>> Your belief, my belief- it's just bullshit based on fake news, right? And there you are- buying it.
Honestly, the news wasn't "fake" in 1998. It leaned Left, but didn't just make shit up. Today, it makes shit up. No sources. Anonymous sources confirming anonymous sources with no sources on the record. It is a total pile of shit today. Surely, you can admit that.
In 1998, every news agency was ready and willing to cover the Clinton sexual misconduct. True, some wouldn't cover the really damning stories, but in some cases, those witnesses were reluctant in the first place.
Broaderick was a highly credible witness, complete with contemporaneous corroboration. If she had gone after him at the time she might have won that case.
As to Trump, I admit to not researching each of these women's stories, but their claims really appeared to be a coordinated political attack and none rose to the level of Broaderick. You can't substitute a large number of accusers for one really credible one. Because you can easily find a dozen a women who (a) don't like Trump, (b) don't like Trump's politics, and (c) who Trump may have inappropriately hit on. That is not the same as a rape or taking advantage of an infatuated girl who is "still in love with Bill" -- 20 years later.
And that's not to mention Kathleen Willey who was also a highly credible claimant beyond the other, obvious ones. |
