is whether hillary participated. In that rape as well as in all the other clinton rapes and predations.

Hannity of all people should know this. He interviewed Broaddrick on precisely that point. (A video and analysis of that interview to follow.) Broaddrick described to him in shocking detail the meeting with hillary clinton that occurred several weeks after the rape. missus clinton went to that meeting for the express purpose of warning Broaddrick to keep her mouth shut. (She and the rapist entered the room, she approached Broaddrick (whom she had never met before) while a slinking rapist stayed behind, she proceeded to warn Broaddrick, she and the rapist immediately left.)

In Hannity's original Estrich-Broaddrick interview, he was honest about the real issue. But even then he ultimately failed because he neglected to expose the following clinton casuistry being spun by Estrich:

the 'statute of limitation' on rape should apply to the clintons in the Broaddrick rape,
the postmodern construction of 'rape,' i.e., the definition of rape is subjective, i.e., what is considered rape by the victim isn't necessarily considered rape by the rapist,
the definition of rape has morphed over time, i.e., what is rape today wasn't necessarily rape in the '70s.

On point 1, the statute of limitation on rape applies in a court of law, not in the voting booth. The question we are deciding isn't whether the clintons should be thrown in the slammer (another matter for another day); the question is less onerous, (from the clintons' perspective, anyway): Do the clintons have the character to be president?

The reductio ad absurdum is Christopher Shays' comment, made after he viewed the Ford building evidence on the rape of Broaddrick: "I believed that he had done it. I believed her that she had been raped 20 years ago. And it was vicious rapes, it was twice at the same event." Asked if the president is a rapist, Shays said, "I would like not to say it that way. But the bottom line is that I believe that he did rape Broaddrick."

And yet Shays voted not to impeach. Purportedly because he asked the wrong question. ("Where was the obstruction of justice?") (Any cognitive dissonance Shays may have experienced rendering that verdict was no doubt assuaged by the political plum clinton gave to Mrs. (Betsi) Shays...)

And so we had two more years of the clinton Nano-Presidency. And with it, inexorably, 9/11.

Regarding points two and three: Juanita's bitten lip, swollen to twice its normal size, the hallmark of a serial rapist, is the obvious counterexample.

This book should be required reading... for Susan Estrich.

Mia T, 10.27.05
THE DANGER OF RUNNING VICARIOUSLY
Bill O'Reilly chews up and spits out the hillary clinton candidacy
(clip included)

The rape took place while Bill was running for governor. Hillary came bursting into the room to talk to two people, one of whom I personally know.

She said "You won't believe what this [expletive] did now. He tried to rape some b*tch."

It was the job of these two to squelch the story.
doug from upland to Sean Hannity,
WABC, 10/16/00

.In a letter to Mrs. Clinton recalling their meeting shortly after the reported assault occurred, she wondered about the significance of Mrs. Clinton's words to her at that time. Thank you, Mrs. Broaddrick says Mrs. Clinton told her, for "everything you do for Bill."

The not-so-subtle implication of the letter is that Mrs. Clinton is, in fact, her husband's enabler. Dealing with her husband's promiscuity and worse might keep her from dealing with the important issues facing the people of New York, namely her candidacy. One might call it a Faustian bargain except that even Mephistopheles might not lower himself to sign such a deal....

COMPLETE ARTICLE
Did he rape that woman, Juanita Broaddrick?
The Wall Street Journal
EDITORIAL
October 18, 2000

I remember it as though it was yesterday. I only wish that it were yesterday and maybe there would still be time to do something about what your husband, Bill Clinton, did to me. There was a political rally for Mr. Clinton's bid for governor of Arkansas. I had obligated myself to be at this rally prior to my being assaulted by your husband in April, 1978. I had made up my mind to make an appearance and then leave as soon as the two of you arrived. This was a big mistake, but I was still in a state of shock and denial. You had questioned the gentleman who drove you and Mr. Clinton from the airport. You asked him about me and if I would be at the gathering. Do you remember? You told the driver, "Bill has talked so much about Juanita", and that you were so anxious to meet me. Well, you wasted no time. As soon as you entered the room, you came directly to me and grabbed my hand. Do you remember how you thanked me, saying "we want to thank you for everything that you do for Bill". At that point, I was pretty shaken and started to walk off. Remember how you kept a tight grip on my hand and drew closer to me? You repeated your statement, but this time with a coldness and look that I have seen many times on television in the last eight years. You said, "Everything you do for Bill". You then released your grip and I said nothing and left the gathering.

What did you mean, Hillary? Were you referring to my keeping quiet about the assault I had suffered at the hands of your husband only two weeks before? Were you warning me to continue to keep quiet? We both know the answer to that question.

Yes, I can answer Brit Hume's question. You are the same Hillary that you were twenty years ago. You are cold, calculating and self-serving. You cannot tolerate the thought that you will soon be without the power you have wielded for the last eight years. Your effort to stay in power will be at the expense of the state of New York. I only hope the voters of New York will wake up in time and realize that Hillary Clinton is not an honorable or an honest person.

I will end by asking if you believe the statements I made on NBC Dateline when Lisa Myers asked if I had been assaulted and raped by your husband?

Or perhaps, you are like Vice-President Gore and did not see the interview.

DO YOU REMEMBER? AN OPEN LETTER TO HILLARY CLINTON BY JUANITA BROADDRICK SUNDAY OCT 15, 2000

"Crucial to this protective wall was the secret police, a group of private detectives hired to protect hillary and 'Saturday night bill.' Their tactics included digging up dirt on women who might be linked to bill in order to cow them into silence. There is even some evidence of possible physical intimidation."

