Proof Hillary, Feinstein and #MeToo’ers Don’t Support Women’s Rights
Listening to progressive Democrats and the neo-Leninist jackbooted feminists spin their narrative, one is easily led to believe that these “protectors of the mammary flame” are the forces of justice who were appointed by the goddesses of some primordial class of protectorate. But for all of the bombastic bravado, is that truthfully the case? Read the following and decide for yourself.
To hear the rabid feminists tell it, Hillary Clinton is the leader of some long existed but only recently freed sect of protectorate whose singular purpose is to defend women from the abuses of evil men. If that is the case and we are to believe that Democrat neo-Leninist feminists care about the rights of women and Hillary Clinton is the queen mother of said sect, she and they have one heck of a curious way of proving same.
Many who have had the misfortune of being in close proximity to Clinton will tell you that her breath and body odor alone is sufficient to incapacitate any number of men. I’m not making that up, over the years there have been whispers that Clinton, in a word, smells.
Despite being armed with brains and body odor – in Clinton’s first political contest, she claimed that she had been frightened and felt threatened, when Republican Rick Lazio left his podium during a debate between the two candidates for the New York Senate seat, to ask Clinton too sign a pledge document agreeing to refrain from taking “soft money” donations. The tactic worked and she went on to win the New York Senate seat.
Opposing Donald Trump during the 2016 presidential contest, Clinton would later claim that she was extremely uncomfortable and said, “It was so discombobulating” having a “creep” like Donald Trump standing behind her during the debate(s).
ARE voters to believe that the “protector-defender” of all that is women was frightened and threatened when one man left his podium to hand her a document and that she was “discombobulated” when another man stood behind her. This is the example of leadership she believes proves to the voters and her radical feminist minions she’s capable of being President? I’m having difficulty imagining the late Margaret Thatcher or the late Golda Meir suffering from such leadership strengths, (sarcasm intended).
Clinton’s example of feminine strength as provided above would not inspire me to encourage my wife to look to Clinton as a paragon of strength. Additionally, is Clinton’s behavior as detailed above, the strength we would want our daughters to exhibit? Or would we rather our daughters model themselves after Golda Meir and Margaret Thatcher?
Those who chant praises and accolades to Clinton and the neo-Leninist radical feminists who aspire to follow in her footsteps, define her as the champion of women’s rights. But here again – let’s examine that claim.
Hillary supports Stormy Daniels. Daniels is the strip-naked and have sex with multiples of men in front of cameras and shimmying naked on poles in bars and strip clubs, as men of all occupational walks of life stuff their hands inside her G-string to deposit money; who has allegedly slept with the now AIDS infected Charlie Sheen. Clinton and hordes of radical feminists in the media and so-called entertainment industry support her allegations that a crime was committed because supposedly President Trump’s lawyer paid Daniels “hush money.” Even if it’s eventually ever proven that President Trump was aware that one of his lawyers at the time, paid Daniels to basically just be quiet and go away, that is in no way against the law. And let me make clear that President Trump has made it clear he has never had physical relationship with Daniels and he didn’t say, it depended upon the meaning of the word “is.”
The ravenous protectors of women’s rights continue to support Daniels, including Clinton. But what about the “rights” of Paula Jones? Clinton and Democrats who posit themselves as the protectors of women’s rights called Paula Jones “trailer trash” when she defended herself against then governor Bill Clinton.
Bill Clinton had Jones brought to his hotel where he exposed himself to her for the purposes of her sexually pleasuring him. Clinton pulled his pants down to his ankles and “ordered” her to perform what he nonchalantly referred to as “inappropriate conduct.” The Clinton machine led by Hillary herself went into full attack mode claiming that Jones had offered to be his concubine. Jones sued Clinton, which led to him paying her $850,000. Lost in the shuffle were Jones’ allegations that Clinton had hit her.
Shouldn’t the defenders of women’s rights, including Hillary, who are defending the feminine rights of Daniels, have been equally as aggressive in the pursuit of justice for Paula Jones?
