Topic: Is Hillary Clinton Trustworthy? - page 48. (Read 234761 times)

These emails are a true treasure trove. The Libya mails give a great insight into how the war scammers feed the garbage media and with it the masses. Remember Viagra? Total fabrication. Humanitarian concerns. Non-existent. And so on. Why these people aren´t before a war crimes tribunal along with scammers from other wars

is totally beyond me.

The rape allegation against Bill Clinton, explained


On Wednesday, Juanita Broaddrick tweeted a reminder of her allegation that Bill Clinton raped her during his campaign for governor of Arkansas in 1978:





Over the phone, Broaddrick confirmed to me that the account is hers, and said she was moved to tweet because she was sickened by seeing the Clintons on the campaign trail again. "I guess it was just seeing them on TV so much now, and her with the Benghazi [hearing]," Broaddrick says. "That was impossible, to watch her during that, and now having to see her on the TV, and on the TV campaigning, it's torture. I have to grab and switch my TV every time I turn around."

Broaddrick's allegation started resurfacing this fall, after Hillary Clinton made a number of statements on the importance of believing rape accusers. On December 3, a couple of weeks after Clinton tweeted, "Every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported," a woman at an event in Hooksett, New Hampshire, asked, "Secretary Clinton, you recently came out to say that all rape victims should be believed. But would you say that Juanita Broaddrick, Kathleen Willey and Paula Jones be believed as well?" Clinton replied, "Well, I would say that everyone should be believed at first until they are disbelieved based on evidence." The audience applauded:

Then, this past Sunday, Hillary Clinton faced a loud and persistent heckler yelling about Broaddrick at a Derry, New Hampshire, campaign event, eventually dismissing the woman in strident fashion. "You are very rude, and I'm not going to ever call on you," Clinton declared, sparking a standing ovation from the crowd.

In statements to reporters and a long Facebook update posted after the rally, the heckler — a Republican state representative named Katherine Prudhomme-O’Brien — explained that she wanted Clinton to address allegations that Bill Clinton had sexually assaulted Broaddrick and Kathleen Willey. Willey claims that Clinton fondled her breast and forced her hand on his crotch in the Oval Office in 1993, when she was a White House volunteer. Though Prudhomme-O'Brien didn't mention her, Paula Jones — an Arkansas state employee who sued Clinton for allegedly exposing himself to her when he was governor in 1991 — is often included in this list of accusers as well.

So far, this issue has mostly been raised by conservative media and Republican politicians like Prudhomme-O'Brien. But it's a substantive matter worthy of coverage from non-right-wing outlets as well. There really are multiple accusations of sexual assault against Bill Clinton, accusations that have too often been conflated with his much better-established and much less morally concerning history of adultery. Are the women making these accusations survivors who deserve to be believed, to borrow Hillary Clinton's language? Or, as she later insisted, have their accusations all been found to be baseless?

The basic answer is that some of the claims appear more credible than others. There are three main accusers, of whom it seems by far the most credible — based on the publicly available evidence — is Broaddrick. Jones's claim was aired for years and faced several major problems (including the fact that she claimed the president's penis had a "distinguishing mark" that doctors and Monica Lewinsky said it did not have), and Willey repeatedly lied to federal investigators and changed her story dramatically between grand jury testimony and a deposition in the Jones case (among other issues).

But Broaddrick's allegation, while hardly proven, has not been definitively refuted. Only Broaddrick and Bill Clinton know what the truth of the matter in the case is. But if one generally believes it's important to believe the victim, it's hard to argue that this case should be an exception.
What Juanita Broaddrick says Bill Clinton did

Juanita Broaddrick gave a lengthy account of her alleged rape in a 1999 Dateline NBC interview (which has been posted in its entirety by the right-wing Media Research Center; the anti-Clinton site Shadowgov.com has a transcript that aligns with the NBC recording):

The interview was conducted on January 20, 1999, before the Senate on February 12 ultimately acquitted Clinton on charges related to his affair with Monica Lewinsky. NBC delayed airing until February 24, and Broaddrick, frustrated, gave accounts to the Wall Street Journal editorial page, the Washington Post, and the New York Times in the meantime.

