Thread: Flashback: Hillary Clinton Threatened Bill’s Accusers in 1998

Archive
Flashback: Hillary Clinton Threatened Bill’s Accusers in 1998

Kristinn Taylor
Jan 5th, 2016 1:10 pm

A 1998 interview confirms allegations by leading Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump that Hillary Clinton was involved in attacking women who accused her husband, then President Bill Clinton, of assault and other sexual improprieties.

In the interview, Hillary said those accusing and investigating her husband “would have a lot to answer for” and that their backgrounds would be investigated.


(Image from Today Show interview via You Tube.)

Clinton, the leading Democratic Party presidential candidate has come under fire from her GOP rival Trump for her role in enabling serial sexual abuse of women by her husband Bill. Trump has accused Hillary Clinton of ‘abusing’ women who claimed they were victims of her husband’s predatory behavior or were involved in consensual affairs.

“I hope Bill Clinton starts talking about women’s issues so that voters can see what a hypocrite he is and how Hillary abused those women!”

Last weekend on Fox & Friends (as reported by Breitbart), Trump said Hillary was not an innocent victim; that she played a role in Bill Clinton’s abuse of women.

“Trump said, “Her defense is — she’s got a problem. She’s married to a person that’s a serious abuser and I mean, at the highest level, and she — you know, she’s not an innocent victim. She was the one that would go along with him in this whole game that they play. And you look at what happened with some of the people that he took advantage of and then she gets involved. So she’s not like the innocent person sitting by the side with tears in her eyes She was very much involved.”

It is commonly believed by Clinton victims that Hillary was behind the siccing of private investigators on the many women who accused her husband of rape, sexual assault or infidelity in the 1990s.

Hillary Clinton revealed her hidden hand when she menacingly issued a clear warning of intimidation to her husband’s accusers (and those who would pursue their charges) on the nationally broadcast Today Show in early 1998 in the days after the Monica Lewinsky scandal broke.

The Today Show interview with Matt Lauer on January 27, 1998 is famous for Hillary’s claim that a “vast right-wing conspiracy” was behind the allegations of an affair between her husband President Clinton and White House intern Monica Lewinsky. (Transcript source.)

“This is—the great story here for anybody willing to find it and write about it and explain it is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president. A few journalists have kind of caught on to it and explained it. But it has not yet been fully revealed to the American public. And actually, you know, in a bizarre sort of way, this may do it.”

Later in the interview, Hillary bluntly issued her threat:

“I think we’re going to find some other things. And I think that when all of this is put into context, and we really look at the people involved here, look at their motivations and look at their backgrounds, look at their past behavior, some folks are going to have a lot to answer for.”

(Today Show video hosted by C-SPAN, comment at 13:00 mark.)

Less than two weeks later, on February 8, former high level Clinton White House operative George Stephanopoulos said on the ABC News Sunday morning talk show This Week that the Clinton administration was threatening to go scorched earth on Clinton’s accusers and investigators by employing the ‘Ellen Rometsch strategy’ should they not back down.
The ‘Ellen Rometsch strategy’ involved blackmailing into silence Clinton accusers, investigators and political opponents by threatening to expose their backgrounds if they did not back off.

Sam Donaldson: “We know what the White House tactics are. I mean they have been almost open about it. Attack the press, and perhaps with good reason, attack the independent counsel, perhaps for some good reason, and stonewall on the central issue, which is the President of the United States. If he has nothing to hide, why is he hiding?”
George Stephanopoulos: “I agree with that. There’s a different, long-term strategy, which I think would be far more
explosive. White House allies are already starting to whisper about what I’ll call the Ellen Rometsch strategy.”

During and after the Lewinsky investigation that led to Bill Clinton’s impeachment for perjury and obstruction of justice, numerous women accusers were publicly or privately persecuted while several high-ranking Republican congressmen were exposed as adulterers for supporting Clinton’s impeachment–leading to the tumultuous resignation of Speaker-Designate Bob Livingston who was set to replace Newt Gingrich who resigned before his own adultery was exposed.

The intimidation campaign threatened by Hillary Clinton worked.

An intimidated GOP-led Senate held a pro-forma impeachment trial with a pre-arranged verdict of ‘not guilty’ so that senators would not be subjected to retribution via the Ellen Rometsch strategy as the House was, according to House impeachment investigator David Schippers.

