Could Hillary Clinton Be Democrats' New Choice for 2024?

Hey, welcome to Crossroads. In today's episode, we'll be talking about the return of Hillary Clinton. Our sexual assault allegations against New York City Mayor Eric Adams are part of something much bigger happening right now. It's a loophole that's about to close and there's a deadline coming up. And also, Biden wants to use highway funds to push, guess what, a new social agenda. We'll talk first what's happening with Hillary Clinton. Let me start with this. President Joe Biden is fading at the polls for the 2024 elections. Democrat voters are showing who their top candidate could be, and guess what, it's not Joe Biden. Guess who it is? Well, Hillary Clinton. That's right. If they get their way, we could see a repeat of the 2016 elections with yet another face-off between Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Here's Epoch Times First. It says, a recent poll shows that failed 2016 Democrat presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is among the Democrats' top picks for the party's primary if 81-year-old President Joe Biden decides not to run in 2024 due to age or other factors such as fitness for office. It says most of the 2,000-plus respondents to the Harvard-Harris poll said that they have doubts about President Biden's mental fitness to serve as Commander-in-Chief, while more voters say he is worsening as President rather than improving. It says that around three in five of all likely voters says President Biden shouldn't run for a second term, although there was a sharp partisan difference with that, with 33% of Democrats compared to 81% of Republicans and 66% of Independents expressing that view. Now, what's my take on this? Look, we've been seeing what's happening with Biden at the polls. He's not very favorable right now with Democrats, mainly because of the Israel-Palestine issue. That one's very much divisive among Democrats. The border crisis is splitting them on a lot of different areas, including notably like New York City, where they don't have the money or the budget, frankly, to deal with this type of crisis. A lot of that is falling right back on Joe Biden. Now, Democrats are watching these problems, especially among voters who want social welfare and stuff like that, because the budgets are being drained also for, guess what, the illegal immigration programs. As they're starting to turn on Biden, however, they're looking at who the other options are and who do they have. Well, Governor Gavin Newsom, he's not exactly super popular among Democrats everywhere. People can look at the state of California and see about how well he's doing there. Who else is on the ticket? Jeez, Michelle Obama, maybe? How's she doing in the polls? Not so hot. Kamala Harris, remember, she couldn't even make it in the first presidential election. Really, during the Democrat primary, she was pushed out. And so, you know, Biden, of course, chose her as the VP. But really, for president, I don't think she'd have the same shot. They need somebody who has at least some charisma, some ability to speak well. You know, they think they'd love to have Barack Obama back, which is, I think, what Michelle Obama would give them, technically speaking. But Hillary Clinton really is the best one they got. And I do think that really, if Biden gets pushed out, and if Hillary Clinton agrees to run, it's a very real possibility that she could be the pick for the Democrats. That being said, speaking of Mayor Eric Adams in New York, dealing, of course, with the, you know, the migrant crisis and the dwindling city budget with this, something big is actually happening right now. There are sexual assault allegations against him. This happens right after he started calling out a lot of the border crisis problems. And it ties into a loophole that was opened up to get Trump. Let me explain. Now, the mayor of New York City, Eric Adams, is facing a civil lawsuit for sexual assault and discrimination. This goes back to 1993. And this happens as Adams, notably, people are pointing to this, he was criticizing the Biden administration for its relatively open border policy, which is, you know, facilitating mass migration into the United States, with help, notably, of the United Nations. Now, under local law, New York City is required to house and feed every single illegal alien who decides to enter the city. And the city is running out of money. Mayor Adams was starting the tour to raise awareness about the problem. He was even calling out President Joe Biden. And he was asking for help from the federal government, when guess what happened? He was hit with a lawsuit. Here's NBC on it. It says, New York City Mayor Eric Adams has been named as a defendant in a civil lawsuit documents filed with the Supreme Court of the state of New York reveal. The lawsuit brought by a woman who says she worked with the Democrat as employees of the city three decades ago, alleges serious charges including sexual assault, battery, and employment discrimination based on gender, in addition to claims of retaliation and the creation of a hostile work environment. Now, the filing this lawsuit did not go into details about the, you know, claims for this. It says the notice filed electronically on Wednesday has yet to be processed by the clerk and seeks no less than five million dollars, as well as attorney's fees and interest at a jury trial. Now, in response to these allegations, a spokesperson for City Hall told NBC New York that the mayor, Eric Adams, does not even know who the plaintiff is. Now, if this sounds familiar, which it probably does, it's because Donald Trump was hit with a very similar lawsuit, notably in New York as well. You might remember, E. Jean Carroll accused Donald Trump of defamation, claiming that Trump lied about raping her in 1995 or 1996, because she couldn't actually remember the year. Trump claimed he did not even know her, much like