Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

Shouting at Hillary about Bill’s abuse of women is counter-productive

Shouting at Hillary about Bill’s abuse of women is counter-productive

No perpetrators play victim better than the Clintons.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P7cEnRkOaXE

In an age when there is zero tolerance for Bill-Clinton-like behavior in the workplace or on campus, Hillary’s participation in the war room against Bill’s female sexual abuse accusers should be a legitimate issue.

Because Hillary has made the (non-existent in fact) Republican War on Women a central focus of her campaign and justification for her candidacy, the Clinton sexual abuse legacy absolutely is and must be put in issue.

I argued in early April 2015 that Republicans Job One was to Teach millennials about the real Hillary:

The reason Hillary is vulnerable on favorability is that the younger generation of voters don’t know the Hillary from the 1990s, the secretive control-freak of Hillarycare, the person who parlayed her husband’s political success into her own financial and law firm stardom, the Rose law firm record hider, the brutal White House bully of Travelgate, and so much more.

And of course, the original War on Women warrior who led the charge against Bill’s paramours….

The real Hillary, the one many of us remember, is nothing like the Hillary of the past few years, with the softened image of the doting grandmother and cell phone hipster….

Hillary has brought on Michelle Obama’s image consultant to remake Hillary. That Hillary needs an image consultant and a multitude of packagers and handlers, after all this time, shows how vulnerable she is.

Republicans need to focus like a laser on Hillary’s weakness, and right now.

The email scandal did move Hillary’s number to the negative.  But with the Clintons, nothing is ever over, and Team Hillary desperately has been trying to reinvent her again. The media focus on all things Trump has helped Hillary in that regard by focusing attention away from her.

Trump, going where few have dared to go, has taken on Bill Clinton’s behavior and Hillary’s connivance.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/683378470093746176?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw

Whether Republicans like it or not, Bill Clinton is back, and whether Democrats like it or not, so are Bill Clinton’s sexual abuse scandals.

But there’s a right way to raise the issue and there’s a wrong way. If done the wrong way, Republicans play right into the Clintons’ hands and allow Hillary to play victim. Hillary as victim will be the media default.

At a New Hampshire town hall a local Republican politician tried to raise the issue of Juanita Broaddrick, who has accused Bill of rape.  Because it was done as an interruption to the appearance, the media jumped right in, called the questioner a “heckler” and allowed Hillary to be the victim.

This Washington Post report shows the spin:

One day before former president Bill Clinton arrives in New Hampshire to campaign for his wife, Hillary Clinton, she was confronted with questions about allegations involving his sexual history at a town hall meeting in the state on Sunday.

State Rep. Katherine Prudhomme-O’Brien (R) repeatedly interrupted Clinton during the meeting, which was held in a middle school gymnasium.

Prudhomme-O’Brien has for years followed the former first lady, peppering her with questions about allegations of past sexual misconduct by Bill Clinton. The state lawmaker’s outbursts startled an otherwise friendly town hall audience. It is unclear whether Clinton was able to hear her comments.

After Prudhomme-O’Brien’s third interruption, Clinton responded angrily: “You are very rude, and I’m not ever going to call on you.”

Later, Prudhomme-O’Brien told reporters that she wanted to raise the issue of Bill Clinton’s alleged sexual misconduct and was incensed by “the hypocrisy of the so-called women fighting for women.”

(video h/t Gateway Pundit)

On her Facebook page O’Brien made an obvious point about Hillary’s hypocrisy:

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=943092589078438&id=101820259872346

I understand why some people think this was a great move by O’Brien. At an emotional level, anything that disrupts tightly controlled and contrived Clinton appearances seems satisfying. And at a tactical level, at least the media is talking about the issue.

But I can’t see this as a success.  Hillary got to play victim, and worse, a victim who overcame the bad Republican heckler by being the strong woman.

Relentlessly educate the public about the real Hillary, and why Bill Clinton’s stellar Democratic Party Rock Star creds are no better than Bill Cosby’s stellar TV creds.

But be smart about it. Hillary and her team have played the victim card for too long, and they are too good at it.

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

Ok, would you write a 50 word ad that attacks Hillary in the right way? I’m collecting stuff to use in some sort of newspaper ad in minority community newspapers just before the election.

    legacyrepublican in reply to daitken. | January 3, 2016 at 10:29 pm

    You don’t even have to go that far. Two words will do it. Just call here “Anita Hillary” and watch the left fall all over themselves trying to put a spin on that.

Perfesser, bellyaching about a problem without offering a solution makes you part of the problem, not part of the solution. How, specifically, would you relentlessly educate the public about the real Hillary?

