ALWAYS HIS LEGACY --- The Broaddrick Files

Note: make sure to check out the website. It has many excellent articles --- THE BROADDRICK FILES

I DIDN'T believe Gennifer Flowers when she said she had an affair with Bill Clinton. I felt the burden of proof was on the accuser. Then I didn't even listen to her whole story because her accusation -- that they had an adulterous affair to which she had consented -- seemed so, well, cheesy.

Then I read Clinton's own testimony and learned that he lied to the American people when he denied the affair. Now I believe Gennifer Flowers.

(I still don't believe Clinton when he testified under oath that he only had sex with Gennifer Flowers ``once.'')

I didn't believe Paula Jones' claim that Clinton dropped his drawers in front of her. I believed Clinton had a trooper invite Jones to a hotel suite, because there were corroborating witnesses. I could figure out what he wanted Jones for, but I didn't think he would be that crude.

Then, her case was thrown out of court, and Clinton still paid her $850,000. Now I believe Paula Jones.

I didn't know what to believe when Kathleen Willey came forward. She seemed credible. Her story fit with the Jones accusation and what we knew about Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. So I believed that what Willey said could be true.

I didn't believe President Clinton when he told me he ``did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.'' I do believe he never would have rescinded that months-long lie if Lewinsky hadn't kept her dress.

I believe Juanita Broaddrick's charge that Clinton sexually assaulted her in 1978. I don't believe Clinton's attorney's denial.

I believe that this White House -- or Clinton's outside operatives -- will do everything possible to smear the reputations of women who tell the truth about Clinton. They'll sneer about book deals, they'll whisper about the women's twisted motives, they'll bash them for being poor.

I believe Broaddrick didn't come forward because she was afraid she would not be believed if she accused Arkansas' attorney general. I believe Bill Clinton hates women. He treats them as if they were fungible, abusable and disposable. Fortunately for Clinton, women-hating (unlike racism) is an acceptable vice in modern America. Hollywood glitterati fete him when he comes to town. A casting couch don can relate to this president. A rock star who cares about the environment doesn't care how the big guy mistreats women.

When Clinton comes to San Francisco, he's the toast of the town. Big donors don't refuse to attend his fund raisers. They pony up. They fawn. They get their pictures taken with him. The cream of The Special City throws big money at the women-hating president.

They don't care if he betrayed his wife. They don't care if he smeared his old girlfriends. They don't care if he lied under oath before a grand jury. They don't care if his defense is that Monica serviced him, but he never gratified her.

They don't care if Paula Jones told the truth. They don't care if he assaulted Juanita Broaddrick. They don't care how many more women get chewed up just so he can use them.

I don't believe the National Organization for Women stands up for women. NOW released a prim statement supporting Broaddrick's credibility but asserting that her charge of a rape 21 years ago can't be proven. That didn't stop them when they went after Clarence Thomas for talking dirty 10 years before.

I don't believe Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein care about women. Elected in the Year of the Woman, which was supposed to bring gender equity to the once male bastion of the Beltway, their offices had no response when asked if the Senatorettes had anything to say about Broaddrick's charge.

Party biggies don't care if he abuses women. They don't care about swollen lips or torn pantyhose. They don't care about uninvited gropes down the the hall from the Oval Office. They don't care if a cad is the role model for American youth. They don't care whom he hurts.

From the website, here is another:

NBC News Sits On A Bombshell

It is obvious that nothing short of a bombshell could shatter the unity of the 45 Democratic Senators and persuade a dozen of them to vote to convict President Clinton and remove him from office. NBC News has been sitting on such a bombshell. It is an eight-hour on-camera interview by Lisa Myers with Juanita Broaddrick in which Mrs. Broaddrick charges that she was brutally raped by Bill Clinton in 1978, when he was attorney general of Arkansas. Lisa Myers first reported this on the NBC Nightly news last March.

She said then, "In court documents today, Paula Jones's lawyers claim Clinton `forcibly raped and sexually assaulted' Broaddrick, then `bribed and intimidated her' to remain silent. Sources say that Broaddrick, 54, recently denied under oath that such an assault occurred. But Jones's lawyers claim she had told their investigator she had suffered a `horrible thing' at the hand of Clinton and did not want to relive it. NBC News has talked to four people from Arkansas who say Broaddrick told them of such an assault years ago."

Broaddrick has since been deposed by Ken Starr's investigators, and her deposition is said to be an important part of the still-secret evidence that persuaded wavering House Republicans to vote for impeachment. If Juanita Broaddrick could tell the Senate what Bill Clinton did to her, even diehard Clinton loyalists might find it hard to vote to keep him in office. The airing of her story by NBC might have forced the Senate to convert its pro forma exercise into a genuine trial where her testimony might have had some impact on those Senators who say that the fuss is about nothing more than consensual sex between two adults.

It was reported on the Internet that NBC had planned to air the Broaddrick story on January 29. That was not true. Tim Russert, the Washington bureau chief of NBC News, has said, "If we honestly had a buttoned-up bombshell, we would go with it in a flash." The story would be aired, he said, when they had adequate corroboration for it. NBC obviously had far less corroboration for the story they aired last March than they do now. The March story contained a serious error-the claim that Clinton had "bribed and intimidated" Broaddrick to remain silent. Broaddrick herself has said that is false. NBC has obviously raised the bar for this story. They still have three investigators in Arkansas working on it, but a reliable Arkansas source says that all the major elements have been documented, and the investigators are busying themselves with minor details.

