by Roger Stone
Although Hillary’s handlers believe she can still be elected president with the minority of voters believing she is honest and truthful, in fact her credibility is her principal problem in 2016.
When Hillary Clinton or her cronies attack this book as partisan or “old news” or seek to dismiss the very serious charges against them they will whine that they are being held to a higher standard. But in fact, particularly in the case of Jerry Parks, they may be getting away with murder.
As Hillary’s now-infamous email scandal demonstrates, where Madam Secretary purposely used private email to conduct government business and escape disclosure requirements, telling the truth is outside her DNA. For instance, during the sole time Hillary publicly addressed this issue at the UN press conference, she claimed that some of the deleted emails were between Bill and her. Yet the Wall Street Journal reported only hours before the press conference that the impeached former president has “sent a grand total of two emails during his entire life.” She also got busted lying about having one computer device when she used two.
Hillary’s lies caught up to her during her failed 2008 campaign. In the heat of the primary against Obama, Hillary repeatedly said in a March 17 speech and several interviews that she was caught under sniper fire in 1996 as First Lady and “ran for cover under hostile fire shortly after her plane landed in Tuzla, Bosnia.” Eight days later, a video became public that showed “Clinton arriving on the tarmac under no visible duress, and greeting a child who offers her a copy of a poem.” Further, more than “100 news stories from the time documented no security threats to the First Lady.”
In January 2001, a scandal broke when Hillary was caught taking artwork and furniture from the White House. She claimed that these items were given to Bill and her as gifts during their years in the White House. However, less than a month later on February 8, Hillary agreed to return $28,000 worth of gifts to the White House and pay in restitution $86,000 for china, flatware, rugs, televisions, sofas, and other items, which was only half of the value.
If Hillary was able to make an $86,000 vanity purchase in February 2008, then why did she describe herself as “dead broke” upon leaving the White House?
Of course, Hillary has often lied about her biography for convenience as well. Since at least 1995, Hillary claimed that her mother named her after Sir Edmund Hillary, the first climber to reach the summit of Mount Everest. Bill even mentioned this anecdote in his autobiography. The only problem, Hillary was born in 1947 and Sir Edmund did complete his historic feat until 1953. Perhaps Hillary’s mother was clairvoyant?
As Roger Stone revealed in his book Nixon’s Secrets, Hillary was fired from the 1974 House Impeachment Committee shortly after she took, and failed, the DC bar examination. Hillary authored memos demanding Nixon yield his tapes (a little irony there?) and that the president was not entitled to a lawyer in the impeachment proceeding. Asked why she was fired, Majority Staff Director Jerry Zeifman said, “Because she was a liar. She was an unethical, dishonest lawyer. She conspired to violate the Constitution, the rules of the House, the rules of the committee and the rules of confidentiality.”
Hillary has no credibility for her denial when confronted with her real record, and that’s a problem. As a serial liar she will get caught lying again.
Reporters like the New York Times’ Amy Chozick mistakenly think that Hillary Clinton has a lock on women voters that will send her to the White House. As a veteran reader of polling data, I think this is incorrect. More than 50 percent of voters were not alive during the Clinton presidency and their impression of Hillary is generally favorable but not very deep. I believe that when women learn about Hillary’s war on women they will turn on her.
The Clintons’ rapid response and standard MO is denial and counterattack. Hillary and her hysterical female supporters will claim that any attack that is launched on her by a mom is misogyny and sexist. That is why it is crucial that those women violated by Bill Clinton and then violated again in the cover-up must speak. Paula Jones was assaulted by Bill Clinton in a Little Rock hotel room. When she refused Clinton’s advances he dropped his trousers pointed at his erect penis and said, “Kiss it.” Jones was paid $850,000 not to discuss the case publicly.
The Daily Mail reported that Paula Corbin Jones surfaced in 2015. This is a woman Hillary Clinton called a “whore” because she was unfortunate enough to have been sexually assaulted by Hillary’s husband.
In an exclusive interview with the Daily Mail Online, Jones delivers her own verdict on Hillary’s bid to become president, saying that her husband’s attitude towards women disqualifies Bill from re-entering the White House—while what she calls Hillary’s “lies” disqualify her from the Oval Office. “There is no way that she did not know what was going on, that women were being abused and accosted by her husband,” she says. “They have both lied.”
Jones, forty-eight, as we have seen, became a national figure when in 1994 she sued President Clinton for sexual harassment after an incident in an Arkansas hotel room three years earlier. Her lawsuit led to Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky being uncovered and led to Clinton being impeached, accused of lying about the nature of his relationship with the White House intern.
But with Hillary Clinton vying for the Democratic nomination, Jones has come out swinging with her own personal take on the White House bid. “She should not be running with the terrible history they have,” she told the Daily Mail Online. She continued, “They have both lied. He does not have a right to be in the White House to serve the people the way he treated women, sexually harassing women. There were many women that came out and spoke out about what he did to them. He does not have a place in the White House to serve the American people.”
