-
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)
missus clinton's REAL virtual office update
http://hillarytalks.blogspot.com
http://www.hillarytalks.us
http://www.hillarytalks.org
Posted on 10/12/2003 4:27:35 PM PDT by Mia T
|
You know, uh, I followed it as everybody did. I thought the recall was not a great idea, but it's up to the people of California and I wish them well now. They've got a lot of big problems out there. Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha ha, yuck. I am really worried though, about serving in the Senate with THE PREDATOR.
|
|
Let us not miss the real point here.
So what missus clinton is trying to do with her rabid little sound bite |
Q ERTY3BUMP
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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."
Word's out: Protest at Hillary's tonight
|
|
|
Q ERTY8missus clinton's REAL virtual office updateBUMP
Assuming she's referring to Arnold, when exactly did the governor of California become a member of the Senate?
|
|
|
 |
FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794
|
|
It is in the breaking news sidebar! |
|
-----The question that won't go away BY CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS | In James Baldwin's account of the Atlanta murders, "The Evidence of Things Not Seen," he recalls a dreadful earlier moment from 1965. The swamps and creeks of Mississippi were being dragged for the bodies of Michael Schwerner, James Chaney and Andrew Goodman (done to death by the political ancestors of Bob Barr), and the search parties kept turning up corpses. Examination proved that these were not the cadavers that the authorities were seeking. It took a while for the subject to change, or at least for it to change enough for someone to exclaim: Wait a minute! What are all these other bodies doing in the swamp? It's one thing to say, with reasonable confidence, that the Oval Office is currently occupied by a war criminal, a rapist and a pathological liar. It's another to ponder the full implications. If half of the many allegations about Clinton's business deals and date rapes are even half-true, then he has been going through political life for years, aware or quasi-aware that any or every telephone call might be the one he has been dreading. That's more stress than most of us could take: Only a certain kind of personality could be expected to endure it. You can look this up under the simpering liberal media description of "Comeback Kid," or you can check it under an entry of an entirely different kind, where the key phrase is "Threat to self and others." In the last taped conversation between Monica Lewinsky and Linda Tripp, the two women are heard wondering how Clinton will explain away a two-hour telephone call to "Juanita." Investigation shows that this Juanita is not Juanita Broaddrick. But then who is it? What else is in the swamp? And is this man a stone-cold rapist or isn't he? It seems to me morally feeble, as well as intellectually slack, to split the difference between Clinton and Broaddrick, or to characterize her allegation as unprovable. The feeblest summary of this compromise is contained in the lazy phrase "he said, she said." In the case of the "he," we already know that he is a hysterical, habitual liar. We also know that almost no allegation ever made by a woman and denied by him has proven to be untrue. And we know that ex-girlfriends have been subjected to extraordinary campaigns of defamation, amounting in some cases to intimidation, merely for speaking about "consensual" sex. What allegation could be more horrific than that of rape? And yet, "he" hasn't said anything yet. If I was accused of rape, and the woman making the charge was a lady of obvious integrity, I would want to do better than have a lawyer make a routine disclaimer. (Especially a lawyer, in this case the pathetic figure of David Kendall, who had not even met me at the time of the supposed crime.) Asked by NBC to say where Clinton had been on the morning in question -- a fact easily established in the life of a state attorney general -- the White House declined cooperation. I would have wanted to do better than that, too. So much for the "he said." What of the "she"? If the allegation is false, then Broaddrick is not just getting her facts wrong. She is deliberately fabricating one of the most damning charges that any one person can make against another. She must be a wicked or deluded or vicious person. There seems no escaping this corollary conclusion. There also seems no reason at all for reaching it. Where is the famous Clintonian rapid-response team? Has it no pride? Can it not find or produce any shadow of a doubt to cast on Broaddrick's character? I think that if it could, we would know by now. A provisional but not unpardonable induction, then, is that she is speaking the truth. Questioned fairly closely by Lisa Myers, she and her contemporary corroborative witnesses were easily able to answer the questions about silence and delay. The victim felt guilty for letting an unchaperoned man into her room, even if he was the attorney general. In a banana republic like Arkansas, allegations against powerful men were believed to have potentially unpleasant consequences. The victim was also having an extramarital affair with a man she hoped to marry. She did not want to be exposed, and she did not expect to be believed. Finally -- and very importantly -- she didn't "go public." She was made public. The feminist movement has taught us to recognize this pattern of response as a familiar and intelligible one. (How sad it was, by the way, to see Patricia Ireland changing her mind at this late stage. Doesn't she know that she has lost something that she can't ever hope to retrieve, and has lost it to Clinton?) Even the first lady seems to be hesitant these days: The question before us being not "Will she run?" but "Will she walk?" Surely the two can't be connected? Can they? Perhaps I won't be taken as an authority on the moral credibility of the feminist leadership. But something ought to be said about the honor of the male sex in this business. It has been disgusting, all through the last year, to hear Clinton defended as homme moyen sensuel. "Everybody does it ... all men lie about sex ... a gentleman is expected to lie." One reason a gentleman may be obliged to lie is to protect the reputation of the woman. Clinton has lied in order to trash them. I don't have any male friends who hump the help and then (with the assistance of paid slanderers) call them liars, gold diggers, sluts and blackmailers. I don't have any male friends who have been plausibly accused of rape, either, though I do know several women who have been sexually assaulted and decided not to go public. I also know of three other women who I suspect could, if they chose, lay a charge of assault against Clinton. This puts him, in male terms, way outside the limit of what can be tolerated. I see him on the television all the time, biting that fat lip of his, and now I have an additional reason for the powerful nausea I have always felt. I imagine his teeth in Juanita Broaddrick's lips, after he's told her to lie still or he'll bite her again. But hey, it's time to move on. So forget it. Forget it if you can. Christopher Hitchens is a frequent contributor to Salon.
