The Clintons' War on Women (2 page)

In this book, you will learn that the Clintons are not the ambassadors of goodwill and progressivism you might think they are. And even though Hillary portrays herself as a champion for the rights of women and girls, she is not fighting for the best interests of women. She
is
the war on women. The stories of everyone who has been hurt by the Clintons deserve to be told.

INTRODUCTION BY ROGER STONE

M
ost people think they know the worst about Bill and Hillary Clinton. They’re wrong. As someone who has worked on the “inside” of U.S. politics at the highest level, I’ve noticed that their personal lives are more stunning, lurid, and wildly dysfunctional than even their harshest critics could ever imagine.

This book doesn’t focus on Monica Lewinsky, Whitewater, or the Clinton pardons. Instead, it’s about the many, many ways in which the Clintons have been tied to sexual abuse, cover-ups, strong-arm tactics, drugs, lies, and the intimidation of victims. As Bill and Hillary have climbed to power, the people left in their wake have been silenced—until now.

On June 13, 2015, Hillary Clinton unveiled the broad themes of her candidacy for president in an address on Roosevelt Island, New York City. Once one of the most polarizing figures in American politics, she now shouts from the rooftops that she’s an advocate for the poor, as well as for women and girls. But simply being a woman, unfortunately, does not make her the advocate that females in this country deserve.

Many in the mainstream press are quick to buy the Clintons’ absurdly hypocritical narratives. Hillary Clinton is an advocate for women as long as you are not one of Bill Clinton’s rape victims or girlfriends. And as Hillary rails against the excesses of wealthy
hedge funders and others on Wall Street, she has used her own status as part of the power elite to bully people.

In
Clinton Cash
, Peter Schweizer recaps some of the Clintons’ epic acts of greed. Now, in this book, I’m ready to shine the light on the Clintons’ nonfinancial crimes. I believe in presenting the naked truth, and I am not holding back.

The Clintons have jointly abused an incredible number of people in their seemingly charmed scramble for power and money. Despite Hillary’s ambition to first elect Bill president and then follow him to the White House, Bill was reckless in his epic philandering and open cocaine use during his period as attorney general and governor. It fell to Hillary to silence his victims and other witnesses, and she rationalized his outrageous behavior rather than hold accountable her sexually abusive and cocaine-driven husband.

Considering the effectiveness of the Clintons’ spin machine and the bias in much of the mainstream media, it’s not surprising that the public impression is that accusations of rape or sexual assault against Bill were disproven. So it is with the question of the former president’s real father and his parentage of an African American child in Arkansas whom he has never acknowledged or embraced. Many Americans who have heard these accusations believe them to be false. As you shall see, the serial trail of deception, disinformation, and crime by the Clintons goes beyond what we remember from the 1990s.

Bill and Hillary are like a modern Tom and Daisy Buchanan. As F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote so eloquently almost a century ago, “They smashed up things and creatures and then retreated back into their money or their vast carelessness, or whatever it was that kept them together, and let other people clean up the mess they had made.”

The Clintons have long had a loyal cadre of equally ambitious staffers who would do anything to cover up their bosses’ misdeeds. Betsey Wright was famously in charge of “bimbo eruptions” whenever yet another ex-girlfriend—or sexual assault victim—would
surface with details of her time with Bill. She was Bill’s “cleanup woman.”

Hillary Clinton positioning herself as a champion of women just doesn’t measure up after a full and complete review of her public record and her connection to some of the most lurid and shocking scandals of the Clinton era. This is that story.

The Clintons have some sort of hidden, institutional immunity that maintains their viability despite the mountain of scandals connected with them. It is incredible to me that they get away with so much crap … until now.

The Clintons’ lifelong history of lying and violating the law, seemingly without consequence or punishment, is a phenomenon known as elite deviance. Elite deviance is a condition sociologists say exists in a society when the elite of that society no longer believe that the rules apply to them. “It is not due primarily to psychopathological variables, but to the institutionalization of elite wrongdoing,” says Professor David Simon in his landmark book now in its eighth printing,
Elite Deviance
.

Elite deviance is an anomaly in which a tiny few people who have enough material wealth, political influence, and personal connections can immunize themselves from considering the consequences of their most abhorrent, destructive, vile, and even criminal behavior. This describes the Clintons perfectly.

