I wish Al Gore had been President.
1
No big deal, he just had oral sex in the White House.
1
Too many men are pigs and an embarrassment to other men. Bill Clinton has been on my list of dirt heels for as long as he’s been in public life. He offends me more than he offends many of the women I know. We still voted for him. Shame on us all.
15
What about Bill ??? What about all of the other political figures, i.e., JFK, MLK, FDR (just for openers) who have used/abused/taken advantage of women while in power? Politicians' sexual misconduct has always been the worst kept secret in the political arena. Perhaps the only "good" that has come from Harvey Weinstein's despicable behavior is this issue is finally being recognized and addressed and no longer tolerated to be swept under the bedroom carpet. Granted, Bill Clinton's "discretions" occurred so long ago. But the real story is that women were taken advantage of or worse, but no one wanted to believe or even hear about their situations. At last, there seems to be a paradigm shift in which the blindfold of justice is being removed and men are finally being held accountable, publically, for their sexual misconduct. It's long overdue, but better late than never.
15
If both Bill and Hillary Clinton apologized to Monica Lewinsky I would respect them more. Monica showed such courage discussing the issues of bullying in her TED talk. I believe that Hillary's ability to blame others for everything – her husband's indiscretions, the loss of life at Benghazi, her election last year – is why people don't trust her.
I could not bring myself to vote for Hillary Clinton. I still have in my head the image of her on national TV excusing her husband for all his flaws because "he was abused as a child." Adults should be accountable for their mistakes.
44
Quite a few of us found Bill's conduct nauseating, to put it politely, but still didn't think I fit under the rubric of "treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors"...
That's not defending his conduct. I certainly didn't. But did it merit removal fro office? I didn't think so, and still don't --
30
While it would be helpful to hear a 'mea culpa' from Bill Clinton, he has been relegated to obscurity. Not so, the President, or Mr. Moore. This behavior must be condemned firmly and explicitly. Period. No passes to any pastors or would be supporters.
10
Puritans are rising again, but we're really in trouble if we abandon Double Jeopardy that prevents an accused person from being tried again following a valid acquittal or conviction.
17
Look: I agree that a discussion about Clinton's behavior is overdue. At the same time, life has a way of punishing wrongdoers. Clinton can never open his mouth without millions of people around the world thinking, "Cigar. Blue dress. Definition of 'is'." For a president, there can be few experiences more humiliating than knowing your true legacy is one of boorish behavior and sleazy alibis.
As a Democrat, I'd still vote for Clinton over George I any day of the year (and it turns out George I has his own history of bottom pinching). And in terms of ability and ongoing service to the public, would you prefer Clinton or Trump? Unfortunately elections often force us to make these choices. But maybe, now that serious conversations about sexual harassment are taking place, the kind of person who behaves like Clinton, Bush, and Trump will either sharply curtail his activities--or decide not to seek public office. Either choice is good for America.
22
Let's be clear, the Senate never acquitted Bill Clinton. The left-wing media needs to stop reporting that Clinton was acquitted--it is fake new. The impeachment process is not a court proceeding and has no mechanism for acquittal. This was actually a point that the lawyers defending Clinton made at the Senate trial, when they objected to the House prosecutors referring to the Senate as a jury, an objection which the Chief Justice sustained. The question being answered by the Senate was not whether Clinton actually lied under oath or obstructed justice--he would have lost any fair trial of the matter--the question was whether his offenses were serious enough for him to be removed from office. Furthermore, the Senate did not as a body reject the idea that it was serious enough for removal. The vote was 50 to 50. What the Senate did was fail to reach the threshold for removal, which required 67 senators vote for removal. If a analogy to a court trail must be made--and it probably should not be--then the analogy should be to a hung jury. No jury trial in this country that voted fifty percent to convict would be considered an acquittal.
20
We seem to have entered a bizarre new world in which an accusation carries the weight of a conviction, no incident is too far in the past not to be disinterred and debated, and due process falls by the wayside. The gains in public awareness made in this arena by the revelation of the Weinstein matter are in danger of collapsing under the weight of overkill.
36
Although I was a Democrat and agreed with many of Bill Clinton's political views, I never voted for him. It was a source of rife between my friends and me; they thought I needed to overlook his "indiscretions" for the greater good. I couldn't. I felt that it said something dangerous about the man and his abuse of power. I still don't think there was any greater good in his presidency. The economy was going to turn around anyway, and I think it would've happened with almost any fairly capable person who followed Bush. And he didn't address the difficult foreign issues, but swept them under the rug, leaving them for the next president. He gave many Americans a false sense of security. That, combined with his rampant disrespect for women in his personal life, convinced me that he was all about power and nothing else. I said it then, and I say it again here: If he didn't have an easy manner and all those laughter crinkles, people would've been able to see right through the man.
18
Reading the letters to the editor today is like listening to a child try to explain his/her behavior. There either is a value system in place or there isn't. You either live by that code or you don't. We all know the code for the male includes "how to manage the raging hormones." Some handle that problem and some don't even try. For those that seek to be models of restraint we ought to expect a demonstration of that behavior. For those that elect not to discipline themselves we ought to expect remorse and a willingness to follow rather than lead. As for the many who, for political or personal reasons, defend bad behavior, there is ample reason to distrust them as well. Ms. Clinton earned her rejection by her actions. The same will be true of those who elect to blame the women and not the President, either now or in the past.
13
Clinton is, and always should be, fair game for questions and criticisms. He handed out life-long sentences to the women he harassed and assaulted. They may be his victims but there is no escape from the regret, shame, anger and embarrassment that they will feel forever.
20
I have never understood how many liberals gave Bill Clinton a pass and how his victims were demonized in the media. Hillary Clinton lost my support at that time as she played the enabler to her husband's behavior & also demonized the victims. Says a lot about 'character" or lack there of...regarding both of them and helps to explain many of their patriarchal political positions.
23
I don't understand the notion that we are "giving Bill Clinton a pass." What should we be doing about Bill Clinton? He's not running for anything. He doesn't need me to give him a "pass" or not - there's nothing I could argue for doing to him now, in regard to his past crimes if such they were. If someone has a claim to press against him, they should press it. Roy Moore is running for office NOW. Plenty of people thought Bill Clinton was a creep - though not nearly as big a creep as Roy Moore, who is accused of abusing underage girls, whereas Clinton at least restricted himself to adults. With Bill Clinton, it was possible to conclude that his bad behavior sexually should not be politically disqualifying, which I still think - affairs should not disqualify someone, that's a personal matter. When there is a question of force, it's different. Also, like a lot of people, I draw a firm line between crimes targeting children and events that are disputed between adults. Juanita Broaddrick is problematic, and really can't be championed by feminists. We must believe women, but women who make accusations must not change their stories. However, now the whole issue is bizarrely confused with Hillary Clinton's presidential run. People seem to think that in voting for Hillary, they'd be condoning Bill Clinton's behavior. That is mixed up. It's the ultimate in sexism to actually blame Clinton's WIFE for his behavior, or to try to keep her out of office because of HIS crimes.
21
Millions of tax dollars, the Starr [Chamber] Report with pornographic footnotes, and the unbelievable hypocrisy of it all: The Speaker of the House was a child molester (Dennis Hastert). He was elected after Bob Livingston had to bow out of the race because Larry Flynt outed Livingston's adultery, and after Newt Gingrich had to resign over his ethical lapses, not to mention his adultery and haranguing his first wife when she was hospitalized for cancer over the terms of his first divorce. The House prosecutor was an adulterous home wrecker (Henry Hyde). And, the Special Counsel, Ken Starr, doesn't actually care about college students being raped, but he ran up a huge legal bill for salacious graphic footnotes in his taxpayer-financed Report.
All that wasn't enough? We're supposed to revisit this and spend yet more time agonizing over Bill's affair with a 24-year old?
28
The Clinton abuse allegations are as deplorable as those made against any politician, celebrity or other individual in power. However, using these arguments as a type of moral equivalency framework is just a shield that blocks close examination of Moore's abuse.
In this instance Roy Moore, not Bill Clinton is running so the revelations regrading his conduct are relevant, not those of crimes committed by other politicians. Those willing to look the other way are belittling the victims and lets a serial offender off the hook.
8
One can easily argue Bill Clinton is responsible for 9/11. For two years this country did not have a president but a full time defendant. Who knows what other business he neglected?
12
In today's hyper-charged climate and hindsight being 20/20 ... Then Bill got away with murder.
9
To all the men still jumping to Bill Clinton's defense: go see a shrink, get some help.
But, why are so many women still throwing their support behind such flagrant abuse?
That explains why our country ails from 3 key problems that women should be leading the fight on -- guns, healthcare and gender equality.
8
Why isn't Trump included in the discussion about Roy Moore?
13
I am sure it isn't hard to find an American male that has done something stupid with a woman. However, unlawful confinement, pedophilia or rape is not stupid, it's criminal. We should be extremely careful not to lump unwanted advances with criminal activity, which seems to be what the press and politicians are so willing to do to shift blame. Roy More stalked under aged girls, confined them in his home or car, and made unwanted advances that was more than just a kiss.
13
What about Bill? What do you want to happen now?
Do you want him publicly humiliated and his presidential legacy permanently damaged due to his sexual activities? Already done. In 1998, he became the second President in US history to be impeached.
Do you want him to lose his law license? Already done, but only for five years.
Do you want him prosecuted for what he did to you? The statute of limitations in Arkansas is for six years, so that does not appear to be possible.
Do you want Bill Clinton to apologize to you? Already done. Juanita, in 1991 when Bill said he wanted to apologize and asked what he could do to make it right, you told him nothing and walked away.
So, what else do you want to happen to Bill Clinton?
10
Many years ago, when Bill Clinton was governor of Arkansas, I was hired as a consultant for the state's fledgling IT department. The saying there went "The women in Arkansas are so fast, we had to put a Governor on them." The more things change....
5
Only took twenty years for the liberals to finally get it right on Bill Clinton. Fortunately Hillary lost the election. Otherwise we would have Bill doing his stuff again.
18
As liberals and democrats, we can't be hypocrites. Clinton's accusers should be respected and the accusations thoroughly investigated. Unfortunately what it will boil down to is many left leaning sexual predators will be purged, negating otherwise brilliant accomplishments, while right leaning predators will continue to be embraced by their constituencies and remain free to push their holier than thou hate filled agenda. We all lose, but republicans, who have always welcomed these types to their ranks will lose less.
9
I am so tired of the Clintons--all of them. I never liked them, even though I held my nose and voted for them on several occasions and now I just want them to go away quietly to the "where are they now" column, dated November 17, 2027.
10
Bill Clinton did "have sex with that woman," as biological evidence on her dress confirmed. He probably had sex with his other accusers and several others we do not know about. From the Monica story, we know he was having secret sexual encounters with a young employee and lying to cover them up. From there, it is not difficult to believe he lied and covered up other abuses of power that sexually victimized women.
Bill Clinton got away with sexual abuse. He can no longer be impeached or prosecuted for what he did while in office. We may never know the full truth of what he did and whether the accusations were embellished or, in some cases, fabricated. But we do know he had took advantage of a position of power to exploit a young employee. To the extent we make excuses for that, we are facilitating ongoing sexual coercion and violence against employees who find themselves in similar circumstances.
12
Somehow Hillary is the cause of this. Lock her up and the world will go back to its normal place. While you are it ask why the 3 accusers of Bill Clinton support Donald Trump.
PS: if we are examining the evil of misogyny and sexism it's fascinating to note the misogynistic and sexist language in describing Hillary Clinton.
9
How can you leave out the MOST important facts in this article?
An independent prosecutor, Ken Starr, was given unlimited subpoena power, staff, money, and time to investigate all these charges against Bill Clinton.
Starr was threatening jail for witnesses who did not confirm these women's stories. He was trying with every bit of his power to "get" Bill Clinton.
And he could not. I am all for investigating all the allegations against other powerful men by giving a prosecutor from the other party the same kind of power that Ken Starr had to investigate Bill Clinton and try to give credibility to the women who charged him.
If those independent prosecutors fail to make these women credible witnesses the way that Ken Starr failed, with the unlimited power he had, then I think we can consider that they are cleared.
This false equivalency by the NY Times has got to stop. Please stop falling for the right wing propaganda and being played like a fiddle. It brought us Trump. Do your job and stop falling for this.
20
Who would you want in the White House now- Clinton or Trump? Hands down it's Bill for me.
13
It seems there are a lot of pigs among American (and other) males. What are we to do?
First, a question: how is it that no charges have been leveled against a single black male. Given the mysoginist lyrics of rap, which seem to merit universal absolution from the Popes and Priestesses of social media, I wonder why.
Second, a suggestion: there seem to have been at least 100 pigs who have been outed. Let's assume that only 1% of the bad guys have been outed. That means there are another 9900 not yet convicted of "misconduct".
Why not convict all 10,000, and provide them with dunce caps, and make them sit in a corner in a public square for 24 hours.
Then let's award the remaining 129,990,000 males with "good guy" caps, and have them march in parades around the country.