In 1978, Broaddrick was volunteering for Clinton's gubernatorial campaign, and claims she met him when he visited his campaign office in her hometown of Van Buren, Arkansas, that April. She says he then invited her to visit his office in Little Rock, which Broaddrick agreed to do a week later, when she was in the state capitol for a conference of nursing home administrators. Once she was at a hotel in Little Rock, she claims Clinton told her that he wasn't going to the campaign headquarters and offered to meet her in her hotel lobby coffee shop instead. Once he arrived, she says he called her room and suggested that they have coffee there, since the lobby had too many reporters. Broaddrick says she agreed. Then, per the Post story:

    As she tells the story, they spent only a few minutes chatting by the window -- Clinton pointed to an old jail he wanted to renovate if he became governor -- before he began kissing her. She resisted his advances, she said, but soon he pulled her back onto the bed and forcibly had sex with her. She said she did not scream because everything happened so quickly. Her upper lip was bruised and swollen after the encounter because, she said, he had grabbed onto it with his mouth.

    "The last thing he said to me was, 'You better get some ice for that.' And he put on his sunglasses and walked out the door," she recalled.

Several friends of Broaddrick's backed up the story. Norma Rogers, who was the director of nursing at Broaddrick's nursing home at the time, told reporters that she entered the hotel room shortly after the assault allegedly took place and "found Mrs. Broaddrick crying and in 'a state of shock.' Her upper lip was puffed out and blue, and appeared to have been hit." Kelsey elaborated to the New York Times, "She told me he forced himself on her, forced her to have intercourse."

In the Dateline show, Broaddrick's friends Louise Ma, Susan Lewis, and Jean Darden (Norma Rogers's sister) all told NBC News that Broaddrick told them Bill Clinton raped her at the time. David Broaddrick — with whom Broaddrick was having an affair at the time; they both eventually left their spouses to marry each other — also told NBC that Broaddrick's top lip was black after the alleged incident, and that she told him "that she had been raped by Bill Clinton."

Broaddrick claims she was traumatized by the incident and scared of Clinton's influence, and so didn't report the rape or tell her then-husband, Gary Hickey. Three weeks later, Broaddrick would attend a Clinton fundraiser with Hickey. She told NBC News reporter Lisa Myers, "I think I was still in denial that time exactly what had happened to me. I still felt very guilty at that time that it was my fault." She further claimed that Clinton called her nursing home a half-dozen times that year, getting through once and asking when she was going to be back in Little Rock; she told him she wasn't.

In 1979, Broaddrick was appointed by Clinton to a non-paid advisory board position, which she told Myers she accepted before she knew it was a gubernatorial appointment. In 1984, she claims she got a letter from Clinton after her nursing home was recognized as one of the top facilities in the state, with a handwritten note saying, "I admire you very much." She interpreted that as a thank you for her silence. Then in 1991, she says she saw Clinton outside a meeting on nursing home standards in Little Rock, and that he said he wanted to apologize to her and asked what he could do to make things right. She recalls saying, "Nothing," and walking away.

About six months after her initial interviews in 1999, Broaddrick told the Drudge Report that mere weeks after the alleged assault, Hillary Clinton had tried to thank her for her silence on the matter at a political rally:

    "[Hillary] came directly to me as soon as she hit the door. I had been there only a few minutes, I only wanted to make an appearance and leave. She caught me and took my hand and said 'I am so happy to meet you. I want you to know that we appreciate everything you do for Bill.' I started to turn away and she held onto my hand and reiterated her phrase -- looking less friendly and repeated her statement — 'Everything you do for Bill'. I said nothing. She wasn't letting me get away until she made her point. She talked low, the smile faded on the second thank you. I just released her hand from mine and left the gathering."

