Posted on 10/14/2016 5:26:55 PM PDT by Kaslin
The Washington Free Beacon noted that former NBC investigative reporter Michael Isikoff insisted NBC News should release the full tape of its interview with Juanita Broaddrick – “NBC ought to check its archive and run the full interview. (AS long as they’re now culling their archives!)”
He added that it was “amazing to watch” Democrats that he saw defend Bill Clinton against his accusers now jump to embrace women accusing Trump. “It’s amazing to watch how D’s who attacked those women are now embracing the Trump accusers, while the Rs who believed them attack them,” Isikoff said.
Since Broaddrick attended the second presidential debate -- with Kathleen Willey and Paula Jones, who both claimed non-consensual harassment from Clinton -- Hillary defenders have tried to pretend they were just bimbos. On The View, Whoopi Goldberg ignorantly claimed "May I just point this out, several of those women slept with him knowing he was a married man, okay?...So, again, she [Hillary] is the victim here. She's the victim here."
On February 26, 1999, NBC’s Dateline broadcast an interview with Broaddrick, who claimed then-Attorney General Bill Clinton raped her in a hotel room in 1978. Correspondent Lisa Myers investigated her claims to confirm that both Broaddrick and Clinton were in the Camelot Hotel where Broaddick said the assault took place.
In a C-SPAN interview last August, her NBC interviewer Lisa Myers said "Nothing has come up since that story was reported that in any way undercuts what Juanita Broaddrick said.”
Hillary has never been challenged to address her raging hypocrisy by a TV interviewer as she's tweeted self-righteously about believing every woman’s charge of a sexual assault. Last December, one of those "everyday Americans" asked her about it in New Hampshire (on video), and Mrs. Clinton said "I would say that everybody should be believed at first until they are disbelieved based on evidence.
NBC and Myers never made any mention of Hillary Clinton in their Broaddrick interview, but Broaddrick told Sean Hannity and others that Hillary came up to her and shook her hand firmly after the assault, saying something like “I just want you to know how much Bill and I appreciate what you do for him.”
Her horrific story brought forth the imagery of Bill Clinton biting down on this poor woman’s lip as he violently attacked her...Broaddrick in shock, her face bloody and swollen, her underwear torn...and then Clinton putting on his shades and saying “You better put some ice on that” as he left the room.
And in reply, the president never had to say more to the press than legalese: “My counsel has made a statement about the first issue and I have nothing to add to it.”
Back then, NBC sat on the Myers interview for weeks – until the Senate voted not to remove Clinton from office. So Broaddrick gave her story to the Wall Street Journal's Dorothy Rabinowitz, who published it on the editorial page on February 19. Later that day, in a brief press event with three questions allowed to U.S. reporters, no one asked a single question about Broaddrick. But Larry McQuillan of Reuters asked, "I wonder if you could share with us some of your thoughts about the pros and cons of Hillary running for the Senate seat in New York?"
Six days later, NBC finally relented to public outrage and presented Broaddrick's emotional testimony and the Myers investigation that placed Broaddrick and Clinton in the same hotel on April 25, 1978. The evidence was as incriminating as the details were horrifying.
Full Dateline NBC: Juanita Broaddrick on Bill Clinton raping her
How did the public react then? A USA Today/CNN poll found that fully 66% of Americans found the rape allegation to be "no big deal," perhaps because 54% of them didn't believe Juanita Broaddrick. How could the public be so calloused? But a deeper look at the survey revealed 44% of the public, almost one half of those polled, had never heard of the story. That survey, in the final analysis, was useless except to wave the story off.
Another one couldn't be dismissed. MSNBC, to its credit, conducted another survey. It asked people who were familiar with the report to call in and register their opinions. An astonishing 30,000 called. Eighty four percent believed Juanita Broaddrick's story; and only 16% were swayed by Bill Clinton's (limited, modified) denial through a lawyer.
It's not hard to guess what the big cover story should have been in Time and Newsweek the Monday after NBC's Broaddrick segment. But it wasn't. "Senator Clinton?" was the cover of Time, with a painting of a dignified, smiling Hillary in a black pantsuit against a blue backdrop. Newsweek was gushier: over a head shot of a twinkly, smiling Hillary, the cover read: "Her Turn: Senate or world stage? Either way, Hillary's ready for her own run at history.
Both magazines carried nine pages or more of heavy-breathing coverage. Time's story was illustrated a huge flattering cartoon of Hillary standing over the New York skyline, large enough to dwarf King Kong. The headline read "A Race Of Her Own: Hillary ignites the country with talk of a New York Senate bid. But will she do it, and with the media and maybe Rudy lying in wait - can she win?" Two of the pages were flattering black-and-white photos of smiling Hillary on rope lines and on Rosie O'Donnell's talk show. One shot in a lighting shop with her smiling and looking upward looked like an outtake from the old Marlo Thomas sitcom "That Girl."
Newsweek's story had a two-page photo of a smiling Hillary handing back a child with the headline "Hillary's Day In The Sun: Now it's her turn. After a quarter century of standing by Bill Clinton - and rising to power with him - the First Lady is ready for a run of her own. Where will she make her mark? In the Senate or on the world stage? The road ahead is risky, but at the moment Mrs. Clinton is the hottest commodity in American public life." Even photo captions betrayed their enthusiasm - "At last, a role reversal...Hillary's fierce devotion to service was forged early." A Jonathan Alter column was titled "Paging Eleanor Roosevelt."
In those same issues, Time's Adam Cohen wrote a one-page article on Broaddrick's rape charge, noting the "vociferously conservative" Wall Street Journal editorial page printed it first, and argued "the story seems unlikely to have much traction."
