FORMER NBC REPORTER CALLS ON NETWORK TO RELEASE EARLIER INTERVIEW WITH JUANITA BROADDRICK

A former employee of NBC says they should air a taping of an older interview they filmed with one of Bill Clinton's victims:

A former NBC News journalist is calling on the network to release raw footage of a 1999 interview with Bill Clinton’s rape accuser, Juanita Broaddrick.

In a chat on the website Sidewire on Thursday, Yahoo! News reporter Michael Isikoff said that the NBC footage of Broaddrick’s “Dateline” interview would show that she told interviewer Lisa Myers that Hillary Clinton attempted to intimidate her weeks after the alleged rape, which Broaddrick says occurred at a Little Rock hotel in 1978.

“Broaddrick told her story to NBC and the WashPost in 99. Both organizations closely vetted her story and chose to run it,” wrote Isikoff.

“Also, NBC has the full tape of the original Lisa Meyers [sic] interview,” he added.

Isikoff is the reporter who is credited with landing the scoop that Bill Clinton was having an affair with Monica Lewinsky. The story was spiked at the last minute by his editors at Newsweek.

When Broaddrick resurfaced in January after years of silence, she claimed that Hillary Clinton tried to “silence” her in a brief encounter weeks after the alleged rape. The former nursing home executive said that she was at a political function when Hillary Clinton showed up, approached Broaddrick and shook her hand while thanking her for “everything you do for Bill.”

Broaddrick said that when she tried to pull away, Clinton grasped her hand and repeated the line. Broaddrick interpreted it as a veiled threat.

Isikoff, who worked at NBC from 2010 to 2014, noted that Broaddrick’s critics have questioned the claim that the former first lady issued the threat because Broaddrick did not mention it in the “Dateline” interview.

“Folks have made much of the fact that her claim about the conversation she had with Hillary wasn’t in the interview that run. Broaddrick said it got cut out; Lisa Myers has since agreed Broaddrick said this then — and NBC chose to cut it out,” wrote Isikoff.

I see. So even that early, they chose to cover for Hillary. The full recording most definitely should be released, but they probably won't ever fulfill the request.

Update: while we're on the subject, here's a Fox interview with Kathy Shelton, the woman who was raped in Arkansas by 2 men when she was 12 years old, and Clinton defended her attackers in court without a care how evil they were:

After watching this, I'm even more horrified than ever that Clinton would do such a terrible disfavor to a girl who'd been through such a horrific experience.

BILL CLINTON HAD A CHILD OUT OF WEDLOCK

Alex Jones's Info Wars has an article about Danney Lee Williams, an African-American who says he's a biological son of Bill Clinton:

My name is Danney Lee Williams. I have many compelling reasons to believe that I am the biological son of former President William Jefferson Clinton — also known as Bill Clinton.

I am simply seeking the truth, and thus I am respectfully requesting that former President Clinton supply a court verified sample of his DNA to be compared with mine to determine paternity.

Before passing judgment, I ask the citizens and media of this great nation to honestly review the evidence and my reasoning. I also would like to shed light on how the widely reported DNA test in 1999 – which allegedly disproves that he and I are not father and son — was in fact fundamentally flawed in how it was executed and reported thereafter.

In 1999, various news organizations including the Washington Post and Time reported that I was not Bill Clinton’s son based on a widely reported DNA test that was based on the DNA report included in independent counsel Kenneth Starr’s impeachment report and a DNA sample that was taken from me. This is false. In fact, the test proved to be inconclusive because the Starr report did not contain the necessary data to reach such a conclusion.

The Starr report only included the results of a polymerase chain reaction (PCR) that the FBI used to determine whether Clinton’s DNA matched Ms. Lewinsky’s dress. In fact this is not enough data to determine if Bill Clinton is my father or not. FBI lab’s test refraction fragmented length polymorphism (RFLP) would also be required to make this determination. The PCR test alone would not be enough to legally prove or disprove paternity.

The truth is that in 1985, during the time I was conceived, my mother was a single parent raising two boys on her own. She would sometimes sell herself to men to make ends meet for her family. During this dark period in her life, Governor Clinton was the only Caucasian man she was having sexual relations with at the time I was conceived. In 1997, my mother passed a lie detector test conducted by investigative reporters to corroborate her claimed that Bill Clinton was her only white suitor at the time she conceived her bi-racial son.

I have seen also the physical resemblance between myself and President Clinton — the facial features, nose, chin line — that strongly suggest a biological connection, which has been pointed out by thousands of people across the nation.

For 30 years, my mother has stood firm on the claim that Bill Clinton is my father, and never once has she recanted her story… nor has my Aunt Lucille, who bared witness to my mother’s account.

Read it all. So Bill may have another child, and this is certainly testimony to his infidelity that Hillary apparently saw nothing wrong with.

While we're on the subject, here's another Breitbart video interview with Juanita Broaddrick, who was violated by Bill in 1978. It's one thing if he committed adultery, but committing rape is crossing a red line, and he didn't deserve to be president for that. Let's hope the Trump campaign can show that the Clintons are the ones who're really creeps here.

THE TERRORIST AT AMMUNITION HILL WAS LET GO BY A BAD JUDGE

It turns out that the jihadist who attacked and murdered 2 people near Ammunition Hill received leniency from a judge who was a bad lot, and is now facing criticism:

As Yom Kippur approaches, Jews around the world are atoning for their sins, but MK Yehudah Glick (Likud) announced on Monday that there was one person he would not forgive: Judge Hagit Mak-Kalmanovith, who postponed the prison sentence of the terrorist who ended up killing two Israelis in Jerusalem on Sunday.

On May 30, the terrorist’s attorney reached a plea deal by which he would admit to assaulting a police officer and receive a reduced sentence of four months.

The lawyer asked that the sentence be postponed until October, and Mak-Kalmanovith agreed. On Sunday, having not yet begun his sentence, the terrorist went on a shooting spree.

“You listened to the pleading of the terrorist, who was arrested many times for violence.

You were cruel to the merciful and had mercy on the cruel,” Glick wrote about Mak-Kalmanovith.

“As a result of your postponing the terrorist’s sentence for four months, he murdered two innocent Jews yesterday and wounded many others,” Glick went on.

“On the eve of Yom Kippur, before your Lord, will you be able to say your hands are clean?” The terrorist’s name is still being withheld under a gag order.

Glick encountered Mak-Kalmanovith in court on October 22, 2014, when he was the leading activist for Jewish prayer rights on the Temple Mount. He wrote in his Facebook post that the judge did not believe him when he said he felt his life was being threatened, and that he regularly faced violence from Arabs on the Temple Mount.

“You preferred the terrorists over me and decided to ban me from the Temple Mount, because you said that I was dangerous. You accepted the twisted and false claim.... You preferred to believe the violent people, the terrorists, the villains and the liars. I felt that you were assassinating me,” he wrote.

A week later, Muataz Hijazi of east Jerusalem shot Glick several times, critically wounding him.

This judge is clearly one who is not fit for her job, doesn't deserve it, and owes many an apology for her surely predetermined positions. In a way, this is similar to how the case of the ISIS terrorist in France who murdered a Catholic priest was handled. Obviously, cowardly law officials who're soft on violent criminals while hard on innocents must face some kind of disciplinary action and impeachment, because that's exactly what's enabling violent offenders to run around loose.