Bill and Hillary Clinton went on to become multi-millionaires and global political superstars while the pressdiscarded their research files on Bill’s sordid past as irrelevant.

http://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2016/01/flashback-hillary-clinton-threatened-bills-accusers-in-1998/

‘Enabler’ Hillary Clinton haunted by efforts to ‘destroy’ husband’s accusers




25 years ago, Hillary Clinton lead the effort to discredit women who came forward with stories of harassment or assault by her husband, then-Gov. Bill Clinton. (Associated Press) more >


By Kelly Riddell - The Washington Times -
Thursday, January 14, 2016

Running to be the first woman president, Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton has taken a stern stand on combating sexual harassment and assault — and has insisted that every accuser who comes forward has “the right to be believed.”

But Mrs. Clinton took a very different approach herself 25 years ago as the wife of then-Gov. Bill Clinton, leading the effort to discredit women who came forward with their own stories of harassment or assault by her husband.

Campaign narratives written by reporters detailed how she honchoed the campaign team that handled “bimbo eruptions,” digging up personal papers and official records that could be used to undercut the stories told by a series of women. One top aide later recounted Mrs. Clinton’s intent to “destroy” the story of one accuser, while former adviser Dick Morris said Mrs. Clinton engaged in “blackmail” to try to force women to recant their stories.

The disconnect between Mrs. Clinton’s historic campaign and her own past is quickly becoming an issue in the presidential election, driven in part by Republican opponent Donald Trump’s vow to make her husband, the former president, an issue for her.

And the women who lodged some of the worst complaints against Mr. Clinton are likewise intent on making sure Mrs. Clinton answers for her actions.

“Was dreading seeing my abuser on TV campaign trail for enabler wife but his physical appearance reflects ghosts of past are catching up,” Juanita Broaddrick, who in 1999 accused Mr. Clinton of having raped her decades earlier, tweeted last week.

A day later she wrote: “I was 35 years old when Bill Clinton, Ark. Attorney General raped me and Hillary tried to silence me. I am now 73 it never goes away.”

And Paula Jones, who sued Mr. Clinton for sexual harassment, winning an $850,000 out-of-court settlement to drop the case, said earlier this month that Mrs. Clinton enabled her husband in his abuse.

“Well, she stood by her man, all right. And she allowed her husband to abuse women, to harass women, possibly other things that he did wrong to women. And she allowed it to happen. As a matter of fact, she would go out and she would try to discredit these women, including me,” Ms. Jones told Breitbart Radio.

Now, with Mrs. Clinton in full campaign mode, analysts are debating whether Mrs. Clinton will suffer for her scorched-earth tactics toward the accusers.

“That’s what people do in political campaigns,” said lawyer and author Wendy Kaminer, who writes on feminism, religion and popular culture. “That Hillary is somehow complicit in whatever her husband did may resonate with people who oppose her anyway, but for people who support her, they will not be persuaded not to support her.”

Some feminists are rallying to Mrs. Clinton, dismissing the questions as politics.

“This whole conversation is irrelevant to Hillary’s ability to run the country,” said Martha Burk, former chair of the National Council of Women’s Organizations. “Trump’s just trying to be a sensationalist. This doesn’t have any place in the discourse about somebody’s ability to run the country; it’s a complete red herring. He’s trying to find something to take the attention away from the fact he doesn’t have the qualifications to be president.”

But the issue is clearly on some voters’ minds. Mrs. Clinton, at a town hall in New Hampshire last month, faced the first pointed question about her husband’s accusers.

“I would say that everyone should be believed at first until they are disbelieved based on evidence,” Mrs. Clinton said, quickly moving on to another question.

Neither Ms. Broaddrick, who accused the former president of rape, or Kathleen Willey, who accused Mr. Clinton of sexual assault, have had their stories disproved. And Ms. Jones’ husband said they considered the settlement the Clintons paid an “apology” to her.

This week, in an interview with CNN, Mrs. Clinton said she wouldn’t engage with Mr. Trump, who has said the former first lady must answer for her enabling of her husband.
“I have no response. I’m going to let him say whatever he wants to say. He can run his campaign however he wishes,” Mrs. Clinton said.

Mr. Clinton last faced voters 20 years ago, and an entire generation of voters has never had the chance to cast a ballot for him. Many of them did get a look at Mrs. Clinton during the 2008 Democratic presidential primary, but her husband has become a bigger campaign issue this year, particularly with similar accusations being raised about comedian Bill Cosby.
Ms. Kaminer said younger women who weren’t old enough to vote in the 1990s probably have no memory of the scandals.

