ANITA HILL MISREPRESENTED HER INTERACTIONS WITH THE SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
Contrary to her representations, Hill was the source of her allegations of sexual harassment, she was evasive when first contacted by Senate staff, and she sought to make her charge without ever having to come forward and without Thomas ever knowing her name. She twice refused to be interviewed by the FBI. She later misrepresented what transpired in her interview with the two FBI agents, both of whom signed statements contradicting her testimony.
CLARENCE THOMAS WAS PRAISED AS A CARING EMPLOYER IN HIS OFFICES AT EDUCATION AND EEOC.
Twelve women who were former colleagues of Thomas testified strongly in support of him. Several of these women testified about their own experiences with sexual harassment at other jobs, and testified about Thomas’ “scrupulous” treatment of women and extraordinary sensitivity. Several of these women were friends of Anita Hill. Not one co-worker of Hill testified in support of her allegations.
THE AMERICAN PEOPLE BELIEVED THOMAS
After watching Thomas, Hill and their witnesses testify, 58% of Americans said they believed Thomas, while only 24% said they believed Hill. And there was no gender gap – only 26% of women believed Hill. Hill’s story simply never added up. Hill also displayed her possible political motives for this testimony in 1998, when she publicly defended Bill Clinton against several credible sexual harassment charges. She admitted that pro-choice women groups will defend pro-choice men against sexual harassment charges, acknowledging a double standard on the issue.
HILL’S WITNESSES WERE ALSO INCONSISTENT
Hill’s four alleged corroborating witnesses provided very weak testimony. One witness told Committee staff that the alleged harassment happened before Hill ever worked for Thomas. Another witness claimed that Hill had no political motives to oppose Thomas because she was a conservative who fully supported the Reagan Administration’s civil rights policies. This representation was false. Angela Wright, who many claimed would provide similar testimony as Hill, declined to testify because of serious credibility issues related to her motives and her previous efforts to falsely accuse a supervisor of racism.
Hill falsely denied that she never called Thomas after she stopped working for him
Yet phone logs reveal that Hill called Thomas many times after she stopped working for him, and even got together with him at a mutual friend’s home in Oklahoma for a breakfast, and even offered to—and did—drive him to the airport following that breakfast.
Hill eagerly followed Thomas to another job even after she claimed he had harassed her at the first job
The three reasons Hill gave to explain why she followed Thomas from the Department of Education to EEOC were exposed as completely false. Contrary to her claims, she was a career employee with job security at the Department of Education. She knew Thomas’ successor (Harry Singleton), who stated that he would have welcomed Hill to continue working at the Department.
HILL IS STILL THE ONLY PERSON TO MAKE ALLEGATIONS LIKE THESE
Hill remains the only women to ever claim that Thomas discussed pornography at the work place. She remains the only person to testify that Thomas sexually harassed her.