A staffer with Hillary Clinton’s presidential campaign made note of an article highlighting allegations of Bill Clinton’s womanizing and sexual assault last year, newly leaked emails show.
The Washington Post fact checker blog published "A guide to the allegations of Bill Clinton’s womanizing" in December 2015, highlighting Clinton’s extramarital affairs and allegations of sexual harassment and assault against the former president.
The article was sent out as a clip from the campaign’s research department the day it was published, according to a hacked email chain from Clinton campaign chair John Podesta’s inbox released by WikiLeaks this week.
The U.S. director of national intelligence and the secretary of the Department of Homeland Security have accused "Russia’s senior-most officials" of hacking and leaking emails posted to Wikileaks and other sites in order to influence the 2016 election.
Kristina Schake, deputy communications director for Hillary for America, then forwarded it to Podesta and his chief of staff, Sarah Latham. "Flagging for you," she wrote.
The email chain was among thousands of messages published by WikiLeaks over the last week.
Bill Clinton’s history has been drawn back into the spotlight in recent days after Republican presidential Donald Trump featured the former president’s accusers at a press conference ahead of the second presidential debate on Sunday.
Trump himself has been accused of sexual assault by multiple women in recent days, after video emerged last Friday of the business mogul talking about kissing and groping women without invitation in 2005.
The Post article highlighted Clinton’s confirmed and alleged extramarital affairs, including those with White House intern Monica Lewinsky and actress Gennifer Flowers. It also detailed allegations of sexual harassment and assault made against Clinton by Paula Jones, Juanita Broaddrick, and Kathleen Willey.
The article also fact-checked a comment made by Trump about Clinton’s "terrible record of women abuse," ultimately rating the remark "too vague for a fact check."