hillaryflute - Tumblr blog

hillaryflute · 4 years

Text

MEGA POST: proof of a right wing conspiracy: Bill’s accusers

1. Kathleen Willey

her claim to fame: Kathleen Willey is a former White House volunteer aide who, on March 15, 1998, alleged on the TV news program 60 Minutes that Bill Clinton had sexually assaulted her on November 29, 1993, during his first term as President in the Oval office.

Analysis: FALSE (Bill most likely did kiss and embrace her in some way but it was consensual and she had planned for it to happen.)

Facts:

1. Linda Tripp–who became friends with Willey when they both worked at the White House–told Starr’s grand jury that Willey plotted for months about how to start an affair with Clinton.

2. Willey’s former friend Harolyn Cardozo told the grand jury that Willey speculated she might become the President’s mistress.

3. Another person who knew Willey at the White House, Marlene MacDonald, a former press-office employee, told Starr’s investigators that Willey was attracted to the President and that she had mentioned a welcomed encounter long after the incident allegedly occurred.

What Linda Tripp said: As Tripp testified in vivid detail, Willey’s sudden claims of indignation didn’t remotely resemble the truth about her feelings about Clinton in 1993. Not only had she been “happy” after the president’s alleged embrace but she and Tripp had been scheming for months to stage her seduction for him. Tripp claimed that Kathleen’s marriage to Ed Willey was loveless, and on the verge of divorce. Kathleen wanted to move to Washington and have an affair with Clinton. Well before the Oval Office incident, Willey had taken on Tripp as her secret romantic adviser, calling to chat in the evenings of her obsession with the president. Tripp admitted to helping Willey since she believed that both Willey and Clinton were “stuck in not very good marriages and it seemed to be consenting adults.” Tripp also enjoyed the intrigue of helping Willey gain access to the president’s daily schedule so that Willey could bump into him, always dolled up “to catch his eye.” The two friends would talk about creating the conditions for a tryst, escaping the Secret Service, and the “logistics of how this could work,” Tripp testified. They had even discussed a specific location. Debbie Siebert, a mutual friend who husband had been named ambassador to Sweden had offered Willey to use their empty house on the water in Annapolis.

After Willey had her encounter with the president, she raced to find Tripp. Willey dragged her outside the parking lot and told her about Clinton’s embrace in graphic terms. Willey praised him, Tripp recalled as a “great kisser,” and said she kissed him back despite her fear that someone would walk in on them.

When Tripp heard that Willey had begun to tell reporters at Newsweek that the President had assaulted her, Tripp called Willey and accused her of lying to the Newsweek reporters.

“Kathleen what are you doing?”

Tripp recalled that Willey rebuffed Tripp’s objections. “You must be misremembering, Linda.. Of course it was sexual harassment. I don’t know why you’re now saying I wanted it.”

“Kathleen, because we talked about it for months before it happened, because you chose your outfits, because you positioned yourself, because you flirted, because you looked for every reason to get in {to see Clinton privately},” Tripp remembered saying when she recalled their conversations later. “Why are you now saying that this came as a huge surprise and he assaulted you?”

Why what Tripp says matters: At this point in time, Tripp wanted to write a tell all book to profit from what she knew was happening within the White House. If Kathleen Willey came out with this new story, then this jeopardized Tripp’s idea of a book because then Tripp would be left out of the loop of Willey’s new false story and be reliant on the other woman for details. Tripp also was no fan of Bill Clinton’s and the fact that she said he did NOT sexually harass Willey should be taken as fact since Tripp had no reason to defend him.

So why would Kathleen Lie?: The Day after her encounter with Clinton, Willey learned her husband had committed suicide and was dead. Tripp, who spoke to Willey during the days after her husband’s death said that Willey seemed disengaged in the aftermath of his suicide and practicalities of arranging the funeral. She “didn’t cry, she didn’t dwell or even speak of Ed,” Tripp said in her testimony. Instead Kathleen talked obsessively about her encounter with the president. Willey worried that her husband’s suicide would be enough to spook the president from having anything to do with her on a personal level. Willey’s financial situation was also a clue to why she would lie. Her late husband’s Richmond law practice had provided what prosecutors often called a “big lifestyle”: designer clothes, luxury sports cars, first class travel, and exciting political and social events. Her husband had embezzled $250,000 from two clients a brother and sister named Anthony Lanasa and Josephine Abbott. Her husband had confessed this to her a few days before he died. He left his widow to fend of the litigation that ensued when Lansa and Abbott moved to recoup their losses. His total debt the day he died was nearly $1 Million. Kathleen was then laid off in 1995.

conclusion: She and her lawyer Daniel Gecker (a known Clinton hater) started to play the Jones camp against the Clinton camp. She had decided by the spring of 1997 that her old and unconsummated filtration with Clinton might yield financial gain after all. She was desperate to pay off the $1 million debt and having taken menial jobs at a bakery and beauty salon in Richmond, she decided to make up the story of sexual assault in order to sue for damages.

2. Dolly Kyle

Her claim to fame: Kyle alleges that she and Clinton had an affair for nearly 20 years, from 1974 until 1992. She was a childhood friend of Clinton’s, meeting him in school when she was 11 years old.In her book Hillary the Other Woman, Kyle says that she dated Bill Clinton all throughout high school, having sex with him for the first time after graduation and continuing to sleep with him on and off throughout his time in law school, while he was governor of Arkansas, and while he was running for president, according to The Daily Mail.During her deposition in the Paula Jones case, Kyle said that Clinton suddenly stopped returning her calls in January 1992 in the midst of the Gennifer Flowers scandal. She says that Clinton was worried about her recording their conversations like Flowers had done. She claims that Clinton at one point had slept with over 2,000 people and admitted to being a sex addict.

Facts and holes in her claim:

1. She was a childhood friend of Bill’s but they did not have an affair.

2. If they had an affair that long it would overlap with the Gennifer Flowers affair (which was already proven to be over exaggerated.) It makes no sense since men who have affairs do not typically continue the affairs for several years. Kyle’s claim seems faulty because if Bill could supposedly carry out and be “faithful” enough to have affairs with both Gennifer and Dolly for years why couldn’t he be faithful to his wife who he had more in common with? Sex addicts do not typically continue long lasting affairs with the same women.This defeats her whole claim of Bill having 2,000 sex partners since in order for that to happen he would have to be very mobile and not continuing an affair with two women for several years.

3. It makes sense that Bill would stop calling her out of fear that she would begin to record their conversations the way Flowers had. Flowers had made tapes taking what Bill said out of context and Larry Nichols had been reaching out to any women he could find to lie about Bill so it makes sense that he would stop talking to women on the phone even if they were only friends.

Here’s what Bill said about her in the Paula Jones deposition:

Conclusion: Dolly seems like a lovesick childhood friend who felt betrayed because she was duped into thinking Bill and Gennifer had a relationship and she felt cheated not knowing. She probably also had an unrequited crush on the president and felt led on so she turned against him.

