Connect with us

Opinions

We owe a huge apology to Juanita Broaddrick, Paula Jones and Kathleen Willey

Published

on

Juanita Broaddrick was known as “Jane Doe No. 5” for years, having accused President Bill Clinton of sexual assault in a hotel room years before. Clinton, after having survived impeachment on the backs of Senate Democrats and even a few Republicans, called Broaddrick’s accusation “false and outrageous.”

“It was 20 years ago and I let a man in my room and I had to take my lumps,” Broaddrick said in an interview as she described why she waited so long to come forward. “It was a horrible, horrible experience and I just wanted it to go away.”

Sound familiar?

Clinton supporters hopped all over Broaddrick because previously she testified in the Paula Jones case that Clinton made no “unwelcome sexual advances toward her in the late 1970s.” From the Washington Post in 1999:

Broaddrick, who owns a nursing home in Van Buren and a facility for mentally retarded children in Fort Smith, Ark., said she first met Clinton in April 1978 when he was the state’s 31-year-old attorney general making his first run for governor and she was working as a volunteer for the campaign.

In 1998, Clinton settled with Paul Jones for $850,000. From the Washington Post story:

Robert S. Bennett, Clinton’s chief attorney in the case, said the president still insists Jones’s allegations of a crude proposition in a Little Rock hotel suite seven years ago “are baseless” but agreed to make the payment in the interest of finally putting the matter behind him.

Five Democrats voted yes on three of four articles of impeachment against Clinton. Democrats in the Senate unanimously voted to acquit. He was literally one vote short of being removed from office.

Since that time, Hillary Clinton and her coterie of defenders have spared no opportunity to smear the women who nearly cost her husband his presidency. Even normally friendly James Carville said of Paula Jones:

“If you drag a hundred dollar bill through a trailer park, you never know what you’ll find…”

He was paraphrasing Hillary, who previously called Gennifer Flowers “trailer trash.”

Now Republican supporters of Roy Moore can be heard echoing Hillary on the now-five women who have gone on record with stories of how 30-something district attorney Moore showed them special attention as teenagers, one only 14 whom he allegedly fondled.

That’s galaxies short of what Bill Clinton was accused of doing–flat out rape. The fact that Clinton had extramarital sexual relations is not in dispute. Clinton is easily one of the most prolific serial sexual abusers ever to inhabit the White House. While the allegations made of Clinton were covered by the press (he was president, what else could they do?), none of the full-throated denials and smearing of these women was ever truly condemned.

Both Democrats and Republicans have been guilty of playing team sports with people’s lives–lives that have been profoundly affected by people in power. Whether all the stories are true or not, coming out publicly to accuse a president, or a Senate candidate and former Alabama chief justice, is no bed of roses.

If the leftwing media is going to treat the five women who have made allegations about Roy Moore as saints, then they all owe Juanita Broaddrick, Paula Jones and Kathleen Willey a huge apology.

Further reading

I Believe Juanita | Michelle Goldberg, New York Times

Democrats are guilty of apologizing for Clinton when they shouldn’t have. At the same time, looking back at the smear campaign against the Clintons shows we can’t treat the feminist injunction to “believe women” as absolute.

Clinton Accuser Juanita Broaddrick CRUSHES Hypocritical Chelsea Handler Over Moore Allegations | Daily Wire

http://www.dailywire.com/news/23511/juanita-broaddrick-crushes-hypocritical-chelsea-amanda-prestigiacomoThen that man denies ever doing it and then goes on and gets elected to United States senate. “I felt like she knew [I was raped], it was just the look in her eyes and the anger on her face, because I was so afraid at that time of anyone knowing what had happened to me,” Broaddrick told The Daily Wire last summer. Mrs. Broaddrick has since been vocal about what she claims happened to her at the hands of Bill and Hillary, making her pinned tweet:

House votes to impeach Clinton , Oct. 8, 1998 – POLITICO

https://www.politico.com/story/2017/10/08/house-votes-to-impeach-clinton-oct-8-1998-243550Bill Clinton was the first president to be impeached since Andrew Johnson. On the day in 1998, the Republican-led House voted to proceed with impeachment proceedings against President Bill Clinton on charges of lying under oath and obstruction of justice. As part of a sexual harassment lawsuit, the president had denied having the affair.

washingtonpost.com: Jones v. Clinton Special Report

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/jones111498.htmAfter more than 4 1/2 years of scorched-earth legal warfare, Clinton and Jones brought a sudden end to the case with a four-page deal in which he acknowledged no wrongdoing and offered no apology. The agreement, which will be filed with a federal appeals court considering whether the lawsuit should go forward, requires the president to pay within 60 days. It also may help the president’s allies defend him against independent counsel Kenneth W.

