Connect with us

Juanita Broaddrick Just Showed Up At Kav Hearing And Hits Dems Hard Where It Counts

Published

on

Oh yes, she did. Juanita Broaddrick, the woman who came forward and accused former President Bill Clinton of raping her just face-planted Democrats.

She is calling their current ignorance over the Kavanaugh case, “The biggest double standard I’ve ever seen.” Broaddrick is saying that in relation to how the tables have been turned concerning the way they treat sexual misconduct allegations when it comes from one of their own against one of those they hate.

She fearlessly spoke to media outlets outside the Senate building where the Kavanaugh hearing was being held with the accuser. Kavanaugh himself is not due to testify until after the accuser, Christine Blasey Ford, who is claiming that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her in 1982.

If you did not know already, Ford is claiming she had first revealed the alleged assault during a therapy session she had back in 2012 and since has told multiple people. Broaddrick told the media that there was “no comparison” between her and case and Ford’s.

She disclosed exactly why she felt this way:

“Because Dr. Ford has no evidence, I had the who, what, when, where and how and had five people that I told, not even counting the woman who found me 30 minutes after the rape with a swollen busted lip, torn clothes and in a state of shock,” she said.

Broaddrick’s claims that Bill Clinton raped her back in 1978 while she was living in Arkansas and working at a nursing home as an administrator. Bill Clinton at the time was the state attorney general. Her story claims she was attacked and left by Clinton with a bloody lip and one direction which was to “put some ice on that.”

Clinton did what Clintons do. He denied the accusation. All of it.

“On Thursday, she attacked Democrats, such as Sens. Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., and Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., who she said did not believe her in the ’90s but have jumped to believe Ford’s account, despite the corroborating evidence Broaddrick said she had in her case.”

“How they can take these accusations and run with them, and laugh at mine for so many years is the biggest double standard I’ve ever seen,” she said.

“It makes me angry that they left [Clinton] in office,” she said about the Senate Democrats who she said refused to consider her allegations.”

“Broaddrick indicated she was skeptical about Ford’s accusations”

“It’s not that I’ve decided, she hasn’t anything truly evidentiary to this point, how can she all of a sudden have something new to say today? She’s presented nothing,” she said.”

From The Daily Wire:

“How they can take these accusations and run with them, and laugh at mine for so many years is the biggest double standard I’ve ever seen,” Broaddrick said. “It makes me angry that they left [Clinton] in office,” Broaddrick said about Senate Democrats who rejected to hear her allegations”

“I have twenty times more evidence for my rape by Bill Clinton than Dr. Ford has against Kavanaugh. Democrats turned their backs on me. They refused to read or acknowledge me in 1999 when I went public with my story. Democrats turned their backs on me.”

“Broaddrick told the Daily Caller in an interview that she showed up at the Senate to “look hypocrites Schumer, Durbin and Feinstein in the eye and ask for an apology.”

“Broaddrick calls the hearing today a “double standard.”

“I have twenty times more evidence for my rape by Bill Clinton than Dr. Ford has against Kavanaugh,” Broaddrick says, “Democrats turned their backs on me. They refused to read my testimony or acknowledge me in 1999 when I went public with my story. Democrats turned their backs on me.”

“Broaddrick said that the mantra the ‘All women deserve to be believed” does not apply to her.”

“All women are to be believed if they’re not conservatives and as long as the assault was not done by Democrats.”

Broaddrick brought up the domestic abuse allegations against DNC Co-Chair Keith Ellison: “Ellison is leading the Democratic party right now. He should be kicked out of office. Karen Monahan has 10 times the evidence that Dr. Ford does. Where is her hearing?”

https://twitter.com/ellisonbarber/status/1045311071379173376?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1045311071379173376&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fijr.com%2F2018%2F09%2F1126889-juanita-broaddrick-democrat-double-standard%2F

Broaddrick is firm in her mission to call out Democrats for jumping the second they heard Ford’s allegations. They didn’t hesitate to stop and question anything and chose instead to believe her on her word, without proof or evidence of any kind.

Broaddrick is calling them all out as “hypocrites” and has no plans in slowing down her effort to show the world that today’s Senate hearing was a “circus” and furthermore that Feinstein ‘owes’ her an apology. Stating that “she refused to read my hard evidence against Clinton in 1999. Do I deserve to be believed?”

According to Broaddrick’s retelling of the encounter:

“Arriving later in the lobby, he called and asked if they could have coffee in her room instead because there were too many reporters in the lobby, Broaddrick said. “Stupid me, I ordered coffee to the room,” she said. “I thought we were going to talk about the campaign.”

“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.”

What do you think? Does Broaddrick have a right to feel the way she does about the Kavanaugh hearing?

 

Join the conversation!

We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, profanity, vulgarity, doxing, or discourteous behavior. If a comment is spam, instead of replying to it please hover over that comment, click the ∨ icon, and mark it as spam. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain fruitful conversation.

Trending Now on Right Wing News


Clinton IT aide created Gmail address to forward Hillary’s emails: report

Published

on

...

* By

Continue Reading

New York Times Editor: We’re Switching From Russia Collusion To ‘Trump Is Racist’

Published

on

The New York Times and others have repeatedly tried to take down President Trump with libelous statements on the Russian collusion front and have failed spectacularly every single time. Now, New York Times Executive Editor Dean Baquet has accidentally admitted that for two years his far-left newspaper was “built” around spreading a hoax. Oops. But it’s never too late to shift propaganda in this political war.

He was secretly recorded saying just that and it got out. Baquet also admitted the Times’ staff is loaded with left-wingers “who cheer us when we take on Donald Trump, but they jeer at us when we take on Joe Biden.” Do tell. I’m shocked I tell you. Simply shocked.

