Tag Archives: Juanita Broaddrick

Bill Clinton charging up to $1,500 for tickets during “conversation” tour

bill clinton

Bill Clinton…Ladies, let me tell you about “My Life”

I’m sure Juanita Broaddrick would like to have a conversation with ol’ Bill.

From NY Post: Bill Clinton will spend his summer rolling in dough.

Next month the former president is scheduled to crisscross the US and Canada in a promotional tour for his new novel, in some cases charging $1,500 a ticket for on-stage events, dubbed “A Conversation with President Bill Clinton.”

Clinton, already a best-selling author for his 2004 autobiography “My Life,” began raking in the cash for the fictional thriller that he wrote with mega-bestselling novelist James Patterson, before the book was finished. He and his co-author reportedly signed a seven-figure deal with Showtime last year for the rights to turn the “The President is Missing” into a TV series.

Frenzied bidding for the television rights for the book, which is scheduled to go on sale June 4, began at $5 million last fall among some of the biggest players in Hollywood, including Steven Spielberg and Ron Howard, according to published reports.

A spokeswoman for Showtime would not comment last week on the size of the final deal.

Clinton’s first novel tells the story of a sitting president who disappears from the White House in the midst of a looming cyber terrorist attack.

It’s not clear how much Clinton and Patterson made from the advance for the book. The book is being published in a unique deal involving two publishing houses — Alfred A. Knopf and Little, Brown & Co.

The novel is being called the publishing event of the year, and Clinton is scheduled to headline next month’s BookCon convention at the Javits Center.

Tickets for the former president’s summer-long North American tour to promote the book start at $10 per person and go as high as $1,500 for the special VIP passes.

A spokesman for Clinton refused to say whether he would be donating any proceeds from the novel to his family’s charitable foundation. “The Clintons support a broad range of groups every year through their family foundation,” said Clinton spokesman Angel Urena.

In addition to the book tour, Clinton will also headline events for the Bill, Hillary and Chelsea Clinton Foundation.

At the non-profit’s exclusive, private gala at an undisclosed venue in New York on Thursday, tickets range from $2,500 per person to $100,000 for a special access pass to the Clintons for a table for 10. Sting is also scheduled to perform at the event.

DCG

To “support” women, Hillary reads from a book at the Grammy Awards…and it wasn’t Juanita’s book

broaddrick tweet

The Grammy Awards last night was, as expected, a full-on display of Trump Derangement Syndrome. See Twitchy’s report here.

Hillary even made an appearance to read an excerpt from the fictional work of Michael Wolff (via HuffPo):

“In a sketch during the award show, host James Corden gathered music greats Cher, John Legend, DJ Khaled, Cardi B and Snoop Dogg to audition to narrate Michael Wolff’s best-selling account of President Donald Trump’s White House, Fire & Fury: Inside the Trump White House, in an effort to get nominated for the Best Spoken Word Album category. But there was one not-so-musically inclined reader in the mix too: Hillary Clinton”

See the video at the HuffPo link above as I’m not inclined to put it on this post.

At the award show, many of the attendees wore white roses as a “gesture” of the Time’s Up campaign to support women. From ABC News:

“When music’s biggest stars walked the red carpet Sunday night as they headed into the Grammy Awards, many were spotted either wearing a white rose or holding a single white rose in their hands.

The gesture is in honor of Time’s Up, which aims to spark conversation around “equality and safety in the workplace,” music executive Karen Rait said ahead of the ceremony.

Kelly Clarkson, who held her white rose, said on “E! Live from the Red Carpet” that after looking into what the white rose represented she decided to join the movement. “It represents hope and peace and sympathy and resistance,” she said. “Those are lovely things for every human to encompass.”

Funny how their support of equality didn’t translate into reality as only one woman won a main award at the show last night.

So I wonder why the host of this year’s Grammy Awards show, or any others in the past years, didn’t have any celebrities read from Juanita Broaddrick’s book “You’d Better Put Some Ice On That: How I Survived Being Raped by Bill Clinton?”

Doesn’t every survivor of sexual assault deserve to be heard, believed, and supported?

And why did the proggies celebrate Hillary reading this when it was reported, just days before, that she fired a male aide accused of sexually harassing a female? I think we all know the answer to that question.

Hillary Clinton and her Hollyweird sycophants can stuff their moral virtue signaling where the sun doesn’t shine. Their sympathy and concern for the safety of women only revolves around their own ideological views, not the REAL victims of sexual assault.