I think we need to re-establish the rule of law in this country, so we should create a new offence, sexual misconduct, and make it simple: "Ask and receive permission." Seems pretty simple. In the old days (most of the twentieth century), I believe that's the way most men behaved. It certainly seems like a basic civilized behavior to be followed between two or more persons, whatever their genders, races, ages, etc. And perhaps the age thing needs to be discussed and clarified and better encoded in law.
We need to simply describe a realistic code of behavior that is acceptable ("ask and receive", or whatever) and move on. I expect the vast majority will adhere to it. At least, I hope so!
1
He's been examined and condemned up yazoo, for goodness sakes he almost was impeached, how many times does he have to go through this? Nobody could be more vicious and dogged in pursuit of blame than Ken Starr and even when Hillary was running these women were trotted out to embarrass her, sitting in the front row, right in her face. Geez leave the man alone.
10
Bill Clinton is NOT running for public office. He has been disgraced, impeached and tried in the court of public opinion many times. This is a red herring. Get over it. The CURRENT president hasn't answered any of his accusers. Pick on him for a while. Bill Clinton is NOT running for public office. Seriously folks, this is old news.
16
Maybe it's time to ask Clarence Thomas and Anita Hill to return for additional testimony before the Senate Judiciary Committee?
19
What Bill Clinton did was horrible. He should have resigned. Those of us old enough at the time should be ashamed that we did not demand just that. Bill Clinton is one reason Hillary Clinton is less than well-liked. I am a Democrat. I cannot stand Bill Clinton.
10
I found the ladies liked Bill when he became a media star.
1
I was loathe to accept that President Clinton was guilty, until he admitted it. Then he was both a predator, and a liar. I am a liberal progressive Democrat, who has developed a new metric for assessing repugnant behavior. It is rampant in our culture, and as a white male, I am part of it by default. Shame lies on America for electing a man who openly boasts of his behavior. Shame on Alabama if it does the same.
Bill Clinton can not rehabilitate his reputation with me, any more that Richard Mulhouse Nixon did. I am reminded today how President Carter spoke of his own failings in his heart, and how he was deeply ridiculed for it. He did this when there wasn't anyone accusing him of acting inappropriately. It seemed quaint to me at the time, but today seems like an enormously brave thing to have stated. We could do with a lot more humility in our leaders today. Bill Clinton is a liar, and that is what I think of every time I see his picture. It transcends his politics.
12
What about Clarence Thomas? His accuser seemed to be far more credible than he is, and she was a far more credible than he was. He is now a Supreme Court Justice. Should the allegations against him be re-examined?
22
The Monica Lewinsky affair was sexual activity by two consenting adults and should never have been made public by the woman whom Lewinsky foolishly confided in. The Lewinsky affair should never have been a subject for impeachment, especially with the philanderer Gingrich leading the charge. The earlier Clinton accusations by these women is another story. But that was another day. If all the gropers and sexual predators in the Congress in the 1990s had been impeached for their own sexual misconduct there would have been no one left to impeach Clinton.
14
Are you serious? The mainstream media dined on the Clinton story for years. It was so easy. They didn't have to study and analyze any kind of policy. They didn't have to be actual journalists. All they had to do was to relay any kind of Gossip that they heard or that the Arkansas project put out there. It was an appalling period of time. They just moved like vultures on any tidbit. And went back to their cocktail parties. No heavy lifting.
And now you want to bring it back? Well why not? It's easier than being a real reporter. You had a taste of it during the email faux scandal. Every woman but Monica had something really sketchy about their stories. With Mellon scaife waiving around his money. Have fun. You won't have to wonder why the Press has such a low rating on both sides of the aisle.
10
I just don't care anymore. All these allegations coming up are a distraction. Let this get taken care (of course, it never will as long as men exist and women need them to reproduce), just stop clogging up my news feed. I am sick of it and don't care anymore.
Unfortunately, Clinton is old news and not running for anything or leading anything at the moment, so this is useless to think about. What is happening now and how will it change our present and future? Who are voting in to lead us right now, not twenty years ago. So many distractions...
2
Why are we evaluating the conduct of every public figure accused of sexual misconduct except for trump who we even have on tape bragging about sexual assault?
10
The Clintons are now private citizens and, to be honest, not the issue at all. The harassment charges have been investigated and seem to have gone nowhere. His relationship with Ms. Lewinsky was consensual and while not wholly appropriate is in NO way comparable to the idea that the President advocated assaulting women or that Roy Moore was potentially cruising minors. The idea that we cannot consider their misdeeds because you disagree with how Mr Clinton was dealt with 25 years ago is idiotic and childish.
6
What about Trump? His blatant bragging about his mistreatment of women is abominable. He should be held accountable.
7
Let's start a list of men who have never been inappropriate with women. It would probably only include Mike Pence.
7
Kennedy (allegedly) defiled the White House and apparently had staffers on the government payroll pimping and pandering on his behalf. But that must be too far back, too? Truman and Coolidge are remembered as decent, ethical people who didn't prostitute the office or enrich themselves at the public's expense. Examples of people with character who would be excellent leaders today: Bill Gates (he doesn't need more money, he's brilliant, ethical and knows world leaders), Steven Chu, and John Roberts. Let's draft someone, instead of settling for the biggest narcissist in the bunch.
2
As the country struggles with all the recent accusations of sexual misbehavior by so many prominent men, even now going back to Bill Clinton, I can't help but wonder what about the current president? With several women coming forward with accusations leading up to the election and his recorded boasting on "Access Hollywood", why is this being ignored?
5
Parsing out the distinctions in outrageous behavior between Clinton and Moore is simply pathetic. Both are exemplars of the real problem, which is the use of power, the attraction of power, to sexually exploit women.
As a Democrat and Trump hater I can say that Clinton looks even worse in retrospect and undeserving of the free pass that many of us gave him. I can remember the excuses that we in the US simply overreact to sexual peccadillos that Europeans simply shrug off. Like Pompidou's mistress and children sitting behind his wife at the funeral. Or Berlusconi, by any measure an Italian speaking pig by any other name.
Ah, we have perfected the fine art of excuse by citing the bad behavior of others, haven't we?
The Clinton's should leave us in peace and simply go away....
And Trump impeached and Moore defeated.
4
Bill's past should be treated no differently than other men who have allegations of sexual abuse, misconduct and/or harassement. Times are changing along with our belief in women's voices. So.....Trump's accusers need to be believed as well and Trump needs to bear the consequneces of his wayward past. We are at a moral crossroads, a tipping point of sorts.
2
"Gloria Steinem, who at the time wrote a column generally defending Mr. Clinton, remains unmoved by time."
She's a world class hypocrite.
14
I have zero problem discussing Bill Clinton as a sexual predator. I have zero problem with taking a hard look at the accusations against him, and making an effort to go beyond our own political biases in order to give women who have been victimized our full support.
BUT
Not if the conversation is an excuse to turn focus away from Moore or Trump.
Not if any part of that discussion includes bad-mouthing Hillary Clinton. Bill's actions are his responsibility, and his alone. How about this: When we start blaming all the other white men in power of encouraging sexual predation, *and* we start prosecuting them for aiding and abetting criminal action, *and* we devote serious time and academic research on how women unwittingly perpetuate patriarchal oppression, THEN we can talk about the wives and colleagues of these jerks.
5
Back in the day, a lady did not go to a man's hotel room (Paula) or admit a man to her motel room (Juanita) unless they were inviting misbehavior. This comment doesn't excuse or condemn President Clinton, it just speaks as a woman also from Arkansas, back in the day.
7
I feel sorry for Jeffrey Toobin. He wrote an excellent book investigating these claims which nobody seems to have read, including Times reporters.
7
Long after Bill and Hillary have left this mortal coil, the republican party will continue to thrash them both at every opportunity. That is, assuming that President Predator doesn't light the fuse on WWIII first.
4
So while writer Peter Baker is into revivals, let's reawaken the sexual conduct of Thomas Jefferson, Warren Harding, Franklin D. Roosevelt, John F. Kennedy, Lyndon Johnson, and Bill Clinton -- among probably 10 more we don't know for sure about.
7
And The Donald?
7
And Donald Trump - he’s and admitted sexual abuser and braggart?
8
"What about Trump"?
9
I am not a partisan Democrat but I think Clinton's sexual escapades are absolutely not reason to remove him from office. However, I do think he proved himself unworthy of our trust and unfit to hold his high office when he wagged his finger at us and lied to every one of us on TV about his shenanigans with Monica Lewinsky.
Now, feminists want to criminalize nearly ALL behavior toward them by men whose attention they don't desire. They also want to reduce or eliminate many traditional rights comprising Constitutionally required due process (5th Amendment, 14th Amendment) and even the Constitutional right to confront witnesses against them (6th Amendment) as evidenced by the Obama initiated procedures forced on colleges when women accuse male students.
Enough of this feminist campaign against fundamental fairness and individual freedom itself. Now, supposedly responsible media like the New York Times have become little more than feminist propaganda rags anxious to publicize accusation and innuendo without even a shred of corroborating evidence. The feminists have declared war on men. They have won early victories. But they may see unpleasant consequences arising from men taking measures to insulate themselves from the threat that women now pose. Women have been emboldened by these recent successes to destroy men with mere accusation but no evidence. That serves to encourage false accusations. Men must take measures to reduce the risk of false accusations.
1
There is no political discourse for the general good; both republicans and democrats have been replaced with the ideology of hypocrisy!!!! Bill and Hilary Clinton are the ideologues for defending the abuser and persecuting the victims. For every democrat there is a republican sexual predator; and for every republican there is a democrat; sexual predators, some serving as congressman and senators and will continue to do so! President Clinton lied and misused his political office and influence to conceal his white house affair; many defended him at the expense of the victims, no greater defender than Hillary and her feminists allies! There defense: it was a different time and the president was promoting economic and social good. Sexual abuse to them was a relative unlike the absolutism of today. Sexual abuse is unacceptable then and is now. Regardless for what principles an individual encompasses, sexual misconduct is an overarching commandment that transcends time and political affiliations... But to accept such behavior and conflate it with the individuals social and economic programs for the general good, is hypocrisy at its best!!!
1
Marjorie Spruill writes in, Divided We Stand: The Battle Over Women's Rights and Family Values that Polarized American Politics,, that in the 1992 election, women voted for Clinton over Bush 45 percent to 37 percent because they were concerned about the rise of the Religious Right who now constituted 24 percent of the electorate. This choice gave them a president who supported women's reproductive rights and appointed a record number of women to his cabinet and other positions in the administration, including Janet Reno, Madeline Albright and Ruth Bader Ginsburg. The context explains their choice and as another reader noted, history willl be the judge.
6
Lots of women--and men--supported Bill because they liked his policies. They tried to suggest he had not harassed several women who accused him of misconduct. They worked hard to not believe the accusers.
I am Democrat, and I did this myself. I was wrong to do so.
I am a survivor of repeated molestation by my aunt when I was a child. My mother on dozens of occasions exposed herself to me "by accident" when I was a kid, though it only happened when no one else was at home. They were both abused by their mother when they were little girls. I never shared my experiences, but the many women and men who are coming forward these days give us all courage, and make us feel less alone.
We all owe them our thanks, and our support.
7
The original Matthew Ygelsias article was subtitled "What He Did To Monica Lewinsky Was Wrong & He Should Have Resigned". Since Ms. Lewinsky has made it clear that her relationship with Clinton was consensual, Mr Yglesias' point of view seems to run the risk of achieving the opposite of what he presumably intends: is it empowering women if they are denied the right to decide for themselves whether they gave consent or not, and for others to make that judgment on their behalf?
8
I remember being at an academic conference during the Lewinsky affair, and a revered teacher (a European) dismissed the whole thing as an example of lower middle class small mindedness. This was the typical attitude of left wing intellectuals at the time. But times change often without our being aware of it. For example, a few weeks ago an actress named Amber wrote an article in the NYT complaining of all the sexual things she was subjected to and proclaiming how she was not going to take it anymore. Since my understanding (stereotype) of the younger generation is that they’re all into hook-ups and things like that, I dismissed her proclamation and defiance in a comment. I was quite surprised at the reactions of the NYT’s readers to my comment. I never realized that the readers were such Puritans. Or had I, unbeknownst to me, been transported to Saudi Arabia? The point of all this is that norms change. In Freudian terminology we can say that while the Id is constant and universal, the Superego changes and is a historical construct. What was acceptable in Clinton’s time is no longer so. But what will be acceptable twenty years from now? And how will the people living then look back and judge what’s going on (in terms of sexual morality) in our present age?
2
I knew when I made the decision to cote for Bill Clinton in 1992 and again in 1996 that he was a flawed candidate. I voted for him because I agreed with the policies he championed.
I was disgusted by Clinton's affair/dalliance with Ms. Lewinsky because it was wrong, and because it meant he used his political capitol to survive. I do not regret my vites because I balance Bill Clinton's sins against his political accomplishments, which include judicial appointments and the fact that we did have a more prosperous economy.
In the 40 years that I have voted I have found almost all candidates to be flawed in some way.
4
Granted, former President Clinton's behavior bears scrutiny at this particular moment. If that's so, however, it ought to be equally true that the current President's behavior merits scrutiny. In all such cases, a thorough vetting of the allegations and an impartial adjudication should be a paramount goal.