----------IS CLINTON A STONE-COLD RAPIST OR ISN'T HE?
SALON | March 16, 1999
Copyright © 2000 Salon.com All rights reserved.
|
NewsMax.com
Schippers: 'I Wanted Broaddrick to Testify' [Hillary Clinton is behind the White House intimidation squad] Carl Limbacher  (viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE) Clinton rape accuser Juanita Broaddrick would have been called to testify at President Clinton's Senate impeachment trial about attempts to keep her from telling her story, former chief impeachment prosecutor David Schippers says. But he had already ruled her out as a trial witness by the time he learned the details of Broaddrick's intimidation. "It was right when we were working on (her case)," Schippers told NewsMax.com in an exclusive Labor Day weekend interview. "Because my investigator, Diana Woznicki, who was just about in daily contact with Broaddrick, would come in and say, 'Juanita called me. There's a guy parked outside her house. ... She said she felt that somebody was watching her.' " Broaddrick herself told NewsMax.com last year that her home had been broken into, her pets released and her answering machine tape stolen while she and her husband were away briefly during the House impeachment probe. "Let me tell you something. They were all over that woman," Schippers told NewsMax.com. "And it was the type of stuff we ran into with the outfit (the Chicago mob). Intimidation just by watching her, making their presence known. ... Just to let her know 'We can do what we want.' " The former mob-buster for Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy reports in his book, "Sellout: The Inside Story of President Clinton's Impeachment," that he never intended to call Broaddrick as a witness against the president. But it turns out, there's more to the story. "By the time we had learned what they were doing to her, the decisions on witnesses had already been made." When asked whether he would have called the Clinton rape accuser to testify had he known about the witness tampering in time, Schippers admitted, "Yes, I would have tried to do it." But there was another, perhaps even more significant, reason why Broaddrick was never called, which the no-nonsense ex-prosecutor revealed to NewsMax.com for the very first time. "I'll tell you something. The only way I got her to open up completely (about the details of Clinton's attack) was to give her my word that I would not use her as a witness." That was before Schippers knew about the break-in, the stolen tape, and the surveillance. But still, he refused to break his word to Juanita Broaddrick. What if the Senate had allowed live witnesses at Clinton's trial, instead of only the videotaped interrogations of Vernon Jordan, Sidney Blumenthal and Monica Lewinsky? "I think I would have found some way to either put (Broaddrick's) lawyer on or some way to get the information out that the same package was sent to her that went to the other women, you know, just to establish a pattern." By "package," Schippers meant the affidavit kit the White House sent to a number of women linked to the president, complete with intructions on how to avoid testifying in the Paula Jones case by denying a relationship, consensual or otherwise. Broaddrick got her package and complied. But in an ironic twist, the Clinton rape accuser let the White House off the hook on suspicions she had been pressured into a denial. "It was her idea to deny the story," Schippers told NewsMax.com. Broaddrick has said she falsely denied the Clinton rape to Jones' lawyers because she simply didn't want to relive the most terrible moments of her life. But Schippers suggested another reason. "She was so terrified. And the reason she was terrified was because she saw what had happened to Kathleen Willey, Gennifer Flowers and all the rest of them." Nearly two years after the Juanita Broaddrick story first broke, there is still palpable outrage in some quarters that Clinton may have gotten away with the 22-year-old rape. But what about the witness intimidation? In that case the perpetrator may not be so lucky, says the former impeachment prober. Independent Counsel Robert Ray "may still be looking into some of the things that happened to Broaddrick," Schippers said. "I know they're still looking into what happened to (Kathleen) Willey. "You know, when everybody says Clinton's been exonerated on this and that ñ that's b---s--t. He has not been exonerated on this and that and the other. Ray is still looking into those things. ... It could very well be. It's certainly evidence of intimidation." Coming soon on NewsMax.com: The full transcript of our exclusive interview with David Schippers. Learn new details never before revealed about:
|
She is referring to Arnold and the fact that he's a gov. and not a U.S. sen. is not relevant to Hillary.