Hypocrites.

DCG

More virtue signaling: Female demorats planning to wear black to Trump’s SOTU address

juanita broaddick

Demorats in solidarity with this victim?/AP Photo

Will Juanita Broaddrick receive an invite from the democrat working group that hopes to “transcend party lines?”

From Glamour: At the 2018 Golden Globes, the red carpet was flooded with black dresses and Time’s Up pins, a coordinated protest against sexual abuse and harassment in Hollywood and other industries. Though responses to the blackout (and the efficacy of this type of showing) was mixed, it does appear to have inspired a similar movement in a different field: politics.

NBC News reports that another blackout demonstration against sexual misconduct is in the works—this time, in Washington, D.C., on the occasion of President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address. On January 30 members of Congress, led by the Democratic Women’s Working Group, are invited to wear black to the address as an act of solidarity. Representative Jackie Speier, a Democrat from California who will be participating, told NBC News: “This is a culture change that is sweeping the country, and Congress is embracing it.”

Last year female Democrats staged a similar fashion demonstration when President Trump addressed a joint session of Congress for the first time: They wore white as an homage to the women’s suffrage movement, and to make a statement about women’s rights. They documented it with the hashtag #WomenWearWhite.

While lawmakers in Washington are often starkly divided by their political affiliations, Speier and other organizers hope that a call to stand up for victims of sexual harassment and abuse will transcend party lines, with members of both parties showing up in black.

Capitol Hill is no stranger to the rampant sexual abuse that has plagued professional environments, from film to farming. A November New York Times report described sexual harassment as an “occupational hazard” for women entering politics; in the same month, 50 women spoke to CNN about their experiences with harassment while working in Washington. And when it comes to individual politicians (mostly male), accusations of sexual misconduct abound: Most notably, President Trump has dodged and denied accusations of sexual harassment since his 2016 campaign, while Senator Al Franken and Representative John Conyers (both Democrats) stepped down from office following allegations of their misconduct.

The Golden Globes blackout was met with criticism, many notes that seeing a sea of black dresses—and reading the statements of actresses who participated—made for one of the most meaningful red carpets in entertainment history. At this time, few politicians have announced their intentions to wear black alongside the Democratic Women’s Working Group to the State of the Union. On January 30 we’ll see which lawmakers step up—and whether the President responds to the protest.

DCG

Liberal MSM’s about-face: Bill Clinton is a rapist

Something interesting is going on with the liberal MSM — they’re turning against the Clintons, specifically Bill Clinton.

At least three mainstays of MSM  — MSNBC, The Atlantic and The New York Times  — are calling Bill Clinton a rapist. Finally.

MSNBC

Last Friday night, November 10, 2017, the rabidly anti-Trump MSNBC host, Chris Hayes, sent out this tweet:

“As gross and cynical and hypocritical as the right’s ‘what about Bill Clinton’ stuff is, it’s also true that Democrats and the center left are overdue for a real reckoning with the allegations against him.”

The Atlantic

Three days later on November 13, 2017, The Atlantic magazine’s contributing editor Caitlyn Flanagan writes about Bill Clinton at the 2016 Democratic National Convention:

“With a pencil neck and a sagging jacket he clambered gamely onto the stage after Hillary’s acceptance speech and played happily with the red balloons that fell from the ceiling.

When the couple repeatedly reminded the crowd of their new status as grandparents it was to suggest very different associations in voters’ minds. Hillary’s grandmotherhood was evoked to suggest the next phase in her lifelong work on behalf of women and children—in this case forging a bond with the millions of American grandmothers who are doing the hard work of raising the next generation, while their own adult children muddle through life. But Bill’s being a grandfather was intended to send a different message: Don’t worry about him anymore; he’s old now. He won’t get into those messes again.

Yet let us not forget the sex crimes of which the younger, stronger Bill Clinton was very credibly accused in the 1990s. Juanita Broaddrick reported that when she was a volunteer on one of his gubernatorial campaigns, she had arranged to meet him in a hotel coffee shop. At the last minute, he had changed the location to her room in the hotel, where she says he very violently raped her. She said that she fought against Clinton throughout a rape that left her bloodied. At a different Arkansas hotel, he caught sight of a minor state employee named Paula Jones, and, Jones said, he sent a couple of state troopers to invite her to his suite, where he exposed his penis to her and told her to kiss it. Kathleen Willey said that she met him in the Oval Office for personal and professional advice and that he groped her, rubbed his erect penis on her, and pushed her hand to his crotch.