Fun fact: Both Kathleen and Dolly were on infowars so that tells you what type of credibility they have.

Info wars is listed as being actual fake news and is listed under CBS’s list of Fake news sites to watch out for.

3. Paula jones

her claim to fame: Paula Corbin Jones is a former Arkansas state employee who sued U.S. President Bill Clinton for sexual harassment. She claims that he sexually harassed her in the Excelsior Hotel.

analysis: FALSE. It is possible Bill met Paula but they were not alone and he did not sexually harass her.

background on Paula: She had grown up quite poor in a rural country outside of Little Rock, under the strict religious guidance of her father Bobby Gene Corbin. Her father was a Christian fundamentalist and many modern pleasures such as dancing, television, fashionable clothes, and makeup were prohibited in the household. When she was 19 her father died of a heart attack leaving her mother, Delmer Corbin unable to control Paula and her two older sisters. Suddenly Paula could wear short skirts and date men staying out as late as she pleased and sometimes not coming home at all. Her brother-in-law, Mark Brown, with whom she and her mother lived with for several years after her father’s death, worried about her flirtatious sexuality and her choice of boyfriends. Quite rightly since one of them eventually sold nude photos of Paula to Penthouse magazine. In an accompanying article, several of Paula’s former boyfriends described her as what southerners call a “wild child,” promiscuous and bold. Paula graduated high school but dropped out of a local community college before completing her first year there. She went through a series of clerical jobs until she began to work for the Arkansas Industrial Development Commission.

Important: She met Steve Jones, a Northwest Airlines ticket agent and aspiring actor. By the spring of 1991 and her encounter with Bill Clinton they were already living together. They married in 1992. Former coworkers of Steve remembered his animosity towards Clinton and his equally strong support of the Republican ticket in 1992. Jones put Bush-Quayle stickers on his locker and his gymbag. He had to be told to take off a Bush-Quayle button from his Northwest uniform. But none of his colleagues had ever heard him say anything about his wife being harassed by Bill Clinton. “Steve would have been screaming bloody murder if something happened to Paula,” a friend told People magazine. “He would have let us know that Clinton was a scumbag.” People who knew Paula and Steve thought that he had pushed her into pursuing a vendetta against the president, to promote either his political views or his acting career or both.

Facts:

1. Around May 23, 1994, Newsweek interviewed several people around the Arkansas capitol who scoffed at her claims. Jones was described as an unreliable, self dramatizing person who had made a pest of herself hanging outside the governor’s office prattling on about Clinton’s sex appeal like a starstruck teenager.

2. Charolette Brown (Paula’s sister) said that before Paula left for Washington, she boasted that “either way it (the trial) went, It smelled like money.”

3. Paula Jones has repeatedly lied about her past, claiming that she had never posed for nude photos ( photos which ran repeatedly in Penthouse when discovered) and that she was sexually naive when the alleged harassment took place (even though her own family states that she proudly proclaimed that she had slept with 15 men before she turned 17).

4. the attorneys who represented Paula Jones (in1998) are from the conservative Rutherford Institute. This institute, which proclaims that it exists to defend religious freedoms from government interference, was unable to honestly answer the question as to why they are involved in so obviously a secular dispute as the issues which Paula Jones’ case raise.

5. John W. Whitehead, founder of the Rutherford Institute, is author of the book “The Second American Revolution”, an instruction book for fundamentalists which describes how Christians can take over the government and force their beliefs on the rest of the nation. His foundation also continues to distribute the so-called “Clinton Chronicle” videos. These videos, created by the Rev. Jerry Fallwell, accuse Clinton of everything from drug and gun running to cocaine abuse and corruption and even murder. It has already been mentioned in my previous text post that Paula jones received $1,000 for her appearance in the Clinton Chronicles.

6. "Paula Jones Legal Fund" had collected over $250,000 in contributions purportedly for her legal defense, the “Fund” is actually a for-profit, sole proprietorship run by Susan Carpenter-McMillan. This “Legal Fund” has been used for, according to the Arkansas Democrat Gazette, purchasing Jones a personal home computer, merchandise at Nordstrom’s, appointments at various beauty salons, a membership to a health club and to board her dog, Mitzy, in a kennel.

7. Daniel Traylor (one of Paula’s first lawyers before she changed like she always did) cited his client’s story to George Cook, a little Rock businessman and Clinton supporter. Traylor told him that “if she (paula) did not get money, that she would embarrass him (Clinton) publicly.” The lawyer suggested that for $250,000 Paula would go away. He also added that an acting job for Steve Jones provided by successful Tv producer Harry Thomason, a close Clinton associate “would help.” Cooks rejected this idea and said it was preposterous and reported it to Clinton’s lawyers.

Conclusion: Paula Jones was an opportunist who wanted money and got it. Today her net worth is $700 thousand despite her claims of not wanting money.

so the next time a trump supporter calls Bill a rapist you’ll be better armed with this knowledge but I’m sure it will just go over there head and they will be like:

sources:

http://www.anotherperspective.org/advoc160.html

https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/537262.The_Hunting_of_the_President

http://heavy.com/news/2016/10/dolly-kyle-bill-clinton-sexual-history-accuser-accusers-women-affair-juanita-broaddrick-paula-jones-hillary-partner/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/pjones/docs/clintondep031398.htm

41 notes · View notes

hillaryflute · 4 years

Text

Proof of a right wing conspiracy the Clinton Chronicles

The next scandal or conspiracy I will be focusing on in this text post is “The Clinton Chronicles,” is a 1994 film that accused the Clintons of a range of crimes. In order to understand this scandal there are some people you need to know.

1. The infamous Larry Nichols. This is the same man who was involved in my last post and who helped orchestrate the Gennifer Flowers scandal. While Nichols apologized and admitted his wrongdoings in the Flowers scandal, he never quite got rid of his need for revenge and as soon as new opportunities came up for revenge, he went after them. Quick reminder Nichols had bad blood with Bill since he was fired from his job working at the ADFA. 2. Pat Matrisciana was the producer of the film: The Clinton Chronicles. He was also the founder of the conservative group Citizens for Honest Government. (this group will come into play later on in this post.) 3. Reverend Jerry Falwell. He was was an American Southern Baptist pastor, televangelist, and conservative activist. He also owned Falwell’s liberty alliance which helped produce shows and videos. Falwell was basically the caricature of what a bigoted right wing extremist christian would be like. Here are some of his quotes: “The idea that religion and politics don’t mix was invented by the Devil to keep Christians from running their own country.” “ AIDS is not just God’s punishment for homosexuals; it is God’s punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.”