This wasn't included in the initial reports on Broaddrick's story by the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, New York Times, and NBC News. But after this article's initial publication, Lisa Myers, who conducted NBC News' initial report on Broaddrick, wrote Vox to clarify that Broaddrick did tell NBC that Hillary Clinton had an encounter with her after the alleged assault, though this did not make the final cut of the Dateline segment. So this was not an new addition to or change in Broaddrick's story, even though it became public months later. Broaddrick repeated the claim in 2003 in an interview with Fox News's Sean Hannity:

Before going public, Broaddrick had been courted to come forward about the allegations by Clinton enemies for years. She told reporters that an anti-Clinton businessman in Arkansas named Philip Yoakum urged her to come forward in 1992, during Clinton's presidential campaign. When Paula Jones sued Clinton for sexual harassment in 1994, Jones’s lawyers also approached Broaddrick, who declined to cooperate. She only came forward after she was interviewed by independent counsel Kenneth Starr's office and her allegation leaked. Broaddrick told the Journal that Myers pursued her for nearly a year before she agreed to an interview, and that she came forward because she wanted to rebut false rumors circulating after her statements to prosecutors (like that David Broaddrick had accepted hush money from the Clintons in exchange for silence).


http://www.vox.com/2016/1/6/10722580/bill-clinton-juanita-broaddrick

OK, I´m brain dead. It is already up there with Hillary in Orange. It´s the same story I saw.

I saw some email stuff where someone´s fax wasn´t working and she told an aide to remove the classified tag or whatever they call it from the email so it could be sent that way.

There are pretty strict laws regarding official correspondence in the United States, right? The country has been and is at war and of course diplomats and others are constantly shuttling to and fro around the world. It´s a dangerous situation. You want to be extremely secure. Loose lips sink ships they used to say. Why hasn´t she been indicted? Are they still collecting evidence? What if the case is ready say Sept. 1 next? It goes under the carpet?

Much more accurate description.

More like: one side represents evil and the other one represents more evil.

She will be end of american dream. she has two personality . one side represents evil the other one represents goodness.

Whoa: Hillary e-mail instructs aide to transmit classified data without markings





Has the State Department released a smoking gun in the Hillary Clinton e-mail scandal? In a thread from June 2011, Hillary exchanges e-mails with Jake Sullivan, then her deputy chief of staff and now her campaign foreign-policy adviser, in which she impatiently waits for a set of talking points. When Sullivan tells her that the source is having trouble with the secure fax, Hillary then orders Sullivan to have the data stripped of its markings and sent through a non-secure channel.

That should be game, set, and match, yes?





“If they can’t, turn into nonpaper w no identifying heading and send nonsecure.” That’s an order to violate the laws handling classified material. There is no other way to read that demand. Regardless of whether or not Sullivan complied, this demolishes Hillary’s claim to be ignorant of marking issues, as well as strongly suggests that the other thousand-plus instances where this did occur likely came under her direction.

Fox News also noticed the e-mail this morning, although they don’t yet have a copy of it linked:

    However, one email thread from June 2011 appears to include Clinton telling her top adviser Jake Sullivan to send secure information through insecure means.

    In response to Clinton’s request for a set of since-redacted talking points, Sullivan writes, “They say they’ve had issues sending secure fax. They’re working on it.” Clinton responds “If they can’t, turn into nonpaper [with] no identifying heading and send nonsecure.”

    Ironically, an email thread from four months earlier shows Clinton saying she was “surprised” that a diplomatic oficer named John Godfrey used a personal email account to send a memo on Libya policy after the fall of Muammar Qaddafi.

