RUSH: This is just too rich. Did you see what Hillary Clinton has tweeted? This went out yesterday: “To every survivor of sexual assault, you have the right to be heard. You have the right to be believed. We’re with you.” Are you kidding me? Hillary Clinton tweeting “to every survivor of sexual assault, you have the right to be believed”? They “have the right to be heard”? You remember what she and James Carville and the rest of the “Bimbo Eruption” team in the Clinton White House did?
Even the Clinton campaign. You remember what they did to women who rose up, came forward, and said that Bill Clinton had either assaulted them or that they had affairs with him? The case of Paula Jones: Carville’s out there running around saying (impression) “That’s what you get when you drag a dollar bill through a trailer park!” I mean, basically accusing these women of being bimbos and trailer trash. I think the phrase was “drag a hundred-dollar bill through a trailer park.”
That comes to mind. “No matter what you gonna get out there, you’re gonna find all kinds of trailer trash. Take a one dollar bill! See? Paula Jones, right over there.” And today we’ve got Mrs. Clinton… This is what is called hubris, and I understand the technique. I know exactly what she’s doing. She also tweeted, “Rape is a crime wherever it happens.” I wonder if Juanita Broaddrick has seen that comment from Hillary today.
Juanita Broaddrick is one of those stories the Millennials don’t know about the Clintons, and probably they’ll never be told by the Drive-By Media about Juanita Broaddrick. But if you are a Millennial — a Miss America Pageant contestant, for example — in the audience and you don’t know who Juanita Broaddrick is, she accused Bill Clinton of rape. Way back when in the, well, late eighties, early nineties, mid-nineties, somewhere. I forget the exact year, and NBC interviewed her and did a story on it.
And what she said was that after the rape when Clinton’s on his way out of the trailer, wherever it happened, I don’t know, he said, he looked at her and said, “Hey, you know, babe, you better put some ice on that lip. You got a little bleeding going on there. See you later.” And he’s out the door. So here comes Hillary Clinton now. And the reason this is happening, is ’cause she losing white women in droves. It’s exactly what we told you yesterday.
Here’s Andrea Mitchell on the Today show today, just a portion of her report on Hillary bleeding white women.
MITCHELL: Hillary Clinton is reaching out to that group that she’d always counted on, white women voters, who are now abandoning her in droves during the last two months.
RUSH: Now, remember, this is in the ABC News/Washington Post poll that ABC buried. They did not report these numbers. That’s why NBC and CBS are. (interruption) That’s right, “sluts and nuts” is what Hillary and company called those who were sexually assaulted by Bill. That’s what came out of the war room. That was the nomenclature used to describe the bimbos. How about the term “bimbo eruption”? She came up with that.
And there was a woman named Betsey Wright in the Clinton White House and the campaign who actually ran the “bimbo eruptions unit.” But it was Hillary who had the idea and it was Hillary who offered the political advice on how to deal with these women. The idea that she didn’t know about it, that she was righteously offended or indignity has always been a joke. Now, Hillary’s banking on the fact that the Drive-Bys are not gonna report this history and therefore the Millennials aren’t gonna know about it.
She’s gonna just realize that the only people probably talking about it will be the people that did way back when, and that was us in talk radio. So apparently what she bleeding white women. The numbers: She’s lost 20% of the white female vote, going from 60% to 40% just in the past two months. Meanwhile, Bernie Sanders is just steamrolling along out there, and he’s attracting all the buzz. He’s got all the energy and all the momentum, and Mrs. Clinton is sitting there just like a lug.
And they’re trying to do anything to inject some energy into this dormant campaign, which is actually predicated on a coronation and an automatic, a fait accompli rather than something she should actually have to earn, ’cause in the Clinton world she already has earned it. She’s earned it countless times, sacrificing her own life and future in marrying Bill and going to Arkansas and having to put up with all of that. I mean, having to live around this is bad enough.
But then when your husband is running around with all the bimbos? He’s only making 25 grand as governor, and you have to go to the Rose Law Firm and having to make strange cattle deals with Robert “Red” Bone? You have to turn 10 grand to a hundred grand by reading the Wall Street Journal and have to turn down a hundred in salary for the Rose Law Firm? Then you hide documents at the Rose Law Firm that don’t show up at the White House Map Room for years!
