Juanita Broaddrick on Bill Clinton’s Jeffrey Epstein Statement: ‘Your Denials Are Worthless’

I just posted some testimony, where a young girl says Bill flew down there, there were massages on the plane, and he "lived" in a villa, as the young girls lived in the one next door.

 

She even bragged about it on camera.

 

During the Kavanaugh hearings I saw feminists marching around with signs saying "We believe all survivors." But they didn't believe those who survived Bill Clintons alledged assaults before
Kavanaugh, and they don't believe the rape allegations against the Democratic lieutenant governor Justin Fairfax now. Their signs should have said "We believe all survivors - as long as they
agree with us politically and ideologically." I guess that would have been a lot to put on a sign.

 

Feminists do believe that Clinton had sex with women We also believe that it was consensual.

 

Juanita Broaddrick has said Bill Clinton raped her. Paula Jones accused him of sexual assault. Clearly, feminists don't believe them. Why, chiefly because Clinton is a Liberal's hero.
The evidence against Clinton is at least as strong, or as weak, as that against Kavanaugh. Feminist's have not leaped to the aid of the two women who accuse Fairfax of rape. This shows
that at the very least, some of the outrage against Kavanaugh had as much to do with politics as it did with sex. None of us KNOW if Broaddrick or Dr. Ford were lying or telling the truth -
and we're not likely to ever know. What we choose to BELIEVE depends more on our political views than it does on evidence. For better or worse, that's true of both Liberals and
Conservatives. Few, if any, of us are objective about these cases. That shows a certain amount of intellectual dishonesty among us all.

 

One thing that weakens your argument is the fact that Richard Mellon Scaife funded the Arkansas Project where Republican operatives were sent to Arkansas to "dig up dirt" on Bill Clinton. One of the things they did was bribe highway patrolmen to lie and say that they sneaked women into the governor's mansion for trysts. I think that Broaddrick may have been paid to lie about the nature of her affair with Clinton. Jones did not accuse Clinton of sexual assault. She accused him of sexual harassment which can be anything from lewd comments or comments interpreted as lewd. If Broaddrick was ever raped, the methodology of the Arkansas project muddies the water.

Bill Clinton is not a liberal hero. He isn't who you think he is, but neither is Hillary.

 

Its ironic that you said "I think that Broaddrick may have been paid..." That kind of demonstrates my point that our views of these cases are formed more by our preconceptions and beliefs than by
evidence. I am not aware of Broaddrick ever recieving any substantial amount of money for talking out against Clinton. I know Paula Jones was paid, if memory serves me correctly, $250,000 by
Clinton for shutting up. That's pocket change compared to what Dr. Ford can expect. Two Go Fund pages had already raised over $2 million for her before She finished testifying. As the darling of
feminists and the Liberal media she can expect a lifetime of lucrative speaking engagements, book royalties, and very possibly, movie rights. Dr. Ford is financially set for life from her testimony.
Certainly, neither Broaddrick or Jones ever did so well. At the time Liberals claimed that money may have been a motive for the Clinton accusers, but Conservatives could say that money is more
likely to be a motive for Dr. Ford since she has made much more than they ever dreamed from testimony. Liberals also said that the Clinton accusers want fame - Both Broaddrick and Jones were
dragged over the coals by Liberals and the press. Many spurious accusations were made against them. In contrast, Dr. Ford has been lionized and praised to the heavens, so a reasonable
argument could be made that a desire for fame is more likely to be a motive for her than the other two (and being a psycholoist she would be better able to manipulate puplic opinion). Finally
Liberals said that Clinton's accusers were motivated by ideology. This is an especially weak argument since Broaddrick was a Democrat before her encounter with Clinton, and only changed
later, whereas Dr. Ford has been a life-long Liberal and has always been opposed to Conservatives like Trump and Kavanaugh. Now, I am just playing Devil's Advocate here. I am NOT saying
I know who is lying and who is not. I don't know, and neither does anyone else, as much as they may pretend they do. As I said before, our views of these cases depends more on our various
politics than they do on facts. That's a sad fact that reflects poorly on us all.

 

At the time of her encounter with Kavanaugh, he was just a spoiled, drunk future frat boy. Neither his political leanings nor Ford's have anything whatsoever to do with what happened.

I don't think that I ever heard a liberal claim that Clinton's accusers wanted fame. As underhanded as the Arkansas project was, I just don't find it much of a stretch that Broaddrick might have been paid to lie. Clinton had lots of extra-marital affairs, but rape just wasn't his M.O. He wasn't the first man to cheat on his wife and he, sadly, won't be the last.

 

At the time of their encounter political leanings weren't important - but at the time of her testimony they were. The point being that Dr. Ford had more reason to lie, for ideological reasons, than either
of Clinton's accusers did. I'm not saying that's what happened - just that it was wrong at the time for Liberals to trash Clinton's accusers by claiming they were motivated by ideology. You might not find it much of a stretch to believe Broaddrick lied - but there are plenty of conservatives to think its not much of a stretch to believe Dr. Ford lied. But neither you nor they KNOW if they lied.

 

Nah, have you looked at, she's ugly as hell, no way that's his type.

 

Her rape happened when she was young, and clinton was a state
governor.

 

Ford had no reason to lie and nothing to gain. The fact that people were moved to generously donate by her story is touching. It gives me hope for mankind. I don't think that any of Clinton's accusers lied due to ideological reasons. I think that they were paid to lie.

As I recall, Broaddrick's story goes like this; She was heading up a nursing home when she decided to organize a fundraiser for Clinton's campaign for governor. Afterwards, she says that she was raped. Months afterwards, she organizes and holds another successful fundraiser where she again claims to have been raped afterwards. I find her working so hard for her supposed rapist to be highly dubious. There is nothing about her job that made her even have contact with Clinton. Then, she attends a thank you party where Hillary thanked her for her hard work. Broaddrick apparently interprets this to mean that Hillary is thanking her for having sex with Bill. I really think Hillary was sincerely thanking Juanita for doing such a good job at fundraising.

Other things that came out of the Arkansas project was linking Clinton to the deaths of everyone he knew or walked by on the street, claims that Bill and Hillary were running drugs out of the governor's mansion. And, of course, Whitewater where lots of insinuations were made. But, it turns out that Hillary made a $5,000 investment and lost it all. You don't need to tell me that many conservatives bought every word.

It was nice to have a rational discussion for a change with someone from the other side. Thank you.

By the way, we really shouldn't be talking about Clinton right now. Right wing sources are distracting their base from the only person that we should be looking at; Jeffrey Epstein. I've got a feeling that we're going to find out a lot of bad things about a lot of prominent people.

 

I agree with you that the developments coming out of the Jeffrey Epstein case will be very revealing. It will certainly be very interesting (or sickening). The allegations of the exploitation of underage
girls are shocking. It is becoming harder and harder to have much faith in the people in politics. In the last election, people held their noses and voted for the candidate they thought stank the least.
I'm guessing the next election will be even worse.

 

Another one bites the dust...

 

He worked for Trump.
And Trump was a regular at Epstein's sex parties.

 

I certainly agree that both sides have engaged in political hatchet jobs. Kavanaugh was no doubt a target because he cut his teeth in Washington as a political hack with the Kenn Starr, Kellyanne Conway, Linda Tripp, Lucianne Goldberg group. To me, that’s not the kind of guy who should be nominated to the SCOTUS. That would be like the Democrats nominating Paul Begala or James Carville. I don’t know if Ford was making this story up, but I highly doubt it. It wouldn’t be the first time that a sloppy drunken teenager made a clumsy grab at a young lady at a party.