.jpg)
Posted on 07/27/2005 8:49:00 AM PDT by doug from upland
1 - Clinton Administration's Bradford DeLong Says No to Hillary
2- Gulping for air, I started crying and yelling at him; plus, Jesse blows it
3 - Military Uniforms in the White House
=======================================================================
In the Spring of 1978, during Attorney General Bill Clinton's campaign for governor, he and Hillary scheduled a joint appearance at a fund-raiser in Van Buren, a small town nestled in the foothills of the Ozark Mountains in Crawford County.
The chairman of the Crawford County committee for the Election of Bill Clinton was an attractive thirty-five-year-old nursing home owner by the name of Juanita Broaddrick. She had volunteered to work for the young attorney general because, as she explained in an interview for this book, "all the women in this area were taken by his charisma, looks, and personality."
But Juanita was no longer "taken" by Bill Clinton. In fact, she was dreading seeing him at this night's event, for the last time they were in the same room, he had raped her.
Just three weeks before, he had come up to her hotel room in Little Rock. "He turned me around and started kissing me," she said, "and that was a real shock. I first pushed him away and just told him 'no.' . . . The second time he tries to kiss me he starts biting on my lip. . . . And then he forces me down on the bed. I just was very frightened, and I tried to get away from him and I told him 'no.' ... He wouldn't listen to me. . . . He was such a different person at that moment; he was just a vicious, awful person."
Juanita did not tell her husband about the sexual assault.
"I felt responsible for what happened," she explained. "You go back to the nineteen seventies and allow a man to come to your hotel room, you feel you get what you deserved. I accepted this guilt.
"When Hillary arrived with Bill at the fund-raiser, she made her entrance through the kitchen area," Juanita continued. "And I was going to leave immediately. But she made her way directly to me, making me very nervous. I was dumbfounded that she came straight to me.
" 'I'm happy to meet you,' Hillary said. 'Bill has talked a lot about you and what you have done for the campaign. And I want you to know how much I appreciate what you do for Bill.'
"I was falling apart emotionally. She would not let me go. She came close to my face.
"'Everything you do for Bill,' she said, looking me stern in the eye. 'Everything.'
"I extracted my hand from hers. And in that instant, I knew that she knew. I never thought for a moment there was any possibility that she didn't know that her husband had raped me."
Found the reference -- Feb. 2, 1999 by Cohen in the Washington Post
The media didn't give Clinton a free pass on the Broaddrick story, but there did exist an overall lack of direction; "where do we go with it from here," summed up the sentiments of many journalists. With no legal, criminal, or impeachment machinery pushing the story along it petered out quickly, with most commentators' final words centered on the sad thought that no one will ever know for sure whether we twice elected a rapist to the highest office in the land. Noting that Newsweek's only coverage of the Broaddrick story had been a pithy remark in its "Conventional Wisdom" item-of-the-week box (she got a sideways arrow for not coming forward sooner but, opined Newsweek, her charges "sound like our guy"), one columnist summed up the reaction to Broaddrick this way: "He raped you, Juanita? Yeah, sounds like our guy. But what's your point?"
Check your mail to see if it's the "January 17, 1999" Wash.Post article I sent you. If so, I don't mind formatting it, but you'll have to tell me which excerpt to get. And what's the limit? 500 words?
Richard Cohen, a liberal columnist for The Washington Post and a Clinton sympathizer, wrote in amazement that the ability of Bill and Hillary Clinton to float above such charges is "staggering" -- "the Clintons play by no rules.
I would love to get Cohen on film saying that.
Found it, although it was a different date. Check your mail.
If someone will tell me what the word-limit is for the WashCompost, I'll post it.
Off topic: It's frustrating to try to find an answer to those questions every time I want to post something because I don't have a good list. All I know about is the thread linked below, which is hard to search. Is there a composite list somewhere? It's probably there and I just haven't found it yet.
Updated FR Excerpt and Link Only or Deny Posting List due to Copyright Complaints
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1111944/posts
Thank you.
Got it in FReepmail. Thanks! It's not necessary to post it.
Wow.
Her political speechifying and travel schedule right now are aimed at eliminating Democratic opposition before it appears. She has the whip hand in the Party, and if she tells Howard Dean not to let anyone have any money to campaign against her, like she did to Al Gore in 2003, then it's all over for whoever she's cutting off.
She's cornering the 'Rat nomination by campaigning preemptively. She and Slick have a history of doing that. Slick did it to Dole in 1996: he had the '96 election sewed up before the Republicans even had a caucus. That's what Chinese reptile money bought him.
I think the American public is going to see through this house of cards she's putting together. She would mobilize the republicans and conservatives in this country like no other candidate.
Sorry to have offended you. I do sympathize with her charge of rape. I was merely suggesting that at the time of this rape, she chose to remain silent. I understand her reason to do so. It would have certainly damaged her business, and as we all know, her reputation. I do not fault her for her silence at that time.
During the 1992 election, the charge of rape could have had great impact. This is all I am suggesting. Perhaps, the news conference of Gennifer Flower would have had more impact had Juanita come forward.
You know nothing of the situation and psychological trauma. Juanita did not have a political agenda as do we. She was a rape victim. Don't make your demands on her until you are the rape victim of a very powerful person.
Thank you for your kind reply. I never meant to condemn or denigrate her in any way.
Perhaps, I didn't explain myself properly. What I was trying to infer was the fact that it would have helped to expose the clinton machinery had she come forward at a time, when possibly,he could have been held accountable by losing the election.
For whatever reason she had to speak out, it was too late. This was my point.
The MSM was in full protection mode during both of his elections. A rape charge would have been more difficult to silence. I agree, today, it may have mattered.
I don't mean to jump down your throat, but she was the one carrying the burden all these years, not us. I would have liked her to come out in 1992, but it was her life.
You seem to be missing my point. Whatever her reason was for choosing to make this information public, it was too late to damage the Clintons. I fully respect her reason for privacy.
I stand by the statement that Juanita coming forward in 1992, could have possibly resulted in the defeat of the Clinton presidency. I do not blame Juanita, in anyway, for choosing to remain silent during that time.
By the way, you have no idea what I know, or do not know, of the psychological trauma that a rape victim experiences when she comes forward to accuse her rapist. My post was never intended to bring any demand on Juanita. My point was the timing of this information. That is all.
Love yer tagline. I'll have to use it the next time I change my son's poopy politician...
Okay.
OK, I understand what you meant (I don't always make myself clear, goodness knows!). However Flowers did speak out and it really didn't amount to mattering much, unfortunately.
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.