Facts and background information: 1. The Citizens for Honest Government was registered with the IRS under section 501 © (3) of the tax code as a nonprofit educational organization, theoretically non-partisan, tax-exempt and free to solicit tax-deductible charitable contributions. In practice, the organization had two main purposes: to propagate the political and religious beliefs of the extreme religious right, with which its founder and sole proprietor Pat Matrisciana was closely allied; and to promote and distribute video tapes by Jeremiah Films and Integrity Films, two for-profit corporate entities he (Mastrisciana) owned. 2. Until 1993, Jeremiah Films produced slick melodramatic videos on themes mainly of interest to Christian fundamentalists. To give you a gist of how paranoid and crazy these films and documentaries were here are some examples: Halloween, Trick or Treat? warned parents that lurking behind such “seemingly innocent symbolism” as black cats and jack-o’-lanterns lay a satanic plot to seduce their children into “Pagan Occultism.” There was also a film produced by this company called Gay Rights, Special Rights where the film focused on “the hidden purpose of civil rights laws forbidding discrimination by sexual presence:to enable homosexuals to procreate in public classrooms where they recruit and propagandize the innocent.”

Now that you know what what type of paranoid and extremist people that were involved in this, let’s get on with The Clinton Chronicles Scandal and how all these men came to know each other and work on this.

1. Matrisciana and Nichols were introduced in late 1993 by a former NBC News cameraman named John Hillyer who had been hired by Matrisciana to scout Arkansas for anti-Clinton material. 2. Before The Clinton Chronicles, Matrisciana and Nichols’s first joint venture was a thirty-minute video called Circle of Power. Distributed nationwide by Falwell’s Liberty Alliance (this is how Reverend Jerry Falwell who was introduced at the start of the post becomes involved,) in early 1994, the video opens with Nichols earnestly telling of “countless people who mysteriously died” after running afoul of Clinton’s political ambition. Taking Vince Foster’s death as a starting point, Circle of Power, tied President Clinton to a series of suicides, accidental deaths, and unsolved homicides.

The Clinton Chronicles: Facts: 1.The Clinton Chronicles was the second more ambitious production of these three men that reached the widest audience after it was released that Spring. 2. The largest volume of fabrications in The Clinton Chronicles concerned the ADFA (where Larry Nichols had worked and had been fired from.) 3. Falwell promoted The Clinton Chronicles as if it were The Ten Commandments. For four successful weeks in May 1994, viewers of Virginia evangelist’s syndicated TV program, The Old-Time Gospel Hour, saw not sermons and spirituals but excerpts from Circle Of Power and The Clinton Chronicles, along with a half-hour informercial touting the videos for a donation of $40 plus $3 shipping and handling. A few of the more than two hundred TV stations that carried Falwell’s program deemed the episodes political rather than religious and refused to broadcast them without payment, but most showed them on schedule.

Now this part is hilarious: Toward the end of the thirty-minute infomercial, Falwell interviewed a figure in silhouette, identified only as an “investigative reporter.” “Can you please tell me and the American people why you think that your life and the lives of the others on this video are in danger?” Falwell asked. “Two weeks ago we had an interview with a man who was an insider,” the dark figure replies. “His plane crashed and he was killed an hour before the interview. You may say this is just a coincidence, but there was another fellow that we were going to interview and he was killed in a plane crash. Are these coincidences? I don’t think so.” The silhouette’s voice was recognized by investigative reporter Murray Wass, who finally got Pat Matrisciana to admit he was the mystery man. “Obviously, I’m not an investigative reporter,” Matrisciana confessed, “and I doubt that our lives were actually ever in any real danger. That was Jerry’s (Falwell’s) idea to do that… He thought that would be dramatic.”

False claims and faults In the Clinton Chronicles: 1. Although the video came advertised as a documentary, many who appeared in it got paid. Citizens for Honest Government ledgers show that the organization paid out more than $200,000 to individuals featured in the Clinton videos between 1994 and 1996. Nichols repeatedly claimed to have received no money but was in fact paid $89,000 according to the ledgers. Jim Johnson (enemy of Bill’s from Arkansas I posted about him here) received a new pickup truck, while Paula Jones and her husband received a paltry of $1,000 for their appearance in The Clinton Chronicles. “We did not pay people to tell lies,” Martisciana told Salon magazine reporter Murray Wass. “We paid people so that they would no longer have to be afraid to tell the truth.” (lol faulty logic at it’s finest am I right ladies?)

2. Veteran reporter Carrier Rengers drew the assignment of reviewing The Clinton Chronicles for the resolutely Republican Arkansas Democratic-Gazette. “Apparently,” she commented tartly, “honesty isn’t necessary in videos.” She painstakingly debunked its most absurd assertions. Had then Governor Clinton really failed to balance Arkansas’s state budget even once? In fact, he had done so every year because state law forbids deficit spending. Had he, as the video alleged, issued a full pardon to a political supporter named Dan Lasater who was convicted of giving cocaine to his aquaninstences? Impossible, because Lasater had pleaded guilty to a federal crime.

Other things you should know: 1. Another Arkansan who joined with the Citizens for Honest Government was a former Saline County deputy sheriff named John Brown. Over a two year period between 1994 and 1995, Pat Martisciana paid the ex-homicide detective $28,000 for “investigative work,” on anti-Clinton videos and Brown appeared in two of them. He took the money, but soon came to take a jaundiced view of Matrisciana’s operation. Later on Brown, regretted his involvement with Martisciana. Although he had appeared on The New Clinton Chronicles (a revised but basically the same as the first edition version) and a second video titled Obstruction Of Justice, he contends that his remarks were scripted, electronically, altered and placed in a context that entirely changed their meaning. Moreover he says the same is true of virtually all the law enforcement officers who appear on Martisciana’s videos. “If they’d had been halfway honest,” Brown explained to a Little Rock reporter, “they’d have called themselves Citizens against Democrats. Basically, they just wanted to play a game of connect the dots. Except that every picture had to show Bill Clinton’s face. They’d take somebody like Dan Lasater or even Roger Clinton, and find a way to tie everything they’d done wrong to Bill Clinton.”

2. One possible explanation for Nichols’s erratic behavior and persistence of revenge towards Bill Clinton was his own addiction to the painkiller Dilaudid . By the time of the Clinton Chronicles, Nichols was gobbling pills buy the handful and staggering around in a daze much of the time. Dilaudid is a Schedule II narcotic with potentially fatal side effects, including suppressed respiration, mode disturbances, and impaired judgment.

Conclusion: The Clinton Chronicles was not based on fact but rather each of the men using the film to get back at the Clintons and further their agenda. Nichols still wanted revenge and Martisciana wanted money as well as revenge. Falwell wanted to use the film to further his political and religious agenda at the same time by going against the Clintons new age new democrat Liberal politics and portraying it as a sin.