What they do have, however, is a modern take on definitions of what constitutes sexual harassment and the impermissibility of any breaches.

“Younger voters have a much more expansive view — and a punitive one — of sexual misconduct than we had 25 years ago,” Ms. Kaminer said. “Now some define ogling a woman as an act of sexual aggression — that’s one I don’t agree with, but still, the norms are out there. Whether or not that affects the way they vote remains to be seen.”
In the most recent New York Times/CBS poll released Wednesday, Mrs. Clinton trails rival Vermont Senator Bernard Sanders by a 2-to-1 ratio with primary voters under the age of 45 — though the poll doesn’t have a breakdown by sex for that age group.

Hoping to reach that demographic, Mrs. Clinton has paraded singer Katy Perry and feminist Lena Dunham out on the campaign trail this season.

In Iowa Ms. Dunham said backing Mrs. Clinton is a pro-feminist move.

“I can’t talk about Hillary Clinton without also acknowledging that she has survived horrific, gendered attacks on nearly every single aspect of her character with tremendous grace and aplomb,” Ms. Dunham, 29, said in Iowa last week. “The way she’s been treated by the media is just more evidence of the anger that exists toward women, particularly ambitious women, and the way we are not allowed to exist on our own merits rather than extensions of powerful men.”

And speaking to People magazine, Ms. Dunham said it was wrong to force the former first lady to answer for her husband’s actions.

“I think that women should not be forced to constantly answer for the rhetoric around their husbands’ lives,” Ms. Dunham said. “It’s really important to view Hillary as an independent candidate and as a person who has her own really interesting and beautiful track record of supporting and protecting women. While she’s clearly very connected to her husband, it’s fully her that I’m so excited to be talking about.”

Some voters do have concerns about Mr. Clinton himself, but the questions Mrs. Clinton is fending off suggest voters are also interested in her role in fighting the accusations — and tarnishing the accusers.

“This is all about Hillary Clinton’s treatment of women who may have been sexually abused,” MSNBC host Joe Scarborough said on his show this week. “Can she move forward in this campaign, talking about a war on women, as she did in Northern Iowa, that women who claim to be sexually abused have the right to be heard and the right to be believed? Do we have to examine what she did to protect herself and her position of power when women came forward and claimed sexual abuse on her husband’s part?”

Mrs. Clinton’s own former confidantes do not cast her behavior in a flattering light.

“There could be no question that Hillary was Bill’s fiercest defender in preventing his other women from causing trouble,” journalist Carl Bernstein wrote in his book “A Woman in Charge: The Life of Hillary Rodham Clinton.” “She never doubted that if the women, and the enemies who used them, succeeded or became too visible and credible, the whole edifice could come down, including their marriage.”

Mrs. Clinton would work side by side with Betsey Wright, then her husband’s top aide, to collect personal papers, correspondence and any official records on the women that could be used against them. The team also hired detectives to dig up whatever they could to snuff out what Mrs. Wright dubbed the “bimbo interruptions” before they could become a threat to his presidential aspirations, Mr. Bernstein reported.

While at the White House, Mrs. Clinton also took the lead in fending off damaging press inquiries.

In his book “All Too Human,” George Stephanopoulos, a chief adviser in the Clinton White House, recalls the story of Connie Hamzy, who told people she had shown her breasts to Mr. Clinton in a hotel in Little Rock.

“Clinton seemed to take great pleasure in picturing the scene again,” wrote Mr. Stephanopoulos, an anchor and political analyst for ABC News. “Hillary was less than amused. ‘We have to destroy her story,’ she said from her seat next to him on the plane. I was with her. Hamzy’s story didn’t sound funny to me either. It was flimsy, but it could do some damage if we didn’t snuff it out fast.”

Mr. Clinton’s most famous indiscretion was lying about having relations with then-22-year-old intern Monica Lewinsky in the Oval Office. Although demonstrating “extremely bad judgment,” there were no accusations of rape, Ms. Burk said.

It also had nothing to do with Mrs. Clinton, she added.

But the aggressive tactics in silencing some of the women broke the Clintons’ ties to some of their closest aides and friends, including Mr. Stephanopoulous, who said he had to go after the Lewinsky affair came to light.

“I refused to vouch for Clinton’s credibility, and I couldn’t buy the party line that this was more about Clinton’s accusers than his own actions — which meant I was the enemy now. That’s the way it was with the Clintons — you were either for them or against them,” Mr. Stephanopoulous wrote.