3
Now it's time to investigate more of the likely Clinton crimes - especially the hijacking of the DNC in the last election.
35
How did Clinton hijack the DNC? They were providing it with most of its money.
4
Why stop with Bill Clinton? Why not go back to JFK and LBJ - both of whom were long-term serial abusers.
21
Don’t forget Clarence Thomas. And what about the current president?
Why?? -- Maybe it's because both JFK and LBJ are dead, and no longer running for Office.
1
Did you forget FDR?
1
Regarding Monica Lewinsky:
As Peter Baker writes: 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.
And yet we are now prepared to abuse her again by depriving her of her own opinion? Is the new philosophy to abuse the victim to save the victim?
Regarding Bill Clinton:
The willingness to conflate Bill Clinton’s womanizing with Roy Moore’s pedophilia, and worse, to suggest that Roy Moore is being unfairly persecuted because Bill Clinton was supposedly let off—as if this would somehow suggest Roy Moore’s innocence!?—is a perverse insult to everyone who has ever suffered pedophilia.
48
My recollection is that Clinton was impeached and tried in the Senate, and then lost his law license. He was not convicted and removed from office based on a Senate trial.
Several of the women accusing him were also heavily supported by the vast right wing conspiracy. The accusations were or could be true, and the women may have been sincere, but their sponsors' motives were not.
8
With what science now tells us about brain development--but what anyone with a brain could have told you from the beginning of itme--a woman in her early twenties is still a kid. Anyone who can say, with a straight face, that an affair between the most powerful man in the world and an intern in her early twenties was *a consensual affair between two adults* is gonna need a lot of clearance room for that ever-growing Pinocchio nose.
The Clintons have always been contemptible because they*ve always known better. Backwoods Bill was privileged to receive the best education possible in this or any possible world. Hillary was seen, even before becoming a Clinton, as a young woman who could go anywhere under her own steam.
Instead they became their own little Mafia family, and spent a lifetime crushing others beneath their relentless heels.
Sometimes justice is particularly apt. That Her lost to a serial abuser and exploiter of women is probably the most fitting loss I*ve ever seen.
Why do we keep talking about Bill? Because Clintonworld strangled the Democratic Party so effectively that his wife*s candidacy brought us Donald.
Yes. It*s time to move on. To a clean new fresh Democratic Party, washed of the stench of the past.
43
Clean what? With the judiciary firmly in the hands in conservatives do you really believe that the democrats will make a national comeback? Get real, not going to happen. We may win a presidency here and there, but not Congress for a long, long time.
3
This makes no sense. You're basically blaming Hillary for whatever Bill did, and that's just not reasonable.
4
Bill was Monica's employer. The most powerful man in the world. That he walked away and she got blamed was terrible.
49
I have been saying this 1992. If Bob Dole had done what Clinton did, he would have been hung from the highest rafters by feminists like Gloria Steinem, one of my idols. Monica Lewinsky was abandoned by feminists and fed to the wolves. It was disgraceful and Hillary was one of the biggest victim shamers and that has always been my problem with her. I am a lifelong Democrat and a feminist.
8
Wait a minute. This is not some romatic novel where the woman is the sole victim of the man's advances.
You seriously need to take another look at the videotapes --Lewinsky was a player.
5
Bill Clinton's insecurities and pathetic need for sexual conquest led him to destroy himself, tied an anchor around the neck of Al Gore which brought us 8 years of Bush, Cheney and endless war. Clinton's attempt to avoid impeachment led him to suck up to Wall Street and Republicans and turn Wall Street into a Wild West casino where they played with house money. Without the two bills Bill signed, the crash of 2008 would not have happened. Even Hillary was handicapped by Bill. It is reasonable to say that the Clintons are responsible for Trump being president right now. All because Bill was too insecure to be able to keep it in his pants.
33
It's hard to believe the irrationality of this. The Clintons are responsible for everything that's gone wrong in the past 30 years, including Donald Trump. Okay.
3
Joe in NY. Let's not get carried away. To blame Hillary for Trump is absurd.
3
What about Donald?
20
Juanita Broaddrick is too kind; she wasn’t just “sexually assaulted by Bill Clinton.” She was forcibly raped by Bill Clinton.
And why does she have to resort to the contemptible Fox News? Why has she never been able to tell her story on, for example, Meet the Press?
30
She denied she was raped under oath. She didn’t remember the date she was alledgedly raped. She had an affair unbeknownst to her husband at the time. What if she was caught just after the act and she had to make up the rape story to save her alimony and/or the relationship with her lover? Many other things in her story don’t add up. Women can be liars too...
5
She wasn't anything by Bill Clinton. She swore under oath that nothing happened (the affidavit is online; a Google search is easy, really) and she's on Fox because real news organizations won't listen to her any longer.
4
What about Clarence Thomas?
28
What about Donald ???
26
I️ hope we can all agree that Clinton is a bad man. If you believe the victims of Weinstein, Spacey, Louis CK, Moore and Trump, you should believe Wiley, Braoddrick and everyone else about Clinton. Disgusting!
16
It's all he said, she said. What I don't like is accusations becoming a media firestorm before any of it can be proven. For all we know, much of these accounts are made up and possibly retaliation for career bumps, non-promotions, lack of success or what have you. Look at Chloe Goins, one of Bill Cosby's accusers. Completely unreliable testimony, yet she's Jane Doe #2. How can any of these women be considered telling the truth when some of their accounts are so unbelievable they have to be dismissed as attention-seeking.
6
Of course. And let's blame Hillary. Everything is her fault after all. Watch Fox News. They believe she should be impeached.
23
Hillary aided and abetted Bill for decades.
6
Indeed I do blame Hillary for leading the smear campaign against all the Bill
Clinton accusers. She lead the so called "Bimbo Eruptions Squad" and portrayed every woman accusing her husband of any impropriety as part of a vast right wing conspiracy. The conspiracy was hers in covering up her husband's wrong doing. Now, the democrats can no longer excuse Bill and claim to be advocates for women. Yet another reason I'm happy Trump was elected. None of this, not Clinton bff Weinstein or any of the rest, would have come out had Hillary won.
4
How come it got so quiet about Trump's sexual misconduct history?
23
If Clinton is fair game so is this person trump, our pretend president
27
Indeed, Bill Clinton abused his power, both as governor and POTUS and sexual predators come in all colors, shapes, sizes and political leanings etc. However, I would like to know why Juanita Broaddrick has allowed herself to be used by Donald the genital grabber in chief Trump? As of today, she has not said anything about whether believes any of Trump's victims, but continues to speak out about Bill Clinton. Is this not another example of hypocrisy?
21
She does not seem admirable. I would like to believe her, but she has shown so much deviousness herself that it's pretty difficult.
4
What makes the difference between just being licentious and actually criminal behavior is using force and deception.
Various accusations swirl around public figures. It does look like Bill Clinton is licentious and cheated extensively on his wife. But as for accusing him of more than that ... only Juanita Broaddrick claims he actually raped her.
And Kathleen Willey lied to the FBI about her relationship with her boyfriend. So what it looks like, is that Bill Clinton's licentious behavior was reported accurately, and in a few cases, it got blown up into more than that.
If more women came forward saying Bill Clinton actually acted like a predator rather than just a man who didn't restrain his sexuality, it would be more believable.
But Bill Clinton doesn't seem like a predator, just hypersocial and hypersexual.
Some of the stuff Roy Moore did, does sound predatory - he was deceptive, he went after young girls, may have tried to force himself on them. Although he did desist when they got upset and asked to be taken home - at least that can be said in his defense.
11
And even Juanita broaddrick changed her story many times and lied under oath.
5
Now is the time to go after tRUMP an a public admitted sexual offender.
13
Some other people who need to reckon with the way they protected Bill:
Hillary Clinton, who insinuated that Monica was mentally disturbed, and therefore not credible.
Sidney Blumenthal, who was assigned to destroy the reputations of journalists, including student journalists, who dared to report the truth.
Jim Carville, who performed character assassination against these accusers.
Madeleine Albright, who allowed herself to be used as a female barricade against the truth.
21
I find Monica Lewinsky problematic. She's still seeking the limelight, over twenty years later, on the basis of notoriety the affair gave her. I think Bill Clinton demeaned the presidency, his wife, his daughter and Monica Lewinsky also. I don't defend him. But Monica Lewinsky is hardly blameless. And why shouldn't Hillary Clinton insult the woman? She had an affair with her husband. What's she supposed to do? invite her over for tea?
6
You should read Abou MENA ARKANSAS associated with IRAN CONTRA, it might change your mind about the elephant in the room.
2
It's not like he got off scot-free. There was an impeachment trial over the perjury associated with Ms. Lewinsky. Nonetheless, he was never called to account for the alleged sexual assaults themselves. So, have at it in the interests of justice. While you're at it, though, let's thoroughly investigate back to the founding of the Republic. I understand Mr. Franklin had quite a reputation. In other words, men's behavior in this regard is not a new problem by any means.
4
This will go nowhere. Bottom line is, can you have blamed Bill?
2
Seems to me that we as a nation are facing very difficult, important, and dangerous situations in the world: N. Korea, Syria, Iran, Zimbabwe, Ukraine, Russia, Spain, etc.
But all this is being completely obscured by vicious partisan infighting (which, of course, is what Putin wants). We have become completely distracted from the important tasks at hand.
Similarly, I remember Clinton for his refusal to make any move to help Rwanda during the genocidal murder of 800,000 innocents. Also his refusal to do anything to restrain Serbia until it was much too late.
I do not intend to diminish any suffering he caused to these women (I supported them at the time and was enraged by his defenders), but I really think we have our priorities seriously messed up here.
8
Let me get this clear. Bill Clinton's former and wholly inappropriate behavior somehow justifies that of the more current molester-in-chief, who, incidentally, calls ALL his accusers "liars" and threatens to sue them (what would that court case look like?). And "the base", comprised in large part of Evangelicals, cheers him on. Is this about where we are on this matter?
17
We have reached the moment of reckoning, as Caitlin Flanagan notes.
Part of the reckoning is realizing that Hillary might be president if she had divorced Bill Clinton, as much of her "inauthenticity" is rooted in the double-standard she had a feminist.
He will always drag her down, sadly enough. And it looks like they both have below them some distance to go.
7
And which case of political men behaving badly has had the most horrendous fallout?
Not that of Bill, nor Donald, nor Roy (nor Denny, Newt, Henry H., Bob L., JFK, FDR...)
But that of Anthony whats-his-name and his penchant for sexting minors on a laptop that also housed a few of Hillary's (gasp!) emails, so tantalizing for Saint Comey to trot out before the voting public one week before election day.
That, more than anything else, gave us this, from which we as a country may never recover.
6
All of this Clinton, Moore, Franken etc. makes me ashamed to be a man.
2
You can reexamine Clinton if you reexamine Gingrich at the same time. And then explain how that holier than thou, helmet headed Catholic who is his current wife is now the US Ambassador to the Vatican.
30
The liberals who question President Clinton's behavior in the1990s and before phrase their concerns as follows: "I think we got it wrong"--Yglesias; "Democrats and the center left are overdue for a real reckoning"--Hayes: "the Democratic Party needs to make its own reckoning."--Flanagan; "I believe Juanita"--Michelle Goldberg; "Monica S. Lewinsky deserves an apology from many of us.."--David Rothkopf.
Notice that with the exception of Ms Goldberg's argument the others are self-referential. They refer to what the Democrats should now do.
Ms. Goldberg is the only one who directly addresses the claims against Mr. Clinton. Yet her argument is non-existent. She says that she believes Ms Broaddrick's testimony to the FBI, which stated that Mr. Clinton raped her but not her affadavit to Paula Jones's lawyers stating that he did not rape her. Both statements were made under penalty of perjury. Ms Broaddrick's statements are similar to saying "It was raining but it was not raining."
This is a logical inconsistency. Why would Ms. Goldberg try to salvage it by believing only the first clause?
11
There is a pattern of narcissistic powerful men engaging in these disgusting behaviors. Even JFK was a sex addict but his proclivities were carefully hidden. Most politicians fit this mold. They can be charming and convincing and many are attractive. I don't blame the victims. For example, with Weinstein the women were dependent on him for their careers. Whenever the balance of power is skewed, women and male victims suffer indignities.
6
What? Clinton? What about our CURRENT President?
19
Interesting, few people are discussing the behavior of Bush Sr.. Numerous women have spoken out recently about his inappropriate actions. Then, there is the president with his deplorable record of treatment of young teens and women. This is not a partisan issue. This is a pervasive problem in our society. Women are treated extremely poorly.
Two key points to keep in mind are:
1) There is a difference between verbal and physical abuse. Verbal abuse can be damaging, but it can also be a bit less black and white.
2) There is a huge difference between abusing a minor versus adult. While both are wrong, being a pedophile is at the bottom of the bottom.
9
In shrugging off Bill Clinton's sexual misconduct accusers, I was almost as bad as those shrugging off Moore's accusers. As a partial excuse the Clintons had been the subject of so many accusations that proved to be nothing or very little (Whitewater, Travelgate, Troopergate, Vince Foster's suicide) that I was worn down by accusation fatigue.