Honorable mentions: 1. In a strange incident, Brown insisted he saw Nichols demonstrate his toughness by emerging from the bathroom having run an electric guitar cord through his scrotum. “That was it for me,” Brown exclaimed. “I got up in his face and told him if he ever came around me pilled up like that again, I would kick his ass and turn him in.” From that point forward, the former detective’s relationship with the Citizens for Honest Government deteriorated rapidly.” 2. On Monday, October 31, Jerry Falwell spoke before a Baptist preacher’s gathering in Little Rock. Originally scheduled to be held at Immanuel Baptist Church, where the President had worshiped during his years as governor, Falwell’s appearance had to be moved after Pastor Rex Horne refused to allow his church to be used for the event. Having watched The Old-Time Gospel Hour on cable tv, Horne felt that Falwell had blatantly violated the Ninth commandment by bearing false witness. “I happened to tune in on a Sunday morning,” he explained. “I saw Falwell promoting the video tapes that have been proven to be scurrilous and full of innuendo and falsehoods directed not just at the Clintons but other Arkansans. I could not, with good conscience , go along with it any longer. 3. Gary Johnson was in the Clinton Chronicles

also here’s Nichols being interviewed on infowars pretty recently. Infowars is a youtube channel lots of Trump supporters watch so now you know lol.

35 notes · View notes

hillaryflute · 4 years

Text

That one time Larry Nichols “confessed” to murder in order to make the Clintons look bad.

“They sent me overseas to kill people for them and told me it was for the good of the Country. So when they asked me to do it for them in the States it felt no different. The real truth is, I did it for the money and I didn’t give a s**t about the women I beat and the men I murdered.”

Bill and Hill be like:

Larry my dude, no one sent you anywhere and tbh if you murdered people how come you aren’t in jail for confessing?

27 notes · View notes

hillaryflute · 4 years

Text

juanita broaddrick

This text-post is going to be about Juanita Broadrdrcik’s claims against Bill. I want to start by saying that I am not a rape denier. At the time that I first heard of this I was doing research because I was apprehensive about liking the Clintons so I wasn’t looking to serve a bias and I took Juanita and the others at their word. If you haven’t read my other posts I highly suggest you do because then it’ll put into context the broader picture and what has been said and disproven about Bill and women.

1.post: Gennifer Flowers

2nd post: Mega Post: Bill’s accusers.

I’m apprehensive about doing this post but it has to be done. Again, I do not think women should be silenced but I agree with Hillary: Hillary Clinton was asked what she would say to Broaddrick, Kathleen Willey, and Paula Jones, she said, “Well, I would say that everyone should be believed at first until they are disbelieved based on evidence.”

claim: Juanita Broaddrick claims that Bill Clinton raped her in 1978 when he was attorney general of Arkansas.

analysis: false. No evidence.

facts that disapprove this claim:

In 1997, Broaddrick filed an affidavit with Paula Jones’ lawyers saying Clinton did not assault her. In 1998, Broaddrick told Kenneth Starr’s FBI investigators that she was raped. Eventually, Broaddrick described the rape for several major news organizations.

Some people try to play devil’s advocate and say that she was scared to come forward at first. That would make sense, except Paula Jones had already stepped forward and put a spotlight on then President Clinton. If what Juanita claimed was true, then would have been the time to say something, especially if what had happened to her was true since the issue already had national attention and lawyers would be able to protect her.

Five people say Broaddrick told them about the rape immediately after it occurred. (These people only stepped forward when Juanita did in 1998/1999)

what’s wrong with this: The friends’ testimony isn’t trustworthy. Jean and her sister have a grudge against Clinton because, as governor, he commuted the life sentence of the man who murdered their father. Broaddrick’s current husband might lie on her behalf.

The National Enquirer paid a lie-detector expert to analyze the videotape and he concluded that she’s lying.

why this is important: The National Enquirer has often been biased against the Clintons. They would have no reason to protect Bill. If anything they were trying to uncover dirt to prove her claim was true and found that it wasn’t. Larry Nichols has good relations with the National Enquirer at this time. Trust me if it were true, he would have ran with it.

There is no physical evidence. There are no medical records. No telephone records. No scheduling records. No hotel records. No police records.

Broaddrick says she can remember every detail of the rape, except the month and day it occurred. If it scarred her for life, wouldn’t she remember the date? Or at least the month?

Broaddrick says she told her husband, David, what happened. But, at the time, David was not her husband. He was her boyfriend, with whom she was cheating on her first husband. Question: What if Clinton and Broaddrick had consensual sex? If you’re cheating on your husband, and then cheat on your boyfriend, do you tell your boyfriend the truth?

Within one year of the alleged rape, Broaddrick attended a fund-raiser for Clinton and accepted appointment by him to a state advisory board. Why did she still want to support a man who raped her?

To me this seems like the biggest red flag. Why be that near to someone who supposedly raped you? Why associate with him at all?

Broaddrick claims Clinton kissed her so hard he left her lip visibly black and blue, and she covered up by telling people she’d had an accident. But her first husband, Gary Hickey, says he remembers no such injury when she returned from Little Rock, nor such a story.

One year later, Broaddrick filed divorce papers against Hickey, claiming he struck her on the mouth. Was that the only time?

It sounds terrible to say but Broaddrick could have been trying to cover up her first husband’s assault by making up a story about Bill. If she had any sort of bruise she could tell friends that it had been Bill Clinton.

In 1997, Broaddrick signed an affidavit and gave a deposition in the Jones case, denying twice under oath that Clinton raped her. “These allegations are untrue and there is no truth to these rumors.” If Clinton did rape her, 20 years later, why would she still not tell the truth?

Starr’s investigators talked to Broaddrick and listened to her story–and decided not to pursue it. That, in itself, casts huge doubts on Broaddrick’s credibility. If Starr would impeach Clinton for oral sex, he would certainly indict or impeach him for rape, if he could prove it. Which nobody can.

Broaddrick says that after his ejaculation, Clinton told her not to worry about becoming pregnant for he had the mumps when he was a child and that he was sterile.

Bill isn’t sterile we’ve been over this. This has echoes of Larry Nichols who also liked to claim Bill was sterile while also claiming that Danney William’s is Bill’s son. (p.s., he isn’t check it out here)

her affidavit where she denied the rape rumors: I met President Clinton more than twenty years ago through family friends. Our introduction was not arranged or facilitated, in any way, by the Arkansas State Police. I have never been an Arkansas state employee or a federal employee. I have never discussed with Mr. Clinton the possibility of state or federal employment nor has he offered me any such position. I have had no further relations with him for the past (15) years.

During the 1992 Presidential campaign there were unfounded rumors and stories circulated that Mr. Clinton had made unwelcome sexual advances toward me in the late seventies. Newspaper and tabloid reporters hounded me and my family, seeking corroboration of these tales. I repeatedly denied the allegations and requested that my family’s privacy be respected. These allegations are untrue and I had hoped that they would no longer haunt me, or cause further disruption to my family.

In their 2000 book The Hunting of the President, Joe Conason and Gene Lyons note that the FBI investigated the allegation for Starr’s independent counsel office and found the evidence “inconclusive.“

In his memoir The Clinton Wars, White House aide Sidney Blumenthal notes that when Paula Jones’s lawyers first approached Broaddrick, she refused to cooperate, and upon being subpoenaed signed an affidavit saying, “I do not have any information to offer regarding a nonconsensual or unwelcome sexual advance by Mr. Clinton.” Only after that did she file another affidavit insisting the assault did occur, at which point, Blumenthal argues, she “had no standing as a reliable witness.”