I mean, she put in a lot of heavy-duty here. So in her mind, in her campaign’s mind, she’s already earned it. She doesn’t have to campaign. That’s what caught her up short in 2008. I think the proof of this is, she’s not a good campaigner, and it’s because she really doesn’t… Her heart’s not in it. I think honestly, folks, she’s one of these elitists that thinks that’s kind of beneath her. She has to do it, there’s no way around it, but she does it as little as possible. She’s on the campaign trail as little as possible.
One of the reasons for that is the more she opens her mouth, the greater the likelihood her approval numbers are gonna fall, and that’s just borne out by history. But it is, more than anything else, it’s a process that’s beneath her. She shouldn’t have to engage in this kind of insulting, have-to-bare-it-all kind of campaign process, because she’s been there; done that. I mean, what more does she have to do? She was in the White House as a co-president for eight years, for crying out loud!
In her mind, in her world she doesn’t have to prove anything to anybody. She doesn’t have to introduce herself to anybody. Everybody should know who she is, and there should be no questions. She’s also been a recipient of fawning media. I don’t care what the campaign’s talking about with how unfair the New York Times has been to her. It’s a crock, too. She and her husband have been the recipients of fawning, almost groupie-like media for 25 or more years.
And when there is a little tough media coverage, I mean, it’s not even 10% of what the average Republican has to deal with every day. She doesn’t know how to deal with it. And her supporters don’t know how to deal with it. People that run her campaign don’t know how to deal with it. So, anyway, the elephant in the room is Bill Clinton. Can you imagine Hillary and Huma Weiner sitting around contemplating the future?
They’re probably honest with themselves, and they’re saying, “The elephant in the room is Bill Clinton,” her husband. He has a past that cannot be forgotten. He has a past that cannot be swept away. So how to deal with it? How to deal with it is just act like it never happened, like all of it was a bunch of lies put forth by the vast right-wing conspiracy, exactly what she did with Matt Lauer on the Today show.
After the Lewinsky blue dress was found with the famous semen stain, the fact that Clinton had then been exposed as a liar, there she is on the Today Show saying, “Ah, ah, ah, ah, ah! There’s a vast right-wing conspiracy out to get my husband.” And it was part of the way they tried to tarnish Ken Starr. And. of course. Matt Lauer and the Today Show people didn’t act incredulous at all. “Oh, really? Is that what it is? Okay, cool.”
And then they followed the lead that Hillary gave them and started trying to find every example of “extremism” from some mysterious vast right-wing conspiracy that was responsible for Monica Lewinsky being in the White House, and then responsible for Monica Lewinsky delivering a pizza to the Oval Office. And somehow the vast right-wing conspiracy was responsible for everybody in the room at the time being shooed out of there so that the only the woman remaining were Bill, Lewinsky, the pizza, and a cigar.
The vast right-wing conspiracy did all that. So this is just a rehash. The way to deal with the elephant in the room is to act like it isn’t there, to act like there is no hypocrisy or irony here at all. Hillary is having trouble with women. In the left-wing version of the female world, remember, they’re all raped, they’re all accosted, they’re all put upon by predatory men. Left-wing politics is that women are nothing but innocent victims constantly being oppressed, assaulted, sexually and otherwise.
So Hillary is coming up and trying to recognize and have these other women recognize that she knows the trials and tribulations of their lives. And the fact that in her past she led a movement to destroy the very same kind of women she is now attempting to secure support from. In the case of Kathleen Willey, in the case of Monica Lewinsky, in the case of Juanita Broaddrick, in the case of Paula Jones — and there’s a long list of them.
Every one of those women, the Clinton campaign tried to destroy personally, insulting their reputations, calling them liars, trailer park trash. So when you have that in your past and on your record, I’m sure in the Clinton world you come out and you propose policies that simply ignore all of that as though it didn’t happen. “It’s not there. It isn’t real. It’s made up by the vast right-wing conspiracy. It’s all lies.
