Schippers: ‘I Wanted Broaddrick to Testify’, They were all over that woman “And it was the type of stuff we ran into with the outfit (the Chicago mob), Intimidation just by watching her, making their presence known, NewsMax September 6, 2000

The following article can no longer be found at NewsMax. Some of their Archives can only be found on the Wayback Machine.

Since it was scrubbed it is presented in it’s entirety.

From NewsMax September 6, 2000.

“Schippers: ‘I Wanted Broaddrick to Testify’

Clinton rape accuser Juanita Broaddrick would have been called to testify at President Clinton’s Senate impeachment trial about attempts to keep her from telling her story, former chief impeachment prosecutor David Schippers says. But he had already ruled her out as a trial witness by the time he learned the details of Broaddrick’s intimidation.

“It was right when we were working on (her case),” Schippers told NewsMax.com in an exclusive Labor Day weekend interview. “Because my investigator, Diana Woznicki, who was just about in daily contact with Broaddrick, would come in and say, ‘Juanita called me. There’s a guy parked outside her house. … She said she felt that somebody was watching her.’ ”

Broaddrick herself told NewsMax.com last year that her home had been broken into, her pets released and her answering machine tape stolen while she and her husband were away briefly during the House impeachment probe.

“Let me tell you something. They were all over that woman,” Schippers told NewsMax.com. “And it was the type of stuff we ran into with the outfit (the Chicago mob). Intimidation just by watching her, making their presence known. … Just to let her know ‘We can do what we want.’ ”

The former mob-buster for Attorney General Robert F. Kennedy reports in his book, “Sellout: The Inside Story of President Clinton’s Impeachment,” that he never intended to call Broaddrick as a witness against the president. But it turns out, there’s more to the story.

“By the time we had learned what they were doing to her, the decisions on witnesses had already been made.” When asked whether he would have called the Clinton rape accuser to testify had he known about the witness tampering in time, Schippers admitted, “Yes, I would have tried to do it.”

But there was another, perhaps even more significant, reason why Broaddrick was never called, which the no-nonsense ex-prosecutor revealed to NewsMax.com for the very first time. “I’ll tell you something. The only way I got her to open up completely (about the details of Clinton’s attack) was to give her my word that I would not use her as a witness.”

That was before Schippers knew about the break-in, the stolen tape, and the surveillance. But still, he refused to break his word to Juanita Broaddrick.

What if the Senate had allowed live witnesses at Clinton’s trial, instead of only the videotaped interrogations of Vernon Jordan, Sidney Blumenthal and Monica Lewinsky?

“I think I would have found some way to either put (Broaddrick’s) lawyer on or some way to get the information out that the same package was sent to her that went to the other women, you know, just to establish a pattern.”

By “package,” Schippers meant the affidavit kit the White House sent to a number of women linked to the president, complete with intructions on how to avoid testifying in the Paula Jones case by denying a relationship, consensual or otherwise.

Broaddrick got her package and complied.

But in an ironic twist, the Clinton rape accuser let the White House off the hook on suspicions she had been pressured into a denial. “It was her idea to deny the story,” Schippers told NewsMax.com. Broaddrick has said she falsely denied the Clinton rape to Jones’ lawyers because she simply didn’t want to relive the most terrible moments of her life.

But Schippers suggested another reason. “She was so terrified. And the reason she was terrified was because she saw what had happened to Kathleen Willey, Gennifer Flowers and all the rest of them.”

Nearly two years after the Juanita Broaddrick story first broke, there is still palpable outrage in some quarters that Clinton may have gotten away with the 22-year-old rape. But what about the witness intimidation? In that case the perpetrator may not be so lucky, says the former impeachment prober.

Independent Counsel Robert Ray “may still be looking into some of the things that happened to Broaddrick,” Schippers said. “I know they’re still looking into what happened to (Kathleen) Willey.

“You know, when everybody says Clinton’s been exonerated on this and that – that’s b—s–t. He has not been exonerated on this and that and the other. Ray is still looking into those things. … It could very well be. It’s certainly evidence of intimidation.”

Coming soon on NewsMax.com: The full transcript of our exclusive interview with David Schippers. Learn new details never before revealed about:

• House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt’s Machiavellian manuevering during the House impeachment probe.
• Schippers’ reaction when he heard Monica Lewinsky tell Linda Tripp on tape, “I would not cross these people (the Clintons) for fear of my life.”
• Schippers’ personal request to the FBI and CIA that they investigate Clinton’s phone sex with Lewinsky.
• The former impeachment prober’s doubts about the accuracy of Clinton’s DNA profile as published in FBI lab documents released by the Office of Independent Counsel.
• Schippers’ belief that Hillary Clinton is behind the White House intimidation squad.

• New details about the Republicans who took a dive on the first impeachment of an elected president in American history.”

http://web.archive.org/web/20010413143852/http://www.newsmax.com/articles/?a=2000/9/4/221955