HEAR DICK MORRIS

"I got the letters from Pellicano to these women intimidating them. I had tapes of conversations from Pellicano to the women. I got handwritten letters from the women."

[Pellicano played a critical role in Mr. Clinton's 1992 presidential campaign by "suppressing" "inconvenient" accounts from several women, by concocting fraudulent "proof" (later discredited) that Gennifer Flowers doctored the damning tape of clinton, and again inside the clinton operation in January 1998, four days after the Monica Lewinsky story broke, to falsely paint Monica as simply a lying stalker, a claim later discredited by clinton's own DNA.]

MARY MATALIN
1997, CBS

There is reason to believe that he is a rapist ("You better get some ice on that," Juanita Broaddrick says he told her concerning her bit lip), and that he bombed a country to distract attention from legal difficulties arising from his glandular life, and that... [f]urthermore, the bargain that he and his wife call a marriage refutes the axiom that opposites attract. Rather, she, as much as he, perhaps even more so, incarnates Clintonism

GEORGE WILL
SLEAZE, THE SEQUEL

Connecticut Rep. Chris Shays said on a talk radio show Wednesday that, based on secret evidence he reviewed during the impeachment controversy, he believes President Clinton raped Juanita Broaddrick, not once, but twice.

Talk-show host Tom Scott of Clear Channel Broadcasting, New Haven (WELI 960) asked Shays about the mysterious impeachment "evidence room," prompting the GOP moderate to say that Broaddrick "disclosed that she had been raped, not once, but twice" to Judiciary Committee investigators.

Shays, who is often hailed by the New York Times for his independent judgment and good sense, found the evidence compelling:

"I believed that he had done it. I believed her that she had been raped 20 years ago. And it was vicious rapes, it was twice at the same event." Asked point blank if the president is a rapist, Shays said, "I would like not to say that it way. But the bottom line is that I believe that he did rape Broaddrick."

HEAR CHRISTOPHER SHAYS
'Shays Shocker Clinton Raped Broaddrick Twice'
National Review Online
By NR staff
8/02/2000

"Who is Juanita Broaddrick? I've never heard of her!" cried Betty Friedan, the founder of modern feminism. Friedan's outburst came at last Friday's conference, entitled "The Legacy and Future of Hillary Rodham Clinton." Held at the American Enterprise Institute in Washington. D.C., the event offered a chilling microcosm of an angry, divided America.

For nearly an hour, a five-woman panel had been debating whether Hillary qualified as a "feminist heroine." I thought Broaddrick's claim of having been raped by Hillary's husband had some bearing on this point, so I broached the subject during the question-and-answer period. Friedan's dyspeptic denial followed.

Was Friedan telling the truth? Maybe. And maybe all those millions of Germans who professed ignorance of the death camps were telling the truth too. The problem is, having admitted her ignorance, Friedan showed no interest in exploring the matter further. And that was the problem with the Germans too.

Totalitarian impulses flourished at the conference. Taking a page from Soviet psychiatry, some Clintonites suggested that Hillary hating might be a mental illness.

Richard Poe
The Hillary Conspiracy

"If you look at white women, and I think that was the key to this election, Kerry won 45% based on the exit polls--but they're generally in agreement--Kerry won 45%, Bush won 55% of white women. By contrast, Bush won only 45% of white women in 2000, so he upped is percentages by 10 points. In 1996, bill clinton won 48% of white women compared to Bob Dole's 43%. That is a huge, huge difference. I don't think you can lay all that at the doorstep of moral values. I think that this president unabashedly and abjectly took the issue of terror and used it to terrorize... white women.": HEAR HAROLD ICKES
Washington Journal
Nov. 8, 2004
C-SPAN
"It's no longer acceptable to say that the abuse and mistreatment of women is cultural. It should be called what it is: criminal.": Hillary Clinton
addressing the UN, 3.4.99


(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)

BEAUTY AND THE HILDABEAST

JEANINE PIRRO: 30-year career fighting for the abused woman
HILLARY CLINTON: 30-year career abusing women

(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE)
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 7, available HERE): by Mia T, 6.26.05
COPYRIGHT MIA T 2005

CLINTONS' DOCUMENTED ABUSE OF WOMEN

the clinton-clinton-Broaddrick kind of rape, according to Susan Estrich

THE DANGER OF RUNNING VICARIOUSLY
Bill O'Reilly chews up and spits out the hillary clinton candidacy
(clip included)

ESTRICH IMPEACHED BY HER OWN WORDS,
EXPOSES STOCK HILLARY PLOY: EXPLOIT WOMEN
my amazon.com review

STRANGE BEDFELLOWS: ED KLEIN AND SUSAN ESTRICH AGREE ABOUT HILLARY

ESTRICH BOOK EXPOSES STOCK HILLARY PLOY: EXPLOIT WOMEN

retrograde feminist fraud positions herself as victim (again) in order to win White House
[FOOL ME ONCE, SHAME ON YOU! FOOL ME TWICE, SHAME ON ME!]

NOTE THE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IN CLINTON REACTION TIME AND CONTENT TO THE TWO RAPE CHARGES

CATCHING THE CONSCIENCE OF THE KINGFISH
differential reaction to the two rape charges snares the clintons

OPEN LETTER TO SEAN HANNITY ON ESTRICH INTERVIEW, THE CLINTONS' RAPE OF BROADDRICK
(with additions, corrections, addendum)

BEAUTY AND THE HILDABEAST

JEANINE PIRRO: 30-year career fighting for the abused woman
HILLARY CLINTON: 30-year career abusing women

hillary clinton is a "CONGENITAL LIAR"
("I am not a crook")

HILLARY FLUNKED D.C. BAR EXAM
"the smartest woman in the world" sought less competitive venue

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.