In Newsweek, the only mention of Broaddrick came in the snippy "Conventional Wisdom Watch" feature. While Hillary drew an up arrow ("Run Hil, run. NY Sen race would make Gore-Bush look like Student Council bid"), The "CW" writer (usually wise-cracking Jonathan Alter, "the son the Clintons never wanted" quips Shirley) called Broaddrick simply by her Starr Report name, "Jane Doe 5," and declared: "Should have leveled (unproven) assault charge in '78, or '92. But sounds like our guy."
Sounds like our guy?
But no reporter sought the First Lady's comment on the Broaddrick assault, and the networks stayed quiet, even when the White House was shameless enough to speak out against violence against women. On February 26, 1999, just two days after the NBC interview, Vice President Gore held a White House event on domestic violence. He proclaimed: "Physical brutality at the hands of a partner or spouse is not simply love gone wrong, or someone needing to blow off steam at the end of the day. It is criminal assault, pure and simple. We don't do anybody any favors, least of all the abusers, when we ignore it."
Coming on the heels of the Broaddrick accusation, the irony should have been inescapable. Yet Associated Press reporter Sonya Ross reported it without any Broaddrick mention. On ABC's Good Morning America, anchor Antonio Mora blandly previewed: "And Vice President Gore announces $223 million in grants to communities to fight domestic violence." Evening news coverage? Zero.
On March 4, 1999 Hillary Clinton declared in a speech at the United Nations: "It is no longer acceptable to say that the abuse and mistreatment of women is cultural. It should be called what it is -- criminal." Given that her own husband now stood accused of abuse on a monstrous scale, again the connection should have been unavoidable. The New York Times carried it, but made no reference to Broaddrick. Neither the AP nor the UPI wire services even bothered to transmit the quote. Nobody cared. Network TV coverage? Zero.
Even those who believe Hillary, should be concerned about her becoming POTUS since she cannot remember anything, might have early stage of dementia.
Just wondering what she looked like when Bill went after her.
I’m not shocked at all. This is par for the course for the lapdog media.
My guess is it’s Hillary that has individuals off’d and not Bill. That’s someone the press is probably scared of, and it continues to this day.
The press does not ask Hillary because they believe the accusations are true!!! If they believed the accusations were false, they would have no qualms asking Hillary and giving her an opportunity to clear her name.
Never Been Credible had an investigative reporter? Since when?
One of those would be really unpopular with network brass unless
he was good at wiring bombs to vehicle gas tanks.
They only have an investigative reporter if it concerns a republican candidate.
At debate #2, Anderson Cooper asked Trump if he ever assaulted women. Trump said no. Then they brought out these women claiming otherwise, and the media now says that since Trump denied it, it is fair to search for women in Trump’s past to refute his denial.
But notice, the media never asked an equal question of Hillary. While it may not be correct to ask her about Bill’s behavior, it is fair to ask about hers. Some pertinent questions could be “did you hire a private investigator to dig into these women’s lives”, or, “we’re you aware of actions taken by Clinton supporters to demean, embarrass, harass, intimidate or demean his accusers”?
If Trump is made to answer for the allegations of improporiety, so should Hillary. But of course, Anderson Cooper didnt even broach the subject, and the MSM has left it alone. What they may not realize is how this blatant hypocrisy and double standard could very easily destroy the issue among the public consciousness. If you hold up a standard but only apply it to people based on political affiliation, you risk turning the value into a political trick rather than a means to raise social awareness. This election threatens a lot of what was once considered sacrosanct.
I’m guessing there’s been more air time spent on Trump’s supposed sexual assaults over the last week than all the time spent on all of Bill’s assaults since they were first made public twenty years ago.....
Not to mention Bill’s 25 trips on the Lolitta Express! He was not even worried about how that would look, considering his past and all. Yet Trump is demonized! Hillary looked the other way while Bill was at the very least watching naked underage girls on a private island have orgies.
Clinton, Michelle Obama and many other female democrats are RIGHT NOW, trying out a liberal fascist technique,based on political correctness, yet unnamed.
Lets call it the Pu$$y Whip Ploy.
Hillary tried it out on Putin and where did that get us?The Crimea is lost.
Clinton tried it out on the Saudis and they laughed at her , and made Hillary Clinton into a dimmi.
Later Hillary Clinton tried it out on Libya and Mohammar Gadaffi laughed at her, so she invaded Libya, reduced a perfectly good country to rubble, and killed Gadaffi, then laughed about it ( Youtube).Now Africa entire is under jihadi invasion.
The liberal fascist feminine left is serious about their pu$$y whipping ploy and now are massively pu$$y whipping the presidential and Congressional elections. Every female democrat candidate is pu$$y whipping her opponent in the best enraged zeig heil fashion familair to anyone who has studied history.
This liberal fascist emotional technique needs to be called what it is, a fascist manipulative technique used across the board to dehumanize opponents. Its basically the same ploy as any racist would use, an appeal to raw emotion based on unproven physical allegations related to biology, with the help of a massive propaganda MSM machine.
America MUST NOT waiver. Send these pseudo pu$$y whipping politicians who foist themselves on America right into the dust bin of history.
The pussy whipping ploy in US politics and internationally causes nothing but mayhem and destruction, while the issues of the day are left unaddressed.It is here a sadistic aspect of “deus ex machina.”
Again Hillary creates division, now between the sexes of America and the World. The legacy of a bull dyke. The depths of their immorality indeed. Putin will eat her for breakfast.
Good point.
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.