Some Clinton allies have implied that Clinton may have had consensual sex with Broaddrick but that she alleged rape because she didn’t want her then-boyfriend David Broaddrick to know she was cheating on him (and on her husband). In his book Blinded by the Right, David Brock hypothesizes, “Dave Broaddrick had suspected Juanita of having consensual sex with Clinton and that Juanita came up with the rape claim later to get herself out of trouble with her boyfriend.” In his book Uncovering Clinton, Michael Isikoff — who helped break the Monica Lewinsky story as a reporter at Newsweek — writes, “Privately, Clinton’s lawyers have conceded that Clinton may have had consensual sex with Broaddrick but insist that he would have never forced himself upon an unwilling participant.”

what would be her motive to lie: Juanita had connections to Sheffield Nelson. Nelson didn’t like Bill. Sheffield Nelson had been an ally of Bill Clinton’s. In 1984, the governor had appointed him to head the Arkansas Industrial Development Commission, the state agency once used by Winthrop Rockefeller as a steppingstone to the governor’s mansion. But by 1990, Nelson had grown impatient waiting in the shadows for Clinton to move on. He believed Clinton had reneged on a deal they had made in 1986, when Nelson first considered running for governor but didn’t in return for Clinton’s promise to step aside four years later. He had expected the governor either to make a presidential move in 1988 or to run for the U.S. Senate in 1990. Clinton’s decision to run for reelection instead apparently triggered Nelson’s abrupt switch to the Republican Party. After this, Nelson became one of Bill Clinton’s enemies and actively sought to take him down. He ran against Bill for Governor in 1990. On November 7, the incumbent governor defeated the Republican challenger in a landslide with 59 percent of the vote. Sheffield Nelson had entered the 1990 gubernatorial race angry at Bill Clinton. What does this have to do with Juanita? In 1992 Nelson went to find Juanita to follow up on a rumor he had heard along with a businessman named Phillip Yoakum, a fellow partisan republican. “ Had many people in Van Buren known outside Juanita’s immediate circle known about her contacts with Yoakum and Nelson, it might have struck them rather odd.The governor had made a well-publicized campaign stop at Brownwood Manor ( Juanita’s nursing home), during his hard-fought 1990 campaign against Nelson.

Bill’s problems were not with the owners of the nursing home. His difficulty were with Norma Rogers and Jean Darden, two sisters (the same ones I mentioned earlier) who managed Brownwood for the Broddricks. Their father’s murder had been spared the electric chair by Bill Clinton and their family had a very public grunge against him ever since.

Nelson and Yoakum’s attempts to publicize the allegations got nowhere the closest they got was to The Los Angles Times, but they turned it down. Reporter Bill Rempel said there were several things wrong with the story:, its partisan origins with Arkansas republicans, the unwillingness of Juanita to talk (at this point she still wasn’t talking and said there was no rape,) and the timing was in late October. “We got the tip in October,” Rempel explained. “It was the consensus of reporters and editors that even if the facts were well documented..there was no way we could fairly report such a sensational report of the eve of an election. We had no way of assessing the validity of the story.”

Author David Brock recalled that when he attempted to research the story in 1995 he was offput by Yoakum’s request to cut in on a book deal. (This hardly seem like the type of person that would be concerned with a woman who was raped. Here he is asking for money and a book deal.)

David Brock had the chance to speak with Nelson and he came to the conclusion that even Nelson, Bill’s old enemy questioned the validity of the story.

The only witnesses Juanita was ever able to evoke and actually claim her word to be true was her husband David and the two Norma and Jean, the women who had a grudge against Bill.

RESTATING FOR EMPHASIS: FBI agents working for the Office of Independent Counsel deemed the evidence coming from Juanita’s accusation to be inconclusive.

FBI agents have investigated this. It’s been looked into. No evidence has been deemed as credible.

what most likely happened: I think Juanita was cheating on her boyfriend and made up a lie in the spurr of the moment. She probably wasn’t even cheating with Bill but saw him as an opportunity to get out of whatever relationship problem she was in at the time. There are of course other possibilities such as her two friends with the grudge against Bill convinced her to lie just to damage his local credibility and then the lie blew up and she found herself trying to backtrack. Rather than admit she was lying she chose to go with the story.

it is important to note that even Juanita herself said that the rumors began in the 1992 President campaign. Here is some background on how Bill’s political enemies circulated and actively looked for rumors that weren’t there:

“We are going to take Tommy Robinson ( a man republicans wanted and helped support to run against Bill for governor) and use him to throw everything we can think of at Clinton-drugs, women, whatever works. We may not win but we’ll bust him up so bad he won’t be able to run again for years.” - Lee Atwater (chairman of the Republican National committee.)

Sheffield Nelson ran in the same circles as Lee Atwater and Larry Nichols.They launched sexual attack adds with rumors based on Bill. Here is what an aide said:

“The Idea was to make people think ‘I wonder about all those rumors I have heard.”

Basically, they just wanted to play a game of connect the dots. Except that every picture had to show Bill Clinton’s face.

sources:

http://www.cnn.com/2016/10/11/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-bill-clinton-accusers/index.html

http://articles.latimes.com/1999/feb/26/local/me-11829

https://www.amazon.com/Hunting-President-Ten-Year-Campaign-Destroy/dp/0312273193

81 notes · View notes

hillaryflute · 4 years

Text

Proof of a right wing conspiracy. Gennifer Flowers.

This is going to be the first of a series of text posts that will offer information on several Clinton scandals. All of the quotes and information cited are coming from the sole source of the book: The Hunting of the President. The Ten-Year Campaign to Destroy Bill and Hillary Clinton by Joe Conason & Gene Lyons. I’m doing these text posts because this book offers a lot of insight on the scandals that I did not know at first and a lot of facts that are not put out there for people to know. This may be lengthy but it’s worth the read. That being said this first post is going to be on the Gennifer Flowers scandal.