“And I, Hillary Clinton, actually do support women! And I understand their plight as American females, to be constantly assaulted, constantly stigmatized and being stared at up and down by would-be muggers and so forth. It’s just a hellish existence to be a woman! Guys might give you the wolf whistle as you walk by. I mean, any number of horrible, rotten things. One of them might even want to kiss you here and there at a bar.
“That’d just be so demeaning,” and Hillary wants to build a bond of understanding, relatability. Forget the e-mails, forget everything else. Here is one statement that should be enough. In the real world, this should undo the campaign. This is Monday (that would be yesterday) in Cedar Falls, Iowa. She said this about women who make claims about with sexual assault.
HILLARY: I think that when someone makes the claim, they come forward, they should be believed, and that is what starts the process. And then there is a determination as to what, if anything, should be done about the claim that was made.
RUSH: Right. (Carville impression) “Now, what I gotta show, you take this dollar bill, and you drag this dollar bill through a trailer park out there! You never know what you’re gonna come up, but I give you a good dang idea what. There’s a Paula Jones! See that picture right there? You drag a dollar through a trailer park out there, and that’s exactly what you’re gonna get: Paula Jones. You’re gonna get Kathleen Willey! A dollar through a trailer park.”
Mrs. Clinton says, “I think that when someone makes the, claim they come forward they should be believed, and that is what starts the process.” This is the woman… Again for you Millennial babes unaware, don’t doubt me. Hillary Clinton led the effort to destroy such women when her husband was campaigning for the presidency and was in the White House, and it continues to this day.
I mean, look, the guy’s not actually keeping it in his pants and he hasn’t since they left the White House, and it’s the same procedure today. It’s brazen. I know it’s brazen. But this is what the Clintons do: They attack this head on by saying it’s just not there. It doesn’t exist. All this stuff is made up! Now she’s got an ad. They have an ad, and it’s on her website in a YouTube channel entitled, “Hillary’s Message to Survivors of Sexual Assault.”
HILLARY: I want to send a message to every survivor of sexual assault. Don’t let anyone silence your voice. You have a right to be heard, and you have a right to be believed. We’re with you.
RUSH: Now, what’s going on here, folks? I mean, this is so brazen. This is so… I don’t know, but it seems to me we could be looking at a Clinton trap here such as in they might just be trying to sucker someone into attacking her on Clinton’s womanizing or something, ’cause this is just brazen. It’s beyond brazen.
“[A] message to every survivor of sexual assault. Don’t let anyone silence your voice”? Anyone heard of Monica Lewinsky? Her life pretty wasmuch destroyed by Bill Clinton and all the other women. Kathleen Willey? I mean, the list is fairly long. Here is Juanita Broaddrick, by the way. This is Dateline NBC from February 24, 1999. Lisa Myers was interviewing Juanita Broaddrick, a former nursing home administrator about her allegation that President Bill Clinton had raped her years earlier. Lisa Myers asks, “Had you that morning or any other time given Bill Clinton any reason to believe you might be receptive?” After Broaddrick says, “No, none whatsoever.” Lisa Myers follows up and asks, “Well, then what happened?”
BROADDRICK: Then he tries to kiss me again. And the second time he tries to kiss me, he starts biting my lip, (chokes up) Just a minute… He starts to, um, bite on my top lip and I tried to pull away from him. (crying) And then he forces me down on the bed. And I just was very frightened, and I tried to get away from him and I told him “No,” that I didn’t want this to happen. (sobbing) But he wouldn’t listen to me.
RUSH: She went on to assert that as he left, on his way to the door, he turned and looked at her and said, “You better get some ice on that” lip. She’s just one of many. This is what’s out there. It hasn’t been fully refuted. It’s mostly sort of been ignored. Anyway, it’s out there while Hillary is claiming to stand up for exactly this kind of woman. But if you’ve been affected, impacted, treated, assaulted by Bill Clinton, and you come forward, the Clinton team will destroy you.
They do not want you to be believed.