It’s probably time to review the relevant criminal statutes again in this case, such as 18 USC 793:

    d) Whoever, lawfully having possession of, access to, control over, or being entrusted with any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it on demand to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or

    (e) Whoever having unauthorized possession of, access to, or control over any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, or note relating to the national defense, or information relating to the national defense which information the possessor has reason to believe could be used to the injury of the United States or to the advantage of any foreign nation, willfully communicates, delivers, transmits or causes to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted, or attempts to communicate, deliver, transmit or cause to be communicated, delivered, or transmitted the same to any person not entitled to receive it, or willfully retains the same and fails to deliver it to the officer or employee of the United States entitled to receive it; or

    (f) Whoever, being entrusted with or having lawful possession or control of any document, writing, code book, signal book, sketch, photograph, photographic negative, blueprint, plan, map, model, instrument, appliance, note, or information, relating to the national defense,
    (1) through gross negligence permits the same to be removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of his trust, or to be lost, stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, or
    (2) having knowledge that the same has been illegally removed from its proper place of custody or delivered to anyone in violation of its trust, or lost, or stolen, abstracted, or destroyed, and fails to make prompt report of such loss, theft, abstraction, or destruction to his superior officer—

    Shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

Did those talking points get illegally transmitted on Hillary’s order? If so, then Sullivan may find himself in legal trouble, too. Paragraph (g) makes it clear that “each of the parties to such conspiracy shall be subject to the punishment provided for the offense which is the object of such conspiracy.”

This explains why more than a thousand pieces of classified information have found their way into Hillary’s unauthorized and unsecured e-mail system — and why the markings have been stripped from them. Hillary herself apparently ordered the Code Red, so to speak.


http://hotair.com/archives/2016/01/08/whoa-hillary-e-mail-instructs-aide-to-transmit-classified-e-mail-without-markings/

Hillary Will Be Indicted, Says Former U.S. Attorney






A former U.S. Attorney predicts a Watergate-style showdown in the Department of Justice if Attorney General Loretta Lynch overrules a potential FBI recommendation to indict Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.

“The [FBI] has so much information about criminal conduct by her and her staff that there is no way that they walk away from this,” Joseph diGenova, formerly the District of Columbia’s U.S. Attorney, told Laura Ingraham in a Tuesday radio interview. “They are going to make a recommendation that people be charged and then Loretta Lynch is going to have the decision of a lifetime.

“I believe that the evidence that the FBI is compiling will be so compelling that, unless [Lynch] agrees to the charges, there will be a massive revolt inside the FBI, which she will not be able to survive as an attorney general. It will be like Watergate. It will be unbelievable.”


http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/07/hillary-clinton-will-be-indicted-says-former-us-attorney/

When will the following list of Clinton's victim accusers grace the cover of the Magazine just like the victims of the other predator named Bill C. did?

Author: More Clinton Sexual Assault Victims Are About To Come Forward










http://www.hannity.com/articles/hanpr-election-493995/bombshell-claim-more-clinton-sexual-assault-14252536/#ixzz3wZfQ8IB5

Law Enforcement Officials, Medical Professionals: There’s Something Seriously Wrong With Hillary Clinton’s Health





Democrat frontrunner Hillary Clinton’s disappearance from the debate stage last month left people speculating that the former First Lady took a long bathroom break, but now a law-enforcement source with inside connections is alleging that Clinton was missing from the stage due to health issues stemming from a previous brain injury.


These long-lasting symptoms stemming from a concussion and blood clot, according to a neurologist, suggest Clinton is suffering from post-concussion syndrome, which can severely impact her cognitive abilities.

All that said, however, Clinton’s campaign maintained to Breitbart News that she is in good health and can serve as President of the United States.

“Strong source just told me something I suspected. Hillary’s debate ‘bathroom break’ wasn’t that, but flare up of problems from brain injury,” wrote John Cardillo on Twitter.

Cardillo, who previously worked as an officer who provided VIP security details for the New York Police Department (NYPD), told Breitbart News that he knows of two additional sources who have commented about Clinton’s health problems, which have even impacted her ability to walk to her car after delivering a speech.