7
Does anyone remember the the glee of all of the Clinton haters creating one phony scandal after another? The packs of investigators persecuting all of his previous friends, Hillary's old colleagues, jailing a woman who wouldn't accuse him, the hyperbolic crowing about "worse than Watergate" for one non-scandal after another. There is only one woman who accused Clinton of rape. If there had been a rape, do you really think Ken Starr would not have used it?
21
I don't feel sexual misconduct is a debate. Any time a man repeatedly harasses and/or abuses a women, it's a behavior and psychological issue that will continue to fester and cause harm unless the man seeks professional help. For some unknown reason, the simple little word "NO" does not register in their vocabulary or mental framework. Sexual predators never stop hurting or taking advantage after just one woman - it's a pattern that repeats itself over and over again.
I could never stand Bill Clinton, especially after he was elected president. The fact that now, after 22 years, his assorted scandal is back in the news is similar to screaming to close the barn door after the horses got out. I only wish his sexual misconduct was viewed as disgusting then as Harvey Weinstein's actions are today. And to be honest, if it weren't for Weinstein's long history of sexual misconduct and the many brave women who came forward, this article on Bill Clinton would be none existent in today's NYT edition.
9
It was a mistake for Juanita Broaddrick to align herself with forces politically battling the Clintons in ways that were impossible to believe. Whatever credibility she and the other accusers may have had was squandered by things like appearing in that circus sideshow with Trump - engineered by Steve Bannon - before Trump's debate with Hillary Clinton.
Accusations of sexual assault are deadly earnest - except when the accusers appear to have thrown in with questionable partisan forces making a sleazy attempt to force someone from office by hurling numerous outrageous and groundless accusations hoping that if they throw enough garbage at a hated political opponent, maybe some of it will stick. All the Clinton accusers had this problem, from Paula Jones to Broadrrick to Willey.
At the time these accusations were made - while the right was trying to impeach President Clinton & force his resignation - various people accused the Clintons of absolutely ridiculous things including having murdered Deputy White House Counsel and Clinton friend Vince Foster. Willey claimed she suspected the Clintons were involved in the death of her husband, who like Foster committed suicide. At that point, most people were not going to believe the accusations against Bill Clinton without powerful evidence - which didn't exist.
My tendency is always to believe the women - but not in this case.
Lie down with vicious liars like Newt Gingrich, Donald Trump & Steve Bannon, get up with fleas.
15
Oh, for God's sake! This feminist has no doubt that Bill Clinton did what he is accused of doing. He's probably still putting his hands where they don't belong, but he is not running for office now. "The left is not blameless" meme doesn't diminish the severity of Moore's actions nor does it make them untrue. Clinton's defenders are wrong and so are Moore's defenders. But, again, Clinton is not running for office and Moore is. Let's concentrate on preventing one more amoral man, Moore, from gaining even more power and stature. Clinton is done and gone.
7
We already went through this with Bill Clinton. It destroyed his presidency in that the fact that he balanced the budget and gave us a surplus as well as many other things people don't appreciate or give him credit for because of it. How much more humiliation are the Republicans and the press going to heap upon him? He has paid dearly for his actions. Why don't you investigate Trump and the women he assaulted--and the underage girls? Why don't you give Trump the treatment you gave Bill Clinton, instead of doing Trump's bidding to investigate Bill Clinton? Regardless of what you think of them, the Clintons are not punching bags.
11
I like the idea of reexamining Bill Clinton, it is long overdue. What I do not like is the dangerous new precedent where the children and wives of sexual deviants are held accountable for their behavior. Mob mentality. We see this with Hilary and Chelsea.
To put this more bluntly, should people blame Melania and Ivanka for Trump's grabbing behavior? Welcome to 2017 where it is not only expected, but it is conveniently political to unilaterally blame everyone with the same last name for anything that will stick.
If it is too far a jump to look at Hilary and Chelsea Clinton separately from Bill, let us hope that Trump does not expect special treatment for his wife and family. He has a bigger family than the Clintons and a lot of wives.
5
Here is what is missing from the arguments about sexual harassment. Human beings individually, and human society in general, evolve.
Slavery was not perceived as evil enough to divide the nation when the constitution was written, but less than a century later it was.
Powerful men taking advantage of their social positions to get more sexual opportunities, has been the norm of every society that has ever existed and now, suddenly it isn’t.
Hollywood has been a sexual playground for famous and powerful men since its inception. The “casting couch” is not a myth. Everyone knew it and those who did not participate put up with it. Then suddenly, there was Weinstein.
I wouldn’t say we should excuse all the wrongs that are coming to light, but we can also understand that times and people change and be happy about it.
And, by the way, wasn’t it Monica who first put the moves on bill?
5
It is very hard to apply today's lens to earlier times. Mark Twain was one of the most progressive thinkers of his era, but looking at his statements from a 2017 perspective, he was a racist with some awful beliefs about African-Americans. We now look back on the philandering/misogyny of everyone from JFK to Sinatra with horror and disbelief. What I think IS important is to look at this behavior in the context of the times. None of us think of our parents as monsters and child abusers because they smoked like chimneys in front of us. drove us with no seatbelts, and fed us hamburger helper, although no credible parent would do so today.
So whether it is Clinton or yes, even Trump or Moore, we should be glad and vigilant that their behavior is now seen as beyond the pale (although altogether still too rampant among powerful men for anyone's comfort). But by the same token, we cannot view actions from 30-40 years ago using the same standard we do today. Repugnant as it may seem, the behavior from back then on everything from smoking in front of children to aggressive pursuit of young women by powerful men to the wretched homophobia endorsed by no less than the APA in its DSM are from a less enlightened time. What I would say is this: If we ARE to hold powerful men to the 2017 standard, the first in line needs to be Donald Trump. Clinton left office 17 years ago, so if we want to talk hypocrisy, let's talk those giving Trump a pass. He does play the President on TV.
7
All accusations are not equal and I'm not going to believe any accusation or claim simply because its made. Juanita Broaddrick and Kathleen Willey have, through their conflicting statements under oath, so muddied the waters that their accusations will never be credible. I'm a feminist from way back and that status is consistent with the need to exercise reason, logic, and critical examination of the circumstances.
11
And just when we thought we'd all forgotten about Bill. Remind us again, please, about John and Marilyn. It's been so many years I've forgotten what that was even about.
1
We can castigate every male, famous or non-famous, who has acted in a way that constitutes sexual discrimination, assault, harassment or other wrong. In my estimation that would be about 2/3 of the male population.
1
The debate is leading to the one question everyone is avoiding like the plague:
What about the accusations against Donald Trump?
We can not go on for weeks having new accusations and calls for resignations from all the potential as yet unidentified offenders in Congress and elsewhere without eventually getting to the elephant in the Oval Office.
It would be more than "extremely troubling" to watch the accusations grow in the coming weeks without taking on the one man who was accused and bullied his way to a complete pass.
If accusers are Now to be believed, lets cut to the chase and get to it.
7
Doesn't anyone remember the statute of limitations. In NY state, for example you have only one year to sue for battery, a wrongful nonconsenual "touching.". You get more time for you sexual transgressions, but not that much more time. As time goes by, the memories of witnesses fade, evidence disappears and the prospect of more litigation is manifestly unjust. In new York, you may try to argue that you should get extra time to sue because your physical or mental status was impaired, but that's difficult today. Sometime within the past 15 years a mans soit was dismissed for lateness even though he was both paralyzed and schizophrenic. (This suit was in NY, the court was either one of the appellate divisions or the court of appeals). So we shouldn't allow a woman to wait 30 years to sue because she was. Allegedly traumatized.
2
If I'm not mistaken all of this was thoroughly litigated in the press, in Congress and in the court of public opinion; the results were what the results were. On what basis would we reevaluate the entire body of evidence that existed back then? On the basis that now the cultural climate is different and thus we should reach different conclusions? Fine; have at it, but let us not equate Clinton's behavior then with the conduct of Roy Moore now. Whatever Clinton's alleged conduct was it was between adults, not underage girls, and in the case of Monica Lewinsky with her consent.
5
As John Oliver's show so succinctly put it a few days ago, this is an example of "What about?" Clinton is not in office, not running for office. Trump and Moore are in, or running for, public office. They are the subjects of discussion, and should stay the focus of interest.
12
Let's also reconsider Clarence Thomas's appointment to the Supreme Court. I have to believe that the Senate would vote very differently today after hearing her testify. Shouldn't we believe her, too?
11
History will fairly judge Bill Clinton and his impact on history. Now, we are in the midst of a national crisis that seriously threatens the foundations of our democracy, and it's best we focus on our more urgent political needs, i.e. to defeat the Republican Party and its ascending anti-American radical wing, which is systematically attempting to disassemble government of the people, by the people, and for the people.
3
Are Republicans bringing up Clinton in order to seek justice for the women who accused him (and who were in my opinion were telling the truth)? Or are they engaging in what-about-ism to excuse recent conservative misconduct, and to normalize it going forward? Focusing on "They did it too!" seems less about getting justice, and more about getting revenge. It's a convenient way of implying (without coming right out and saying it) that misconduct on one side is balanced by misconduct on the other. Please re-examine the claims from Clinton's accusers in a Post-Weinstein light, and own up to mistakes of the past. But do it for the right reasons, not as a way to lighten the damage to modern abusers, or take political potshots.
2
Bill Clinton should not have been impeached because US presidents should not be removed for private personal misconduct but rather for public misconduct ("high crimes and misdemeanors").
But the Democratic whitewash was all about boosting a future presidency of Hillary Clinton, a political figure who would never have climbed to the presidential arena without her husband's name and record.
The Democratic party bought into a neoliberal coalition, a duopoly, of the donor class and the political class created by the Clintons. This artificial coalition has wreaked havoc on traditional coalitions of average Democrats across the country, people who uncomfortably realized their were outsiders to the glossy elite world of the Clintons. The crowds at the Bernie Sanders rallies were The Uninvited.
The Democratic party should have turned the page on the Clintons on January 21, 2001 -- and for sure on January 21, 2009. Keeping the charade goings was a huge mistake. President Obama's appointment of Hillary Clinton as secretary of state compounded the error.
4
Perjury and obstruction of justice are high crimes and misdemeanors.
2
I agree Bill Clinton should have accepted guilt for sexual misconduct and quietly chosen to disappear at that time for the good of the country, I thought that then, but so should have Newt Gingerich who was doing exactly the same thing, at the same time and all during the impeachment hearings, and was never held accountable either for misconduct or craven hypocrisy. I believe our current president should be held to the same standard of behavior, past and present.
5
I cannot agree with the people who want Roy Moore to step down.
They insist that he is not worthy to serve in the Senate, and that has even come from some people presently in the Senate. Roy Moore is a closed minded, hipocritical ideologue who represents the very worst of our present political class. Look at the Senate. Roy Moore would fit right in. In fact, he would probably raise the average intellectual and ethical level of the Senate should he be seated.
1
What we know about Bill Clinton is that he used a cigar to stimulate an intern, he ejaculated on her and her dress, and he lied about it. We also know that he was credibly accused by many women of acts wholly in keeping with his character and demeanor. We know that he was defended by his wife, and his wife and bill Clinton's surrogates acting on the instructions of the Clintons did their best to discredit, defame and intimidate his female victims and any others who might have had similar stories to tell, and they did it to maintain both Bill and Hillary's 'political viability'. We know that attacking Bill's victims who had the temerity to accuse him is something Hillary has not apologized for, and neither Bill nor Hillary have tried to make amends for the attacks. I don't see what good it does to the Resistance, the Democratic Party or to the Clintons to investigate what is well known, but sad beyond words for the women involved.
22
"I don't see what good it does to the Resistance, the Democratic Party or to the Clintons to investigate what is well known, but sad beyond words for the women involved."
Well said. It doesn't do anything good for Dems and that's all the GOP cares about.
3
I️ am a Democrat and have no objection to revisiting Bill Clinton's sexual harassment accusations in light of recent developments. Let all the women who were ignored, or paid off (or both) speak their mind.
But first things first: Clinton is out of office. We have a sitting president whose predator-like behavior has been recorded in his own voice. We have many women whose accusations have gone unheard. We have as much evidence about Trump as Moore, Franken, and others. He'd like rival Harvey Weinstein if anyone took a slightly closer look. If the women he's silenced felt empowered to come forward.
President Trump is in a position to do significant harm to the country and to the world -- and certainly to women. Could we please focus on his crimes with regard to sexual harassment first?
It's patently absurd to go after every single predator, on both sides of the aisle, in all walks of life, and to IGNORE the fact that far more damning evidence has been established with regard to the most powerful man in America.
Pamela Katz
Brooklyn
16
While Clinton engaged in extramariital sex, correct me if I am wrong, none of the women involved claim lack of consent. And if so, it certainly muddies the water lumping Clinton into the current discussion of sexual assault.
7
There was an accusation of rape. And consensual does not mean there was inappropriate or harassing behavior. And that sentence applies to both Clinton and Trump.
2
Both Ms. Broaddrick and Ms. Willey claim lack of consent. Only Ms. Lewinsky says she was not coerced.