Just a little food for thought here, ’cause I know, I know. Look, this is very partisan issue, and I know a lot of you in the audience happen to be Democrats and happen to be liberals. You don’t want to believe any of this simply because I’m the one saying it. But you need to understand I’m not “saying” anything. I’m just repeating and reporting what’s already out there. I got Hillary.
I got Clinton saying, “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Miss Lewinsky.” I’ve got him lying. We know what happened here. Here’s the thing, for you people on the left and you Millennials: There is a man currently in this country who is in the process-of-being destroyed. Can any of you think of the name I might be alluding to here? Try Bill Cosby. Women are coming out of every nook and cranny in this country and claiming that he drugged them and claiming that he raped them 10 years ago, 15 years ago, 20 years ago.
And last I looked, everybody was believing those women, and Bill Cosby is pretty much considered a dirt bag now. So it seems to me that if — because of the importance of the issue and the seriousness of the charge — you’re going to accept it because the women are saying so about Bill Cosby, then how can you just casually disregard what the women are accusing Clinton of doing? Are saying, “Simply because it’s Clinton”? How does this inconsistency work?
RUSH: By the way, don’t forget this, folks. There was a tape that surfaced recently that featured Hillary Clinton laughing about getting a good deal for a guy who was accused of raping a 12-year-old girl. The guy was 40 years old or some such thing and Hillary got the guy a good deal for raping a 12-year-old. She was laughing about it. My memory on this is somewhat vague, but I remember that.
I think it was when Hillary Clinton served as the court-appointed attorney for a 40-year-old man accused of raping a 12-year-old girl. It was in 1975. She targeted the accuser’s credibility (i.e., the woman, the 12-year-old) in court records. Hillary went after the little girl. Now, you might be saying, “Well, that’s what defense lawyers do, Mr. Limbaugh, and everybody’s entitled to a defense in our country. It’s right there in the 19th Amendment and the 14th Amendment.
“It’s right there. I know it’s in there, Mr. Limbaugh. It’s in the Constitution. So even the biggest scumbags in the world are entitled to a defense even if they’re rapists, and Mrs. Clinton…” Yeah, I know, but look, it’s just… You know, hypocrisy has never nailed a Democrat, and I don’t think it ever will. But we’re dealing with more than hypocrisy here. We’re dealing with genuine irony. I mean, Mrs. Clinton preaches a bunch of stuff she doesn’t actually believe.
This is classic the way the elites do it. They set up two sets of rules for everybody. Well, two sets of rules: One set for us and the other set for them, which exempts them from the rules they put up for us. She’s a phony on this stuff. I mean, her husband is serial skirt chaser. I know the theory, the strategy: “Just ignore it. Just pretend it’s not there. Don’t acknowledge and don’t even use it. Say, ‘Yes, I know I have these things in my past and it’s exactly why I’m even more committed to these issues!’
“Don’t even go there. Just act like none of this ever happened. ‘It’s all of this right-wing conspiracy these BS allegations. There’s no truth to any of it.'” That’s the Clinton technique. The 12-year-old girl, by the way, was “emotionally unstable and had the tendency to seek out older men,” Clinton wrote in a court affidavit. I mean, this 12-year-old girl was literally destroyed. “That’s right, Mr. Limbaugh!
“But, of course, we Millennials are learning that is what happens in court. Everybody needs a good defense, even the guiltiest of the guilty.” Yeah, right, understand that, but realize who did that. Remember Claire McCaskill? This is from TheHill.com. What is the date of this? January 12, 2014. “Sen. McCaskill Didn’t Want to Be in Same Elevator with Hillary Clinton — The ill-feeling between Hillary Clinton and Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) was at one point so intense that the Missouri Democrat told a friend that she was scared of getting stuck alone with the former first lady.
“‘I really don’t want to be in an elevator alone with her,’ McCaskill told the friend, according to the forthcoming book HRC: State Secrets and the Rebirth of Hillary Clinton by The Hill’s Amie Parnes and Politico’s Jonathan Allen. The deep tension between Clinton and McCaskill first formed after McCaskill made remarks on NBC’s ‘Meet the Press’ that struck raw nerves for both Hillary and President Clinton. In 2006, McCaskill was debating then-Sen. Jim Talent (R-Mo.) on the Sunday morning political show.