Judge Brett Kavanaugh is accused by Christine Ford, a liberal activist professor whose students have reported exhibits “crazy and frightening” behavior in the classroom.
Ford claims the incident took place 35 years ago, an alleged incident that she claims to have only remembered during a couples counseling session with her husband in 2012. A counseling session in which she was unable to remember the month, day or week the claimed assault took place. During the counseling session Ford was unable to remember the home she was at, why she was there, who was there or how she got home. She was unable to name the supposed assailant. She has now miraculously reclaimed her memory and accuses Judge Kavanaugh.
In the convenient return of her memory Ford also claims that Judge Kavanaugh’s classmate, Mark Judge, was also involved in the attempted assault. Mark Judge has vehemently denied the allegations. In what can only be viewed as an attempt to salvage her story Ford, through her George Soros funded attorney now claims that there were four young men, besides she and another young woman in the house. However, her story continues to fall flat, as Patrick J. Smyth, one of the other young men Ford now claims was present, has provided a letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee that reads in part: “I have no knowledge of the party in question, nor do I have any knowledge of the allegations of improper conduct she has leveled against Brett Kavanaugh. Personally speaking I have known Brett Kavanaugh since high school and I know him to be a person of great integrity, a great friend, and I have never witnessed any improper conduct by Brett Kavanaugh toward women. To safeguard my own privacy and anonymity, I respectfully request that the Committee accept this statement in response to any inquiry the committee may have.”
Mark Judge wrote in part: “in fact, I have no memory of this alleged incident. Brett Kavanaugh and I were friends in high school but I do not recall the party described in Dr. Ford’s letter. More to the point, I never saw Brett act in the manner Ford describes.”
Ford’s counselor’s notes indicated that during the counseling session with her husband, she claimed to have no idea who the man was she asserts attacked her. But, here again, in an attempt to salvage her story, she blamed her counselor as having incorrectly taken notes.
An important point to note here is that both Mark Judge and Patrick Smyth have voluntarily provided strong written denials. That means the media and private investigators are crawling all over these men’s private lives and high school backgrounds. If there was something to hide and/or of concern tangential to Ford’s allegations, would these men present themselves to have a checkered history now revealed publicly? I think not. No attorney worth their salt would subject their client to such vulnerability.
However, the champions of women’s rights remain undeterred. They are demanding Ford have her day, while also branding Judge Kavanaugh as unfit to be confirmed to the Supreme Court. The fact that the American Bar Association, which gives 94 percent of their campaign donations to liberal Democrats and liberal causes, rated Judge Kavanaugh A++ suddenly means nothing. That Judge Kavanaugh has passed six full-blown FBI investigations as he ascended the judicial ladder with not one hint of impropriety, according to Ford’s pretend-to-be supporters should not be taken into account.
But Hillary and the protectors of women’s rights are demanding Ford’s rights be honored. That’s interesting because Hillary and many of these very same protectors of women’s rights offered no such concerns for the rights of other women.
Bill Clinton raped Juanita Broaddrick in 1978; and yet Hillary and her champions of women’s rights bullied and attempted to intimidate her to stay silent. Broaddrick told FoxNews: “Not one Democrat would look at my deposition with the independent counsel…they did not want to know about it.” Broaddrick said: “[In] 1999, when Dianne Feinstein, along with every other Democrat, refused to read my deposition to the independent counsel. They would have nothing to do with it.”
Kathleen Willey wasn’t just groped by Bill Clinton; he fondled her against her will and forced her to put her hand on his genitals in a 1993 Oval Office meeting. Willey has stated repeatedly that Hillary did nothing to stop her husband, instead she chose “to go after the women that he hooks up with, to ruin them again and again and again.”
