Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

(1-17-99) THE CLINTON RAPE THAT WON'T BE FORGOTTEN - Congressman Reduced to Tears
NewsMax blast from the past | 1-1999 | Limbacher

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 CNBC’s "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.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: alcatraz; criminal; rapist; scumbag; stripes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-63 last
To: doug from upland
Per congressional action, it is sealed for 50 years. The GOP did not fight to make it public.

And, with that reminder, I question myself, why I even bother voting at all.

51 posted on 11/08/2003 8:18:57 PM PST by FlyVet
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
Can that action be rescinded?
52 posted on 11/09/2003 3:48:07 AM PST by NYpeanut (gulping for air, I started crying and yelling at him, "Why did you lie to me?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: 68skylark
with Bill Clinton loving every minute as the central figure in the limelight unitl he's finally acquitted by a sympathetic jury.

Or pardoned by President Hillary Clinton!

53 posted on 11/09/2003 4:41:59 AM PST by varon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
"I wish [Californians] well now - they've got a lot of big problems out there. I'm worried about serving in the Senate with the predator," said Mrs. Clinton

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2003/10/9/221618.shtml
54 posted on 11/09/2003 4:57:10 AM PST by maggief
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlyVet
Per congressional action, it is sealed for 50 years. The GOP did not fight to make it public. And, with that reminder, I question myself, why I even bother voting at all.

Same here- what little faith I had in our "representatives" and our government took a near-fatal hit. Still haven't recovered. May never.

55 posted on 11/09/2003 5:24:54 AM PST by backhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Burkeman1
There were also questions about who actually paid his tuition at Georgetown. He was supposedly from humble beginnings, raised by a single mother, didn't win any scholorships to Georgetown, yet his tuition was paid. Nobody knows who paid it. The trips behind the Iron curtin in the late 60s early 70s , at the height of Vietnam, a time when few americans other than government officials or maybe some journalists were even allowed in. Clinton was a private citizen, yet he was over there, why?

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.

56 posted on 11/09/2003 6:52:14 AM PST by YankeeReb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: NYpeanut
It takes congressional action but, of course, the GOP doesn't have the guts to do it.
57 posted on 11/09/2003 7:05:49 AM PST by doug from upland (Why aren't the Clintons living out their remaining years on Alcatraz?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

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!


58 posted on 12/11/2007 11:12:19 PM PST by NotJustAnotherPrettyFace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

Doug—this might help...She may even have a phone # where she works...

http://www.papillonsartpalace.com/micssing.htm


59 posted on 12/11/2007 11:29:05 PM PST by billmor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: billmor
I tried doing a lookup there on the original name and came up empty-handed. Do you know if she's married and going by another name?
60 posted on 12/12/2007 5:51:17 AM PST by NotJustAnotherPrettyFace
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland

When I was putting Halloween decorations back up in the attic and found a newspaper I saved from long ago that I forgot all about.

Tacoma News Tribune
December 20, 1998

Headline: CLINTON IMPEACHED

If that wasn’t amusing enough to read again after all these years, now with his wife running, I notice a story at the bottom of the very same front page that must be read:

U.S. and Britain halt airstrikes against Iraq
Sub-headline, Citing ‘significant damage’, Clinton says Saddam must be ousted to avoid future threats.

BAGHDAD, Iraq – President Clinton ended the air campaign against Iraq on Saturday saying: “I’m confident we have achieved our mission.” Yet despite suffering more than 400 punishing bomb and missile strikes over four nights, Saddam Hussein’s government remained defiant and said it would bar any return of U.N. arms inspectors to the country.
SNIP
In blunt language, Clinton called for the ouster of the Iraqi leader. “So long as Saddam remains in power, he will remain a threat to his people, his region and the World.
SNIP

So lets look at just how much of a ‘continued threat’ Saddam really was AFTER Clinton made the above statement. This is just a partial list of the times Iraq fired at American and British aircraft patrolling the Northern No Fly Zone during Operation Northern Watch. Some of the data was not available, like the entire year of 2000. The list also does not include other violations, such as locking air defense radar onto Coalition aircraft. If all the violations were included, the list would be much much longer.
Sooooooo with all of these documented attacks on our aircraft patrolling the Northern No-Fly Zone after Clinton said “Saddam must be ousted”, why is Bush and Cheney being persecuted for doing just that? I feel Bush’s only mistake was placing too much emphasis on the WMD and not building a better case based on the countless other violations of the cease fire.