What H is concerned about is the impresssion she *hopes to* leave on the listener.
|
THE CLINTON RAPES, LIVING HISTORY, USEFUL IDIOTS AND ENTROPY |
|
"I wouldn't want any unneutered Clintons in my house." —Former Labor Secretary nominee Linda Chavez, wondering about the reproductive status of Socks the cat, whom she has offered to adopt
"It's the first time Clinton has ever rejected p---y in his life" —G. Gordon Liddy, on reports that the Clintons were giving away First Cat Socks to Betty Currie
"Jackson was carrying on his affair with Sanford while he was counseling President Clinton during the Monica Lewinsky scandal. In fact, he even brought his pregnant mistress to the White House, one can only assume to show off to Clinton how to properly destroy one's career and reputation." —Jon Stewart
"Here's the worst part about this whole thing. During the impeachment trial, Jesse Jackson was Bill Clinton's spiritual adviser. In fact, that's where Bill and Monica got that cigar. Jesse was passing them out: 'Here you go! It's a girl! It's a girl!" —Jay Leno
"Hillary Clinton is the junior senator from the great state of New York. When they swore her in, she used the Clinton family Bible. You know, the one with only seven commandments." —David Letterman
"CNN found that Hillary Clinton is the most admired woman in America. Women admire her because she's strong and successful. Men admire her because she allows her husband to cheat and get away with it." —Jay Leno
"I may not have been the greatest president, but I've had the most fun eight years." —Bill Clinton
"Last time I saw (Clinton) he was swinging on the chandelier in the Oval Office with a brassiere around his head, Viagra in one hand and a Bible in the other, and he was torn between good and evil." —Congressman James Traficant, Jr. (D-Oh.)
"If I were, I would be looking up from a pool of blood and hearing (my wife ask), 'How do I reload this thing?'" — Congressman Dick Armey (R-Tex.), asked during the Monica Lewinsky scandal what he would do if he were in Clinton's position
"You know, if I were a single man, I might ask that mummy out. That's a good-looking mummy" —Bill Clinton, looking at "Juanita," a newly discovered Incan mummy on display at the National Geographic museum
"I'd be happy to give him a blow job just to thank him for keeping abortion legal." —Nina Burleigh, former White House correspondent for Time magazine, in an interview with the Washington Post. She was elaborating on an article she wrote in Mirabella magazine, in which she admitted that she enjoyed having Bill Clinton check out her naked legs during a game of hearts aboard Air Force One. "If he had asked me to continue the game of hearts back in his room at the Jasper Holiday Inn," she wrote, "I would have been happy to go there and see what happened.
|
"I wouldn't want any unneutered Clintons in my house." --Former Labor Secretary nominee Linda Chavez, wondering about the reproductive status of Socks the cat, whom she has offered to adopt
"It's the first time Clinton has ever rejected p---y in his life" --G. Gordon Liddy, on reports that the Clintons were giving away First Cat Socks to Betty Currie |
|
The report fails to explain how Buddy was able to wrest from the strong arm of the Secret Service and negotiate the multimillion-dollar, taxpayer-financed retrofits that were installed to make the poorly located suburban house safe for the universally despised former first couple. The report also fails to include a timeline detailing the whereabouts of the clintons on the day of the death. The clinton report's indictment of a sport utility vehicle (SUV) has caused incipient whispers of a vast left-wing conspiracy and the ever-expanding list of dead adverse clinton witnesses to fill the Senate cloakroom.
Buddy was a 1997 'gift' from a 'benefactor' who subscribed to the notion: "If you want a friend in Washington, get a dog," particularly sage advice for a DC couple forever mired in scandal and antipathy. Whether Buddy also subscribed to that notion was questioned as recently as last January when he entangled himself in clinton's legs, dropping the impeached ex-president to the pavement; clinton insisted at the time that there was no malevolence involved, that they were simply playing a game of fetch. clinton refused to say who was doing the fetching. (see BILL & HILL & BUDDY & HELEN, Helen Thomas Syndrome: THE SYMPTOMS )
The White House reported that the clintons' first First Pet, Socks, a cat, greeted the canine acquisition with "a hiss previously reserved only for Ken Starr." Because Buddy remained Socks' nemesis throughout the clinton dog days, Socks was eventually exiled to Virginia, to the suburban home of Betty Currie, former clinton subornee and sex scheduler. At the time, clinton observed: "I made more progress in the Middle East than I did between Socks and Buddy." Retrospectively, it is clear that clinton's characterization was not correct.