Larry Nichols In order to Understand the Gennifer Flowers scandal it is important to introduce the man who was at the heart of this scandal and helped construct it. That man is Larry Nichols. Nichols had a grudge against Bill Clinton. This is due to the fact that in 1988, Nichols (who was from Conway Arkansas) had landed a new job as a marketing consultant for the Arkansas Development Finance Authority (ADFA), the state’s centralized public bonding agency. Now this is important, the ADFA was created by Clinton Legislation over the strong opposition of Stephens Inc (this will come into play for another scandal.) Nichols’s brief career at ADFA was ill-fated from the start. Several things happened: 1. When Betsey Wright, heard that Nichols had been hired by the agency’s director, and that he had invoked her name to get the job, she was furious. She had instructed personnel directors at other agencies who had asked about Nichols over the years that he was a dangerous con artist and political opportunist. 2. Nichols was preoccupied with issues more global than the marketing of Arkansas bonds. He started telling other ADFA employees that he was a CIA operative working on behalf of Nicaraguan contras. The CIA part was false but the claim wasn’t altogether false because he had gotten involved with the Collation of Peace Through Strength, an organization headed by the retired general John Singlaub-one of marine lieutenant’s colonel Oliver North’s secret money conduits in the Iran-Contra affair. What ended up happening was that “for five months, Nichols devoted himself to the contra cause while drawing a state salary, until the Associated Press discovered he had taken his politics to work. In September 1988 the AP reported that since coming to ADFA, Nichols had placed 642 long-distance telephone calls, at state expense, to Contra leaders and politicians who supported them. “ 3. Due to all this, Bill had to fire Nichols. “Although Clinton was traveling abroad on a trade mission when the phone-call story broke, Betsey Wright made sure he learned about it immediately: “I woke him up in Asia in the middle of the night and told him to fire Nichols.” The next day state officials forced Nichols to resign. This part is important: he left protesting his innocence and complaining about the “knee-jerk liberal reaction from Governor Clinton.”

Gennifer Flowers So what does Nichols have to do with the Flowers scandal? It seems as though everything. He had the motive and revenge seeking after being fired and humiliated. Fast facts: 1. Larry Nichols called a press conference at the Arkansas state capitol on October 1990. He handed out copies go a $3million libel lawsuit against Bill Clinton. He complained that he had been wrongly fired from his state job as a “scapegoat” in order to conceal the “the largest scandal ever perpetrated on the taxpayers of Arkansas.” Nichols accused Governor Clinton of having misused ADFA funds for “improper purposes.” Nichols also presented a list of 5 alleged Clinton mistresses upon whom those funds had supposedly been spent. 2. Among the women listed was Gennifer Flowers. This is important as well: Flowers turned out to be the only one of the five women who Nichols knew personally. The two had recorded advertising jingles together and still used the same booking agent. And there was one more interesting coincidence: In early October, about two weeks before Nichols’s press conference, Gennifer Flowers had called the governor’s office seeking help in finding a state job.

Now a bit more of a profile on Gennifer Flowers herself: Musicians and club owners who had worked with Flowrs described her as manipulative and dishonest. Her resume falsely proclaimed her to be graduate of a fashionable Dallas Prep school she’d never attended. It also listed a University of Arkansas nursing degree she’d never earned and membership in a sorority that had never heard of her. Her agent told the Democrat-Gazette that contrary to her claims, Flowers had never opened for comedian Rich Little. A brief gig on the Hee Haw television program had come to a bad end, the agent would later confirm, when Flowers simply vanished for a couple of weeks with a man she’s met in a Las Vegas casino-and then concocted a tale of having been kidnapped. She had never been Miss Teenage America. Even her “twin sister Genevieve” turned out to be purely a figment of Flower’s imagination.

Given all this so far it is easy to conclude that the Gennifer Flowers scandal was one incited by revenge for Nichols and fame for Flowers. But what about the tapes you may ask? There are holes in that “evidence” as well.

The Tapes: It is important to note that each of the four taped conversations between Bill Clinton and Flowers revolved around the same topics: Larry Nichol’s accusation’s and Flower’s supposed fear and loathing of the tabloid press.

Now here are some quotes between Bill and Flowers that poke more holes in her claims of having a twelve year affair:

“Gennifer,” he said, “It’s Bill Clinton.” His voice was muffled and for a longtime lover, oddly formal. Flowers remarked that he didn’t sound like himself. Did he have a cold? “Oh it’s just my….every year about this time I.. My sinuses go bananas.” Bill’s allergies affect him every spring and fall. His voice gets hoarse and his nose swells and reddens. Anyone intimate with him for more than a decade, as Flowers insisted she had been, might be expected to know that.

Once again she launched into a tale of woe. Parties unknown, she said, had broken into her apartment and rifled the place. “There wasn’t any sign of a break-in,” she explained,” but the drawers and things. There wasn’t anything missing that I can tell, but somebody had…” “Somebody had gone through your stuff?’ Bill asked. “But they didn’t steal anything. “ “No..I had jewelry here, and everything was still here.” This is possibly why Flowers never reported the any break-in to the Little Rock Police Department. Years later, she would pin the rap for this alleged burglary on Bill Clinton himself. It is also important to note that at no point on any of Flower’s tapes did Bill Clinton say anything that indicated a long-term sexual relationship with her. During one of their earlier talks, Clinton had told her about his joking response to Bill Simmons, a Little Rock AP reporter who had read him the bimbo list over the phone.” I said, ‘God Bill, I kinda hate to deny it. They’re all beautiful women.’ I told you a couple of years ago when I came to see you that I’d retired. Now I’m glad I have, because they (his Republican enemies) have scoured the waterfront. And they couldn’t find anything.” This quote you just read is the full quote. Often times on Youtube channels, they will cut the audio at the end of the ‘they’re all beautiful women part.’

Most probable relationship of Bill and Flowers affair: 1. The account that probably came closest to the truth was a column by the Democrat-Gazette’s John Brummet, a respected political analyst and frequent Clinton critic. His sources said Flowers had mentioned to friends fifteen years earlier that she was “having a fling with Clinton,” but “they say they heard nothing from her after 1979 about a relationship with Clinton and were surprised and skeptical upon reading her assertion in Star magazine of a twelve year affair that only ended in 1989. “They are also dubious about her assertion that she was in love with Clinton all those years, dreaming of marriage. They say that she had other relationships in Dallas and Little Rock during that time.. They speculate that she doesn’t like men generally and probably enjoys using them. Their instinctive reaction to the Star article is that her vivid, detailed account probably contains truth, exaggeration and fabrication, not necessarily in equal parts.”

2. Her ex-room mate Lauren Kirk told CNN corespondent Art Harris, that she believed Flowers had lied for revenge and money. “She just can’t accept the fact that he (Clinton) came, wiped himself off, zipped up and left.”

Concluding: If Bill and Flowers did have an affair it was the typical affair of a few sexual encounters but not a twelve year or loving relationship.

Aftermath: On the morning of the Clinton’s 60 minutes appearance, a very curious item appeared on the front page of the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette. Larry Nichols announced that he was dropping the liberal suit trumpeted in the Star only a week earlier. “The feud is over,” he said. “I want to tell everybody what I did to try to destroy Governor Clinton.” In a one-page statement distributed to the Little Rock press, Nichols claimed that his only motive had been to avenge his wrongful firing four years earlier. “The media has made a circus out of this thing and now it’s gone way too far,” he wrote. “When the Star article first came out, several women called asking if I was willing to pay them to say they had an affair with Bill Clinton.”