“The two were in the midst of a campaign that McCaskill ultimately won, and the Clintons had given her strong backing. But when the subject of Bill Clinton came up, McCaskill said, ‘He’s been a great leader but I don’t want my daughter near him,'” and that’s what caused the deterioration of that relationship. But again, you got Cosby out there and all these women coming forth and everybody believes every word they’re saying. I don’t know anybody who doesn’t believe it.
Well, I’m sure there are some. I just don’t know anybody, and there are more women coming forward. They’re doing television shows about it now. And it is clear that these women are automatically believed. All it took was one that had the goods and then all the others that follow are not even challenged. Whatever stories they tell, everybody’s buying. Why not the same kind of treatment with Bill Clinton? Look, I understand. I know the answer is to these questions.
Bill Clinton is a popular Democrat. He rings around conservatives and beat Republicans, so he can do anything he wants. He’s such a big stud, big hero. “He beats Republicans! That’s all we care about. He can do anything he wants; we don’t care.” Yeah, so it is a double standard. You get that from the left. They’ll circle the wagons around their victimizers. Look, there’s a new movie out, unrelated to Bill Clinton, but just to show you, there are two movies.
There’s a new movie out that’s just gotten grave reviews here starring Robert Redford as Dan “Blather” and Cate Blanchett as Mary Mapes. Well, it’s a movie made to tell the story about what happened to Rather in that National Guard story involving George W. Bush. What’s the purpose of that? This is the left circling the wagons. There’s a bunch of young people now coming of voting age who don’t know anything about it.
So they circle the wagons, get a movie out there, and try to cast doubt on what really happened. HBO is preparing a movie on Clarence Thomas right now. For what? Sexual harassment! Of who? Anita Hill. He was totally exonerated. There’s nothing to it. She came in late during his confirmation hearings for the Supreme Court. The late Paul Simon’s late wife, senator from Illinois, got this whole thing going. Anita Hill was approached.
“Hey, we’ve gotta stop this guy! You’ve worked with him. How about we get some sexual harassment thing going?”
They create this whole robust story to try to derail Clarence Thomas’s nomination. They’ve got no evidence. That’s where the phrase “the seriousness of the charge” first became known to me as a serious political weapon used by the left. Well, it was the second time. The way it goes is, “Well, the seriousness of the charge sort of means the nature of the evidence is not that important. The seriousness of the charge not the nature of the evidence means we’ve got to look into this.”
“Well, there’s no evidence for it.”
“Doesn’t matter! The seriousness of the charge dictates that we cannot ignore it.” So here’s Clarence Thomas nominated 1990 by George H. W. Bush, tried to destroy the guy on the basis pubic hairs on Coke cans and they had guys running around looking at whatever he had rented at video stories, and Anita Hill’s got all these people testifying on her behalf, what a wonderful person she is. Well, HBO’s making a movie about it now. You know why?
There’s a whole generation of people don’t know anything about it. Clarence Thomas is on the Supreme Court. Liberals gotta make sure that every generation gets “the truth,” quote/unquote, of the formative issues of the time, and so the HBO people are dutifully casting this movie. I think it’s Wendell Pierce — you know, an actor I like, too. I really, really like Wendell Pierce. I hope I’m not destroying his career here by saying so. Wendell Pierce was in Ray Donovan last season.
He’s been in Suits. He was in The Wire. I love Wendell Pierce. He’s a great actor. He’s gonna play Clarence Thomas. And you know who’s gonna play Anita Hill? Kerry Washington of Scandal, the TV show. I have no idea what Wendell Pierce’s politics are. Here’s Hollywood actor. You can guess. I have no clue. Doesn’t matter. I just like the guy’s work. He was funny as hell. He was a comedic actor when he wants to be. Dead serious. Anyway, so that’s how they do these things.
