12. “Pick the target, freeze it, personalize it, and polarize it.“ Cut off the support network and isolate the target from sympathy. Go after people and not institutions; people hurt faster than institutions. – from “Alinsky’s 12 Rules for Radicals”
As the good name of Judge Roy Moore continues to be besmirched every day by the Liberal Main Stream Media, some Liberals have finally figured out that perhaps they did not respond properly in the case of the sexual misconduct of Former President Bill “Bubba” Clinton, a guy who has been around more times than the turnstiles at Disney World.
Gee, DiNozzo. Ya think?
The Ultra-Liberal New York Times reports that
Another woman went on national television this week to press her case of sexual assault by a powerful figure. But the accused was not Roy S. Moore or Harvey Weinstein or Donald J. Trump. It was Bill Clinton. “I feel like people are starting to believe and realize that I was truly sexually assaulted by Bill Clinton,” Juanita Broaddrick said on Fox News nearly two decades after first going public with her story. “All victims matter. It doesn’t matter if you’re a Democrat or a Republican. Who cares if you’re straight or you’re gay, or if you believe in God or not. We all have a right to be believed.”
The cultural conversation about women, power and sexual misconduct that has consumed the United States in recent weeks has now raised a question that is eagerly promoted by those on the political right just as it discomfits those on the political left: What about Bill? While Fox News and other conservative outlets revive years-old charges against Mr. Clinton to accuse Mr. Moore’s critics of hypocrisy, some liberals say it may be time to rethink their defense of the 42nd president.
Matthew Yglesias, a liberal blogger who once worked at the Center for American Progress, a pillar of the Clinton political world, wrote on Vox.com on Wednesday that “I think we got it wrong” by defending Mr. Clinton in the 1990s and that he should have resigned. Chris Hayes, the liberal MSNBC host, said on Twitter that “Democrats and the center left are overdue for a real reckoning with the allegations against him.”
Caitlin Flanagan, a social critic who calls herself a “lifelong Democrat, an enemy of machine feminism and a sexual assault survivor,” wrote on The Atlantic’s website that “the Democratic Party needs to make its own reckoning of the way it protected Bill Clinton.” Michelle Goldberg wrote a New York Times column headlined, “I Believe Juanita.” David Rothkopf, a former Clinton administration official, said Monica S. Lewinsky “deserves an apology from many of us she has never received.”The emerging revisionism may influence a historical legacy that Mr. Clinton and his allies have spent the past 17 years scrubbing of scandal. Despite his impeachment on perjury and obstruction for covering up sexual liaisons with Ms. Lewinsky, Mr. Clinton until lately had made progress in framing the national memory of his presidency as a time of peace and prosperity.
But the arrival of President Trump on the political stage has chipped away at that. To counter damage from the “Access Hollywood” tape recording him boasting about groping women as well as allegations by a number of women that it was more than just “locker room talk,” Mr. Trump recruited Ms. Broaddrick and other women who had accused Mr. Clinton to join him on the campaign trail last year.
The spate of sexual misconduct stories in recent weeks has brought those cases back into the public spotlight.
“It’s about time,” Kathleen Willey, another woman who accused Mr. Clinton of sexual harassment, said Wednesday in a telephone interview from her home in Richmond, Va. “We’ve waited for years for vindication.”
She expressed bitterness that liberals and feminists did not believe her or the other accusers at the time. “They’re hypocrites,” she said. “They worship at the altar of all things Clinton. They’re all over Roy Moore, but they had nothing to say about Bill Clinton when he was accused of doing what he was accused of doing.”
Some Democratic leaders rejected the comparison. “I don’t think there’s any double standard here,” Senator Chris Van Hollen of Maryland, the chairman of the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, said last weekend on “Fox News Sunday.” “You were also talking in this case, as you know, about allegations of child sexual abuse.”
Mr. Clinton’s behavior, proved or otherwise, has long been an uncomfortable subject for Democrats. Many chose to defend him for his White House trysts with Ms. Lewinsky because, despite the power differential between a president and a former intern, she was a willing partner. To this day, Ms. Lewinsky rejects the idea that she was a victim because of the affair; “any ‘abuse’ came in the aftermath” when the political system took over, as she wrote in 2014.