Hillary Clinton Is No Friend To Sexual Assault Survivors

http://thefederalist.com/2015/09/21/hillary-clinton-is-no-friend-to-sexual-assault-survivors/Hillary Clinton in 2015 must really loathe the Hillary Clinton who lived in the White House in the 1990’s. That nobody wants to hear from them, that nobody wants to believe them, and nobody wants to have the comprehensive services that they need. Clinton’s remarks reflect the consensus of many feminists who believe activities like examining evidence and interviewing witnesses before pronouncing guilt are tantamount to denying that rape exists.

Washingtonpost.com Special Report: Clinton Accused

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/stories/janedoe022099.htmIn the 15 months since, countless others have come calling. The House Republican managers prosecuting President Clinton at his impeachment trial. She has talked and exchanged electronic mail with scandal impresario Lucianne Goldberg and once sought advice from Clinton accuser Kathleen E.

 

 

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Media

Jim Acosta is building his own celebrity, not seeking the truth

Published

on

Jim Acosta is building his own celebrity not seeking the truth

The press shouldn’t be part of the news. It happens from time to time based upon proximity; because they have to be close to situations, they occasionally get drawn in. What a good journalist should never do is intentionally insert himself into the news, but that seems to be exactly what CNN’s Jim Acosta is doing.

He doesn’t care about reporting. It’s as if he now enjoys being the news. That’s the only logical conclusion one can come up with when viewing his actions over the past several months. Once an obscure media figure during the Obama era, Acosta has found true celebrity status by going after the President and his staff.

He tasted blood and he liked it. Now, it seems he’s addicted to it.

The latest “outburst” against him came from the President himself. It happened during an event with the President of Kazakhstan in which Acosta asked an unrelated question:

‘OUT!’ Trump orders CNN star Jim Acosta to leave Oval Office after reporter’s newest outburst

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2018/01/16/out-trump-orders-cnn-star-jim-acosta-to-leave-oval-office-after-reporter-s-newest-outburst.html“Did you say that you want more people to come in from Norway? Did you say that you wanted more people from Norway? Is that true Mr. President?” Acosta frantically shouted.

“I want them to come in from everywhere… everywhere. Thank you very much everybody,” Trump responded as Acosta continued to bark questions.

That’s all acceptable, albeit slightly inappropriate considering the reason for the event. Acosta took it up several notches with his followup question:

“Just Caucasian or white countries, sir? Or do you want people to come in from other parts of the world… people of color.”

This was intended to insert himself into the news once again. It’s a ridiculous question to ask and embarrassed the President and the nation on an international stage. “Journalists” like Acosta are willing to harm the country and its people as long as they can harm the President at the same time.

I’ve treated the President fairly since he was elected. When he pushes a big-government agenda, I voice my concerns. When he does well, I give praise. I would never attempt to shame him (and the nation as a result) with petulant outbursts of absurd questions. Jim Acosta apparently doesn’t hold such standards.

Continue Reading

Foreign Affairs

With ISIS defeated, it’s time to bring the troops home

Published

on

With ISIS defeated its time to bring the troops home

In the lead up to the 2016 presidential election, much was made of the threat of ISIS.  Wild threats abounded as candidates fought each other over who would come down harder on the then-thriving Islamic State.

Sen. Ted Cruz threatened to “carpet bomb (ISIS) into oblivion”.

Now-President Trump promised to “bomb the (expletive) out of ‘em.”

Former Secretary of State and presidential participation trophy winner Hillary Clinton added the possibility of war with Russia by insisting on a no-fly zone over Syria.

And who could forget neocon mascot Senators Rick Santorum and Lindsey Graham engaging in what amounted to a bidding war over who would dump more American ground troops into the Middle East?

But since the Trump administration clunked into gear a year ago, news about ISIS has grown more and more sparse, with the latest revelation buried under coverage of the President’s latest Twitter meltdown:

ISIS is gone.

Over the course of the last year, ISIS has been destroyed by increased airstrikes, and coalition armies have systematically liberated ISIS-held territory across Iraq, to the point that both the Iraqi and Iranian governments have declared victory over the self-appointed caliphate.

Of course this is wonderful news for Iraqis, Iranians, Kurds, and everyone else oppressed by the brutal black-flagged regime.

But will it mean good news for American families?

Out of 1.3 million active US military personnel, about 450,000 are deployed overseas.  That’s right – nearly half a million Americans are deployed at over 600 bases in at least 130 different countries, at a time when we have exactly zero declared wars.

When are they coming home?

The victory over ISIS, while encouraging, doesn’t remotely put the War on Terror to bed.  Aside from the thousands of soldiers still fighting America’s longest war in Afghanistan and mopping up ISIS in Iraq and Syria, we have hundreds of even thousands of American troops in places like Norway and Poland, and a large Air Force presence in Somalia.  

The last time the United States actually fought a Congressionally-declared war was in WWII, and that’s important because in the absence of a congressional declaration, we have slowly built up a perpetual military presence around the world, with no end in sight.

It wasn’t supposed to be this way.