While all of this is going on out there — Bill Cosby, telling lies about Clarence Thomas — here comes Hillary Clinton acting like she is God’s gift to women who suffer sexual assault, when she is married to a serial abuser, or someone who has been. Yeah, yeah, yeah. This Rather movie, it’s based on a book written by Mary Mapes. I’m kind of glad, ’cause we’re gonna be able to relive all those great parodies. This whole cockamamie story was built on the lies of some informer named Bill… What was his name?
Bill Burkett, who claimed is to have all these memos from the National Guard director where Bush didn’t show up and didn’t serve. He was only there to get out of going to Vietnam. Bill Burkett. It was Power Line blog which exposed the total fraud of it. I mean, it even got to the point where they proved that some of the typewritten material could not have existed because the typeface used didn’t exist. I think this is the way it goes. The typeface that was supposedly were used to make these documents wouldn’t be in use for years or decades or some such thing.
It was conclusively proven that they made up the whole story. So here comes a movie. They don’t say Rather is innocent in the movie. What the movie does is raise doubts about the conclusion that Dan Rather made it up, Mapes made it up. It raises doubts about whether they should fire him, and actually focuses on evil corporate America for the way they fired the great Dan Rather and so forth. So Rather went out there. He went to the preview. He went to the premier. Are you kidding me, Robert Redford?
Anyway, Rather said, “Yeah, partisan political operatives, of course, had a great deal to do the demise of my stellar career. Of course, I watched the movie with partisan political operatives, and, uh, uh… I have to say that the thing I came away with the truth, honestly. You have to do that when making a movie. Partisan political operatives duid me in, you know! (grumbling) Robert Redford.” Okay. Fine and dandy. And Bill Cosby over here.
RUSH: This is Hillary on the Today Show. I just want you to hear this. I referenced it but if you don’t recall it, this is how it happened. January 26, 1998, Hillary talking to Matt Lauer on the Today Show.
HILLARY 1998: The great story here — for anybody willing to find it and write about it and explain it — is this vast right-wing conspiracy that has been conspiring against my husband since the day he announced for president.
RUSH: That’s 1998. This is Lewinsky time. So that’s why we make jokes. Also, at the time, folks, Fox News has been up for over a year. They started 1996. “The vast right-wing conspiracy” was me. I was the Mr. Big of the vast right-wing conspiracy. So I started asking myself, “Okay, how did I arrange for Monica Lewinsky to be hired as an intern to the White House? Then, how did I arrange for Monica Lewinsky to be assigned to the Oval Office on a date certain?
“And then how did I order a pizza that would be delivered to Monica Lewinsky, who would then, in turn, deliver it to the president, Clinton, in the Oval Office? How did I pull after that off? And then, after making all of that happen, how did I arrange for Clinton and Lewinsky to end up in a little study there off the Oval Office? And how did I arrange for a cigar to be at the president’s disposal?
“How did I arrange for Monica Lewinsky to be possession of a blue dress? How did I do all this?” Well, let me tell you something. (interruption) I know. They were paranoid about it. Do you know why? Don’t laugh about this. Don’t forget this New York Magazine story from a couple of weeks ago explaining why Hillary has her own private e-mail server. Don’t forget this, folks.
The first two paragraphs of that story, the lede of that story, explained Hillary’s paranoia was because I had somehow succeeded in leaving a note under the pillow in the Lincoln Bedroom on inauguration night 1993. Harry and Linda Bloodworth-Thomason were staying in the Lincoln Bedroom that night. There was indeed a note from me that night, and it was indeed under the pillow, and this article referenced it twice.
Mrs. Clinton’s biography (that nobody bought and nobody read) references it twice. But she was really paranoid. “How in the world did that happen?” It’s their White House. They’re president. How does a note from me get in there? And then there was a reference to furniture being moved. So the clear implication was that Mrs. Clinton’s paranoia is legitimate.
You know, “Just ’cause you’re paranoid does not mean they’re not out to get you,” and Mrs. Clinton’s paranoia richly deserved because I had invaded of all things the privacy of the White House. That was five years prior to her claim here on the Today Show with Matt Lauer. So I am the Mr. Big of the vast right-wing conspiracy. It’s the way history repeats sometimes, like this Mary Mapes and Dan Rather and Robert Redford whatever movie. The left just can’t leave things alone.