Buddy web sites quickly exploded throughout cyberspace. (Socks web sites, too, Socks would add.) Mrs. clinton, a long-time adherent of synergistic exploitation, "authored" an instant book about three groups favored for exploitation by the clintons: dogs, cats and children. "Dear Socks, Dear Buddy: Kids' Letters to the First Pets" was published by the clintons' personal agitprop-and-money-laundering machine, Simon & Schuster. (see Is hillary clinton's $8M "book advance" a Peter-Principle artifact?) Although Chappaqua locals share the national repugnance for the clintons, their feelings never spilled over to Buddy. "The big highlight for people was, 'I just saw Buddy,' never mind Mr. and Mrs. Clinton," said Christine Meyer, owner of Wags and Whiskers here. |
|
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, you may recall, 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. |
|
NewsMax.com
Schippers Book Bombshell: Clinton Acknowledged Broaddrick Rape Carl Limbacher Order your copy of "Sellout" from NewsMax.com. at a great price cheaper than Amazon.com! CLICK HERE TO ORDER.
Bill Clinton tacitly admitted that he raped Juanita Broaddrick during a conversation with her husband in the mid-1980s, according to an account given to House impeachment investigators by Broaddrick herself, a new book claims. (viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE) David Schippers, the former Chicago mob-busting attorney selected by House Judiciary Chairman Henry Hyde to head the Clinton impeachment inquiry two years ago, offers the Clinton rape shocker in "Sellout: The Inside Story of President Clinton's Impeachment." Schippers was initially recruited by Hyde before the Lewinsky case broke, to conduct the first serious oversight investigation of the Justice Department in twenty years. In that capacity, he uncovered other aspects of Clinton administration corruption that went far beyond the lies and obstruction in the Monica Lewinsky and Paula Jones cases. But when Starr sent over an impeachment report that focused exclusively on Sexgate, the constraints of time and the timidity of the GOP leadership left Schippers little choice but to make that the focus of the House impeachment probe. The longtime Democrat who twice voted for Clinton hired two trusted investigators he knew from his days working with Chicago law enforcement. Seeking to build a case against Clinton that went beyond his lies and obstruction in the Lewinsky case, Schippers sent Diana Woznicki and John Kocoras to Arkansas in search of other Jane Does who had been pressured to deny a sexual relationship with Clinton. "Within a day or two," Schippers writes, "Diana reported to me about a woman in Arkansas, Juanita Broaddrick, who alleged that Clinton had raped her years earlier." Schippers' first instinct was to ignore the unconfirmed rumors. It was to him "a shocking story, but nothing in itself that would affect our case in the Senate." Then Woznicki dropped a bombshell on her boss. "Oh, one more thing that I picked up. She was subpoenaed by Jones lawyers. She filed an affidavit denying everything." Schippers' reaction? "Bingo! That changed the whole picture." If Broaddrick had been pressured to lie, it would be part of a pattern of obstruction of justice that the Senate couldn't possibly ignore. Once Schippers discovered that Starr had investigated Broaddrick's charges, he requested any and all information the Office of Independent Counsel had on the case. House probers learned that Broaddrick's charges were corroborated by several witness interviewed by the OIC. At that point, Kocoras and Woznicki were dispatched again to Arkansas. During a meeting with Broaddrick and her lawyer, the Clinton rape accuser was reluctant to acknowledge the assault. But in a telephone conversation later that day, Broaddrick unburdened herself of the secret she had carried for 20 years. For an hour and a half, the Arkansas businesswoman described the the terrifying experience to Woznicki, who had worked with rape victims during her days on the Chicago police force. When the two investigators returned to Washington, Woznicki told Schippers, "Juanita fits the pattern of the classic rape victim." The broad outline of Broaddrick's story has been known ever since the Wall Street Journal published her account on February 19, 1999, seven days after Clinton's impeachment trial ended. In April 1978 she accepted an invitation from then-state Attorney General Clinton to meet at her hotel's coffee shop while she was in town on business. Clinton persuaded her that it would be better to meet in her room. Once there, he made sexual advances. When Broaddrick resisited, Clinton forced her onto the bed and bit her lip until she submitted to the rape. But in his book, Schippers reveals a stunning new detail as he recounts Woznicki's version of Broaddrick's story. "One evening, years before, in 1984 or 1985, Mr. and Mrs. Broaddrick had attended a function in Hot Springs, Arkansas. The couple didn't realize that Clinton was the keynote speaker. When they found out, they returned to their hotel room. "In the course of the evening, (Juanita's