Eric Adams is claiming he didn't know the woman who's going after him right now, but Trump ended up having to pay E. Jean Carroll five million dollars in damages, the same amount that Eric Adams is now facing. Now, in New York, cases like this don't really need evidence. The accusation itself counts as evidence. And so, because if someone accuses you that is the evidence, that means the situation it's on you to prove that you are innocent. It creates a situation where the burden of proof is on the accused, because there's already evidence presented, and that evidence is what you have to defend yourself against. The evidence just being the allegation, right? And if you're going back to, you know, the early 90s, and you have to find evidence to prove you're innocent, yeah, good luck with that. You're essentially guilty until proven innocent, which is, of course, one of the big criticisms of this. Again, since the accusation itself counts as the evidence, and it's on you, then, to provide evidence showing otherwise. And again, in cases this old, literally going back to the 90s, when, you know, people didn't exactly document everything on social media, or have cell phones, or text messages to maybe prove a timeline, or innocence, or whatever, there's very likely little or no remaining evidence. Now, normally, that would kind of protect you. But in this case, where you're essentially guilty until proven innocent, it's going to go after you until you can say otherwise. It's almost impossible, in other words, to provide anything defending yourself. Maybe unless you like a TV show at the time, or something like that. Now, an important point here, though, is that New York had to change its laws to go after Trump. None of this would have been possible, technically. They would not have been able to go after Trump, and by extension, they would have not have been able to go after Eric Adams right now, had they not changed the laws. The case with E. Jean Carroll going after Trump was past the statute of limitations. The case was only able to happen because New York state lawmakers passed what they call the Adult Survivors Act, which was signed into law by Governor Kathy Hochul. Now, that law gives people one year. It's only in place for one year, and they can bring civil claims for damages, for sexual attacks, regardless of when it took place. It could take place any time during your life, and if you want to make the allegation, you can go after whoever you want, essentially. Here's Boston Globe explaining a bit of what happened with that. It says, the civil trial came decades after the expiration of the statute of limitations for the alleged sexual attacks, and New York's law has shown how a limited window can make a difference, they say, allowing those who can prove their allegations in court an opportunity for redress, or not even really prove, just make the allegation which counts as evidence. Carroll's case rested in part on the testimony of other women who came forward to testify that they too were assaulted by Trump, and the Me Too movement demonstrated the strength, they say, of survivors gain in numbers, meaning if multiple women make allegations against somebody, you're essentially toast. Now, that one-year window for the Adult Survivors Act, that's about to close. They passed it a little over a year ago. The end of that, because again, it's only one year, the end of that will be this Thursday, and so that tiny little window they opened up for people to make lawsuits based on whatever they want, is coming to a close, and as it's coming to an end, well, guess what we're seeing? A wave of sexual assault allegations last minute. The charge against New York City Mayor Eric Adams is one of them, but there are actually a lot of others as well. Just as a few other examples, former New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, who again was pushed out of office amidst sexual harassment allegations, which were likewise dropped after he was pushed out of office, well, he just announced he was going to re-enter politics. He was going to try to run yet again, and what happens? Right when he was looking to run again, right when he announced it, he was just recently hit with another sexual assault allegation, and this is also happening only because of the loophole of the Adult Survivors Act. It's coming back to bite him. Here's the New York Post on that. It says disgraced former Governor Andrew Cuomo was being sued for sexual assault by his former assistant, his executive assistant, according to a legal summons filed just before the deadline for the Adult Survivors Act, which again ends this Thursday. The Post said it learned this last Friday. It says that this woman alleges that while she worked in the executive chamber as executive assistant from 2019 through August 2021, her ex-boss Cuomo subjected her to humiliating and demeaning tasks, hugs, kisses, sexual touching of the buttocks, and forcible touching of the breast. And it's not just Cuomo and Eric Adams, again the the former governor and the current mayor of New York City. Many other allegations are pouring in right now, just ahead of that coming deadline. A large group of celebrities is also now facing sexual assault lawsuits, filed in a very short time frame. Hollywood Reporter has it, it says this, a series of high-profile figures in Washington are being sued ahead of a deadline to file lawsuits under the New York law that suspended time constraints on claims involving allegations of sexual misconduct for one year. At the top of the list, defendants who are expected to be sued or were named in the complaints filed Wednesday and Thursday in New York Supreme Court, there's probably a longer list by now, you have Sean Diddy Combs, you have Axel Rose, you have Cuba Gooding Jr., you have Jamie Foxx, Jimmy Levine, and on Tuesday, Bill Cosby was also sued yet again in another lawsuit for a woman claiming she was drugged and sexually