    MikeInCA in reply to Skookum. | January 4, 2016 at 9:18 am

    Maybe the Professor could create a blog, read by thousands of people everyday, oft-quoted on talk radio, that details the history and extent of the Clinton family malfeasance. This blog would provide several conservative writers with a platform to address the train-wreck of Leftwing policies and encourage conservative solutions.

    Then maybe the Professor could create a second blog, targeted at College age readers, which exposes the Left-wing policies in higher education which have radically changed college life. And this blog would encourage college age readers to question their existing beliefs and explore Conservative ideas.

    But the Professor has a full time job teaching law, so until he gets around to all this, why don’t you explain what you’ve done.

      Skookum in reply to MikeInCA. | January 4, 2016 at 2:34 pm

      Hell, according to you the problem is solved. Then why did the perfesser choose to bellyache on one of the fora he developed that solved the problem?

    “…bellyaching about a problem without offering a solution makes you part of the problem, not part of the solution. ”

    He already gave you a solution. Back in April 2015. Republicans Number One job is to Teach millennials about the real Hillary.

    The question is, what have you been doing with the intel + information on Hillary that has been painstakingly assembled for you at the Professor’s expense?

    Have you started a wiki page on Hillary?
    Circulate the info. on your social media?
    Insert the info into comment sections of high-traffic news sites?

    Sent the Professor a check to pay for Legal Insurrection’s upkeep?

      Skookum in reply to Aucturian. | January 4, 2016 at 2:45 pm

      “The question is, what have you been doing with the intel + information on Hillary that has been painstakingly assembled for you at the Professor’s expense?

      “Have you started a wiki page on Hillary?
      Circulate the info. on your social media?
      Insert the info into comment sections of high-traffic news sites?

      “Sent the Professor a check to pay for Legal Insurrection’s upkeep?”

      I’ve been pointing out the criminality of the Clintons since 1992, long before the perfesser established his blogs.

      If you really think a wiki page or another voice on social media is the solution, you are nearly as worthless as the perfesser in this regard, but I will give you points for going beyond mere bellyaching and actually proposing potential solutions, even though your proposals are lame.

      Any law perfesser who does not understand the fundamental principles of constitutional construction is obviously grossly overpaid. But, feel free to send him your shekels to further fund pseudo-conservative degeneracy.

      forksdad in reply to Aucturian. | January 5, 2016 at 3:59 pm

      And how do we teach them that she is a lying sack of oozing evil that at best facilitated her husband’s sexual harassment and abuse and at worst hounded and threatened the victims; standing up and asking her these questions?

      How do you bring this front and center without asking about it? Nobody in the media asked Billy-boy what he was doing in Moscow for long months during the cold war and so whatever malfeasance he was up to there has never come to light. We don’t know why he was asked to leave Oxford or any of his escapades because no one calls them on it.

      It only comes to light and they are only forced to face it when it is ‘heckling’. For Goodness’ sakes they ask Trump about a segment on a reality tv show and not Hillary about the sleaziest man to sit in the Oval Office? She was his wife and helped to threaten and helped him cover up his affairs and assaults. She knew. She must be held accountable.

Ms. Prudhomme O’Brien, has according to her Facebook account, made MANY attempts since 2007 to ask Hillary about Juanita Broaddrick. It appears that she was more civil when she first started out but got nowhere. Hillary insisted that she had never heard of Broaddrick.

I think it was fine of Prudhomme O’Brien to confront Hillary, as I have read that millenials are now Googling Broaddrick’s name like crazy.

Broaddrick, who seldom Tweets, Tweeted a thank you to Prudhomme for confronting Hillary today: https://twitter.com/atensnut

Here’s Prudhomme O’Brien’s firsthand account of confronting Hillary about Broaddrick back in 2007. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/1865782/posts

I think she’s been pretty patient. I think after nearly ten years of trying to get Hillary to speak on the matter I might have lost it too

Perhaps Donald should ask her some tougher questions like: “Could you give us the reasons your husband, William Jefferson Clinton became a serial adulterer.” or “If you should win the presidency, will your husband be allowed to live in the White House? Will he be allowed to have his girlfriends spend the night there? What will you do to protect the White House from being perceived as a brothel?” or “Will you extend the war on women against your husband’s girlfriends?”

All Trump – or anyone – has to do is, Step 1: belabor the obvious.

Step 2: vigorously repeat step 1 after Clinton whines.

Now this is very interesting: Prudhomme O’Brien confronted Al Gore way back in 2000, and asked him to speak out about Broaddrick. This was when the Clinton’s were still in power. She then found herself on the receiving end of an IRS audit. Judicial Watch stepped in and straightened it out: http://goo.gl/VCWevR

I think it is fair for Trump and any other candidate to mention slick willie if hillary brings up the phony “War on women”. But the real attack should be on her corrupt clinton foundation and all of the countries she shook down while SoS. And her husband should be looked at for the speeches he gave for the ridiculous fees of half a million dollars approved by the State dept. Mention Benghazi at every townhall meeting. Mention the e-mails she sent to her daughter and the president of Egypt. Mention all of the positions she has flipped on but don’t make her a victim!