2
Paula says that he pulled down his pants and exposed himself without provocation.
3
Seriously, Bill? What about Donald?!
20
Democrats are entitled to harass, abuse and rape women because all allegations of harassment, abuse or rape against a Democrat are, by definition, politically motivated. Democrats who support free birth control and abortion without limits are entitled to a free pass if they harass, abuse or rape women because they take the right policy position on women's rights.
Democrats are entitled to harass, abuse or rape poor women because, well, we have all heard about the "trailer park trash" defense. If more than one woman accuses a Democrat of harassment, abuse or rape, then the accusations are to be written off as mere "bimbo eruptions." If a woman supports her husband against accusations of harassment, abuse or rape she is to be commended, especially if she is not just "standing by her man" but really believes in him, and especially if she wraps herself in a blanket of standing up for women.
Democrats want to be the leaders of this nation, and we have seen where the support of accused sexual harassers, abusers and rapists have led us. Free birth control, abortion on demand, and women who are harassed, abused and raped by powerful men. But, hey, if you can point to a Republican who did wrong, that must justify the Democrats' action in harassing, abusing or raping a woman.
11
That is wholly false.
Many democrats found Clinton's conduct extremely offensive.
Furthermore, I know many democrats who refer to JFK as a predator, now knowing his history.
Almost all democrats look with disgust at the Harvey Weinstein saga. Yes, he is mentioned because the right thinks of Hollywood as a liberal bastion.
You may want to malign but democrats, for the most part, are very consistent on this.
Liberal-lefty media report on abuses, right or left.
Ask Fox News how their coverage of Trump is going.
The right is contemptible at best.
3
what does birth control have to do with sexual harassment
2
Bill's hair is much more attractive than Trump's.
8
I would sincerely hope Christina, that your comment on Bill's hair is sarcasm. If not, we where the problem lies.
1
You have to wonder how many men today, with power and money, have skeletons in their closets now rattling the doors to get out. They must be sweating bigly.
8
At the time the Bill Clinton saga erupted I was what my colleagues in the medical profession snearingly referred to a 'tree hugger', a 'bleeding heart liberal'. But even at that time of life on the far-left, I thought Bill Clinton was inexcusable. I also lost any shred of respect for Hillary Clinton when she 'stood by her man' and assailed women who spoke against him. It was self-serving politics at its best and gives some good explanation for the lack of trust given H. Clinton's recent campaign. So now the chickens have come home to roost....and deservedly so...it was shameful of the bleeding hearts to ignore his behavior.
14
Clinton was a reckless, foolish man. One thing though - Broderick signed a statement with Ken Starr saying nothing ever happened. Now she says something did. So there's that. Paula Jones was funded for over a year by Kelly Anne Conway's husband, as his law firm was pursuing this case for a right-wing Republican group. These monies were secret. So there's that. Gennifer Flowers took money from the Enquirer, so there's that. Was he a fool, a cad, a liar about his sexual compulsions? Yes. Is it the same as the Moore case? Not really. Do I wish all the Clinton's would just go away? Yes (you too, Chelsea)
What is really tragic is we may have gotten Arafat to sign the peace deal with Israel if Clinton was not so busy with this case due to his undisciplined and reckless behavior.
But the case(s) against him was far different than the Roy Moore saga.
4
What's really tragic with the mess around President Clinton is we might have taken Osama Bill Laden out years before 9/11 without all the distractions - some Clinton's fault, some the fault of Newt Gingrich, the GOP Congress and Ken Starr. All should be ashamed of their behavior.
4
Interesting facts that would have been a lot more interesting, if presented with a bit more objectivity.
3
The Republican Party has devolved to the point of ignoring or defending unpatriotic. unethical. and immoral behavior of its leadership.
The typical line of defense involves “whataboutism.” The once great GOP is a disgrace to our nation.
6
Ditto the democrats. Those who live in glass houses...
1
If we are going to revisit the Clinton's then we must first revisit the big Don. His boasting about grabbing women by the PRIVATE PARTS was clearly much more than locker room talk yet he got selected and is now manipulating the system to keep his power. This man has done so many things that are are an offensive to our democracy and sense of decency and to humanity in general. If Clinton's accusers want to have another go at him (I am all for it btw) then they should also beat the drum loud and clear that Donny must go as well. We don't need a long drawn out investigation, we don't even need the "Trump Russia thing" ... we just need to get the guy out of office because he is unfit to serve. He is a psychopath.
5
We should also revisit Justice Clarence Thomas. He is also still in a position of power and influence.
I believe Anita.
3
Two wrongs make a right. Maybe that's Moore's defense. Maybe that will be the Weinstein defense. Maybe the pass given to Clinton is the reason Trump, Moore, Weinstein and other men thought it was ok to harass, abuse or rape women.
1
Why has George stephanopolous been able to avoid scrutiny over his efforts to destroy the women who came forward against clinton?
12
As long as the GOP allows Trump to remain in office, I will not be willing to tar and feather Bill Clinton. After all, the proof against Trump came out of his own mouth when he assured Billy Bush that women will allow famous men to do whatever they want to them, just as he did to that woman on the plane who he now, as he does so easily, calls a "liar"!
6
It's not clear why we would ban Louis CK from everything, work, speeches, cancel movies, and so on, for showing his [X] with young female employees, but have Bill Clinton in the public media despite having done [X] with young female employees.
9
Part of what made it so difficult to vote for Hillary Clinton was her attacks on her husband's accusers. I simply voted for the lesser of two evils.
6
what about Moores wife? just because she is a Christian?
1
Bill Clinton let our country down because of his sexual appetites and behavior; that is for sure. But we cannot look at the total Bill Clinton story without emphasizing that for a long time far-right Republican groups had been out to smear the Clintons — both Bill and Hillary — in every way they could. Huge amounts of money were spent by them, some of it for legal costs of these accusers. What really happened to these women became secondary to political attack. And it's still going on, even today.
There is a big difference between the Roy Moore and Bill Clinton stories. Moore's accusers have nothing to gain; no one is paying their way. All they will get out of this is abuse in the conservative press and probably from people in the street. So yes, I believe them. In the case of the Clinton accusers, they became part of the smear campaign. I don't know whether to believe them or not — with the exception of Monica Lewinsky. I believe her.
2
Clinton should be impeached. Oh, that's right, he was impeached.
now what? Should we take away his citizenship?
he is not in any office or running for any office.He does not work for any corporation that can fire him.
If Americans elected Trump who said on a video that he could grope women because he is famous, then there is no hope that women will be protected.
11
And there's even less hope for this country.
2
Isn't it curious that, whatever Bill Clinton's sexual escapades - and since we're apparently going to be hearing a Joseph+Mary=Jesus rationale from the right - Clinton wasn't banned from the local mall, nor did he try to romp with teenagers, and certainly not with minors under the age of consent.
If we're going to play of the game of DC Pecadillos, we're in for a long haul, and an even longer list of current office holders on both sides who are miscreants.
But that's not what this is about, it is.
Nope.
This is about looking the other way and ignoring the facts in order to allow a fake Jesus freak to win a Senate seat.
But, hey, let's play the Clinton Card.
And, NO, let's not play the Trump Card.
6
Heavens, what would Trump do if the Clintons' did not exist? He'd be a mess trying to find a demon to point to so no one looks at him. What is far more important, and current, is a president who openly acknowledges on tape in front of God and Everybody, that he sexually assaults, intimidates and demeans women and who then gets away with it and is placed into office. That any woman could ever vote for Trump is mind boggling. Bragging that you make sexual assault and intimidation is a big key to someone's lack of character and lack of control. Trump avoids the limelight of his errors by throwing out a golden apple, which everyone then goes to chase. Let's keep our investigations current, shall we? There is no more important abuser than the one in the Oval Office, past creeps not withstanding.
4
Moore has been accused of pursuing children. Lurking in the mall, calling up kids when they are in trig class, grabbing the 14 year old. This is completely different from Bill Clinton's transgressions, which as far as we know, involve adult women. It may be distasteful, but it's now two decades later, and it sure was extensively "investigated" by Ken Starr. And there is always the possibility that just because a person chooses to pursue an adventure with a married man, and it ends badly, this does not automatically make someone a victim. Would Callista Gingrich be a victim if Gingrich hadn't married her?
7
As if this is not obvious, the big difference is that Mr. Clinton is not in public office now, nor is he running for one.
This is in stark contrast to Messrs. Moore and Trump, to name just two.
6
Bill hasn't been in office since the 1990's -- that's what about Bill.
4
This is the very opposite of a distraction from Moore and Trump. It is only when we agree that all victims are listened to and all allegations taken seriously that we can get people of all political sides on board.
Democrats should be welcoming the fact that they have an opportunity to show themselves even handed and maybe correct a terrible historic wrong in the process, not engage in the same whataboutery that they condemn in others.
3
Clinton was wrong to engage in an adulterous affair that "that woman." But by all accounts (including the one from "that woman"), it was consensual and they were both beyond the age of consent. Her first revelations to that other woman, Linda Tripp, were largely boasts and a celebration of her moment of glory in the Oval Office. Clinton's only really crime (beyond infidelity which is not a crime, and "let the first without sin cast the first stone") was lying about it. The alleged accusations against Moore are crimes; no one under the age of consent can consent. It couldn't be clearer. We have become enmeshed in a climate of constant false equivalencies. I don't feel any different now about Clinton than I ever did. I never shrugged off the lack of moral compass that led to his behavior, but it simply did not rise to the level of criminal behavior.
6
Digging up in present is more important than past. It does not make any sense blaming of sexual harassment to a person in Wheel chair or near 90. Or to a person who is weighted more heavy with his nobility than sexual politics. American public has already excused him.
The critical examination of sexual harassment is long overdue. Men have dominated and intimidated women for millenia. If the current discussions can be evaluated in non-partisan ways, then perhaps those who believe that they have some inherent power or right to abuse or diminish those with less power will learn a necessary lesson.
However, we must remember that there is a wide range of sexual abuse, from lewd leers to violent rape. Some perpetrators can be rehabilitated and some can't. How to judge? These variations must also be included in the debate.
Is it time for a federal commission to investigate?
1
I'm a registered Democrat but at the time I was astounded that so-called feminists were on board with bad boy Bill. I also consider him one the reasons that politicians are held in such low regard--lying in federal court, his famous "it depends on how you define what 'is' is," and on and on.
5
Given the presumption of guilt upon accusation and the vagueness of the notions of sexual assault, who in their right mind will enter public service. the growing evidence for exploitation of k-12 students by female teachers ( based on convictions-not just accusations) suggests that gender is not a major factor, except as it is correlated with opportunity.
1
I've been scratching my head over the latest developments in the sexual allegations. There's an outrage with consequences for all of the accused - they either had their shows pulled, been fired, reprimanded... But NONE of them have been awarded a higher status than they've had before. Unlike Mr. Trump.
Where is the outrage and consequences for our Mister President? The Hollywood video appears to be just a speck of dirt on his suit. Is his suit so dirty that we can't see any spots on it anymore? Or is it that people (looking at you, GOP) are able to overlook anything and everything as long as the accused is still of some use to them?
3
It always astounded me how women could support Bill Clinton. Now women want us to believe that their abuse should be punished, in a witch hunt of allegations and a dredging up of 30 year old accusations that in many cases cannot be proven. But Mr. Clinton's actions are not 30 years old. They were known at the time, and like those of Mr. Trump, were allowed to pass, but the difference is the pass for Mr. Clinton was given by the people who are now so incensed by Mr. Trump and Mr. Moore.
The hypocrisy has to stop. Without action against Mr. Clinton, this whole exercise is nothing more than recreational shaming.
2
my wife and I are longtime democrats, but the Clinton cover ups, the free pass by the feminist community of his obvious predatory behavior, and Hillary's despicable attempts to shame his accusers out of political expediency turned us away from the party and to 3rd party candidates
4
I would like to ask those women who were paraded like props in front of the the presidential debate between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump if they really think they were doing the right thing by using that venue to air their grievances. If they were truly upset about sexual harassment against women, why would they support Trump and allow themselves to be taken advantage of by this abusive man who has openly bragged about sexually harassing women and threatened these women for speaking out?
6
I'm a lifelong feminist who was disgusted that feminists and Democrats gave Bill Clinton a pass. I wanted them to demand Bill's resignation and let Gore take over. When I was a young professional woman, I walked a mile in Paula Jones's boots. When Bill paid her $850,000 to settle her sexual harassment claim, that should have been the end of feminist support for Bill Clinton.
I NEVER understood why Democrats were so determined to return Bill to the White House as First Gentleman.
So many liberal women are so outraged that Trump won the votes of 53% of the white women in America. Maybe those women thought it was a toss-up, to put harasser Trump into the White House as Prez or harasser Bill into the White House as First Gent, so they voted on other issues.
Many of the same people who are OUTRAGED about Roy Moore gave Bill Clinton a pass. I'm pretty disgusted that Democrats give Democratic harassers a pass and Republicans give Republican harassers a pass.
Me, I'm an equal opportunity take-no-prisoners feminist. Neither Bill Clinton nor Donald Trump should be living in the White House, and Roy Moore must not enter the US Senate.
94
You speak for young daughters as well. Thanks so much.
Odd, because I'm a feminist who had been sexually harassed on the job just prior to the whole Anita Hill fiasco, so long before the Jones/Clinton fiasco, and I found Jones to be offensive to women like myself who had actually been harassed at work. You blithely ignore the facts in that case, many of them, including the fact that Judge Weber-Wright dismissed Jones's case for "lack of merit", meaning that Jones was unable to show any harassment had occurred. Do you not recall the infamous claim by Jones that the only example of harassment she could come up with was that she hadn't received flowers from Clinton on Secretary's Day? Jones was funded by two rabid Clinton haters and, in my opinion, was actually extorting the US Presisent, or attempting to. She further wanted to sue the man who offered her $1 million to drop her case. The $850 was because, despite the case being tossed by the judge, Whitehead et al were urging her to file yet another appeal, and I think perhaps Clinton just paid her to end it and to shut her up. I don't see where women who falsely cry rape or harassment or the like are helpful at all to women who actually ARE raped and harassed. Feminisits should not support extortive and bogus lawsuits against anyone, not to mention witch hunts. The real immorality there was a well-funded cabal of people trying to destroy another person because they hated that he won a democratic election.
4
The whole Bill Clinton mess hit the public attention with the Paula Jones lawsuit, and it was Monica Lewinsky and her dress that nearly got Bill impeached.
There are many ways that this was not anything like the current allegations and political brouhaha.
1. Bill never ran for anything after this -- you might say that is because he became an ex-president and they don't -- but it's a fact. You don't see Democrats voting for a man whom almost everyone concedes did expose himself to Paula Jones -- even though this is based on one woman's testimony. The fact that the Clintons settled with Paula Jones for 0.8 M$ sure doesn't lead me to think Bill was innocent. But then Trump insists that paying 24 M$ to settle "Trump University" is no evidence of fraud.
2. Monica was consensual adultery. If you want to remove all adulterers from office ...
3. Clinton came very close to being removed, the central question really being whether lying under oath to conceal adultery constitutes "a high crime and misdemeanor."
I don't know a single Democrat who condones, or condoned, Clinton's behavior. And again, nobody voted for him after this became widely public.
And there sure wasn't a video-tape of Clinton bragging about groping women, because he's so rich ... and then Bill going on to win the presidency after that.
Nor anything like the apparent fact that Roy Moore may still win the election in Alabama.
7
Monica worked for Clinton. Whether she was a "willing" participant or not, it's sexual harassment to take advantage of a subordinate in this way. CEOs get fired all the time for having "inappropriate relationships" with subordinates in their companies.
Bill was CEO of the United States. I think he should have been fired.
3
No, that is NOT sexual harassment.
While it's fair to raise how Clinton's behavior was handled 20 years ago, it is important to recognize a seismic shift in the way we see this behavior now. Nothing excuses sexual harassment, but Gwenyth Paltrow would not have been believed in the 1990s if she had made her allegations against Weinstein then (the very reason she didn't make them). That has to do with the times, not someone's political affiliation. More importantly, if we can raise Clinton's behavior from 20 years ago, it's fair game to address Trump's behavior, which was brought to light only a year ago. He seems to be off the hook entirely since the election results came in.
7
Hate Bill Clinton for what he did to this country, AND to women. It's OK, we as a nation can do both. It's 2017. We now know NAFTA was a lie, as was the repeal of bank regulations, the repeal of media ownership regulations.....he lied about the things he did that harmed this country and its people. He lied about the things he did that harmed women. He's a liar. A pathological self-serving monster. Gore Vidal described Clinton as "the perfect reptile". That's Bill Clinton.
8
If we are going to play this "What About So and So" game, are we to include all presidents? If so, who would you have had step down either before taking office or during? How much weight will you place on their sexual behavior (excluding abusive behavior because that should not be excused) and how much on their achievements?
From the NY Times, Jan 25, 1998:
"In the sexual history of the American presidency, the list of Chief Executives who have had their bedroom conduct, mores, and good judgment questioned, rightly or wrongly, in office or not, includes not just Clinton, Washington, Arthur, (Franklin) Roosevelt, and Kennedy, but also Jefferson, Jackson, Lincoln, Cleveland, Wilson, Harding, Eisenhower, Lyndon Johnson, and Bush (Sr.)
Purported wrongdoing ranges from having a serious sexual relationship outside of marriage (Washington, Lincoln, Wilson and Roosevelt) to fathering a child out of wedlock (Jefferson and Cleveland) to having one or more extramarital affairs (Harding, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Bush, and Clinton)."
To provide context and to highlight how the Republicans stand out for having hounded Bill Clinton over consensual sex (Lewinsky) like no other president in history, in the same article, Michael Beschloss, a presidential historian and political analyst, stated "... that, hardly ever before, if ever at all, has a case of alleged wrongdoing emerged so forcefully and importantly while the concerned President was still sitting in the White House."
6
Infidelity is vastly different than sexual harassment. If the other person worked for the President (say, Monica for example) then it's one person using their power for sexual favors. Having a mistress on the side, while unseemly, is not in the same league.
3
Skeptik: Yes, I understand the difference. I actually replied to your reply to someone else earlier, but as I said in that reply, Monica has consistently stated that the affair was consensual and that no abuse of power occurred except later in the sense that Clinton denied it in response to the investigation. Harassment has to involve coercion or unwanted lewd behavior, which has been explicitly denied by Lewinsky. She was 22, so not a "kid", and worked unpaid for Panetta. I don't think you can call something harassment if the other person explicitly denies any such thing happened or that abuse of power occurred. Poor judgment, certainly, and impeachment for obstructing by lying was certainly fair, but remember, the right went after him for other things, failed, found out about Lewinsky, and then used consensual sex to try and bring him down. Pretty low-hanging fruit considering all that they tried to get Clinton on, and certainly not criminal or even a case of harassment according to Lewinsky to this day.
2
Can we agree that men and women have sexual contact?
Can we agree that men and women are members of political parties which have agendas?
Can the NYT stop running these "Those were the days" stories about Democratic presidents who had sexual contact with people who were not their legal wives?
Unless President Clinton has sexually harassed some person in the last week, no one needs to have the old stories brought up again and again. His impeachment was never, never, never about his sexual harassment of women. It was a political trial which Mr. Clinton won. Not one of his liberal supporters supported than or supports now "sexual harassment" of women by men who are their employers. Stop.
Go ask Newt Gingrich his opinion of the sacred nature of marriage. Go ask Rudi G. how to tell your wife you want a divorce. Go ask Trump for his tax returns, then ask him what his star power as a celebrity allows him to do to women--even married women.
7
To compare Newt and Rudy to Bill is absurd.
1) Newt and Rudy committed adultery but with willing adults who didn't work for them. JFK and Teddy can't say that.
2) Bill had sex with a White House intern. Full Stop. It's the textbook example of sexual harassment. He had the power. She was just a kid.
3) Bill later lied about it under oath and to the American people.
4) Nobody ever said that Bill should go to jail for his many transgressions, only that he should have lost his job for turning the Oval Office into his private Man Cave and for later lying under oath.
5) All of this was blamed on the Vast Right Wing Conspiracy and all of this turned out to be accurate. It's not a conspiracy if it really happened.
6) It really happened.
2
Skeptik: Don't be disingenuous. A 22-year-old is not a "kid". Lewinsky worked as an unpaid intern for Leon Panetta (Chief of Staff) when the affair started. She has steadfastly maintained that the relationship was consensual and that no abuse of power occurred except after the affair in the sense that Clinton denied what happened - this in response to the investigation. Harassment would certainly hold if Lewinsky said that she was coerced, but she explicitly stated that did not happen.
Inappropriate behavior, yes. Poor judgment, yes. Expressly forbidden in corporate environments, yes if there is a power dynamic regarding the job, but corporations deal with this routinely in lateral relationships. They discourage it, but they know it happens and they don't fire people for it. Harassment or abuse of power? Not in the eyes of the one who knows best. Clinton was certainly very wrong to obstruct the inquiry by lying and could have well been rightfully impeached for that, but that was not originally why the right went after him. They could not get him on the original targets, so they went after consensual sex that they learned about to bring down a sitting president.
Even with all the millions spent by the right to get Bill Clinton on many alleged crimes, they never came up with anything chargeable. They still drag his name out though when convenient as a distraction, but all they got him for was lying (definitely wrong) about consensual sex (poor judgment but not criminal).
4
David--I'm with you. I was once a 22 year old woman, and let me assure you we can and do think for ourselves, even at that age. Monica, to her credit, has always insisted it was consensual, that it was her choice.
I've always wished her well. She suffered horrible embarrassment that was one hundred percent politically motivated. She was nothing but a pawn in a very nasty game.
2
Bill Clinton is the poster boy for sexual harassment in our political system.
[Why the Democratic Party held on to this disgraced individual and his enabling wife is a mystery to me. Think of what would have been different, in the past election for instance, if they hadn’t. And much like Trump uses his base to stay in power, Bill Clinton USED his base, especially in the Black community, to escape removal from office.]
12
How someone who was shown to NOT have sexually harassed anyone, with the case being tossed out by the judge for having no merit, is a "poster boy" for sexual harassment, is beyond me. Maybe we should make people who are acquitted of murder because there is absolutely no evidence of anything, poster children for murderers too?
2
What I always found remarkable and grossly repulsive is that President Clinton's impeachment from perjury and obstruction for covering up sexual liaisons with Ms. Lewinsky" became the story, rather than his inappropriate, disgraceful and sexual misconduct with a White House Intern. Both the GOP and the Democratic Party allowed this inexcusable behavior to prevail through their own silence. Politicians behaving badly and abusing their power through sexual encounters has been going on far, far too long. For once, this despicable behavior is finally being addressed publically.
7
Years ago, a friend of mine who was married to a Republican Congressman told me about meeting Bill Clinton at the White House. Being a lifelong Republican, she wasn't particularly excited about the prospect. But when she was introduced, he looked into her eyes as he took her hand. At that moment, she said, her knees turned to Jell-O. She described him as one of the warmest most charismatic men she'd ever met. Ah, yes, there was Bill's power. For some men, like Trump, it's always been about his money. Whether it's about position, charisma and/or wealth, men often use it to get their way. I, too, was a Bill Clinton defender, however, recent events have led to my own reckoning. I firmly believe now, without the burden of Bill's baggage, Hillary would have had the edge she needed to win. It's truly ironic that she opened this Pandora's Box when she said women need to be believed.
33
What a cop out.
2
I remember what I was angry with Clinton about, when the Monica scandal broke, It was the lie, 'I did not have sex with that woman'. He had an opportunity to strike a blow for freedom, by simply saying, 'my sex life is none of your business'.
7
Bill Clinton was punished again for his earlier misconduct when Hillary Clinton lost the election to another sexual predator.
10
Well, it*s not so much Bill, as Her, the consigliere who would be don.
When you enable, and cover up, you encourage the bad behavior of your spouse. You tell him anything goes, honey, as long as we keep working towards the prize.
On Election Day last year, I felt sick to my stomach as I got ready to walk to the polling station. I almost didn't go, because I had no intention of voting for either of them. But my son reminded me of the importance of the down ballot candidates, and I felt I could without too much rising nausea manage to vote for the Democrats, though none were free of hypocrisy. But that's the political affliction.
So I voted affirmatively for *none of the above* for President, as my enlightened state permits me to do, and I was grateful as hell that the *what you see is what you get* guy won, instead of the woman ready, willing and able, all her life, to trash women with less power, less education, less of a road away from guys like Bill.
And I have no regrets, because those who call themselves progressive are finally waking up and finding a little fire in the belly and going out to do the battles they ought to have done before. Better late than never.
6
Progressives wanted Bernie, not Hillary. Progressives have been "awake" for a long time and that's why they're progressive. As for Hillary, as bad as she is, the guy you're calling "what you see is what you get" is absurdly far from your description of him. I just wanted an adult for president, not an overgrown child whose stupidity and willful ignorance could likely get us all annihilated.
3
That is so full of bile against the wife of the assaulter. I think it is repulsive.
4
In a nutshell, most men ARE pigs when it comes to women (my apologies to the pig). Even if they haven't actually sexually harassed a women, many objectify women sexually when alone amongst their male friends. I'm a man so I should know.
4
Yep. But words and actions are two different things.
3
the dem party of donna brazile will be the main supporters of dragging bill clinton's sexual misconduct back into the public eye. they want the party to be rid of the clinton's stranglehold on campaign donations and supporters. bill may finally get his due for his abuse of monica lewinsky.
7
The current re-evaluation of Bill Clinton's behavior is an example of the guilty searching for death-bed redemption, long after the crime and 20 years too late. Democrats had made a Faustian bargain with Clinton selling their moral character in exchange for his support of their policy goals. This is a classic example of "the end justifies any means" mentality and is, in no small part, a reason for the vitriol and lack of collegiality in our politics. When, for political reasons, we cannot even agree on the basic standards of appropriate human behavior then we have lost all hope of any consensus on any topic. Perhaps with these unfolding revelations, we can begin again to build bridges between good people from both parties.