It was a pattern of behavior; it included an alleged violent assault; the women involved had far more credible evidence than many of the most notorious accusations that have come to light in the past five weeks. But Clinton was not left to the swift and pitiless justice that today’s accused men have experienced. Rather, he was rescued by a surprising force: machine feminism. The movement had by then ossified into a partisan operation, and it was willing—eager—to let this friend of the sisterhood enjoy a little droit de seigneur.

The notorious 1998 New York Times op-ed by Gloria Steinem must surely stand as one of the most regretted public actions of her life. It slut-shamed, victim-blamed, and age-shamed; it urged compassion for and gratitude to the man the women accused. Moreover (never write an op-ed in a hurry; you’ll accidentally say what you really believe), it characterized contemporary feminism as a weaponized auxiliary of the Democratic Party. […]

The widespread liberal response to the sex-crime accusations against Bill Clinton found their natural consequence 20 years later in the behavior of Harvey Weinstein: Stay loudly and publicly and extravagantly on the side of signal leftist causes and you can do what you want in the privacy of your offices and hotel rooms. But the mood of the country has changed. We are in a time when old monuments are coming down and men are losing their careers over things they did to women a long time ago. […]

The Democratic Party needs to make its own reckoning of the way it protected Bill Clinton. The party needs to come to terms with the fact that it was so enraptured by their brilliant, Big Dog president and his stunning string of progressive accomplishments that it abandoned some of its central principles. The party was on the wrong side of history, and there are consequences for that. Yet expedience is not the only reason to make this public accounting. If it is possible for politics and moral behavior to coexist, then this grave wrong needs to be acknowledged. If Weinstein and Mark Halperin and Louis C. K. and all the rest can be held accountable, so can our former president and so can his party, which so many Americans so desperately need to rise again.”

New York Times

Writing in today’s (November 14, 2017) print version of the New York Times, Op-Ed Columnist Michelle Goldberg is more mealy-mouthed and protective of Hillary Clinton than The Atlantic‘s Caitlyn Flanagan. That being said, Goldberg nevertheless admits that:

“In this #MeToo moment, when we’re reassessing decades of male misbehavior and turning open secrets into exposes, we should look clearly at the credible evidence that Juanita Broaddrick told the truth when she accused Clinton of raping her. […]

Of the Clinton accusers, the one who haunts me is Broaddrick. The story she tells about Clinton recalls those we’ve heard about Weinstein. She claimed they had plans to meet in a hotel coffee shop, but at the last minute he asked to come up to her hotel room instead, where he raped her. Five witnesses said she confided in them about the assault right after it happened. It’s true that she denied the rape in an affidavit to Paula Jones’s lawyers, before changing her story when talking to federal investigators. But her explanation, that she didn’t want to go public but couldn’t lie to the F.B.I., makes sense. Put simply, I believe her. […]

It’s fair to conclude that because of Broaddrick’s allegations, Bill Clinton no longer has a place in decent society.

More fumigation by God’s Heavenly Army:

~Eowyn

Joe Biden called out men who don’t stop sexual assaults

joe biden and bill clintonTHIS. IS. RICH.

From Yahoo (via Teen Vogue): There’s a whole lot of reasons we love Joe Biden. The former Vice President has stolen our hearts many times over with his compassionate politics. His beautiful friendship with Barack Obama and the memes it created got us through many days. On top of that, he’s been a champion for women for a long while. Lately, he’s been continuing this awesome work with his campaign “It’s On Us”. “It’s On Us” encourages men to step up in preventing sexual assault.

Biden recently sat down for an interview with Teen Vogue to talk more about It’s On Us, and it’s amazing!

There’s so much good in this interview, and it just backs up why Joe Biden is the greatest. First of all, he consulted young women on how to best move forward with the It’s On Us campaign!

It might sound like a no-brainer, but with current politics it’s all too familiar to see decisions that affect women decided by only men. This obviously makes no sense, because if you’re trying to help women, you should listen to women. Biden spoke with thousands of girls in high school and college to figure out how best to combat sexual assault on campuses. Here’s what they told him:

“The overwhelming, spontaneous response without any prompting was, get men involved. Get men involved…that’s when we started the “It’s on Us” campaign, going out to college campuses because bystanders who see something happen, in my view, if they don’t holler, scream, pick up the phone and call and intervene, they are complicitous in the commission of a crime. They are complicitous.”