Honorable mentions: 1.Gennifer Flowers once boasted about the many married men she’d seduce for fun and profit: “I usually throw them back. I don’t want to keep then. Let the wives have them back.” 2. The agreement between Flowers and the Star stipulated that no one would ever be allowed to examine her original tapes. 3. Flowers never produced a single photograph, valentine, or birthday card as evidence of her twelve-year affair with Clinton; no witness ever came forward who had seen them together. 4. Flowers had claimed that between 1978 and 1980, she and Bill had enjoyed many trysts in Little Rock’s Excelsior Hotel. The Excelsior Hotel wasn’t built until 1983.

If you read this all the way through thank you and I hoped it shed more light on the Flowers scandal as it did for me. This and my future posts for this text post series will be found under the hashtag:proofofarightwingconspiracy.

74 notes · View notes

hillaryflute · 4 years

Photo

LEMON MASCARPONE CREAM PIE

5K notes · View notes

hillaryflute · 4 years

Text

H.G. from The New York Times comment section:

“I saw this. In Detroit, a lot of folks who would normally support Hillary, were passing around inflammatory memes of BLM, the incarceration rate under Bill, and a lot of anti-Hillary invictives. It spread like wildfire on fb. Conversations sprouted about the Dems taking the black, inner city vote for granted and branched into Native American/Black eradication, Bill’s “black love child”, even anti-vax - the memes got louder and more outrageous and arguments broke out. Folks talked about writing in for Bernie or Jill Stein. I was stunned because Detroit has always been a place where the Dem message was clear; the was a black slate, union slate…issues were discussed…the church ladies voted and plenty of folks followed suit. This was totally upended.

And in the end - 70,000 less Detroiters showed up for Hill than for Obama - in a state Trump won by 10,704 votes.”

——–

USA Today:

“Russia’s Internet Research Agency “launched an extended attack on the United States by using computational propaganda.” More than 30 million people shared content from the Internet Research Agency on Facebook and Instagram from 2015 to 2017.

The Internet Research Agency operated a “troll farm” based in Russian President Vladimir Putin’s hometown that employed hundreds of English speakers with “a strategic goal to sow discord in the U.S. political system, including … supporting the presidential campaign of then-candidate Donald J. Trump and disparaging Hillary Clinton,” according to the indictment.

The Oxford report says the Russian trolls’ efforts focused on a few main objectives: pushing African-American voters to boycott the election and giving them misinformation about how to vote; getting Latino voters to distrust the U.S. government; “encouraging extreme right-wing voters to be more confrontational”; and spreading false stories and conspiracy theories.

Efforts targeting African-Americans, Latinos, liberals and members of the LGBTQ community used different approaches with each group, but the overall aim was to get voters “to boycott the election, abstain from voting for Clinton, or to spread cynicism about participating in the election in general.”

“Differential messaging to each of these target groups was designed to push and pull them in different ways. What is clear is that all of the messaging clearly sought to benefit the Republican Party – and specifically, Donald Trump,” the Oxford report says.

The Russian campaign used a range of platforms, including Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, Instagram, YouTube, Pinterest, Vine, Gab, Meetup, Reddit, Medium, Pokemon Go and Google+, according to the reports.

New Knowledge says the “scale of their operation was unprecedented,” reaching “126 million people on Facebook, at least 20 million users on Instagram, 1.4 million users on Twitter, and uploaded over 1,000 videos to YouTube.”

The report says there was a “clear bias” toward Trump in the operations. The agency posted no pro-Clinton content on Instagram or Facebook, except for one post encouraging Muslims to attend a rally supporting her.”

——–

The New York Times #1:

“The report says the “most prolific” efforts on Facebook and Instagram focused on African-Americans as the Russians developed unwitting “human assets” to help them share their content.

Of 81 Facebook pages created by the Internet Research Agency in the Senate’s data, 30 targeted African-American audiences, amassing 1.2 million followers, the report finds. By comparison, 25 pages targeted the political right and drew 1.4 million followers. Just seven pages focused on the political left, drawing 689,045 followers.

While the right-wing pages promoted Mr. Trump’s candidacy, the left-wing pages scorned Mrs. Clinton while promoting Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont and Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate. The voter suppression effort was focused particularly on Sanders supporters and African-Americans, urging them to shun Mrs. Clinton in the general election and either vote for Ms. Stein or stay home.

Whether such efforts had a significant effect is difficult to judge. Black voter turnout declined in 2016 for the first time in 20 years in a presidential election, but it is impossible to determine whether that was the result of the Russian campaign.

The New Knowledge report argues that the Internet Research Agency’s presence on Instagram has been underestimated and may have been as effective or more effective than its Facebook effort. The report says there were 187 million engagements on Instagram — users “liking” or sharing the content created in Russia — compared with 76.5 million engagements on Facebook.

The New Knowledge report finds that while “other distinct ethnic and religious groups were the focus of one or two Facebook pages or Instagram accounts, the black community was targeted extensively with dozens.

”Facebook ads were targeted at users who had shown interest in black history, the Black Panther Party and Malcolm X. The most popular of the Russian Instagram accounts was @blackstagram, with 303,663 followers.

After the election, the report says, the Internet Research Agency put up some 70 posts on Facebook and Instagram that mocked the claims that Russia had interfered in the election.

“You’ve lost and don’t know what to do?” said one such post. “Just blame it on Russian hackers.”

——–

The New York Times #2:

“To a degree not fully appreciated, the Russian operation relentlessly targeted African-Americans.

On YouTube, the Russians played on police shootings of unarmed black men with channels with names like “Don’t Shoot” and “BlackToLive.”

While most media attention has focused on Facebook pages appealing to the political right, the Russian effort aimed at black Americans was actually larger, reaching almost as many people. Of 81 Facebook pages created by the Internet Research Agency, 30 targeted African-American audiences, amassing 1.2 million followers, the report finds. By comparison, 25 pages targeted the political right and drew 1.4 million followers.

One clear Russian goal, pursued on multiple fronts, was to suppress Democratic turnout in 2016.

One strand focused, once again, on African-American voters. “These campaigns pushed a message that the best way to advance the cause of the African-American community was to boycott the election,” the Oxford report says. One bogus post declared: “HILLARY RECEIVED $20,000 DONATION FROM KKK TOWARDS HER CAMPAIGN.”

The Russian accounts urged people who had backed Bernie Sanders against Hillary Clinton for the Democratic presidential nomination to stay home or to vote for Jill Stein, the Green Party candidate, in the general election. The New Knowledge report also describes what it calls “malicious misdirection” and “tweets designed to create confusion about voting rules.”

All of the emphasis on Facebook has obscured the huge role of Instagram, as well as the Russian activity on many smaller platforms.

Most of the early media coverage of the Russian campaign focused on Facebook. The New Knowledge report argues that the Internet Research Agency’s presence on Instagram, which is owned by Facebook, has been underestimated and may have been as effective or even more effective than its Facebook effort. The report says there were 187 million engagements on Instagram — users “liking” or sharing the content created in Russia — compared with 76.5 million engagements on Facebook.