Jones became the central figure in the extraordinary scandal that engulfed the Clinton White House and almost led to his removal from office when she accused him of sexual harassment. The incident had taken place in 1991 when Clinton was governor of Arkansas and Jones a twenty-four-year-old clerk with the Arkansas Industrial Development Commission. She claimed he propositioned her in a hotel room at the Excelsior Hotel in Little Rock, dropping his trousers and asking her for oral sex.
She had asked to meet him because it would be “exciting” to meet the governor, and she hoped it might lead to promotion. Instead, she said in court, she found herself telling him she was “not that kind of girl.” It was a brief encounter, and she alleged that Mr. Clinton took her hand, pulled her towards him, then said: “I love your curves.” She tried to walk away, she said in a deposition, but “Mr. Clinton then walked over to the sofa, lowered his trousers and underwear, exposed his penis (which was erect) and told me to ‘kiss it.’”
Jones told her sisters and mother about the incident but took no further action. It wasn’t until two years later, in 1993, when former Clinton bodyguards spoke in a magazine interview about escorting a woman called “Paula” to his room in May 1991 that she was advised to go public.
She hired a lawyer and in 1994 sued Clinton and asked for $700,000 in damages, claiming she suffered emotional trauma. Clinton denied the claims, or even that he had met Jones. He dismissed her as an opportunist out for money and to damage him politically.
He asked that the civil suit be put off until he left the White House, but in January 1997 an appeals court ruled the trial should go ahead.
A year later, Judge Susan Webber Wright tossed out Jones’s case, saying she had not suffered any damages. She ruled that even if Clinton’s behavior had been “boorish and offensive” it did not amount to sexual harassment under the law.
Jones appealed and the Supreme Court reinstated her case leading to the unprecedented step of President Clinton being forced to make a deposition.
While working on the Paula Jones investigation, independent prosecutor Kenneth Starr uncovered Clinton’s alleged affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. Clinton was asked if he had sex with Lewinsky—and he denied it. He would make the now infamous statem
ent: “I did not have sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinsky,” but would later go on TV to admit to an inappropriate relationship with the twenty-one-year-old.
Hillary stood by him, although former White House staff have recently said she used a book kept on her bedside to bash her husband around the head so hard it caused him bleed. Staffers told Kate Andersen Brower for her book The Residence: Inside the Private World of The White House how they heard loud arguments coming from the private quarters of the White House around the time of the Lewinsky affair.
During the Clinton sex scandal Jones became a side show as Linda Tripp produced a semen-stained blue dress and audiotapes of she secretly recorded of her conversations with Lewinsky.
It was the president’s original statement to lawyers for Jones that almost led to his downfall, as he had denied any improper relationship with Lewinsky, which was found to be untrue. Having been accused of perjury, charges were drawn up and impeachment proceedings begun. Although Democratic leaders preferred to censure the president, Congress began the impeachment process against Clinton in December 1998.
A divided House of Representatives impeached him on December 19 and the issue then passed to the Senate, where after a five-week trial, he was acquitted.
Clinton survived the political fallout what became known as the “Lewinsky affair.” His marriage to Hillary also survived. By the time Lewinsky was headline news, Jones had already reached an out-of-court settlement with the president. Despite denying her claims he agreed to pay her $850,000, but did not offer an apology. One of his attorneys said it was simply to end the case, and move on with his life.
Legal fees ate up over $600,000 of the award, and the pressure of being in the spotlight for almost four years caused her first marriage to end.
It also resulted in Clinton agreeing to be stripped of his license to practice law in Arkansas starting five years after he left the White House, having been found in contempt of court in 1999 for misleading testimony and reported to the state bar over the finding.
Her experience is likely to shape her views of the Clintons—especially her view of the nature of their marriage. “He is going to be telling her what to do,” she said. “It is a partnership. They have a political relationship, that is all it is.”
While countless books and articles have been written about the dynamics of the Clinton marriage, Jones is insistent that Hillary was fully aware of what her husband was like, saying, “I believe she knew all about it. Theirs was a political relationship and not a normal relationship that a man and a wife have. They did not have a normal relationship…. If she is for the everyday person why did she not stand up for the women when she knew what her husband did?”
There is no way that she did not know what was going on, that women were being abused and accosted by her husband. “She knew what was happening and just to ignore it. It was a political relationship and suited them both,” Jones said.
Jones added: “The Clintons don’t care what they do, who they run over to get to the top. It is all about political status.”
Unsurprisingly, Jones has little respect for Bill Clinton, as she maintains he is a liar who was happy to pay her close to $1 million but would not apologies for his actions. Her scorn for his wife is equally ferocious, and she shudders at the thought of Bill back in the White House—even if it is as playing Hillary’s helpmate. Wiley Bill has told at least one senior Democrat advisor that he will co-opt and control a Hillary presidency. “He assured me he could handle Hillary and take control to provide a third term for William Jefferson Clinton,” the advisor told Roger Stone.
EPILOGUE
At the time The Clintons’ War on Women went to press, legitimate concerns had begun to arise in the Clinton campaign. The controversy that arose over Clinton’s emails is now much more than a “witch hunt” concocted by the GOP.