Elite deviance protects and perpetuates moral depravity and debased ethical relativism among the powerful and wealthy in our midst. It is an aberration of civil society that is only possible through the elites’ cadres of supporters, sycophants, apologists, and fellow travelers in media, academia, politics, and high finance. This includes Clinton apologists James Carville, David Brock, Betsey Wright, Lanny Davis, and the now fully exposed George Stephanopoulos.

In short, elite deviance means that there are a few among us to whom the rules don’t seem to apply. They can behave with impunity in ways that would otherwise incur severe, if not life-ending,
repercussions for all others in the American criminal justice system. This pertains to the Bushes as well as the Clintons, as we shall see.

Hillary’s decision to grasp for the presidency requires a thorough examination of the public and private records of Bill and Hillary Clinton and their adult daughter, Chelsea. The Clinton foibles did not end when Bill left the White House, though his brazen sale of presidential pardons in return for million-dollar contributions to the Clinton Foundation was a tip-off to the gusher of money and horse trading that would follow. Clinton’s final days as president would be marred by the pardon he granted to international fugitive financier Marc Rich, in return for contributions from his ex-wife, Denise. Clinton would have to tell Democratic fixer Ben Barnes that he couldn’t deliver a pardon for convicted Ponzi schemer Stephen Hoffenberg because “y’all got outbid by Rich.”
2

Unlike Clinton’s impeachment or the semen-stained dress of Monica Lewinsky, the Clintons’ use of the State Department and the Clinton Foundation to line their own pockets and the various lies they have told to bury evidence of quid pro quo has more than attracted the attention of the
New York Times,
the
Washington Post,
and the
Wall Street Journal.
Every week there are new revelations about monetary profiteering by the conniving Clintons.

Since the 1990s, many voters have come to think of Bill as the naughty, winking old uncle who gave them beer when their parents weren’t looking and had a harmless weakness for women. That narrative is advantageous to the Clintons, because it’s far more excusable than the truth. It works even better for Hillary, who is perfectly happy to be seen as the strong, smart woman who stood by her flawed but affable, philandering husband while launching a career to shatter the glass ceiling for women in government once and for all. But the American public needs to see past this false, dangerous narrative of a charming, goofily naïve Bubba and a poor, devoted Hillary.

In fact, despite the family image Bill and Hillary try to project to the American people, their marriage is a sham. While Bill can
play an affable yokel with political skill, it is Hillary who wears the pants in the political relationship and served as a virtual co-president, steering and controlling public policy and making decisions in Waco, Texas, that would leave seventy-six dead.

The Clintons’ activities have not only included Bill’s physical rape of women, but also Hillary’s degradation and psychological rape of women whom Bill has assaulted. Hillary, it will be seen, looks likely to authorize the heavy-handed private detectives who terrorize Bill’s victims into silence. Behind the scenes, she calls them “sluts,” “whores,” and “bitches,” blaming and shaming them for the unwanted physical attentions and violence of Bill. This is the “advocate for women and girls”?

The brave women who came forward to expose Bill Clinton’s sexual abuse and assaults on them were denigrated as “trailer trash,” and Clinton himself called it “trash for cash” when some of the supermarket tabloids like the
National Enquirer
and the
Globe
began paying women whose stories they found credible.

Brent Scher of the
Washington Free Beacon
produced a compelling study that showed that Hillary hasn’t practiced what she preaches when it comes to female pay equality. In the U.S. Senate, the State Department, and the Clinton Foundation, women were systematically paid significantly less than men, yet Hillary makes pay inequality her battle cry. It’s a glaring example of her inauthenticity. The Clintonistas floated a phony “internal analysis” to
Buzzfeed
in an attempt to discredit Scher, but close examination of both analyses shows that Hillary is a fraud on the subject of male-female pay inequality.

The Clintons’ avarice is as stunning as Bill’s sex crimes and Hillary’s role in silencing his victims to cover them up. The Clintons are reliably estimated to have made close to $300 million since Bill Clinton left the presidency. Former President Clinton made over $200 million while Hillary made $100 million. Bill Clinton made $30 million while Hillary made $25 million last year alone. The Clintons are the 1 percent as well as the war on women.