Progressives just don’t care about sexual abuse allegations against Bill. They believe the accusers should be honored that Bill ever touched them.

    Carl in reply to Sanddog. | January 4, 2016 at 7:28 am

    True, but it is not the progressive vote that is in play here. It is those women (and some men) out there who are too young to recall the Clinton Sleaze, the bimbo eruptions, the blue dress, etc.,etc., or had forgotten it all.

    On this one, Perfessor, you are wrong. Of course they will play the victim card, and yes, they are experts at it. And yes, the Media will spin it all for them like they always do. But truth does have relevance here and it must be told. People have to be shown what putting these two criminals back into the White House will mean. Hillary almost got away with stealing White House furniture when she left too. Everything is on the table because you know, beyond the shadow of any doubt, that whomever the Republican candidate is every single even slightly unsavory thing in his/her past will be front page on the NYT and WaPo. Look at what they are already doing to Rubio–that he couldn’t balance his checkbook once was front page. Romney put his dog on the car roof. On and on. Sara Palin was made to look like an idiot. Harry Reid flatly lied about Roney’s tax payments and proudly admitted to it. If we are wimps (like Romney was) and don’t constantly remind the voters what scumbags this couple is, we will lose again. And we have sooo much free material!!!

Quite right: we should be hammering home secrecy, arrogance, and corruption. It was precisely by portraying Bill’s own legal transgressions as “all about sex” that he was able to save his presidency and increase his approval ratings to the point his party even gained seats in his second midterm.

The Clintons are masters of misdirection and avoidance. If they were not, they would both likely be in prison today.

    Midwest Rhino in reply to Estragon. | January 4, 2016 at 2:43 pm

    “The Clintons are masters of misdirection and avoidance. If they were not, they would both likely be in prison today.”

    Well, with enough inside corrupt connections, a leading Democrat could drunkenly drown a woman, fail to report it, an walk away still a leading lion of the left. No mastery of deception needed, just a connection to raw ruthless power.

innocent bystander | January 4, 2016 at 6:29 am

4.“Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules.” If the rule is that every letter gets a reply, send 30,000 letters. You can kill them with this because no one can possibly obey all of their own rules.

5.“Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.

6.“A good tactic is one your people enjoy.” They’ll keep doing it without urging and come back to do more. They’re doing their thing, and will even suggest better ones.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rules_for_Radicals

It was Impolite – but – the SOB deserved it. And, many of us are fed up of seeing Bill skate. Once he visited the Island of Under-aged Females it quit being defensible.

    OMG, you think it was defensible before that?

      JPL17 in reply to Carl. | January 4, 2016 at 10:27 am

      No, but before that, it was “just about sex”. In contrast, having sex with underage girls (or cavorting with men who do) is about a lot more than “just sex”.

      P.S. Didn’t mean to “down ding” you. I accidentally clicked on the “thumbs down” icon, because it’s directly below and literally less than 1/16 of an inch away from the “Reply” button. I wish the web designer would fix that!

        Milhouse in reply to JPL17. | January 4, 2016 at 9:00 pm

        No, before that it was not “just about sex”, and if it was then the island didn’t change that. It’s never been “just about sex”, it’s been about perjury, rape, harassment, defamation, bribery, and corruption.

Erratum: Mr. Jacobson writes that the non-stop coverage of Donald Trump helps Hillary by “focusing attention away from her….” It should be “diverting” attention away from her.

Mr. N.I. Silver
Bethesda, MD

MaggotAtBroadAndWall | January 4, 2016 at 9:43 am

According to Gallup, guess when Hillary’s favorability numbers were highest? If you said in December 1998, just after Slick had been impeached and the news was saturated with coverage about his sexual predatory behavior toward women, you win.

http://www.gallup.com/poll/185324/hillary-clinton-favorable-rating-one-worst.aspx

Midwest Rhino | January 4, 2016 at 11:03 am

Trump’s celebrity status comes into play, since he can’t be brushed aside with a wave of Hillary’s hand. He doesn’t have to heckle to make national news, so Hillary has to “heckle” him. She has to enter his arena and confront those charges, or by silence acknowledge them.

And on educating those under 40 about Clinton treachery, there is fertile ground in Chinagate details, which fits Trump’s emphasis on bad trade deals. While Clinton policy was undermining American sovereignty, Billy Bob played the rogue role of “boys just wanna have fun”, and Hillary played the victimized good wife. Bill’s side dish Monica with a cigar and that blue dress, made it all about sex, obscuring the sexual abuse, the lying, the treason.