Major newspapers have begun to pursue the story with fervor, and Democratic Party heavyweights are questioning her legitimacy as a candidate. The Obama administration’s Justice Department has also opened up an official investigation into what was contained on Clinton’s private server. A slow panic has crept into the campaign itself.
“They’re worried about it,” a longtime Clinton adviser told the Washington Post. “They don’t know where it goes. That’s the problem.”ix
On August 11, the media reported that two emails on HRC’s private email address were classified as “Top Secret” information. Clinton also admitted in an affidavit that Huma Abedin had an account on her personal server. Abedin, as we know, worked several assignments of interest for the Clintons aside from her official job at the State Department. The most notorious of these was Abedin’s designation as a consultant to Teneo, a New York–based firm of which Bill Clinton’s former personal assistant Doug Band is founding partner and president. This, of course, opened the door to many potential conflicts of interest.
One juicy tidbit garnered from the Abedin emails thus far is the revelation of a dinner Huma arranged between Declan Kelly, a Teneo executive, Hillary Clinton, Clinton Foundation donors, and State Department officials during an official State Department trip to Ireland in late 2012. Abedin had previously stated in a letter that she “was not asked, nor did [she] provide, insights about the Department, my work with the Secretary, or any government information to which I may have had access.”x
Unsurprisingly, despite this unsavory and questionable arrangement, Abedin has denied any and all wrongdoing.
The other three aides who have turned over emails are Cheryl Mills, Philippe Reines, and Jake Sullivan.xi
On August 12, Clinton “finally produced to the FBI her server and three thumb drives. Apparently, the server had been professionally wiped clean of any useable information, and the thumb drives contain only what she selectively culled.”xii The server was originally located in the Clintons’ Chappaqua estate. It was “wiped clean in June … but nonetheless stored at a data center in New Jersey.”xiii The data center is Platte River Networks, which also set up Clinton’s server.
On August 14, the Associated Press reported that the two classified emails “deemed ‘top secret’” include a discussion of a news article detailing a U.S. drone operation and a separate conversation that could point back to highly classified material in an improper manner or merely reflect information collected independently.”xiv
That same day Jon Karl, the chief White House correspondent for ABC News, reported that the most recent batch of released emails show “Clinton asking to borrow a book called Send: Why People Email So Badly and How to Do It Better, by David Shipley and Will Schwalbe. Clinton has not said why she requested the book, but it includes some advice that is particularly interesting in light of the controversy over her unconventional email arrangement at the State Department and her decision to delete tens of thousands of emails she deemed to be purely personal.”xv One chapter “advised that to truly delete emails may require a special rewriting program ‘to make sure that it’s not just elsewhere on the drive but has in fact been written over sixteen or twenty times and rendered undefinable.’”
Also on August 14, former attorney general Michael Mukasey wrote an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal that outlined the severity of the crimes that Clinton may have committed:
It is a misdemeanor punishable by imprisonment for not more than a year to keep “documents or materials containing classified information … at an unauthorized location.” Note that it is the information that is protected; the issue doesn’t turn on whether the document or materials bear a classified marking. This is the statute under which David Petraeus—former Army general and Central Intelligence Agency director—was prosecuted for keeping classified information at home. Mrs. Clinton’s holding of classified information on a personal server was a violation of that law. So is transferring that information on a thumb drive to David Kendall, her lawyer.
The Espionage Act defines as a felony, punishable by up to 10 years, the grossly negligent loss or dest
ruction of “information relating to the national defense.” Note that at least one of the emails from the small random sample taken by the inspector general for the intelligence community contained signals intelligence and was classified top secret.
To be sure, this particular email was turned over, but on paper rather than in its original electronic form, without the metadata that went with it. If other emails of like sensitivity are among the 30,000 Mrs. Clinton erased, that is yet more problematic. The server is now in the hands of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, whose forensic skills in recovering data in situations like this are unexcelled.
The highest step in this ascending scale of criminal penalties—20 years maximum—is reached by anyone who destroys “any record, document or tangible object with intent to impede, obstruct or influence the proper administration of any matter within the jurisdiction of any department or agency of the United States … or in relation to or contemplation of any such matter.”xvi
On August 16, Platte River Networks, the company that set up Hillary’s server, said it is “highly likely” that a full backup was made.xvii
It was also reported by the Washington Times on August 16 that “the total number of her private emails identified by an ongoing State Department review as having contained classified data has ballooned to 60.”xviii
It is certain that the Clinton campaign is in turmoil. The cavalier dismissal of the email controversy by Hillary Clinton early on in her campaign has turned serious as the egregious mishandling of government property is threatening her presidential aspirations.
Adding to the turmoil in the Clinton campaign, we have also learned there has been a concerted effort by Hillary and Chelsea to distance Bill from the campaign. A highly placed Democrat in Hillary’s entourage told us that Bill is slipping mentally and has been sidelined as a result. This is coupled with new information that DNA lab samples suggest that Chelsea Clinton may indeed be the daughter of Clinton law partner Webb Hubbell.xix