13 Jan 1999 SAM systems track and fire on Coalition aircraft
25 Jan 1999 Coalition aircraft respond to surface to air missile launch
28 Jan 1999 Coalition aircraft respond to Iraqi AAA fire
11 Feb 1999 Coalition aircraft respond to Iraqi AAA fire
12 Feb 1999 Coalition aircraft respond to Iraqi AAA fire
15 Feb 1999 Coalition aircraft respond to Iraqi AAA fire
1 Mar 1999 Iraq fires anti-aircraft artillery at coalition aircraft
14 Mar 1999 Coalition aircraft respond to Iraqi AAA fire
1 Mar 1999 Iraq fires anti-aircraft artillery at coalition aircraft
6 Mar 1999 Coalition aircraft respond to Iraqi AAA fire
25 May 1999 Coalition aircraft respond to Iraqi AAA fire
04 Sep 2001 Iraqi AAA fired at, radar targets ONW aircraft
27 Aug 2001 ONW aircraft fired upon, coalition responds
17 Aug 2001 ONW Aircraft fired upon and targeted by radar
07 Aug 2001 Iraqi missiles and AAA fired at ONW aircraft
18 Jul 2001 USAF F-16 aircraft crashes in Turkey
14 Jun 2001 ONW aircraft respond to targeting radar, AAA
23 May 2001 ONW aircraft fired upon and targeted by radar
30 Apr 2001 AAA fired at ONW aircraft
06 Apr 2001 Iraq fires AAA at ONW aircraft

22 Feb 2001 ONW Aircraft fired upon and targeted by radar
12 Feb 2001 ONW Aircraft fired upon and targeted by radar
24 Jan 2001 Iraqi missiles and AAA fired at ONW aircraft
04 Dec 2002 Iraq attacks ONW aircraft monitoring No-Fly zone
02 Dec 2002 Iraq attacks ONW aircraft monitoring No-Fly zone
28 Nov 2002 Iraq attacks ONW aircraft monitoring No-Fly zone
18 Nov 2002 Iraq attacks ONW aircraft monitoring No-Fly zone
17 Nov 2002 Iraq attacks ONW aircraft monitoring No-Fly zone
30 Oct 2002 ONW aircraft defend against Iraqi anti-aircraft threat
22 Oct 2002 Iraq fires AAA at ONW aircraft
26 Jun 2002 Iraq fires AAA at ONW aircraft, Coalition responds
19 Jun 2002 Iraq fires AAA at ONW aircraft, Coalition responds
28 May 2002 ONW aircraft fired upon, Coalition responds
01 May 2002 Iraq fires AAA at Northern Watch Aircraft
28 Feb 2002 ONW Aircraft fired upon and targeted by radar
04 Feb 2002 Iraq fires AAA at ONW aircraft
31 Jan 2003 Iraq Attacks Operation Northern Watch Aircraft Monitoring No-Fly Zone
04 Feb 2002 Iraq fires AAA at ONW aircraft
28 Feb 2002 ONW Aircraft fired upon and targeted by radar
19 Apr 2002 Iraq targets Coalition aircraft
01 May 2002 Iraq fires AAA at Northern Watch Aircraft
28 May 2002 ONW aircraft fired upon, Coalition responds
19 Jun 2002 Iraq fires AAA at ONW aircraft, Coalition responds
26 Jun 2002 Iraq fires AAA at ONW aircraft, Coalition responds
04 Jul 2002 ONW aircraft threatened, Coalition responds
23 Aug 2002 Iraqi targets coalition aircraft
27 Aug 2002 Iraqi targets coalition aircraft
09 Oct 2002 Iraq threatens coalition aircraft
22 Oct 2002 Iraq fires AAA at ONW aircraft
18 Nov 2002 Iraq attacks ONW aircraft monitoring No-Fly zone
28 Nov 2002 Iraq attacks ONW aircraft monitoring No-Fly zone
02 Dec 2002 Iraq attacks ONW aircraft monitoring No-Fly zone


61 posted on 12/12/2007 6:01:32 AM PST by NavyCanDo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: NotJustAnotherPrettyFace

I don’t know if she has a different name now.


62 posted on 12/12/2007 7:19:42 AM PST by doug from upland (Stopping Hillary should be a FreeRepublic Manhattan Project)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: billmor

Thanks.


63 posted on 12/12/2007 7:21:37 AM PST by doug from upland (Stopping Hillary should be a FreeRepublic Manhattan Project)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 59 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-63 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson