....why does it matter if she lied under oath and/or if she’s lying now? I’d say that matters a great deal—considering she is attacking Hillary for this. I’d say that’s a relevant and important part of this. I’m not saying Broaddrick needs to have some gavel come down on her—I’m saying the people telling this story,…

1. Of course people lie under oath.

And what I don’t get is this “she needs to be heard” bit as if...she wasn’t heard. She most certainly was. And then she signed an affidavit stating that she was not raped. And people listened—as they should’ve. And now she’s saying she lied and she WAS actually raped. So, where in this story is her voice being…

I don’t understand why so many people want to sweep this under the rug, like Broaddrick should get a pass or something for this—like we should not believe her at her word here, but we should believe her at her word 20 years later. I don’t get it. Would it have been difficult to tell her story? Yea—of course it would…

1. What man rapes a woman and comes home and tells his wife that he raped a woman? Mmmkay.
2. If anything, Bill likely told Hillary that it was a consensual affair. Would you have warm feelings towards a woman who you thought may have seduced your husband, and at the very least you think (based on what your husband has…

Yes, the public must—however, it gets just a wee bit confusing when the alleged victim signs an affidavit saying none of this happened. When the alleged victim says under oath—this did not occur—and then years later changes the story. Why do people keep ignoring that part?? That is very problematic and it makes this…

AMEN.

I don’t understand—what are you saying Hillary “should” do here? What would be, in your opinion, an appropriate course of action for Hillary?