Ms. Willey, Ms. Broaddrick and Paula Jones, however, described unwilling encounters. Ms. Jones asserted that Mr. Clinton, while he was governor of Arkansas and she was a state employee, summoned her to a hotel room, dropped his pants and requested oral sex. Ms. Willey, a former White House volunteer, accused him of kissing and groping her in the Oval Office. Ms. Broaddrick, an Arkansas nursing home owner, alleged that Mr. Clinton forced her to have sex during a meeting on the campaign trail in 1978.
Mr. Clinton’s lawyers have disputed all three charges, although he eventually paid $850,000 to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit by Ms. Jones without admitting wrongdoing, citing the political costs of continuing to fight it. None of those cases was part of the impeachment articles against Mr. Clinton, which rested on whether he lied under oath about his interactions with Ms. Lewinsky and coaxed her to lie, too. The House impeached him along party lines in December 1998, but the Senate acquitted him two months later.
Many Democrats condemned Mr. Clinton at the time, but they opposed his removal from office, citing what they considered the partisan nature of the attempt. The fact that some of his accusers willingly collaborated with Mr. Clinton’s conservative opponents troubled some. Others seized on inconsistencies in the women’s accounts. Ms. Broaddrick, for instance, initially denied that anything happened, saying later that she did so because she did not want to be dragged into the political arena. Ms. Willey later said she suspected the Clintons were somehow involved in the death of her husband, which was called a suicide.
Gloria Steinem, who at the time wrote a column generally defending Mr. Clinton, remains unmoved by time. “Most important is to listen to the women themselves,” she said in an email forwarded by her office on Wednesday. “Please watch Monica Lewinsky’s TED talk. It is important, moving and tells you who the abusers are.” She did not respond to questions about Ms. Broaddrick or the others.
Of course, many liberals and Democrats stood by Mr. Clinton despite the allegations because they agreed with his policy stances and did not want to reward those on the other side. Nina Burleigh, a journalist, wrote a column at the time joking that she would give Mr. Clinton oral sex for protecting abortion rights.
In an email on Wednesday, she said she did not mean to imply she supported sexual harassment. “As far as I know, Monica Lewinsky was a willing participant, not a victim,” she said. As for the other accusations against Mr. Clinton, she said, “Was he a Harvey Weinstein? I doubt it, but I have no evidence either way.”
Still, some on the other side in the 1990s have noticed a change. “Some of the same people who dismissed the women who came forward” then, “it seems like they’re evaluating these issues differently now than they did during that time,” said Gov. Asa Hutchinson of Arkansas, a Republican who was one of the House impeachment managers.
Mr. Clinton has kept publicly quiet amid the flurry of sexual misconduct stories lately, and his office had no comment on Wednesday. But other Democrats were not as willing to come to his defense this week. Of a dozen prominent political activists contacted on Wednesday, none went on the record on Mr. Clinton’s behalf.
Liberals always point the finger at others while ignoring their own hypocrisy.
Let’s look a little deeper at Bubba’s “excursions into exploring his sexuality”, shall we?
Back in the Bill Clinton era, White House advisor Betsey Wright coined the term “bimbo eruptions” to describe a long list of presidential gal pals. BIll “Bubba” Clinton’s Bimbo List” included, but is not limited to (I’m sure) Jennifer Flowers, Former Miss America Elizabeth Ward, Paul Corbin Jones, and, of course, Monica Lewinsky.
The Lewinsky scandal was a sensation that enveloped the presidency of Bill Clinton in 1998–99, leading to his impeachment by the U.S. House of Representatives and acquittal by the Senate.
Paula Corbin Jones, a former Arkansas state worker who claimed that Bill Clinton had accosted her sexually in 1991 when he was governor of Arkansas, had brought a sexual harassment lawsuit against the president. In order to show a pattern of behavior on Clinton’s part, Jones’s lawyers questioned several women believed to have been engaging in sex with him. On Jan. 17, 1998, Bubba took the stand, becoming the first sitting president to testify as a civil defendant.