husband) David went down to the bar and found himself standing next to Clinton. Clinton stuck out his hand and said, 'You're with Juanita, aren't you?' "Broaddrick squeezed Clinton's hand as hard as he was able. He looked Clinton right in the eye and, continuing his grip, said, 'Don't you go near her or near her home; don't you even so much as look at her.' "Startled, Clinton pulled his hand away and said, 'I didn't know she was with you when that happened.' " When "that" happened? Clinton wasn't mystified by Mr. Broaddrick's angry demeanor and ominous-sounding words. He accepted the warning without protest and asked for no further explanation. His sanguine reception of Broaddrick's hostile behavior has only one explanation. Undoubtedly, Clinton knew exactly why Broaddrick was upset about "that." Certainly David Broaddrick had understood. Without explicitly saying so, the future president of the United States had just acknowledged he was a rapist. Apart from the Broaddrick case, David Schippers' historic investigation of Bill Clinton uncovered reams of incriminating evidence. But as the no-holds-barred investigator explains in his book: "A great deal of evidentiary material remains under seal or in the executive protection of the House Judiciary Committee. While I cannot discuss that evidence, except in general terms, I am free to reveal other evidence and testimony that my staff developed independently. ..." But even under these limitations, the old Chicago hand is able to shed light on areas of Clinton administration corruption yet to be explored by the media.
Schippers explains how his pre-impeachment probe of the Justice Department uncovered a frightening Clinton INS plan to naturalize tens of thousands of immigrants, likely Democratic voters, the White House thought, in time for the 1996 election. The 75,000 who were made citizens under the Clinton plan already had arrest records. At least one prospective Clinton voter was naturalized while he was in jail. The administration official in charge of the corrupt naturalization scheme was none other than Vice President Al Gore. *While trying to establish impeachment trial ground rules behind closed doors, Republican senators sat mute while Democrats ran the show, Schippers charges. "We make our own rules," barked Delaware Democrat Joe Biden. Only one Senator - Democrat or Republican - seemed interested in anything more than a show trial, asking reasonable questions and listening intently to Schippers' recommendations. That was Al Gore's vice presidential running mate, Sen. Joe Lieberman. *The lengths to which the White House went to try and prevent Oval Office sexual assault victim Kathleen Willey from testifying have never been fully reported. In "Sellout," Schippers details administration attempts to "lawyer-up" the key witness with one of the Washington's top criminal defense attorneys. Fees would not be a problem, Willey was told. After she declined, the threats and intimidation began. One particularly frightening episode is revealed for the first time in Schippers' book.
Schippers described how one Republican congresswoman, upon reviewing the secret files on Broaddrick and other women, "put her head in her hands and cried, 'My God, this is his M.O.' She related an incredible story about how Clinton had once tried to set up liaisons with two women from her district by having someone posing as a Secret Service agent invite each woman to the White House for a private presidential discussion about women's rights. The women inadvertently bumped into one another and compared notes before declining the invites. Larry Klayman's Judicial Watch developed clear evidence of further presidential perjury in the Dolly Kyle Browning case. Schippers actually called Browning to Washington twice and had her ready to testify. But the Senate's unwillingness to hear new evidence precluded opening up this new avenue of Clinton corruption.
Schippers confirms a sickening new detail about Clinton's attack on Broaddrick, making it clear for the first time why several congressmen were nauseated - and one left in tears - after reviewing secret evidence that remains hidden from the American people to this day.
|
|
Shays, you may recall, 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. NOTE: 'ON PREDATORS' has been tweaked. ("VICIOUSLY!" AND "TWICE!) To better capture the cognitive dissonance.
(viewing movie requires Flash Player 6, available HERE)
|
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.
HAPPAQUA, N.Y., Jan. 4 -- The clinton-PR-machine-generated report of the death of Buddy, the impeached ex-president's chocolate Labrador, raises more questions than it answers. The report states: "Buddy playfully took after a contractor leaving the Clinton home about noon and was struck by a sport utility vehicle on Route 117 at the bottom of Old House Lane...Neither Mr. Clinton nor Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton were [sic] home at the time. The only comment they will make on the matter is by way of a statement issued by Mrs. Clinton's office: 'My best memory is that I did not have any involvement in that death.'"