“I got this from both a [federal agent] … and I also got it from a New York [NYPD] guy who worked security at a Hillary event in New York City,” Cardillo told Breitbart News, adding:

    These are two people that aren’t just personal friends. I worked with one and then post law-enforcement worked with another on some related things. So, these aren’t anonymous people. These are good friends. Both of them told me the same thing, that after her speeches, whether she did a talk or a policy speech, she had to sit behind – she would come off the podium backstage – and have to sit and rest before making it back to the car because she was so fatigued, dizzy and disoriented.

Cardillo said these two security officials don’t know each other and do not live in the same state, but “their stories were almost identical.”

One of the men told him that Clinton was “very pale, kind of disoriented. He said she looked like she was about to faint. She was very pale, almost sweaty.”

Cardillo said one of the incidents occurred while she was Secretary of State. The event worked by the NYPD official was roughly a year ago.

Veteran Republican strategist Roger Stone, who previously worked with GOP frontrunner Donald Trump, told Breitbart News that he has also heard about Clinton’s long-term health problems.

“A number of New York Democrats, very prominent, well-known, wealthy New York Democrats, told me last year that Hillary had very significant health issues and that they were surprised that she was running in view of her health problems and her lack of stamina,” Stone told Breitbart News. “So far, she’s run a very controlled campaign,”


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2016/01/06/law-enforcement-officials-medical-professionals-theres-something-seriously-wrong-hillary-clintons-health/

Bill Clinton rape accuser: Hillary 'tried to silence' me


A woman who publicly accused former President Bill Clinton of raping her in 1978 is resurrecting her claims on social media.

“I was 35 years old when Bill Clinton, Ark. Attorney General raped me,” Juanita Broaddrick tweeted Wednesday.

“Hillary tried to silence me,” she wrote of Bill Clinton’s wife and the current Democratic presidential front-runner.  “I am now 73…it never goes away.”

    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.
    — Juanita Broaddrick (@atensnut) January 6, 2016

The Hill reached a woman by phone in Van Buren, Ark., on Wednesday who identified herself as Broaddrick. She said the Twitter account is hers.

Broaddrick said she set the account up in 2009 but hasn’t used it much since because she’s unfamiliar with Twitter.

The former nursing home administrator alleged in 1999 that Bill Clinton raped her in Little Rock, Ark., during his 1978 gubernatorial campaign.

In a brief interview, Broaddrick, who said she retired after selling her nursing home business in 2008, said she’s decided to play a more visible role heading into 2016.

“I’ve been quiet for too long, and now with the possibility of [Hillary Clinton] being the Democratic nominee and possibly president, I feel the need to get involved,” she said.

Broaddrick said that she doesn’t describe herself as Republican or Democrat, but is supporting Donald Trump for president.

“He says the things I like to hear,” Broaddrick said.

She lauded Trump for broaching the issue of Bill Clinton’s past marital infidelities and allegations of sexual assault.

“I’m glad someone did. Everyone has been hanging back and most of the mainstream media won’t approach it but it’s something that should be talked about.”

David E. Kendall, the Clinton’s then-personal attorney, strongly denied Broaddrick's charges when they first emerged during Bill Clinton’s presidency.

“Any allegation that the president assaulted Ms. Broaddrick more than 20 years ago is absolutely false,” he said in a statement released by the White House in February 1999, according to The Washington Post.

“Beyond that we are not going to comment,” the attorney added then.


http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/264988-bill-clinton-rape-accuser-hillary-tried-to-silence-me

State Department gave ‘inaccurate’ answer on Clinton email use, review says




Two years before the public learned of Hillary Clinton’s private server, the State Department gave an “inaccurate and incomplete” response about her email use when it told an outside group that it had no documents about Clinton’s email accounts beyond her government address, according to a report from the State Department’s inspector general to be released Thursday.

The State Department made its statement in response to a 2012 records request from the independent watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW). The response came even though Clinton’s chief of staff, who knew about the secretary’s private account, was aware of the inquiry, the report says. In addition, the IG review found that agency staffers had not searched Clinton’s office for emails.

The incident was one of four cases that the report highlights as examples of flawed responses to public-records requests made while Clinton was in office. The report found it was part of a long-standing problem stretching back through previous administrations.