The Constitution vested the power to declare war with Congress alone, so that the people’s representatives would get a say in our decision to send Americans to die. A quick review of the last sixty years will show that, as Congress has deferred that power to the President via authorizations for use of military force (AUMFs), conflicts have started more frequently and dragged on much longer, with no defined scope or condition of victory.  As I pointed out in a recent column about Presidential Emergency Powers, ceaseless foreign conflicts and undefined potential threats have removed virtually all accountability from executive power. If the President wants a war, the President gets a war – Congress be damned.

As much as we have been conditioned to accept the presupposition that a persistent, global American military presence is necessary for our security, that’s really not the case at all. President Eisenhower’s famous warning about the “military-industrial complex” has been largely unheeded, and it’s undeniable at this point that there are a lot of folks in both the public and private sectors who profit, either directly or indirectly, from the massive and perpetual show of American force. That profit is at least part of the reason that the United States currently spends more on defense than the next seven countries combined, nearly three times the second-place nation on the list, China.

But the $610 billion we spend for defense each year pales in comparison to the cost in human life and limb precipitated by our consistent propensity for foreign adventurism.  Since 2001, 6,930 Americans have died fighting the War on Terror, and over 52,566 have been wounded.

And that’s without factoring in the tragic epidemic of veteran suicide.

Outside the states, the death toll has been exponentially greater, with estimates ranging between one and two million dead in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Pakistan alone.

The longer a war drags on, the greater the danger that these numbers will become mere statistics, and that’s why the defeat of ISIS presents a great opportunity to change course on our reckless foreign policy. With the rise of antiwar sentiment on the conservatarian right and its slow integration into the pro-life movement there should be plenty of common ground and political will to draw down our foreign involvement.

It’s time to take advantage of the opportunity to bring our people home, before more Americans come home in body bags.

____________________________________________________________

 Article originally published in the Des Moines Register.

Continue Reading

Culture and Religion

Kevin Swanson: Christian persecution is a good thing

Published

on

Kevin Swanson Christian persecution is a good thing

On the January 5, 2018, Generations podcast, Kevin Swanson points to the recent Oregon Court of Appeals ruling in favor of a lesbian couple who were emotionally distraught that Sweet Cakes By Melissa would not honor their same-sex wedding by making them a wedding cake. As a means of business transaction, the state of Oregon basically told its citizens that they must enter a private contract with certain parties just because they happen to be gay and want them to honor their marriage or anything LGBTQ related because they have “rights.” If someone wants to honor God’s Law and God’s Holy Word, you should not have the power to force them to sin against God which the state wants many Christians to do. The LGBTQ jihad have successfully destroyed a family-run business in Oregon.

As we all know, Christian persecution is nothing new but especially in America. It just seems to be magnified thanks to the LGBTQ/Rainbow Jhaid being the progressives ‘imperial stormtroopers.’ Swanson points out the times in which Samuel Worcester (who sided with the Cherokee Indians who did not want to abandon their lands thanks to President Andrew Jackson who wanted the lands to mine for gold and helped usher in “The Trail of Tears.” Lest we forget that Jackson used blacks as slaves and as his own prostitutes), Everett Siliven (a Nebraska Baptist pastor who had to shut down his church-run private school for children because it was not “licensed” by the state), and Randy Alcorn (a pastor sued by Planned Parenthood for “transpassing on their property” because they wanted to encourage women not to murder their unborn babies) lived in the persecution they had to deal with.

They may be footnotes in history, but they really should not be. It is the testimony of how the State wants to take God’s place in this world, and do whatever it wants regardless of who it harms for their respected personal gains. Compared to what? Jackson and company getting rich at the expense of displacing Native Americans? Giving up Christian education because you’re not licensed by the state and sending children to the government-run monopoly to become the next useful idiots for the pagans that rule the world? Or being able to murder pre-born babies so you need not worry about the procreation part of sexual relations?

Christians can’t be cowards in any day and age. If we don’t stand for God, then the pagans would have then and now scored victories against God and his Holy Law, in their attempts to break free of God himself and earn salvation on their own. Many people have died for the faith and they have been allowed by the Grace of God to be remembered. Other people have come to Jesus because of the people that gave their lives and freedoms for the Lord. In that sense, persecution is a good thing.

Reference

Inevitable Persecution for U.S. Christians

https://www.generations.org/programs/836The family bakery in Oregon lost their appeal, and now they are forced to surrender $135,000 to a lesbian couple for not supporting their wedding. Christians who believe even the most rudimentary Christian truths have fallen into the very slim minority, and are persecuted as such.  We go through the history of Christian persecution in the United States from Samuel Worcester in the 1830s to Everett Siliven, Randy Alcorn, and other familiar names of those who have suffered for the faith.

Continue Reading

NOQ Report Daily

Advertisement

Facebook

Twitter

Advertisement

Trending

Copyright © 2017 NOQ Report.