Skip to comments.(1-17-99) THE CLINTON RAPE THAT WON'T BE FORGOTTEN - Congressman Reduced to Tears
Posted on 11/08/2003 11:13:00 AM PST by doug from upland
Sunday, January 17, 8:29 AM
Congressman Reduced to Tears Over Secret Clinton Rape Evidence
Arizona Rep. Matt Salmon told the Arizona Republic it left him "nauseated". Connecticut Rep. Chris Shays told the New York Times it was "horrific". Those are just two of the on the record reactions from House members who have viewed the evidence now being kept under lock and key in D.C.'s Gerald Ford Building -- about a rape allegedly committed in 1978 by then-Arkansas Attorney General Bill Clinton.
Now Inside Cover has learned that the secret House material on the alleged rape of Jane Doe #5, a.k.a. Juanita Broaddrick, is so powerful and convincing that it actually reduced another House member -- a man -- to tears.
Thursday night, on CNBCs "Hardball," host Chris Matthews alluded to an unnamed Representative who Matthews said was brought to tears as he reviewed the Broaddrick material.
Reached by Inside Cover Friday on Sean Hannity's WABC radio show, Matthews revealed that, "the word is it was (Rep.) Mike Castle. Check it out." Inside Cover will do just that, though Castle's office was closed at press time.
Matthews own assessment of the Juanita Broaddrick rape charge against Clinton? "I think it's believable. I think it's very credible. I know a reporter for the Washington Post who I've known for 20 years and she told me that she interviewed this woman and found her highly, in fact, totally credible." Matthews added, "Clinton sounds like a vampire."
While the White House gleefully watches as Larry Flynt and James Carville blackmail GOP Senate trial managers with insider dirt, Republicans remain reluctant to release the bombshell Broaddrick material. Matthews said Henry Hyde has decided not to introduce any evidence substantiating Broaddrick's charge at trial.
The "Hardball" host has reported in the past that Broaddrick's story was the last straw for more than a few pro-censure Republicans, who promptly reversed course and voted for impeachment. With two impeachment articles passing by a margin of five votes or less, Mr. Clinton might not be standing trial today but for the secret rape evidence against him.
Perhaps Americans will learn the closely guarded details of what brought Rep. Castle to tears and Mr. Clinton to impeachment -- after the President is acquitted by the Senate.
It is Nov. 2003 and he still walks free. He still is doing harm to our foreign policy. I will forever be a Clinton-hater and wear such badge proudly.
You and Me both buddy, You and Me both.
And I thank Ross Perot for the Clintoons.
Yup. I've saved a lot of things from that ordeal. My only child (son) lives in your area (Glendora) and says he's not going to have any kids. Oh well.
How despicable. Thanks for the ping, StarFan... I'll ping my CT list.
See post 33 (Shays)
Please Freepmail me if you want on or off my infrequent Connecticut ping list.
by Mia T
There was a third chance to get rid of the clintons. In '98, when there was still time to stop bin Laden...
The failure to remove the clintons in '98 was a monumental error and is directly traceable to the logic of pathologic self-interest.
Recall in particular:
THE LIEBERMAN PARADIGM
Senator Joseph Lieberman's bifurcated Monicagate speech in 1998 on the floor of the Senate was almost universally misperceived as an act of honesty and courage.
In reality, it was neither.
Lieberman's argument that sorry day was rightly headed toward clinton's certain ouster when it suddenly made a swift, hairpin 180, as if clinton hacks took over the wheel. . .which they probably did.
What was Joe promised? A place on the 2000 ticket?
To be fair, it was not the Lieberman speech but rather a New York Times apologia that institutionalized this shameless scheme to protect a thoroughly corrupt and repugnant--and--as everyone except The New York Times now acknowledges-- dangerous -- Democrat regime.
The Lieberman Paradigm made its debut in The Times' utterly loony 1996 endorsement of clinton. The Times actually argued -- NOTE: this is NOT satire on my part (nor is it satire, as far as I can discern, on the part of The Times) -- that although bill clinton was a "corrupt," "dysfunctional personality [with] delusions" -- The Times' own words -- we need not -- we must not -- remove bill clinton; we need only remove.the character lobe of bill clinton's brain.
THE SHAYS SYNDROME
Not an aberration, the Shays Syndrome was quickly adopted by the entire Senate as its impeachment show trial deus ex machina of choice.
Shays examined the evidence in the Ford Building, concluded that clinton did, indeed, rape Broaddrick -- "VICIOUSLY!" AND "TWICE!" he declared at the time-- and was planning to vote to impeach; he changed his mind, however, after a tete a tete with the rapist.
Any cognitive dissonance Shays may have experienced rendering that verdict was no doubt assuaged by the political plum clinton had given Mrs. (Betsi) Shays...
Each of the 50 senators, on the other hand, cured the cognitive dissonance problem pre-emptively by making certain not to examine the damning Ford Building evidence in the first place.
When Alex kills a woman during a rape, Alex is sent to prison.
A risible and repulsive result;
While Alex is conditioned in prison with aversion therapy,
In the end,
We will have set apart clinton as the hero
Mia T, A CLOCKWORK ORANGE
"Free Republic is one of those groups obsessed with the Clinton era."
And, with that reminder, I question myself, why I even bother voting at all.
Or pardoned by President Hillary Clinton!
Same here- what little faith I had in our "representatives" and our government took a near-fatal hit. Still haven't recovered. May never.
But, as the media keeps telling us, "it's all about sex.". I suspect it will be a long time coming (if ever) that all the questions about this sleazeball are answered, long after him and the witch are gone from public life.
Bump for a blast from the past. Maybe some of the newbies will see this. If any of them (crazily) have any thoughts about voting for Mrs. Bill Clinton in the primary or (perish the thought) the general election, this ought to be one of the PRIMARY reasons not to let either of the Clintons near the Oval Office ever again!
Doug—this might help...She may even have a phone # where she works...