What has kept it from being given an air date? Robert Wright, the chairman of NBC, told me that they were still missing a piece of very crucial information, and he didn't feel comfortable airing the story until they got it. He told me, off the record, what the missing information was, and he okayed my checking it out with Mrs. Broaddrick.

She informed me that NBC had that information and the documents that proved it. I was able to confirm this and inform Bob Wright that he had been given false information. He responded that he must be out of the loop farther than he thought. He said he would look into it. In an earlier conversation he had acknowledged that there were people with clout at NBC News who, like CNN's Rick Kaplan, were friends of Clinton's. When, in our second conversation, I told him that I was going to write that it looks like the Kaplan clones at NBC are responsible for the delay, he did not agree, but he did not protest my saying it.

The prime suspect would be the president of NBC News, Andrew Lack. Washington bureau chief Tim Russert reports to him, and Lack reports to Wright. It is not likely that Russert would sabotage a story that one of his best reporters had been working on for a year by telling Lack that they were still missing indispensable information that they actually had. Russert assured me that there were no phone calls to NBC from the White House about this story, but he could not possibly know if Clinton or one of his aides had spoken to Lack. When asked about Andrew Lack, a retired CBS correspondent came up with "Kaplanesque."

In 1992, Rick Kaplan, who was then with ABC News, was suspected of having been behind ABC's sacrifice of a big scoop-Clinton's infamous 1969 letter to Col. Eugene Holmes. The letter explained why he had not kept his promise to enroll in the ROTC at the University of Arkansas, a promise he made to escape induction. ABC's delay in reporting the story helped save the Clinton candidacy. It appears that a Kaplanesque official at NBC News has now helped save Clinton's presidency by sabotaging the timely airing of NBC's exclusive interview with Juanita Broaddrick.

==================== end ==============================

Hillary knew. This so-called fighter for women's rights knew her husband abused women and not only did nothing to stop it, she was orchestrating the attacks on them behind the scenes.

FReepers, this woman must be stopped now before it is too late. I checked the RAT underground site a few days ago and I have heard some very foolish and dangerous supporters of hers on talk radio. Unless she is destroyed, she may actually get to the White House. It would not be beyond her and the true believers to do something to a GOP candidate just before the election. That is not far fetched. The Clintons have left a trail of bodies to get what they want.

this woman must be stopped now before it is too late
The following article is typical of the adulation our junior senator receives almost daily in the local paper. Her visits are seldom announced in advance; she always appears before a supportive group, and never receives one unfriendly questions from the press. Western New York is usually thought to be rather conservative, but a majority voted for Hillary! for senator. If she is a presidential candidate New York State will overwhelmingly support her, sad to say.

CLINTON ADDS GLITZ TO ANNOUNCEMENT OF FEDERAL FUNDING FOR UB BIOTECH CENTER
The Buffalo News
By Stephen Watson, News Staff Reporter
December 22, 2001
http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial20011222/1040994.asp
      When Gov. George E. Pataki recently came to town to announce a huge investment in a new high-tech center at the University at Buffalo, the audience was mostly a sea of dark-suited politicians and business leaders.
But when Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton came to town Friday, to announce a relatively small investment in the same project, it looked more like a social event than a news conference.
      There were the obligatory officials in gray suits, but the audience also reflected Clinton's star power.
      Students with little likely interest in the bioinformatics center that was the focus of the news conference crammed into the conference room, along with office workers and professors - many with cameras.
      One man brought a copy of the former first lady's book, "It Takes a Village," and asked her to autograph it after the news conference.
     Clinton, the state's junior senator but an international celebrity, draws a crowd. Friday in Amherst, she also draw a standing ovation when she walked into UB's Center for Tomorrow on the North Campus.
      Clinton and Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds, R-Clarence, formally announced $3.1 million in federal support for the bioinformatics center that UB and private partners are building in Buffalo's medical corridor.
      Details on the funding previously have been disclosed, but that didn't stop some 170 people from coming to hear Friday's announcement by Clinton.
      Two weeks ago, Pataki announced $200 million in state and private support for the center.
     In a separate but related announcement Friday, UB officials also said that they have received a five-year, $1 million grant from the National Science Foundation to enhance the school's computer systems.
     The grant will pay for a system to store and manage massive amounts of computer data, assisting research in bioinformatics, geographic information science and other areas.
     Clinton described the federal commitment as "a first installment, a down payment" for the center, but after the meeting she said she couldn't predict how much the center could get in the following year's budget.
     "It depends upon how much discretionary money is available, what the other demands around the country are, but Tom and I are going to keep fighting to make this a priority," she said.
     Clinton praised Reynolds, who found $2.6 million from two different appropriations for the center. And Reynolds returned the favor, praising Clinton for finding $500,000.
     Politicians noted that, after Sept. 11, UB's bioinformatics center was competing with a lot of other projects for scarce federal resources.
     But Rep. John J. LaFalce, D-Town of Tonawanda, said the center had been a priority for federal lawmakers as far back as July. He recalled a breakfast with Reynolds and Rep. Jack Quinn, R-Hamburg, that month where the trio went over a list of 100 "gimmies" for which Mayor Anthony M. Masiello, County Executive Joel A. Giambra and others in Western New York sought federal money.
     "To a person, we all said the center for bioinformatics should be number one" on the list, LaFalce said.

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.