Trump (or Cruz) can say “I don’t care if Bill keeps a mistress, but the abuse of victimized women is the issue. Hillary excelled at silencing many victims for decades”. That way he gets to mention the mistress, and the other victims, while pointing out it is not the sex/adultery itself that matters (most).

But the abused, and pedophile island, are just outward indicators of far deeper issues. The abuse of Lady Liberty is the deep issue. The trail of women trampled by Hillary should lead to forensic exams on the Real Clinton History.

How did China catch up so fast? Easy. We sold them all the technology they needed – or handed it over for free. Neither neglect nor carelessness are to blame. Bill Clinton did it on purpose.

As a globalist, Clinton promotes “multipolarity”– the doctrine that no country (such as the USA) should be allowed to gain decisive advantage over others.

To this end, Clinton appointed anti-nuclear activist Hazel O’Leary to head the Department of Energy. O’Leary set to work “leveling the playing field,” as she put it, by giving away our nuclear secrets. She declassified 11 million pages of data on U.S. nuclear weapons and loosened up security at weapons labs.

This also ties Billary to Obama, and his disdain for America as a superpower, as Hillary diminished US hegemony in the Middle East, effectively giving the stand down order at Benghazi, and actively toppling Gaddafi. … Trump tweets are probably effective … direct heckling maybe not so much.

Attack Billary by any and all means necessary to reach anybody who will listen. ALL Clinton subject matter should be on the table and Willy J is absolutely fair game.

Those who only discuss politics daintily over tea and cakes will probably need an effective message delivered a bit differently than, say, a tired plumber sitting on a barstool lamenting his daughter’s latest tuition bill. Or the vets down at the legion hall comparing medications and war stories. Or the clueless OMG crowd living the digital acronym life in 140 characters or less. Communication is all about being understood. Speak their language or risk your message being received as white noise, if at all.

I’ll admit that it might be an absolute challenge for some folks to communicate broad-spectrum without appearing to be a complete fraud (Hillary), but it seems to me a cardinal skill if you seek positions of leadership. Why the hell would you follow somebody who can’t tell you where they’re going?

I do think Bill Clinton’s abuse of women should be on the table, just as Hillary’s denial should be too. But more importantly, in my humble opinion, is Hillary’s abuse of the 12-year old rape victim whose perp she was defending….run the audio, over and over again.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/06/20/exclusive-hillary-clinton-took-me-through-hell-rape-victim-says.html

The pair of them stole furniture from the WH. That makes neither one eligible to run for a Federal office. ( Theft of Gov. Property. )

The heckling keeps her from controlling the narrative, and reminds the voters repeatedly that this is their legacy. Her message gets lost in the fight. Every thing they do is touched with corruption including and especially the clinton foundation.

Sorry for yelling, but I have come late and I think it is an important point.

It is important to focus on Bill the sexual predator rather then
Bill the pervert.

Paula Jones, Katheryn Wiley, Juanita Brodrick should be focused on.
Especially his entourage’s efforts at hiding the facts. Carville’s comment on “dragging a hundred dollars through a trailer park”.

How Bill lied under oath about Monika. How it cost him $100,000 grand and got him disbarred. How he debated what the meaning of “is” is. How he settled with Paula mJones, out of court, for more then 3/4 of a million dollars.

How they were using the Secret Service to help hide these things.

Don’t bring up Flowers, or Monika ( except for his lying under oath ). It’s just irrelevant sleaze, meant to hide all the nastier stuff.

    gdaddo in reply to HandyGandy. | January 4, 2016 at 7:51 pm

    Bill Clinton was never disbarred. His Arkansas law license was suspended for five years; as a result, the Supreme Court decided to also suspend his license to practice before that court.

    Clinton had forty days to contest the decision. Rather than face possible disbarment, he resigned from the Supreme Court bar. In other words one license was temporarily withheld, and another was voluntarily surrendered.

    To some this might be a small detail or a mere technicality, but it is a fact, and this matters, especially these days when one of our biggest problems is that we have media rather than journalism, and narratives and story lines rather than facts drive the national discourse.

I also think it very proper to ask her “How can you fight the war on women when you sleep with the guy who is Commander in Chief for the other side?”

Well Bill brutally raped 27 women (not counting the 10 or so excursions with Jeff Epstein) that reached the news. Hilary threaten to kill the children of many of those victims. She had some of their pets killed.

I don’t think any of this matters in the election, though. When Hilary was on her multi-month drunk she fell and hit her head hard. It looks like she will die from the injuries she took from the fall before November. I’m just guessing about that, of course.

What’s the difference between Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby?

Trump goes there:

http://www.buzzfeed.com/andrewkaczynski/trump-it-would-be-interesting-to-ask-bill-clinton-the-differ#.quJqbXdNg

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend