Kathleen Willey Infuriated By Media Firestorm Over Cain's Alleged Sexual Harassment
A former White House aide that accused Bill Clinton of sexually assaulting her back in 1993 says she's infuriated by the media firestorm caused by anonymous harassment allegations leveled at Republican presidential candidate Herman Cain.
Speaking with radio's Steve Malzberg Friday, Kathleen Willey said, "Why are we even entertaining, you know, any of this from a person with no name and no face and a spokesperson who isn’t really clear on anything either" (video follows with partial transcript and commentary):
KATHLEEN WILLEY: You know, it’s infuriating is all that I can say about watching what’s going on because everything is vague and innocuous, and we don’t have any names, and we don’t have any dates, and we don’t have any, you know, we don’t have any people. We have spokesman for the people, you know, the women. And, you know, it’s clearly a double standard. And I, hopefully, you know, the American people are starting to see through this is all I can say, because, you know, they just, they have just blown this thing out of, out of proportion.
I saw something interesting last night, something Brent Bozell was talking about. What happened to me and us, you know, as compared to Cain. When my first story, my story came out, I had three segments on network news. Paula had one. Gennifer I think had one or two. I mean, you know, there have been stories about Cain, they’re up to like 50 or 60 things on network TV, you know, as compared to with information, because it’s a whole less clear in this thing with Cain.
Willey was referring to a NewsBusters report finding the broadcast network news outlets did a total of fifty segments about Politico's allegations in the first three days after the story broke. By contrast:
STEVE MALZBERG, HOST: There were three reports after you went public in ’97, there were three brief reports for Juanita Broaddrick back in ’99, and when Paula Jones went public in February of ’94, only ABC gave her sixteen seconds. The other networks did nothing until Bill Clinton got a defense attorney in May of that year.
WILLEY: Exactly. Exactly.
MALZBERG: Now do you attribute this, this double standard as you call it to Democrat-Republican, or is there any racial overtones in your view here with Cain?
WILLEY: I don’t think so much racial. It’s that, it’s just conservative versus liberal and progressives, you know? It’s two different agendas, and unfortunately for us in this country, you know, we’ve got biased press, biased networks, biased anchors, and, you know, they do, they do what they can do. I mean, they don’t have any restraints on them. It’s a real lesson, you know, it really is because I was, you know, I always felt when I was a kid that Walter Cronkite was telling the truth. I mean, really. And we’ve found out that it’s never been, it’s never been that way.
MALZBERG: Kathleen, what about the hypocrisy of the, of the women’s groups as well?
WILLEY: Oh, don’t even get me started. Really, I know. Well, there again, they didn’t come to my rescue. I, I cannot tell you how many phone calls I made to Patricia Ireland at NOW. And, and, you know, just pleas, pleas for help. Just anything. They, they never called me back. They never called me, none of them. And, they’re, when they were asked, you know, about me after all this happened, the responses were so tepid. You know, it was like, “Well, if it did happen, we had something real serious to deal with here.” And then who was it, the one that said, you know, Betty Friedan or somebody, just made a horrible, crude remark, you know, about what just happened, you know, as long as he, as long as Clinton keeps, keeps, you know, he’s not against abortion…
MALZBERG: Abortion, yeah, then he’s okay by them. Yeah, I remember that. Let me ask you: what do you think of this woman in particular - we don’t know her name – trying, trying to get the story out against Cain while not wanting to speak, not wanting to be identified, wanting to hide behind her lawyer, all this after signing an agreement and getting money? What do you think of her?
WILLEY: Why is, why is anybody giving her any credibility at all? That’s my point. Why, you know, why are we even entertaining, you know, any of this from a person with no name and no face and a spokesperson who isn’t really clear on anything either? That’s the point. And these people are getting as much airtime as they want.
Indeed they are, and everyone involved should be asking themselves why unnamed, unspecific accusers create such a media firestorm today when women that actually stepped forward with far more serious charges in the '90s were almost totally ignored by comparison.
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
She's Right About Kronkite
Submitted by HardRightTurn on Mon, 11/07/2011 - 12:54am.
I feel the same way she does. Now I wonder how many knowledge gaps I have because of the lieberals in the press during those times. I shudder to think.
To more fully comprehend the Left, one must read “Leftism As Psychopathy” by John Ray, M.A., Ph.D. Caution, it might scare you a little bit.
http://jonjayray.tripod.com/psycho.html
On the bright side,the
Submitted by ant on Mon, 11/07/2011 - 1:12am.
On the bright side,the defense of Clinton's lecherous behavior stole all credibility from NOW. So, his tendency towards sexual offenses has saved us from having to listen to the shrieks of the National Organization of Leftist Women Who Only Really Care About Killing Fetuses.
Or
Submitted by HockeyKid on Mon, 11/07/2011 - 8:21am.
National Organization of Womb-raiders
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
D's, the msm, and terrorists
Submitted by amyshulk on Mon, 11/07/2011 - 2:24am.
D's, the msm, and terrorists - what do they all have in common?
Chess vs. Checkers.
R's, people wishing to be informed of current events, and our military are playing by the rules of Checkers - straightforward and evenly applied and they {D's etal} are playing Chess.
This just illustrates the point.
Sickening when our soldiers have to obey ROE's while their enemies don't. D's spent how long telling us what a guy did in "persoanl" matters had NO bearing on his ability to man the highest office of the land, while a man who is running for that office is smeared, slandered, libeled - whatever they want.
In the thick of it? The msm. They don't get it. They are a joke, and only those who don't give current events priority fail to see it.
Ronald Reagan
Rather
Submitted by HockeyKid on Mon, 11/07/2011 - 8:25am.
It's more like conservatives are playing checkers against the kid who makes up the rules as he goes along: "No, I only have to king your checker if you get across the board BEFORE I've moved three of mine, because you have the red checkers. That's the rules."
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
Kathleen Willey
Submitted by lrgon on Mon, 11/07/2011 - 6:10am.
The theory is that there are women,some of which are supposedly under a binding legal agreement not to come forth and say publically before cameras their story of the alleged sexual harrasment. What the women signed or didn't sign not to pursue legal action against the alleged harrasment may be a factor since proving their allegations in a court of law isn't an easy case.
One thing is clear - the wagons have circled among some conservatives to protect a person whom they think is being unfairly treated by the media. Cain, they say is a conservative and is a threat to another Obama term and that is the motive behind these alleged sexual harrassment stories. It's a fair enough theory based on the media's past history of attacking conservatives.
However, how "conservative" Mr.Cain is "is" another matter. TARP is not conservative no matter how you slice it and Cain sliced a big chunk of TARP and swallowed it down with a big ol' soft drink cola and recommended it as a cure for an American ailing economy!
The caining Cain is getting by the MSM is nothing compared to the caining Clinton's accusers got for daring to allege that Clinton was a predator. But knowing what we know of this man, how many of you truly believe Bill Clinton side of the story? How many of you at least accept the notion that Clinton gave women a whole lot of misery? As Governor and as president he was never charged in a court of law nor had to face a judge and jury. But how many doubt the stories of Ms. Willey, Broderick and Jones in their dealings with Bill Clinton? How many more women were there that didn't have the nerve to come forward after seeing the mistreatment the Mainstream Media put these ladies through?
One thing should be clear: there is an evil organization that uses the Mainstream Media's wolf's for their own ends.
Historically there have been plenty the MSM has protected from public scrutiny and not all have been over a sex scandal. FDR is a prime example.
But the 42nd president was the organization's darling and the media wolfs protected him.
His penchant for illicit sex and cravings for women kept the damage control specialists busy! Yet people all around Clinton were going to prison in connection to White Water and the Clinton Re-election campaign had to return hundreds of thousands of dollars the campaign committee received illegally from foreign sources due to exposure from private watchdog groups.