Hillary is truly an elite, moving in rarefied air through a hushed world of luxury and deference. The former First Lady won’t fly in anything less than a G5 and will stay in no hotel where she cannot get the Presidential Suite or that is not five star. The Clintons’ life is one of a network of retainers, cut flowers, printed schedules, sold access, and public posturing.

This book is not about Bill Clinton’s hypersexuality and consensual sex addiction. Clinton has had sex with dozens and very likely hundreds of women. In fact, to the point where former president Gerald Ford urged him to get professional help for his addiction. It is when Bill Clinton veers into rape and possibly pedophilia that the line must be drawn.

As a libertine, I think consensual sexual relationships are private business, and I had little regard for the House of Representatives’ decision to impeach Clinton because he had sex with Monica Lewinsky (though Clinton’s lie was the crime, not the act of receiving oral sex from the kneeling intern). I grew up during the Summer of Love and I admit to a wild sexual lifestyle in my younger years. But I stress anything I engaged in was among consenting adults and the idea of sex with children is repugnant. The most vile part of the Clinton story is about
nonconsenual
sex: rape. It’s not a pretty word, but there is no other that more accurately describes Clinton’s serial assaults on Eileen Wellstone, Juanita Broaddrick, Kathleen Willey, and probably dozens of others.

When the sex was nonconsensual Clinton would get physical, tearing the clothes off his victims and biting them on the lower lip, as at least three of his assault victims claimed, it constitutes a very different issue and crosses a line. Inappropriate relationships with underaged girls take the transgression to a new level. Unfortunately, Clinton has been a close personal friend of billionaire pedophile Jeffrey Epstein and others in his circle, especially during the time in his post presidency when he was linked to Epstein’s hedonistic Orgy Island.

The Clintons will call this book old news. But no news is old if people haven’t heard it and had a chance to consider its source. Clinton attack dog James Carville will pounce on this book. Journalists who can find no misdeed whatsoever by the Clintons in their long political career, will seek to dismiss the horrific details of the Clintons’ trail of rape, drugs, cover-ups, greed, murder, and, at a minimum, the moving of the body of White House counsel Vince Foster after his suicide.

The Clintons’ spin machine was adept at withholding so much of this information from the American people at the time it occurred that it bears examination.

There is much alleged about the Clintons that is not true. There is far more that is true and breathtaking in terms of the cold, cunning ambition, greed, accommodations, and power lust of Bill and Hillary Clinton.

I’m ready to tell the story I picked up from many years of insider knowledge. I had access to the exhaustive opposition research done by George H. W. Bush’s presidential reelection campaign in 1992. Lee Atwater, who died of brain cancer in 1991, managed President Bush’s 1988 campaign, spotting Clinton early as a threat to Poppy Bush’s reelection. Atwater recognized that Clinton’s Southern charm and moderation could appeal to white Democrats and return them to the Democratic fold, breaking up the mostly white coalition that had elected Bush in 1988. Atwater used his chairmanship at the Republican National Committee to begin deep opposition research on the up-and-coming Arkansas Governor.

After Atwater’s death, many of the midlevel Atwater operatives in Bush’s fumbled 1992 reelection campaign expressed dissatisfaction with the campaign’s decision not to use this material. Campaign manager Bob Teeter, a pollster (“my god, a pollster as your campaign manager”—Richard Nixon) told the Atwater loyalists that Poppy himself had ruled out the disclosure of Clinton’s drug use or his fathering of an illegitimate child who happened to be African American.

The 1992 presidential election was the only one that I professionally sat out since 1968. This book will reveal the strange and secret working relationship between Bill Clinton and maverick billionaire Ross Perot to deny Bush another term. In many ways, the Bush-Clinton face-off in ’92 was a “heads, I win; tails, you lose” election in which one establishment candidate financed largely by the same interests simply outmaneuvered the other. Bush, under the tutelage of White House Chief of Staff John Sununu, had hurt himself badly by violating his Reagan-esque pledge not to raise taxes. Bush’s inability to notice a softening of the economy contributed to a vulnerability exploited by Bill Clinton and abetted by the diminutive Texas eccentric. Clinton was elected with 57 percent of the vote opposing him; he slid in with 43 percent. When George Bush plaintively glanced at his watch in the televised debate, it was clear that he understood that his days in the White House were limited, yet he and his family have never shown the kind of rancor toward the Clintons that they have with Republicans who have contested the elections of George Bush.