Biden, as a politician, has given voice to something women have understood about the nature of preventing sexual assault for basically all of human history. You cannot put the pressure on victims to prevent their own assaults.

A lot of the advice people hear about preventing sexual assault is put towards the victims. By calling out male bystanders who see an assault about to take place and do nothing, Biden is putting the pressure to prevent assault in the right place.

Biden pulls no punches when calling out the men who see assaults about to happen and do nothing. He really calls out the men who hear other men perpetuating rape culture, by pointing out that silence will make them complicit. By not speaking up when they hear someone talking about assault, they become complicit. Biden puts it this way:

“Being a man means respecting a woman’s autonomy, not invading a woman’s autonomy. You want to be a strong man? Respect.

Biden also reminds college leadership that they need to step up to prevent campus sexual assault. He acknowledges that colleges might be scared to report the numbers, since it might downgrade their standing. However, he points out that their students’ safety is way more important.

Many colleges act this way, and that’s part of why campus sexual assault is such a widespread problem. Biden puts this into chilling perspective with this quote:

“No father or mother should drop their kid off this late August, early September at their first day at college and drive away worried [if she is] going to be safe.”

We cannot thank Joe Biden enough for being a spokesman for this important campaign. Calling out men who see their friends participate in assault, and college leadership who aren’t doing enough to prevent assault, are steps that need to be taken!

(H/T to Teen Vogue)

DCG

Hillary’s narcissism on display: She blames FBI Director James Comey for her loss

hillary-clinton

Last Saturday, on a call with top campaign donors, Clinton said her campaign was winning until FBI director James Comey sent a letter to Congress on Oct. 28 announcing that the FBI had uncovered emails possibly related to its earlier probe into her use of a private server as secretary of state.

Watch your back Comey...

Watch your back Comey…

According to the Seattle Times, Clinton told the donors that her campaign was leading by large margins in nearly every battleground state and was tied in Arizona, a traditionally Republican stronghold, until Comey released his letter. (Never mind the fact that on October 18, 2016, the hacker(s) Anonymous claims that “a source inside the [Hillary] Clinton campaign has leaked an internal polling document that shows her support is gone”.)

Why do you suppose that the most qualified womyn for president, who has the most impressive record, can’t take responsibility for her own loss? I blame Narcissistic Personality Disorder (NPD). From Wikipedia:

“NPD is a long-term pattern of abnormal behavior characterized by exaggerated feelings of self-importance, an excessive need for admiration, and a lack of understanding of others’ feelings. People affected by it often spend a lot of time thinking about achieving power or success, or about their appearance. They often take advantage of the people around them.

People with narcissistic personality disorder are characterized by their persistent grandiosity, excessive need for admiration, and a disdain and lack of empathy for others. These individuals often display arrogance, a sense of superiority, and power-seeking behaviors.”

Here’s a look at how Hillary clearly exhibits NPD traits:

Hillary Clinton what difference does it make

Hillary had no empathy for the the parents and families of those murdered in Benghazi. Her “what difference does it make” statement said it all.

erica-garner

Hillary wanted to take advantage of Eric Garner’s family to push an anti-Second Amendment agenda. In late October, WikiLeaks emails exposed that the Clinton campaign had conversations about using Garner’s death to protest gun violence. Garner’s daughter was not happy about the revelation. “I’m troubled by the revelation that you and this campaign actually discussed ‘using’ Eric Garner … Why would you want to ‘use’ my dad,” tweeted Erica Garner, as reported by CNN.

hillary-clinton-and-secret-service

Hillary has a disdain for those hired to protect and even take a bullet for her. Former Secret Service agent Dan Emmett describes Mrs. Clinton as treating the Secret Service like hired help, never saying “thank you” to agents, unlike her husband, Bill, and their daughter, Chelsea.

hillary-supporters-crying2

Hillary didn’t care about her devastated supporters. On the night of her election loss, Hillary didn’t even bother to address her supporters. She sent her lackey John Podesta out on stage to give a lame speech to them. They were in tears and she couldn’t even go out and thank them for their support.

clinton-and-her-maid

Hillary’s sense of superiority lends her to believe she is above the law. As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton routinely asked her maid to print out sensitive government e-mails and documents — including ones containing classified information — from her house in Washington, DC, e-mails and FBI memos showed. If any soldier had done what Hillary did, they’d be in Leavenworth.

hillary-clinton-and-war-on-women

In her quest for power, Hillary has no empathy for women who are victims of sexual harassment and assault and who could bring down her husband. She once tweeted that “every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard”.  Unless of course, you are a woman who Bill Clinton loved to prey on. Then those women are just part of the “vast right-wing conspiracy.”