Another casualty was Mr. Morris, their longtime pollster and friend.

“What really turned me off was what I call secret police,” Mr. Morris said in an interview with Larry King on Ora TV’s “PoliticKing” last year. “When she [Hillary] hired this fleet of detectives to go around examining all of the women who had been identified with Clinton. Not for the purpose of divorcing Clinton. Not for the purpose of getting him to stop, but for the purpose of developing blackmail material on these woman to cow them into silence that had a Nixonian quality to it that I hold against her, and I continue to.”

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/...bill/?page=all

Hillary’s War on the Women Who Boinked Bill


John Hawkins
|
Posted: Mar 14, 2015 12:01 AM



Most Americans haven’t forgotten the bald-faced lies the Clintons told about Bill’s affairs and molestations along with the sheer savagery of the attacks their surrogates launched against these women.

For example, we all remember Bill Clinton perjuring himself by saying,“I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.” Of course, Bill was lying which helped lead to the House voting to impeach him. The Senate attempted to follow suit and although 50 Senators voted for impeachment, they didn’t reach the 67 vote threshold needed to send Clinton home in disgrace.

What you may not remember as well was the brutality of public relations war the Clintons waged against these women. Just to point out one particularly nasty quip out of many, Clintonista James Carville rather famously said of Paula Jones that if you, “drag a hundred-dollar bill through a trailer park, you never know what you’ll find.” Of course in the end, Paula Jones ended up getting an $850,000 out-of-court settlement from the Clintons while Bill had to pay $90,000 for lying in court and was stripped of his law license for five years as part of a deal to avoid disbarment.

However, there was much more to the story. While agents of Bill and Hillary were publicly trying to destroy the women Bill slept with and molested, the IRS was going after them as well. Before Obama’s IRS harassed the Tea Party, Clinton’s IRS auditedGennifer Flowers, Liz Ward Gracen, Paula Jones and Juanita Broaddrick.

Even worse, several of the Clinton women faced extremely creepy harassment.

Both Gennifer Flowers and Juanita Broadrick say their homes were burglarized.

Quoting Ann Coulter’s book, High Crimes and Misdemeanors: The Case Against Bill Clinton, former Clinton mistress Sally Purdue received “a series of threatening visits, phone calls and letters.” Purdue claimed that a man visited her who said, “If I was a good little girl, and didn’t kill the messenger, I’d be set for life: a federal job…I’d never have to worry again. But if I didn’t take the offer, then they knew that I went jogging by myself and he couldn’t guarantee what would happen to my pretty little legs.”


In an interview with me back in 2007, Kathleen Willey made some even more disturbing allegations.

I’ve read a transcript of your examination on the stand and it seemed pretty obvious to me that you were being very evasive. You seemed to be trying to do everything humanly possible to give the impression that nothing had happened between you and Bill Clinton without actually perjuring yourself. Is that the case?

I did not want to tell that story. My intention was for that story to go to my grave with me. Eventually, I just knew I had to tell the story and I did.

Like I said, in the transcript, you did everything you could to avoid talking about it and got to the point where you had to perjure yourself or tell the story, right?

That’s absolutely correct…and I had been threatened a few days before that and all kinds of things had been happening to me.

Like what? Tell me about that.

Strange phone calls. You know, “We’re getting ready to turn the power off, do you have small children or elderly people there?” The power company doesn’t do that and the power never went off.

Then, one day, I live out in the country, in a very rural part of Virginia and…I walked out of my house one day and I had three flat tires. I wondered how that had happened and came to find out that someone had come down with a nail gun and shot the tires out in the sidewalls. I mean, you don’t run over nails and get them in the sidewalls.

And I had a beloved pet of 13 years that disappeared…

That was your cat, right?

That was my cat. I put the word out…and put up pictures saying she was missing and one morning, I was out walking at first light with my dogs, a couple of days before the deposition, and this stranger approached me and asked if I had ever found the cat. He was very knowledgeable about my cat, and talked about what a nice cat he was — talking about him in the past tense. Then he asked me if I had gotten my tires repaired — “Did you ever get those tires fixed” — which was when I knew something was going on. Then, the worst part was when he threatened my children by name….He said, “You’re just not getting the message, are you?” The message was clear, it was to lie at that deposition in two days and not tell the story of what Bill Clinton did to me.