What is actually shocking is this recording comes by way of the leftist rag, Slate. They got their mitts on the recording of a company-wide meeting Baquet held with his staffers and it is an illuminating look at how leftist media utilizes and manipulates propaganda for political effect. Why Slate would let that out is puzzling, to say the least.

Baquet has now admitted that for two long years his leftist newspaper was “built” around the Russia Collusion Hoax: “It got trickier after [inaudible] … went from being a story about whether the Trump campaign had colluded with Russia and obstruction of justice to being a more head-on story about the president’s character. We built our newsroom to cover one story, and we did it truly well.”

Truly well? Do you mean by lying and falsifying facts? They did that very well. There was not a shred of evidence that Trump colluded with Russia yet the NYT reported on it as fact for two years and in actuality, made stuff up to fit that narrative.

But the New York Times has seen the light, so to speak. The Russia collusion hoax hasn’t worked so now they are switching tactics… Trump is now a racist and everything will revolve around that lie: “Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story. I’d love your help with that. As Audra Burch said when I talked to her this weekend, this one is a story about what it means to be an American in 2019. It is a story that requires deep investigation into people who peddle hatred[.]”

The truth is that if Trump were actually a racist it would have come out decades ago. This is a last-ditch effort to besmirch a sitting president so a communist can take his place in the next election. It’s subversion and in my book… a form of treason.

You can still taste the salty leftist tears from being disappointed that Mueller did not take down Trump: “The day Bob Mueller walked off that witness stand, two things happened. Our readers who want Donald Trump to go away suddenly thought, “Holy shit, Bob Mueller is not going to do it.” And Donald Trump got a little emboldened politically, I think. Because, you know, for obvious reasons. And I think that the story changed. A lot of the stuff we’re talking about started to emerge like six or seven weeks ago. We’re a little tiny bit flat-footed. I mean, that’s what happens when a story looks a certain way for two years. Right?”

So, while the NYT, WaPo, and other lefty rags spewed lies and propaganda, outlets such as Breitbart, The Daily Wire, and The Daily Caller among others did real reporting and told the truth. For their efforts, a number of them have been banned on social media.

From Breitbart:

“Baquet pretty much spends the rest of the 90 minutes meeting fielding questions from individuals who are supposed to be professionals but who only want to know how they can call Trump and his supporters racists even more often.

“You see, according to the Times’ staff, everything is racist because everything really is racist.

“You probably think that whole “everything is racist” thing is me being sarcastic. Here’s a direct quote from a staffer [emphasis added]:

Hello, I have another question about racism. I’m wondering to what extent you think that the fact of racism and white supremacy being sort of the foundation of this country should play into our reporting. Just because it feels to me like it should be a starting point, you know? Like these conversations about what is racist, what isn’t racist. I just feel like racism is in everything. It should be considered in our science reporting, in our culture reporting, in our national reporting. And so, to me, it’s less about the individual instances of racism, and sort of how we’re thinking about racism and white supremacy as the foundation of all of the systems in the country.

“Good grief. What a dispiriting and not-at-all surprising look at the ignorant whack jobs in charge of our media — and in the case of the New York Times, not just the media, but what is considered the elite of the media elite. What are they obsessed with? What do these conspiracy-loons see everywhere in 2019 America…?

“Raaaaaaacism.

“Here we sit in the most tolerant, diverse country in the world just a few years after having twice elected a black president with the middle name “Hussein,” and the people in charge of the media are breaking down into pools of self-pity because they want to scream racist at us even more than they already have.

“And again, let’s not forget that the only way they can try to pretend America is racist is by way of massive hoaxes: the Very Fine People Hoax, the Covington Hoax, the George Zimmerman Is White Hoax, the Hands Up Don’t Shoot Hoax, the Jussie Smollett Hoax, and the countless hoax hate crimes they spread over and over and over again without scrutiny.”

Good grief is an understatement. The NYT does not cover real news anymore like the rising tide of anti-Semitism in this country. They are too busy protecting terrorists and radicals, while smearing the president and conservatives, to do their actual jobs.

The New York Times openly admits that anti-Jewish hate crimes don’t interest the Times because white supremacists are not behind them: “If anti-Semitism bypasses consideration as a serious problem in New York, it is to some extent because it refuses to conform to an easy narrative with a single ideological enemy. During the past 22 months, not one person caught or identified as the aggressor in an anti-Semitic hate crime has been associated with a far right-wing group, Mark Molinari, commanding officer of the police department’s Hate Crimes Task Force, told me.”

But young white males are domestic terrorists according to these people. Geez. Not communist Antifa or Black Lives Matter or the Nation of Islam or the Black Panthers… white boys are the ticket, y’all.

Since the media is out of Russian ammo and they detest Trump, they have to have another way of smearing him and throwing the race card is their final desperate move in this political dance. Nothing else has stuck to Teflon-Don. Look for them to cry ‘racism’ non-stop for the next two years in their latest contrived hoax against the president. But you won’t hear them cover actual racism because it does not fit their political narrative. It has to be Trump, Trump, Trump! or it’s not news.

The NYT is a peddler of hate. No wonder they had to stop publishing political cartoons because the editorial staff can’t recognize blatant anti-Semitism. These aren’t journalists anymore… they are Brown Shirts. They feel they’ll get away with calling Trump a racist. After all, they got away with the Russian crap for two years.

DONATE NOW TO BUILD THE WALL WITH BRIAN KOLFAGE, CLICK BELOW:

Continue Reading

Latest Articles

Latest Articles

[ifform list="4174" submit="Subscribe"]

Send this to a friend