These are just a few of the MANY examples of Hillary’s NPD traits. I could go an and on yet I’m not trying to write a novel here.

Thankfully we dodged a bullet on November 8, 2016. Hillary will not be our president. And for that, according to Hillary, we can thank Comey 🙂

happy-dance

DCG

Women – anti-Trumpers – Are Boycotting Ivanka Trump’s Brand

And how many of these womyn boycotting Ivanka have supported Broaddrick, Jones or Wiley? Yeah, didn’t think so.

ivanka-trump

From Cosmopolitan Magazine: Lindsey Ledford, a 29-year-old student at the University of Maryland-University College, is a self-described “Maxxinista” who shops at her local College Park, Maryland, T.J. Maxx at least three times per week. But about a week ago, her favorite store abruptly lost her business: Ledford was checking out a black blouse with a stripe down the center when, suddenly, she felt like her throat was closing and she couldn’t breathe.

 “My first thought was, Grab them by the pussy. We can do anything we want. Don’t even ask,” Ledford told Cosmopolitan.com.

The blouse was triggering traumatic flashbacks to physical abuse she’d suffered in the past, and to times she’d been grabbed or groped by men without her consent. “None of them ever asked how I felt, what I was thinking, or what I wanted. They didn’t wait,” she wrote in a flurry of tweets at T.J. Maxx after fleeing the store. “That is what ‘Trump’ means to me,” she told me: complete disregard for women and their bodies. “It doesn’t matter if Ivanka’s name is in front of it, or Donald’s.”

disregard

Speaking of disregard for women…

Ledford is now one of a passionate group of women joining forces to boycott both the Ivanka Trump fashion and accessories brand and, unless they drop Ivanka’s line from stores, the retailers who carry it. The list includes T.J. Maxx, Amazon.com, Zappos, Bloomingdale’s, Lord & Taylor, Neiman Marcus, Nordstrom, Dillard’s, DSW, Macy’s, Marshall’s, and Saks Off Fifth. “As much as I love shopping at T.J. Maxx, I can’t stomach seeing that name front and center,” she said. “Supporting a brand — Trump — that condones sexual assault and makes excuses for it is wrong.” (Ledford also logged a complaint with a phone call to customer service; she said a rep politely listened and promised to pass along her feedback.)

text

Shannon Coulter on a mission against Ivanka

The boycott was hatched on Twitter by Shannon Coulter, CEO of a boutique marketing agency in San Francisco, on October 10, in the wake of Trump’s now-infamous Access Hollywood tape; since then, Coulter’s tweets about the boycott, including tweets aimed at the retailers who carry Ivanka Trump products, have earned an estimated 1 million impressions on Twitter, according to her analytics report.

For a long stretch of the campaign, “[women] were ready to give Ivanka a pass because she’s his daughter and it’s hard to be objective about your dad. But the Trump tape just sent people over the edge,” Coulter told me. “I think [women] took particular offense, as I did, to the fact that Ivanka tries to make feminism a part of her brand but is standing by, as an official campaign surrogate, a guy who is an alleged serial sexual assaulter of women. The disconnect was too big. And they were ready to speak up about it and flex their consumer power about it.”

I'm sure this daughter can be objective about her father

A father and daughter who the proggies always give a pass

Though Ivanka insisted this week at a Fortune Most Powerful Women event: “I am not a surrogate. I’m a daughter,” the lines between Ivanka and her father’s incendiary politics have been blurred beyond recognition for some former fans and customers. Ivanka and her eponymous line are “inextricably tied to a movement that denigrates women,” Amy Andelora, a 52-year-old high school teacher in Mesa, Arizona, told me.

Days after the tape’s release, Andelora tweeted a plea to Neiman Marcus, asking the retailer to remove Ivanka’s line. She is also boycotting her favorite store, Nordstrom, where she says she formerly spent “hundreds of dollars per month,” because, similar to Ledford, she felt triggered by a pair of Ivanka shoes.

drama

“It’s a visceral response, when I see the name ‘Ivanka’ nestled inside a shoe,” she said. ”The man who assaulted me used almost exactly the method Donald Trump described in his conversation with Billy Bush. I can’t see a Trump-related label without remembering what happened to me three years ago in a house I couldn’t escape.