During this testimony, Clinton denied having had an affair with Monica S. Lewinsky, an unpaid intern and later a paid staffer at the White House who worked in the White House from 1995–96. Lewinsky had earlier, in a deposition in the same case, also denied having such a relationship. Kenneth Starr, the independent counsel in the Whitewater case, had already received tape recordings made by Linda R. Tripp (a former coworker of Lewinsky’s) of telephone conversations in which Lewinsky described her involvement with the president. Asserting that there was a “pattern of deception,” Starr obtained from Attorney General Janet Reno permission to investigate the matter.
The president publicly denied having had a relationship with Lewinsky and charges of covering it up. His adviser, Vernon Jordan, denied having counseled Lewinsky to lie in the Jones case, or having arranged a job for her outside Washington, to help cover up the affair. Hillary Clinton claimed that a “vast right-wing conspiracy” was trying to destroy her husband, while Republicans and conservatives portrayed him as immoral and a liar.
In March, Jordan and others testified before Starr’s grand jury, and lawyers for Paula Jones released papers revealing, among other things, that Clinton, in his January deposition, had admitted to a sexual relationship in the 1980s with Arkansas entertainer Gennifer Flowers, a charge he had long denied. In April, however, Arkansas federal judge Susan Webber Wright dismissed the Jones suit, ruling that Jones’s story, if true, showed that she had been exposed to “boorish” behavior but not sexual harassment; Jones appealed.
In July, Starr granted Lewinsky immunity from perjury charges, and Clinton agreed to testify before the grand jury. He did so on Aug. 17, then went on television to admit the affair with Lewinsky and ask for forgiveness. In September, Starr sent a 445-page report to the House of Representatives, recommending four possible grounds for impeachment: perjury, obstruction of justice, witness tampering, and abuse of authority.
On Dec. 19, Clinton became the second president (after Andrew Johnson) to be impeached, on two charges: perjury—in his Aug., 1998, testimony—and obstruction of justice. The vote in the House was largely along party lines.
In Jan., 1999, the trial began in the Senate. On Feb. 12, after a trial in which testimony relating to the charges was limited, the Senate rejected both counts of impeachment. The perjury charge lost, 55–45, with 10 Republicans joining all 45 Democrats in voting against it; the obstruction charge drew a 50–50 vote. Subsequently, on Apr. 12, Judge Wright, who had dismissed the Jones case, found the president in contempt for lying in his Jan., 1998, testimony, when he denied the Lewinsky affair. In July, Judge Wright ordered the president to pay nearly $90,000 to Ms. Jones’s lawyers. On Jan. 19, 2001, the day before he left office, President Clinton agreed to admit to giving false testimony in the Jones case and to accept a five-year suspension of his law license and a $25,000 fine in return for an agreement by the independent counsel, Robert W. Ray (Starr’s successor), to end the investigation and not prosecute him.
In a later interview, Hillary claimed that Bill suffered childhood abuse which may have caused him to philanderer and experience “bimbo eruptions” later in life. She described her philandering husband as “a hard dog to keep on the porch”.
In hindsight, it would have probably would have been a less unwanted image if Hillary would have called Bubba “a difficult dog to keep on the porch”, instead.
As we return to the present, we are witnessing the Trial By Media of Judge Roy Moore, Republican Candidate for Jeff Sessions’ vacated Senate Seat in Alabama.
As Judge Moore continues to experience a manufactured “Bimbo Eruption”, some striking differences between what is happening against him and the women who came forward against President Clinton are very clear.
There was not as long a period of time between Bubba’s actions and his accusers coming forth as there was in the case of Roy Moore.
And, the Democratic Establishment and the Main Stream Media did not take them seriously, as opposed to the sainthood status given to the accusers of Judge Moore.
And, as opposed to William Jefferson Blythe Clinton, Judge Roy Moore has not admitted to any inappropriate sexual behavior.
And finally, Judge Moore knows what the definition of what “is” is.
Until He Comes,