Both reports note that there was hardly a social platform, however obscure, that the Internet Research Agency did not invade: Reddit, Google+, Vine, Gab, Meetup, Pinterest, Tumblr and more. The Russian trolls even created a podcast on SoundCloud.”

——–

Ever wonder why so many videos were circulating online showing Hillary’s past comments being against gay marriage?

Answer: Russian bots trying to suppress her vote with the LGBT community.

Hillary helped increase funding for HIV/AIDS research and medicine as First Lady. She was the first First Lady to march on a gay pride parade. As a two-time New York Senator, Hillary fought for stronger LGBT hate crime laws and gay adoption rights. As Secretary of State, Hillary passed the first-ever United Nations resolution on gay rights (declaring: “gay rights are human rights and human rights are gay rights”), began the Global Equity Fund, and made it so trans Americans could change the gender on their passports.

But let’s vilify the woman for evolving on gay marriage (just like Obama, Biden, and Bernie did).

If you are gay and voted against Hillary due to her being against gay marriage at one point in time (just like her male counterparts), you were fooled by Russian bots.

Furthermore, Hillary received nearly 4 million more votes than Bernie Sanders during the Democratic primary.

The DNC didn’t rig the voting machines.

But that didn’t stop Russian bots from spreading the myth that the DNC stole the primary for Hillary, and that voting for Jill Stein wouldn’t be a “wasted” vote.

Russian bots manipulated Bernie supporters into thinking his nomination was stolen, therefore making it easy to convince them to either not vote or vote for Jill Stein.

Let us also remember that at the Children’s Defense Fund, Hillary investigated African American juveniles being placed in South Carolina adult prisons. Hillary also went door-to-door to expose school segregation in the south. Yet because of Bill Clinton’s 3-strikes policy (that was voted for by Bernie Sanders and supported by the black caucus at the time), Russian bots were able to manipulate African American voters against Hillary.

In 2020, please don’t be fooled by Russian bots and please vote for the Democratic nominee – no matter who he or she is. Clearly, every vote counts.

6K notes · View notes

hillaryflute · 5 years

Text

I have screamed this for months now.

213 notes · View notes

hillaryflute · 6 years

Text

Reblog or your mom will die in 928 seconds.

I love my mom.

I am risking nothing

I AM SORRY FOLLOWERS, I LOVE MY MOMMY

Will not risk.

sorry followers :(

5M notes · View notes

hillaryflute · 6 years

Text

H.G. from The New York Times comment section:

And in the end - 70,000 less Detroiters showed up for Hill than for Obama - in a state Trump won by 10,704 votes.”

——–

USA Today:

——–

The New York Times #1:

“The report says the “most prolific” efforts on Facebook and Instagram focused on African-Americans as the Russians developed unwitting “human assets” to help them share their content.

After the election, the report says, the Internet Research Agency put up some 70 posts on Facebook and Instagram that mocked the claims that Russia had interfered in the election.

“You’ve lost and don’t know what to do?” said one such post. “Just blame it on Russian hackers.”

——–

The New York Times #2:

“To a degree not fully appreciated, the Russian operation relentlessly targeted African-Americans.

On YouTube, the Russians played on police shootings of unarmed black men with channels with names like “Don’t Shoot” and “BlackToLive.”

One clear Russian goal, pursued on multiple fronts, was to suppress Democratic turnout in 2016.

All of the emphasis on Facebook has obscured the huge role of Instagram, as well as the Russian activity on many smaller platforms.

——–

Ever wonder why so many videos were circulating online showing Hillary’s past comments being against gay marriage?

Answer: Russian bots trying to suppress her vote with the LGBT community.

But let’s vilify the woman for evolving on gay marriage (just like Obama, Biden, and Bernie did).

If you are gay and voted against Hillary due to her being against gay marriage at one point in time (just like her male counterparts), you were fooled by Russian bots.

Furthermore, Hillary received nearly 4 million more votes than Bernie Sanders during the Democratic primary.

The DNC didn’t rig the voting machines.

But that didn’t stop Russian bots from spreading the myth that the DNC stole the primary for Hillary, and that voting for Jill Stein wouldn’t be a “wasted” vote.

Russian bots manipulated Bernie supporters into thinking his nomination was stolen, therefore making it easy to convince them to either not vote or vote for Jill Stein.

In 2020, please don’t be fooled by Russian bots and please vote for the Democratic nominee – no matter who he or she is. Clearly, every vote counts.

6K notes · View notes

hillaryflute · 6 years

Photo

756K notes · View notes

hillaryflute · 6 years

Text

[Retweet]

456K notes · View notes

hillaryflute · 6 years

Text

H.G. from The New York Times comment section:

And in the end - 70,000 less Detroiters showed up for Hill than for Obama - in a state Trump won by 10,704 votes.”

——–

USA Today:

——–

The New York Times #1:

“The report says the “most prolific” efforts on Facebook and Instagram focused on African-Americans as the Russians developed unwitting “human assets” to help them share their content.

After the election, the report says, the Internet Research Agency put up some 70 posts on Facebook and Instagram that mocked the claims that Russia had interfered in the election.

“You’ve lost and don’t know what to do?” said one such post. “Just blame it on Russian hackers.”

——–

The New York Times #2:

“To a degree not fully appreciated, the Russian operation relentlessly targeted African-Americans.

On YouTube, the Russians played on police shootings of unarmed black men with channels with names like “Don’t Shoot” and “BlackToLive.”

One clear Russian goal, pursued on multiple fronts, was to suppress Democratic turnout in 2016.

All of the emphasis on Facebook has obscured the huge role of Instagram, as well as the Russian activity on many smaller platforms.

Most of the early media coverage of the Russian campaign focused on Facebook. The New Knowledge report argues that the Internet Research Agency’s presence on Instagram, which is owned by Facebook, has been underestimated and may have been as effective or even more effective than its Facebook effort. The report says there were 187 million engagements on Instagram �� users “liking” or sharing the content created in Russia — compared with 76.5 million engagements on Facebook.

——–

Ever wonder why so many videos were circulating online showing Hillary’s past comments being against gay marriage?

Answer: Russian bots trying to suppress her vote with the LGBT community.

But let’s vilify the woman for evolving on gay marriage (just like Obama, Biden, and Bernie did).

If you are gay and voted against Hillary due to her being against gay marriage at one point in time (just like her male counterparts), you were fooled by Russian bots.

Furthermore, Hillary received nearly 4 million more votes than Bernie Sanders during the Democratic primary.

The DNC didn’t rig the voting machines.

But that didn’t stop Russian bots from spreading the myth that the DNC stole the primary for Hillary, and that voting for Jill Stein wouldn’t be a “wasted” vote.

Russian bots manipulated Bernie supporters into thinking his nomination was stolen, therefore making it easy to convince them to either not vote or vote for Jill Stein.

In 2020, please don’t be fooled by Russian bots and please vote for the Democratic nominee – no matter who he or she is. Clearly, every vote counts.

6K notes · View notes