Though some customers are defecting, Ivanka Trump’s eponymous line — an estimated $100 million operation in the last fiscal year, according to a July report in Forbes — has thrived in spite of her father Donald Trump’s wildly controversial presidential campaign. (Trump has made damning comments about women, Mexican and Muslim immigrants, and Gold Star families, while Ivanka, an executive vice-president at the Trump Organization, has consistently defended him as a “feminist,” insisting she knows him to be different.) As a private company, the Ivanka Trump brand does not release sales or profit numbers. But an Ivanka Trump brand PR representative told Cosmopolitan.com that sales and revenue grew 37 percent over 2015.

“Over the past year many more women have discovered and become loyal to the brand, leading us to experience a significant year over year revenue growth,” said Abigail Klem, chief brand officer through the representative.

According to annual and quarterly reports by her licensing company GIII, sales at the Ivanka Trump brand grew $29.4 million over last year, and increased $11.8 million in the last six months. “Whether or not people are saying good things or bad things, her name is getting out there,” Madeline Hurley, a retail industry analyst at market research firm IBIS World, said. “She can’t really pay for the press that she’s getting.”

But for some, the fact that Ivanka’s business has appeared to profit from the exposure of the Trump campaign is all the more reason to boycott. “[Ivanka] is supporting one of the most offensive, sexist, racist, xenophobic human beings to ever run for president,” Ledford said. “She is making a buck off it.”

Though Ivanka said at this week’s Fortune event that she’s “always tried to maintain complete separation between [her brand] and the campaign,” Ledford and others point to what they feel is a notable example to the contrary: after introducing her father at the Republican National Convention (in a speech filled with traditionally Democratic policies like equal pay, paid leave and affordable childcare), Ivanka tweeted a Macys.com link to buy the blush-pink shift she was wearing from her collection with the line: “Shop Ivanka’s look from her #RNC speech.”

text

Don’t you DARE inquire as to where to buy this dress…(at least it wasn’t blue!)

“Do I think it’s appropriate for her to tweet out a link to where you can buy the dress that she was wearing? No, definitely not,” said Dini von Mueffling, founder of an eponymous public relations and strategy agency in New York. “Instead of tweeting about her dress, I think the message that she should have put out there was how honored she was to be part of a moment in our nation’s history, and to be part of trying to improve the lives of Americans everywhere.”

Gloria Ratcliffe, once a faithful customer, threw out a pair of Ivanka Trump pumps after another of Ivanka’s high-profile campaign appearances — when she attended the second debate in support of her father, just days after the release of the now-infamous tape. Ratcliffe also decided against buying bridesmaids dresses for her spring wedding from Nordstrom, as well as shoes for the wedding party from DSW, because both carry the Ivanka Trump brand.

Some anti-hate attire for the wedding, perhaps?

Some anti-hate attire for Ratcliffe’s wedding, perhaps?

“My wedding is a day of love. I’m not going to wear clothes that represent hate,” Ratcliffe said. “[Trump] doesn’t respect women at all, and I’m not giving my money to people who are supporting him, because it’s going to inevitably end up in his pocket.” (Ivanka’s line is a sub-brand of the Trump Organization).

So far, none of the retailers who carry the Ivanka Trump brand have dropped the line in response to the boycott. Cosmopolitan.com reached out to 12 retailers; only two replied. A representative for Nordstrom said: “We have received some feedback from customers, though we don’t currently have plans to stop offering this brand.” (When asked about the nature of that feedback, the representative didn’t answer). Zappos declined to comment.

But Coulter and the women boycotting Ivanka’s brand aren’t giving up. Ledford, for instance, is still steering clear of T.J. Maxx: In addition to voting for Hillary Clinton and donating to her campaign, Ledford feels the boycott is another way of taking concrete political action. It’s “something I can do to say ‘enough is enough,’” she says. “I can not give my money to them.”

Coulter continues tweeting, every day, multiple times per day, and calling retailer customer service lines to complain about the Ivanka brand. She says she has received backlash for the boycott on Twitter — some men, in particular, argue that Ivanka shouldn’t be held accountable because they believe she’s being manipulated by PR people or by her father.

“I don’t think that’s true,” Coulter said. “She’s the head of an international, $100 million dollar a year brand. She’s sophisticated. I think she’s smarter than Donald Trump. Part of why I started the boycott is because I respect her as a businesswoman. We should hold her to a higher standard.

And just how many liberal women were triggered by this?

Exit question: How many liberal women were triggered by this fine example of a “higher standard?”

DCG