1
I believe Paula Jones and Kathleen Willey- though Ms. Willey hurt her own credibility when she accused the Clintons of murdering her husband. Juanita Broderick's allegations are more problematic because she stated under oath first that nothing happened. Then she changed her story. In any event, one of the reasons so many on the left discounted their stories is that these women allowed themselves to be used as political props by the right wingers trying to destroy the Clinton presidency. Then some of them did it again during last year's presidential debates. No word from these women supporting Trump's accusers but instead they showed up to support him after he was alleged to have harassed and assaulted numerous women. It's no surprise people view them with skepticism- particularly Ms. Broderick who has been all over Fox News.
59
This is the most constructive comment I have read. I think this is exactly why people still today fail to put Clinton in the Harvey Weinstein bucket. None of Weinstein's accusers have inconsistent stories or support Trump as a result of their own plight. None of them are utilized on Fox news for political purposes. There are many women with similar stories. The whole Clinton story is just strange and somewhat inconclusive. That being said, I would never get close to his hotel room!!
1
Given all of that, why on earth do you believe them?
2
The sordid legacy of Bill Clinton has already met reckoning as his star power failed to get Hillary and real traction against Trump in the last election. Where as "staying by her man arguably gave Hillary her political career in NY and onward to SECState, her aggressive disparagement of Bill's accusers neutered any attack on Trump's equally sordid legacy with women.
But, we should all remember that as Trump survived his misogyny Bill survived his because many men-and yes women-equate aggressive womanizing as a sign on manliness (think James Bond). Speak to many of the straight females who voted for Trump (and soon Roy Moore) and some will sheepishly admit to this paradoxical attraction. This dynamic also explained some of Howard Stern's durable success at the height of his broadcast radio career.
Folks don't often like to think about mysogyny in these terms because modern polite society should not normalize this behavior. But we must appreciate the disease before we can cure it. And political labels are neither useful nor helpful for cracking this issue and exercising misogyny out of politics.
3
Bill Clinton was a dog. His wife sold her soul by staying with him to further her political ambitions. Did she think we forgot...nope and now we have Trump because the DNC and Hillary thought she would win and that people forgot. I didn't forget but I also didn't vote for Trump either. What a shame the Democrats left us with such a lousy choice. See where that got us Dems...Trump.
6
NYT "revives debate" to take one more bash at the Clintons. There's something pathological about the NYT's reflexive need to bash the Clintons. Whitewater, "Clinton Cash", EMAILS!!, Benghazi!!, Clinton Foundation, etc., rinse and repeat. Goes back at least to Howell Raines tenure. What's up with that?
The NYT easy-touch with the connected upper-class gentry, e.g. Bushes, contrasts with your aggressive posture against the Clintons, lower-class strivers. Not a good look, NYT.
10
Embarrassing confession:
I have always been acutely aware of what constitutes even the appearance of inappropriate sexual conduct with women. It has never struck me as a particularly difficult line to draw. I have never done anything for which I have regrets. And I am thrilled to see the issue finally making its way into the public sphere.
But.
I consider the disastrous election of Pres. Malignant Narcissist to have been the start of what to me is the equivalent of a political and civic war requiring every possible legal and constitutionally permissible action to block Trump's at every turn and possibly drive him from office.
What this also means to me is that -- however odious I still find some of President Clinton's actions (and, even though a Clinton partisan in early 1990s,I loathed them then) -- I hope that Democrats will use every possible strategy to prevent Republicans from making this an issue that would advantage their party or their candidates in any way.
This is high-stakes legal combat, with nothing less than nuclear threats and the future of health care at stake, and for purely political reasons I hope the effort to retroactively demonize Clinton -- who I concede WAS a demon -- fails.
Bill Clinton's so called sexual adventures were between consenting adults including Lewinsky-give me a break. He was impeached for lying about sex in office. None were minors and excuse me the left did not pooh-pooh it as at least 12 dems in the House voted to impeach their own president can the same be said for the right-no it cannot as evidenced by electing the admitted Groper in Chief. As I recall Paula Jones was paid in full for her services to Clinton-really do these women who are of mature age not know what they are doing?
3
Clinton has been accused of rape
Rape is a felony offense
In some states like New York there is no statute of limitations for first-degree murder, rape, Class A felonies, and kidnappings. Virginia has no statute of limitations for major crimes like murder, rape or sexual assault. Arkansas has no statute of limitations for murder or for rape when a positive DNA match is established.
Depending on where the alleged offense took place he still could be prosecuted -- and whether he is no longer running for office, or these allegations took place a long time ago is IRRELEVANT.
As long as Democrats continue to play defense for Bill they are going to have a tough time shaking off the accusation of using double standards and of chalking it all to 'politics as usual' whenever it is one of them, but tearing their garment in utter outrage when it is someone from the opposing party -- yes, it is called HYPOCRISY.
5
Fair or unfair, he was impeached. That's quite a punishment.
1
I have no use for Roy, but I believe that Bill Clinton was afforded way too much public tolerance for his grabbing and fondling of women.
Some instances, as with Monica, appear to have been consensual. Some clearly were not.
Hillary and Bill used all the tactics that Roy and his buddies are using to discredit the women who claimed they were groped by Bill.
We should have been harder on him.
But our laxness then is no reason not to be very tough on Roy Moore.
7
Under Clinton we did have peace and prosperity. During his term, he was accused of everything from narcotics smuggling to outright murder by his opponents. Broderick and Jones were produced by, supported by and compensated by those same political opponents. It is against this backdrop that the contemporaneous evaluation of Bill Clinton was made. The consenting sexual relationship with Lewinsky is what brought Clinton low. He was impeached by men like Newt Gingrich who was also having an affair at the time. The result of this hypocritical moral outrage was the eventual election of G.W. Bush who disbanded FBI counterterrorism efforts (resulting in the attacks of 9/11, and two decade-long wars), a massive transfer of wealth from the working and middle classes to the aristocracy and the eventual collapse of our economy and the great recession. I ask no one's pardon for defending Bill Clinton. I don't believe his accusers or their political patrons.
5
I do agree that this is something we should re-examine, however I don't like discussing it in the context of distracting from or minimizing the actions of Roy Moore and the president. In that context it's a false equivalency. Is it worth re-looking at? Absolutely, I just want to separate those conversations and not let it be used as a political tool for Republicans to deflect from their own misdeeds.
1
I'm a lifelong feminist who was disgusted that feminists and Democrats gave Bill Clinton a pass. I wanted them to demand Bill's resignation and let Gore take over. When I was a young professional woman, I walked a mile in Paula Jones's boots. When Bill paid her $850,000 to settle her sexual harassment claim, that should have been the end of feminist support for Bill Clinton.
I NEVER understood why Democrats were so determined to return Bill to the White House as First Gentleman.
So many liberal women are so outraged that Trump won the votes of 53% of the white women in America. Maybe those women thought it was a toss-up, to put harasser Trump into the White House as Prez or harasser Bill into the White House as First Gent, so they voted on other issues.
Maybe a lot of women saw the incredibly weak response of feminists to the mass sexual assaults in Cologne, Germany, and decided a tough guy who would keep Taharrush Gamea OUT of the USA was a better bet.
If Democrats want to win next time, they must confront these issues.
4
It is becoming obvious that the DemParty eat their own .. eventually..
Juanita Broaddrick ran/owned a nursing home.
Nursing homes were regulated by the Attorney General, who happened to be Bill Clinton.
The threat to close her down was what Hillary used to intimidate her.
7
For those of you that don't know this: Sexual Harassment, is not whatever one can think of inappropriate behavior, its more than that and it should.
Maybe we should focus on rape, lets start with Judge Moore.
(Clinton's accusers had their chance and their day in court and lost, look it up).
2
Clinton's behavior and alleged behavior fell into a spectrum of categories. For example, his consensual affair with Jennifer Flowers was nobody's business but Bill and Hill and Jenn (though I thought he had poor taste). At the other extreme was Willey who claimed she was raped (though I never quite believed her and as far as I know no one else alleged rape). Then there was Lewinsky, which technically constituted sexual harassment because he was her boss, but she was apparently the aggressor by all accounts. The others (e.g., Paula Jones) were a bit murky and in Jones' case the state troopers were found to be depraved liars peddling stories for bucks to right wing "news" organizations. So we can revisit Bill Clinton if anyone wants, but it may not be a clear picture even though the sharper lenses of today.
3
These cases should be evaluated independently of one another and based on the evidence and there is no need to "re-evaluate" Clinton. Ken Starr tried to recruit Broaddrick and offered immunity for any claims or changes in her testimony in his White Water witch hunt and she refused to cooperate and had gone back and forth on her claims. Then she appeared with Trump? Paul Jones was well known for her attempts to meet Clinton, she did not complain to anyone at the time of her meeting with him and it is likely her ex-husband was the one who pushed this into a law suit which was utterly groundless. Most of the settlement mentioned here was through insurance not out of Clinton's pocket and that is not uncommon.
It was beyond shameful for Trump to exploit Kathy Shelton as Hillary Clinton was assigned the case, tried to refuse it but could not, and did her job while the prosecution failed.
The Clintons are the most investigated couple in American history and at the end of the day not very much was exposed. Yes, he lied about having consensual sex relations with a sexual aggressive and experienced intern and that was wrong. That is what people do when they are caught in an affair, they lie.
Despite this article's claims I know of no one who is "defending" Clinton's trysts with Lewinsky. But this hardly warranted an attempted impeachment.
5
What Bill C should have done differently is:
Announced that he would not answer questions about consensual sexual relations, on the principal that such questions are an invasion of privacy--that he was drawing a line to defend the privacy rights of all Americans.
Then it would have been up to a series of judges, probably all the way to the SCOTUS, to determine whether Kenneth Starr was justified in saying that the target's entire consensual sexual history was relevant to a charge of workplace sexual harassment.
As it stands, neither Starr (and his mega-dollar team) nor any private investigator has assembled a preponderance of evidence in court against Clinton. If someone ever does so, by all means make him pay. And if anyone assembles proof beyond reasonable doubt of rape or indecent exposure, then lock him up.
But one important piece of information is missing from this article: have the Mss Broaddrick, Willey and Jones all accepted payment from anti-Clinton groups? I believe the answer is yes, and I feel Peter Baker was negligent in leaving that out. The approximate amounts would be very helpful as well, in weighing the reliability of their charges. For comparison, none of the hundreds of accusers of Trump, Moore, Weinstein, Spacey, Weiner, Vitter, Hastert, Packwood, etc., etc. were ever paid to accuse them. This comparison is crucial, and should be mentioned in every article on the subject.
7
So what if accusers have been compensated over and above one initial $0.8 million settlement? Are you privy to contracts, perchance? I'm guessing they include appearance fees, as none of these women seem to be independently wealthy. Regardless, the payments are occurring years after the events in question, a point which surely cannot be lost on you. That doesn't throw credibility into question.
As for changing a story? I do not doubt that Hillary's machine - you recall, she used to matter - had some import during the time of the investigation. It was widely known that she and her cronies were quite vested in pressuring and slandering each of her husband's accusers as they popped up. Testimony would doubtless be influenced by such an unequal power relationship.
This bears a striking resemblance to the unequal power dynamic her husband maintained with Ms. Lewinsky. Curious.
2
Republicans have taken the opportunity with the Roy Moore disaster to resurrect the Bill Clinton story front and center- as if Clinton's behavior somehow lessens the seriousness of Moore's indiscretions. Bill Clinton was a philanderer nonpareil and one can argue whether he ever received his just desserts in a court of law or in the court of public opinion but his story is history and current events 'trump' whatever further punishment Clinton may or may not deserve.
2
It isn't just Bill Clinton as Hillary was his enforcer who job was to discredit the accusers as much as possible. Pointing this out during the primaries made it clear that Democrats are no more principled than Republicans when their candidates are in the spotlight as very few Democrats held her accountable. After passing herself off as some sort of feminist it also makes it clears that both parries are just as hypocritical.
5
Bill Clinton no longer holds any public office. He has repeatedly paid for his past transgressions. I grew up in Arkansas and am famliar with many of the players in the Clinton governorship and later in his campaign for president. He was an attractive man who always had a lot of girl friends on the side - it was common knowledge. He was pursued by many women, often attractive women like Monica Lewinsky. To her credit, Ms. Lewinsky has always been a stand-up honest person: their relationship was consensual. I suspect that most if not all of Bill's relationships were consensual. Power is the great love potion.
Neither Bill or Hillary will ever run again, thank goodness. These women have aired their stories for years. It's yesterday's news.
Judge Moore is running for the Senate. He's todays news and so are all the women who were pursued by him as teenagers. He seems to have reformed since he got married. His wife thinks he's perfect.
55
I'm not so sure that Hillary will never run again. From what I hear, she's running right now.
2
Hm. "Paid for his transgressions?"
Tell me, did you read Clinton's autobiography. He still has not even offered an apology. In fact, his excuse for his conduct casts a dispersion on all men.
IF his speech at the Democratic Convention when Gore ran for President would have ended with the line, "You now can vote for a better man than I." Gore wins. IF his speech at the Democratic Convention when his wife ran for President would have begun with, "I have caused suffering in my wife's life...but she has lead me through tough times that I selfishly caused." Hilary would have won in a landslide.