A petition drive was organized nationally by another private organization to impeach Clinton on bribery charges. Chinagate would have finished Clinton except that a White House intern named Monica was used by the managed Maintream Media to save Clinton and many others from a bribery and perhaps treason scandal. "Sex" was a diversion away from the more serious charges of bribery!How many of you heard of bibery in connection to Chinagate?
The organization that runs the MSM knows that the public has not been conditioned to overlook bribery and treason but that a sex scandal could be used as a convenient damage control ploy. Precisely that is what they did despite the bravery of Paula and Kathleen and Juanita. "Slick willy" slipped out of having to answer for his attacks on America's security and America's women.
America's women deserve the protection from the media and the truth should be their only motive but we all know that is not the media's role since their "agenda" is fixed by an organization outside of public scrutiny not accountable to anyone.
Let the chips fall where they fall.
If Cain is indeed a threat to the organization he is certainly not a threat to the policies of war, welfare and big government which the organization's man in the White House also champions. It could just mean that they think that Obama can do a better job at pushing their agenda than a guy that reminds one more and more of Chauncey Gardinier.
Phweet.
Submitted by The Vet on Thu, 11/10/2011 - 9:08am.
Still no one reading your long winded screeds loon. You think people are paid to read your crap? Is that why you won't knock it off? Not a single person here getting paid to read the piffle of a loon.
Loons have lots of time to waste apparently.
2 Women Say Herman Cain Beat Them Senseless with Frozen Turkey
Submitted by GlenStanish on Mon, 11/07/2011 - 7:04am.
Politico is now reporting that two women claim Herman Cain beat them "senseless" with a frozen turkey in the late nineties. http://www.thedailyrash.com/two-women-say-herman-cain-beat-them-senseles...
Tea Party HAS YOUR BACK KATHLEEN!!!!!!!!!!!!
Submitted by Annie Ashe Fields on Mon, 11/07/2011 - 7:12am.
You poor thing... Seriously. What you have been through. I really admire you speaking NOW - doing the very thing NOBODY did for you at the time YOU needed someone and doing what Cain's ACCUSERS haven't done, because they know they were just being p.c. at a time when "pubic hair on a Coke can" could get you a quick $50k... EVERYBODY KNOWS that's why they didn't come forward. EVERYBODY.
Way to go, Kathleen! Come to a Tea Party and be warmly embraced! Unlike like Progressives, we don't say "Where were you when..." - We don't point fingers like a bunch of school kids about who did it first, etc. Doesn't matter when you arrive at the truth, dear... As long as you get there. And we welcome all comers.
Sorry Kathy but you got felt up by the wrong guy.
Submitted by NeoKong on Mon, 11/07/2011 - 8:30am.
Now if he had been a Republican...well.....
journalism
Submitted by kinijane on Mon, 11/07/2011 - 9:23am.
Theres no such thing as a true journalist now (maybe 1 or 2) they are all opinion
talking heads and have no qualms about lying to the public or to sensationalize a
piece to claim their 15 minutes of fame. You know when watching some of them
they don't even believe their own rhetoric.
Juanita Broaddrick Paula
Submitted by cristo on Mon, 11/07/2011 - 10:02am.
Juanita Broaddrick
Paula Jones
Gennifer Flowers
Kathleen Willey
Elizabeth Ward
Monica Lweinsky
I think it more interesting
Submitted by pockets64 on Mon, 11/07/2011 - 11:05am.
I think it more interesting to note what news did not get attention during this whole bogus Cain story:
-WH _refuses_ Congressional subpoena.
-More Solendra-type loans hanging out there.
-Solendra bonuses paid to execs just before the bankruptcy.
-More Fast-and-Furious deflection.
-More horrendous jobs data.
-The Greek tragedy.
The timing on the Cain story and the subpoena refusal is remarkable.
BTW, I challenge anyone who thinks BO is a modern H itler. He's more like Leon Degrelle.