Clinton’s exclusive use of a private email system, which became public in March 2015, led to an FBI investigation into whether her unusual arrangement had compromised national secrets.

After a firestorm of controversy, Clinton’s email practice has become more muted as a campaign issue in recent months as she has maintained her status as the Democratic presidential front-runner.

Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton responded to reporters in Las Vegas on Tuesday over the controversy surrounding her personal e-mail server. Clinton reiterated that she did not send or receive any classified material from her personal account. (AP)

But the new report demonstrates the potential peril Clinton still faces over the issue. In addition to the FBI probe, the State Department inspector general, Steve Linick, indicated that his work is not done.

His office is preparing an additional report that could touch even more directly on Clinton’s conduct — examining the use of personal email and its effect on the department’s compliance with its duty to preserve records.

Pointing to the report’s broad conclusions about weak records management, State Department officials concurred with the inspector general’s findings and recommendations to boost staff, training, procedures and oversight.

“The Department is committed to transparency, and the issues addressed in this report have the full attention of Secretary Kerry and the Department’s senior staff,” said spokesman John Kirby, referring to Clinton’s successor, John F. Kerry. “We know we must continue to improve our FOIA responsiveness and are taking additional steps to do so.”

Brian Fallon, a spokesman for the Clinton campaign, said, “The Department had a preexisting process in place to handle the tens of thousands of requests it received annually, and that established process was followed by the Secretary and her staff throughout her tenure.”

The report said that some seeking records from the secretary’s office have had to wait more than 500 days to get replies. The secretary’s office lacked any written procedures for handling records requests and had no senior official in charge of overseeing the work, the report says.

Of 417 records requests made from the era of Madeleine K. Albright to the present, 243 are still open and pending.

The inquiry found that the secretary’s office almost never searched its own email in ­public-records requests before 2011. From 2011 to 2015, the secretary’s office inconsistently searched office emails as it saw fit.

The 2012 request by CREW was sparked by the discovery that Lisa Jackson, then-administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, had been using an alias email at work with the name “Richard Windsor,” largely for personal communication.

CREW filed a public-records request with the State Department that month for “records sufficient to show the number of email accounts of or associated with Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton.”

Staff soon after alerted Clinton’s chief of staff, Cheryl Mills, to CREW’s request. The inspector general found that Mills tasked a member of her staff to follow up on the request. In May 2013 — four months after Clinton left office — the State Department told CREW that “no records responsive to your request were located.”

The IG report cited no evidence that Mills intervened in the CREW inquiry or approved the final response — only that she knew about the request and wanted a close aide to keep track of it.

A lawyer for Mills did not respond to a request for comment.

Melanie Sloan, the executive director of CREW at the time, said Wednesday that the findings showed the agency should have known its response was wrong.

“Cheryl Mills should have corrected the record,” Sloan said. “She knew this wasn’t a complete and full answer.”

Fallon, noting that the report found no sign that Mills reviewed the CREW records response, said Mills “did absolutely nothing wrong.”



https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/report-clinton-led-state-department-gave-inaccurate-answer-on-email-use/2016/01/06/da01edf8-b4a1-11e5-a842-0feb51d1d124_story.html

Remember how bad and evil nixon's watergate was supposed to be, compared to 0bama and harpy clinton's multiple scandals with dead people, weaponizing the IRS, lying "if you like your plan, you can keep your plan", etc, etc...?

really? IMO, Most disgusting woman. As is Obama. They are both liars and guilty of treason to the United States

Flashback: Hillary Clinton Threatened Bill’s Accusers in 1998



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.

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.

[...]

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.

    “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.”

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 press discarded their research files on Bill’s sordid past as irrelevant.


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



-----------------------------------------------
She is not a good laid-y...

Hillary Clinton is good lady but if she is in politic subject i dont trust anybody.

Bill Clinton has admitted to affair with Lewinsky and Jennifer Flowers they have settled other of his shameful behavior out of court.