…I understand. Now, you’ve talked about some of the harassment you’ve suffered. Can you tell me about that and also about your manuscript being stolen recently?

Well, over Labor Day week-end, someone broke into my home, in the middle of the night, while I was upstairs asleep…They wanted it to look like a botched burglary…I think they came in through the screen…they took my purse, which I later found out in the woods. They didn’t take the credit cards, but they took the money that was in my wallet. They broke the antenna off of my car, they tampered with my satellite system, my wireless internet system, and took the manuscript and this is within days of two stories in a national magazine and newspaper (saying) I was almost finished with my book and that it was going to be published in November. I think the person that came in here, came in here with a mission. That mission was to terrify me and get their hands on my manuscript.

Near the end of the book, you had a fascinating little paragraph on some of the harassment that other authors of Clinton books have suffered. Can you tell us a little bit about that?

Well, we’ve got just any number of people who have criticized or questioned the Clintons and have been subjected to this kind of behavior — former state troopers in Arkansas, of course, other women like me. Our stories are so similar it’s eerie. I mean, we all tell the same stories.

Now the argument that’s usually made by Clinton defenders is that all these women that Bill has slept with, sexually harassed or perhaps even raped are crazy, lying sluts with no credibility. Of course, if it’s true that Bill only goes for deranged liars who can’t be trusted, what does that say about Hillary?

Additionally, despite the habitual lies and disrespect for the rule of law shown by the Clintons, if we just had these consistent allegations by multiple women who crossed Bill and Hillary to go on, many people might be willing to hesitantly chalk this story up as another one of those crazy Clinton conspiracies (The Clinton body count, they killed Vince Foster and made it look like a suicide to keep him quiet, etc, etc.). After all, MAYBE, just MAYBE these were fans of the Clintons harassing these women while Bill and Hillary had nothing to do with it.

However, there’s one more piece of evidence that strongly suggests that we should believe these women. That’s the Clinton’s employment of Anthony Pellicano.

Pellicano did work directly with one president: during Bill Clinton's first presidential campaign Pellicano was hired, reportedly by Hillary Clinton, to discredit Gennifer Flowers, the woman who alleged that she had maintained a 12-year affair with the candidate. Six years later, with Clinton into his second term, the White House, according to the New York Post, hired Pellicano, considered a respected forensic audio specialist, to look into Monica Lewinsky's background.’

Pellicano is like a character you’d have expected to see on Breaking Bad and he was caught intimidating a target in a manner consistent with the way Bill Clinton’s victims were bullied.

Pellicano has been imprisoned in a federal detention facility in Big Springs, Tex., since his May 2008 conviction on a variety of racketeering counts, which included charges of computer fraud, identity theft and operating a criminal enterprise aimed at wiretapping its rich and famous victims.

...His battles with the law began in 2002 when (Anita) Busch…discovered her car had been vandalized and her life threatened.

She went to the authorities after she found a dead fish on her battered windshield along with a rose and a note saying, “Stop” in a scenario that rivaled a plot from a Hollywood noir movie.

During their investigation, the authorities found a trove of audio files at Pelicano's Sunset Boulevard office of unauthorized wiretaps of such stars as Sylvester Stallone, and of running the names of others, such as Garry Shandling and Kevin Nealon, through a law-enforcement database.

Why do so many people believe that Bill Cosby is a rapist when he hasn’t been convicted? Because woman after woman keeps coming forward with the same sort of story. Well guess what? Woman after woman has come forth with the same sort of story about being harassed by agents of Bill and Hillary Clinton. We also know Bill and Hillary hired AT LEAST one person who has been caught engaging in the sort of harassment these women faced and turned him loose on them. In addition, one thing everyone should know about Hillary after her latest email scandal, if they didn’t already know it before, is that’s she’s perfectly willing to engage in criminal behavior that looks sleazy because she believes she can get away with anything. The way these women Bill slept with, molested and perhaps even raped have been treated by the Clintons while they’ve paid very little price for it suggests she may be right.

I don’t know about anyone else, but I believe that these women were threatened, burglarized and harassed by agents of Bill and Hillary. That makes the two of them extremely dangerous people, it tells you how phony Hillary’s whole “doing it for the sisters” gaga is and the thought of having a depraved woman like her in charge of the IRS, FBI, DOJ and other instruments of government that she can use to attack her enemies should scare people to death.

http://townhall.com/columnists/johnh...-bill-n1970596