Then there is Connie Hamzy, who said Bill Clinton propositioned her while she was sunbathing at a Little Rock hotel pool. Eileen Wellstone said Clinton sexually assaulted her after meeting her at a pub near Oxford University. Sandra Allen James, a former D.C. political fund-raiser said Clinton invited her to his hotel room during a 1991 campaign trip, and pinned her against the wall and shoved his hand under her dress. Christy Zercher an airline flight attendant on Clinton’s campaign plane in 1992 said he exposed himself and grabbed her breasts. A 22 year-old Yale student told campus police that Clinton sexually assaulted her. An University of Arkansas female student complained that then-law school instructor Bill Clinton attempted to restrain her from leaving his office after he had groped her and forced his hand inside her blouse. When the student complained to her faculty advisor, Clinton claimed the student “came on” to him. There is Monica Lewinsky who Clinton used for his sexual pleasure – who was smeared by team Hillary and the media as a “crazed stalker.” Of course that doesn’t explain how she was able to circumvent the Secret Service and make her way to the private hallway in the Oval Office and sexually pleasure Clinton. Gennifer Flowers suffered remorseless character assassination after her12 year affair with Clinton. Let us not overlook Elizabeth (Ward) Gracen, Dolly Kyle Browning, Sally Perdue, Lencola Sullivan, Elizabeth Ward, Susie Whitacre and Bobbie Ann Williams. (See: Rap Sheet: The Women Who Claim To Be Victims of Bill and Hillary Clinton; John Nolte; 12/31/2015)
Why didn’t these paragons of virtue committed to defending women’s rights defend the rights of those sexually molested and beaten by Clinton? Why didn’t Hillary go before the cameras in support of them as she is doing in support of Stormy Daniels and Judge Kavanaugh accuser Christine Ford?
Kamala Harris, D-CA, is rabid defender of women’s rights. She wasted no time in saying that she found Christine Ford’s allegations “entirely credible” and that action against Judge Kavanaugh must be taken. Hmmm!!!
Isn’t it interesting that Harris, a self-proclaimed proud defender of abused women’s rights, in the face of highly suspect accusations and with Ford’s story unraveling faster than a cheap polyester shirt, Harris, et al, have been completely silent on a documented pattern of physical and emotional abuse complete with medical records by Democrat star, Congressman Keith Ellison.
Why aren’t Harris, Feinstein, Clinton, Hollywood, et al demanding Congressman Keith Ellison, D-MN, and now candidate for Minnesota State Attorney General be held accountable for his actions?
There is no question. There is no doubt. There is however concrete proof, including medical records and police reports from two women who Ellison abused at his good pleasure. Karen Monahan released medical records of the abuse she suffered at the hands of Ellison and it should further be made known that Ellison abused Monahan in front of her child. Amy Alexander released documents reporting an assault perpetrated upon her by Ellison whom she had dated. (See: Medical Records Document Keith Ellison’s Physical and Emotion Abuse of Female Accuser; Laura Loomer; 9/19/2018)
Why aren’t Harris, Feinstein, Pelosi, the #MeToo’ers et al demanding the protection of the rights of the women who were paid in excess of $17.2 million by sitting members of Congress over a 20 year period, $15 million of which was spent in the last 10-15 years to buy silence and cover-up sexual harassment cases committed by members of Congress?
If Democrats and the ruthless neo-Leninist radical feminists are the watchdogs and guardians of women’s rights – why do the rights of women, without contradiction, only matter when they can use women’s rights as a bludgeon against those persons they despise?
This offers unimpeachable factual evidence that neither Democrats nor the rabid, man-hating radical feminists care about women. They care about the money they can rake in and the polarizing of the political landscape they can garner in their attempt to gain and retain power.
About the Author
Mychal S. Massie is an ordained minister who spent 13 years in full-time Christian Ministry. Today he serves as founder and Chairman of the Racial Policy Center (RPC), a think tank he officially founded in September 2015. RPC advocates for a colorblind society. He was founder and president of the non-profit “In His Name Ministries.” He is the former National Chairman of a conservative Capitol Hill think tank; and a former member of the think tank National Center for Public Policy Research. Read entire bio here