assaulted in the 1980s by the actor. Now these plaintiffs who typically would have been constrained from suing under the statute of limitations, just like Donald Trump, have again been taken advantage of the New York Adult Survivors Act, which again revived the window to bring sexual misconduct claims for one year. Now it closes at midnight on Thursday and this month lawsuits were filed against all these individuals and also ex-Grammy CEO Neil Portnow, so there might even be more by Thursday, we'll see. Now look, my take on all this, the way we've seen Hollywood acting and the way we see a lot of these stars all acting, it's totally possible. I wouldn't put anything beyond them, nothing would surprise me in terms of their behavior and given a lot of these politicians and frankly the way they ran the city, it wouldn't surprise me either to be honest. I don't actually know, I don't want to make allegations against them, I don't want to make allegations judging the people making the allegations even. My take with it is this though, well first off, other than just the character track record of some of these individuals, that aside and that bias aside, I would say that the pathway that is openness to happening, at least in my opinion because of the, you know, again the Adult Survivors Act, I personally believe was about the campaign to get Trump and what terrible irony for them that they opened this window for one year to get Trump in my opinion and suddenly they're using to go after all these celebrities and so on and you know of course Democrat officials. The other side of it though is this essentially created a path where anyone can be accused of a crime, anybody. You can go back to the 1990s, the 1980s, I mean maybe even earlier than that, although I don't think we've seen earlier than the 1980s. Anyone can be accused of a crime regardless the statute limitations and regardless of whether any evidence exists other than the accusation itself and again, you know, if you get a few people together and they decide they want to take somebody down, maybe they're part of a club or a social circle that they just jump on Twitter and one person decides to accuse someone and someone else decides to join them, that person is guilty and that's all it's going to take. Now they set it up in a way again where the accused has almost no chance of being able to refute it. You are guilty until proven innocent and in some cases regardless of whether you even get shown to be innocent, your career, your personality, everything you built is destroyed because it's one of those things that just taints you. This is one of the accusations that will forever taint a person. Now personally I think it's a very difficult issue. I mean victims of crime should have a path of recourse but of course there are also standards on the application of justice to make sure people are not falsely accused and as part of the ways of assuring that you're not just being taken down for political reasons or personal reasons, we have a lot of different protections. That's a statute of limitations meaning you have a certain window of time to bring charges. There are requirements on the evidence you present and making sure the evidence is actually justified and enough to prove someone's guilt. Now American standards also you know really in this country also holds that you are innocent until proven guilty not the other way around. What this new law does is just changes all of this essentially. Now you can pass laws to change this as we've seen and it's likely some people who are you're going to get some people who are legitimate victims I think who will get justice. I do think it definitely opens a window where people who were maybe too ashamed or too afraid or maybe the social environment at the time just had a stigma around bringing allegations like that and maybe they feel that they no longer have that fear. They feel that they can step forward and you know get justice. There is a I think a very real possibility that there will be many people who feel that they were you know done wrong and that they can finally get the justice they want. But by changing the standards of law and notably changing the protections against false allegations it also opens the floodgates for false allegations and also for political manipulation of law. And again this is the but these are the very reasons why these standards were in place from the beginning. Again the standards are now being overturned for this. Now there is two types of justice. There is justice for the victim but there are also standards of justice for the accused as well. And of course the way the American Founding Fathers set up a system of justice was to make sure that you were not politically targeted, you're not being taken down for reasons other than you know actual guilt. And yes sometimes that does protect people who are actually guilty. The standard of you know the standard of the evidence you need to present is pretty substantial under normal circumstances and lacking that even if the person is guilty you will have some guilty people get off the hook. It's one of those kind of balancing acts you have to get in the application of justice that gets things right more often than not but sometimes does have loopholes in it. So it's a difficult issue in my opinion. Now that said that's it for YouTube, Twitter, and Facebook. For the rest of the episode join me on Epic TV where we talk more about Biden wanting to use highway funds to push a woke agenda and also reports of how the J6 videos, I'll show you, it shows Capitol Police firing rubber bullets at peaceful protesters possibly violating laws and doing so. I'll be talking about why it's important. All of that and of course the live Q&A will be on epochtv.com. E-P-O-C-H-T-V.com. Join me there. Link in the description below and I will see you soon. Experts agree one of the best ways to protect against financial uncertainty is to diversify