Yes, it is a miserable failure on behalf of liberals and Democrats to not be willing to owe up to Clinton's wretched conduct toward women, including his wife.
So, what has Bill Clinton paid for his transgressions? He still has not apologized to America for being a flat out liar. What if there were no blue dress with his DNA splattered all over it? He would still be repeating his famous lie to the nation.
4
Why should anyone care about Bill Clinton? He hasn't been President for almost 17 years. Bill Clinton is irrelevant to today's issues of political corruption. When the Republicans are called out on their corruption and immorality they play the kid card: "Why am I being punished? Johnny did it too and he wasn't punished."
4
During the campaign, posts referring to Clinton's harassing behavior was frequently put down by Hillary supporters (one response even said bringing it up was judging 90s values with today's values, and received many "recommends"). The truth: Clinton abused his power and did not receive his reckoning. A thoughtful, well-balanced account of the whole thing is Gormley's Death of American Virtue: Clinton vs. Starr (and he interviewed all participants, including Clinton, Starr, Lewinsky [who in the end received the worst consequences of anyone], Tripp, et. al.).
2
One reason so many people discounted the sexual misconduct accusations against Bill Clinton is that they came on the heels of a series of false claims. The Clintons were investigated for Whitewater for years and no wrongdoing on their part was ever found. Their opponents suggested that Hillary Clinton had committed a crime just because one of her investments in cattle futures had paid off. They said the Clintons had Vincent Foster murdered. They acted as if some crime had been committed when the Clinton administration fired and replaced several people in the travel office. They spread rumors that the Clintons were behind the deaths of more than fifty of their associates.
Also, during the impeachment (and the time leading up to it), many Republicans focused on the fact that Bill Clinton was accused lying under oath about his affair with Monica Lewinsky. That is, his opponents insisted it was about perjury, not about sex. They were right legally, but this focus diverted attention from the accusations of Kathleen Willey and Juanita Broaddrick (and even Paula Jones, to some extent). The order of attention seemed to be Monica Lewinsky first, followed by Paula Jones (whom Clinton crudely propositioned), with Juanita Broaddrick and Kathleen Willey coming in a distant third and fourth.
2
Hillary Clinton's account of the handling of the 1975 case brought against her client by Kathy Shelton, who was 12 years old at the time of the attack, makes it difficult to ever imagine her as being a champion of women and girls.
Kathy Shelton's experience deserves a mention along with Juanita Broaddrick and others.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/10/09/why-donald-tru...
5
Know what? This is certainly fair. Bill Clinton was given an undeserved pass. I absolutely agree. I wish Ms. Broaddrick had made her case strongly when the assault happened in 1978, but the prevailing view at that time was that without witnesses, it would be "he-said-she-said" and, let's face it, "he-said" usually won.
You know who else was given a pass? Clarence Thomas in 1991. Supreme Court Justices can be impeached for unethical behavior, and I believe he should never have taken office given the credible accusations against him. Maybe he should be impeached now. Oh, never mind, he's a conservative justice.
What has finally happened in this country is that enough women have come forward to convince even the most skeptical that sexual harassment and assault is epidemic in this country, and has been for many decades. This is a good thing. We are evaluating these issues differently now. So let's all agree on one thing: keep partisanship out of the evaluations going forward.
Roy Moore is now. No one should give him a pass.
7
When historians write the story of the first quarter of the 21st century, they will start with William Jefferson Clinton's outrageous, puerile defilement of the Oval Office and the resultant backlash against Al Gore, the Democratic nominee for president in 2000 leading to his whisker-close, Supreme Court- engineered loss to George W. Bush. The rest, as they say, is history. We got 9/11, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, Guantanamo and the war on terror, and federal paralysis on climate change. When they look at the 2016 election, they will note his moronic, narcissistic stunt of visiting Loretta Lynch in her airplane parked on the tarmac, despite the Justice Department's investigation of Hilary Clinton at the time. The result was Comey's infamous letter, which proved just disastrous enough for Ms. Clinton to lose the election. How this man has managed to burnish his reputation to high approval levels is a mystery to me. Slick Willy strikes again. Enough! We need a #MeToo movement for abusers. Come forward and reveal yourselves. Let's pump out the septic tank and start over with real protections for women.
2
Whatever you think of Bill Clinton, he’s not in the White House. Politically, he’s irrelevant. Yet Donald Trump has been recorded bragging about his predatory behavior, and conservatives aren’t doing anything about him.
2
he was impeached. what else do you want?
1
Here we go again.
"Feminists" here circling their wagons around Bill Clinton and attacking his accusers.
5
FEMINISTS do not defend false accusations because they make real ones harder for women. Paula Jones, I am convinced, had a pass made at her by Clinton, turned him down, and that was the end of it. That happens to men, and women, ever day and has forever. He did not sexually harass her, as the judge determined and so threw Jones's case out.
Jones was promised a ton of money by Clinton haters if she would pursue her case. That is extortion. Why would feminists support extortion?
I was sexually harassed, and I was offended by Jones because women like her make it harder for women who really ARE harassed and threatened and fired, etc. A man makes a pass at me and I reject it and life goes on, I keep my job, it's never mentioned again, he doesn't try again...big deal. THAT is what happened to Jones. She falsely claimed to have been harassed by someone. How on earth does that help women and why would feminists support such a person? Never mind that women like that can ruin innocent men's lives? The Accusation is NOT ENOUGH.
2
Let's see, we have a "president" in office involved with election-tampering at the national level and apparent collusion with a hostile foreign power; a pending Republican "tax bill" whose aim is to provide windfall tax benefits for the .01% and big corporations, at great costs to most Americas; a president who loosely threatens nuclear war, and toadies up to the worst tyrants in the world (Duarte, Putin); an administration who took the US out of the global Climate Change agreement and sent paid shills to talk up coal at the worldwide summit; an all out-attack on the environment, and clean air, water...
And, in that context, the Times thinks that "questions about Clinton" and his behavior 20 years ago is a home page lead story?
And NOT A SINGLE LINE on the home page about the latest MASS-SHOOTING this week? Doesn't news "coverage" like that "raise questions"?
7
Ok, Bill Clinton WAS awful 25 years ago and does not hold any public office now.
The GOP really gets off on going after either Clinton, so it is inevitable they will go after Bill too. Add it into the new investigations planned for Hillary and we can have a twofer on Capital Hill. Imagine both of them being questioned by Gowdy!
However, we seemed to have skipped forward here - jumped over the past year -and forgotten that orange hued elephant in the White House. Sitting there today in the Oval Office.
What about the 10 plus accusers of President Trump? Are they to be believed NOW? Should we re-examine all the accusations made against Donald Trump?
WHY NOT?
Does Juanita Broaddrick believe that Trump's accusers deserve the same moment in the sunshine as she is now requesting?
Is everyone trying to avoid the Trump situation?
This whole public debate is disgusting from all angles. And everyone lining up in their bubbles of denial and throwing shade at each other is creating a circus.
If people want to go to the past to newly accuse or renew past accusations, let's start from today and work backwards month by month. Don't worry, you all will eventually get to the golden ticket of Bill Clinton (and Hillary). In the meantime, we can look at our current President.
4
What about Trump?
6
Respectfully to the victims of then-Gov. Clinton's improper, disgusting and perhaps illegal behavior, I cannot fathom the purpose of re-litigating this sad, tedious, and very stale story now. There is so much important stuff in the here and now, both pertaining to victims of sexual harassment and worse, as well relating to the other questionable conduct of the present Administration. I just feel my eyes glazing over at the mere thought of re-evaluating my position viz. Mr. Clinton, who, after all, lost his law license as a result of the Lewinsky/Jones fiascos, and who, in addition, was nearly removed from office as a result. We are either moving forward as a society or backwards. Giving Juanita Broaddrick and these other women a public forum now feels quite sad and unhelpful. I'm not condoning the behaviors of Mr. Clinton more than 25 years ago, I'm just saying, point taken, move on.
2
Gloria Steinem cannot admit she is wrong. She has done more harm than good with her self serving full of herself lecturing and putting women in boxes of her own making. Shame on you Gloria Steinem!
2
Could this be the initiation of the mother of all Pandora's boxes? How far back do we really want go here? Especially today with someone like Trump residing in th White House. Sen Hanson of Idaho? Sen. Packwood of Washington? President Kennedy?
President Clinton was tried more so than any other Executive in Chief prior to him or since. And he's not running for anything! Persue him, again, at your own peril.
4
If being a predator is no barrier to the highest office (Clinton, Trump), then why should it be a barrier for any lesser office (Moore)?
And does anyone believe that the list of predators in Congress starts and ends with Franken?
3
Not as old as what Moore is alleged to have done
4
He's did it, often. He was accused and that conclusion reached by most at the time and repeatedly affirmed thereafter. He's not in office, nor will he ever again be. Neither will his wife. What's there to debate or rethink?
When will we get back to the case of our current Groper-In-Chief? He's our national shame. And he's the leading inspiration for more of the same and for certain kinds of men cheering and thinking and wishing they could get away with it.
3
I encourage everyone to read “Liberals’ Sudden Concern about Bill Clinton’s Beavior is Cynical and Self-Serving,” by David Harsanyi on the Federalist website. He quotes Nina Burleigh’s 1998 remarks regarding Clinton’s behavior. For me that says it all about Bill Clinton and the women who hold him in high esteem. Thank you.
http://thefederalist.com/2017/11/15/liberals-sudden-concern-clintons-beh...
2
I'll happily trade Bill for Donald. How about they both go away?
1
Bill Clinton hasn't been in office since the last century. If Clinton's past is going to be re-examind, let's first investigate Trump, who's actually in office: his tax returns for a start. Then all of the sexual assaults he's been accused of. Under oath. In public. Like they've already done to Bill. Then let's investigate crimes of torture under Bush; and the hundreds of thousands of needless deaths from AIDS under Reagan; then for fun, let's all re-hash Watergate under Nixon; maybe then there will be time to re-investigage for the 100th time everything Bill Clinton ever did. But only then.
7
And what about that guy in the White House?
What's his name?
3
Funny, not one of them mentions Newt Gingrich and Henry Hyde's sexual misconduct while they were prosecuting Clinton.
6
Squirrel!
3
REALLY?
So the GOP harbors a child molester, and gosh, that means we have to bring up Clinton?
Republican Playbook: Look, someone else is doing something....(so you won't notice what WE are doing).
5
Game. Set. Match.....BINGO!!!
2
It is clear that Gloria Steinem and other feminist leaders valued their access to power more than the rights of abused, powerless women.
2
And what about the current Groper-in-Chief in the Alt-White House? Bill Clinton was a sex offender. So was George Bush, Senior. Trumpty Dumpty is a self-admitted sex offender. When will the party of Roy Moore drop their double standard and impeach the Donald for his own high crimes (not to mention his misdemeanors)-- collusion with a foreign adversary to undermine our elections, collusion with Julian Russ-ange and his Ruski-Leaks front who released reams of stolen emails, and of course, obstruction of justice forever after. GRUSTNYY!
3
The question for now is "What about Donald." As long as the current President gets a free pass regarding sexual misconduct, there will likely be very little progress on this age old problem in DC, Hollywood, or elsewhere. We can go back to "Bill" and ponder and rethink but until we deal with this issue in real time, and at the top of the political power chain, nothing will change for women. We seem to be getting to the top of the chain in Hollywood, but sadly, not in DC. That pretty much makes all these other stories just nice diversions and smoke screens for those highest in power, in my opinion.z
3
The woman who accused Bill Clinton were not credible then and they certainly aren't credible now. What woman who was sexually assaulted aligns themselves with a self professed sexual predator?
7
Hell I'm not embarrassed by his conduct... his conduct was stupid, unacceptable, poor judgement and not respectful of his wife and the office....
it's his problem. The embarrassment lies in how the behavior is handled by the media, the public and fellow politicians. It was poor behavior but probably not "impeachable". The main problem I have with it is that we seem to handle this and all other discrepancies and/or criminal or unethical behavior differently for those in power or the wealthy or the white vs the poor, brown, etc avg citizen. There doesn't seem to be equality under the law or where taxes are concerned in this country in reality. It's equality under the law only if you are well off enough and/or white. This is all a matter of principal - take Moore for example - the issue is not specifically that he did something 20 or more years ago - the point of it all is that he's not worthy of sitting in that office for multiple reasons - it shouldn't matter what party he's from - sadly our country doesn't work that way.... and don't get me started on the evangelical far right that support these people. It's a simple question of is a person fit for office or not - can you point to them and have them as an example for your kids - would you be proud of them?
2
Hillary used the phrase "bimbo eruptions" to label Bill Clinton's accusers. At the time, I wrote a column titled "Third World Feminists Puzzled by Hillary," which was published in the LA Times. I thought that the faustian bargain Hillary made all of her life was hypocritical. I now believe that it contributed to her failure in the 2016 election and the resulting loss of our democracy. Men and women on the left also supported Bill, demonstrating their double standard. The Clintons have always been political players who craved power more than anything. I like Bill's intelligence, his policies, his charisma. I admire his achievements in light of the humble beginnings he came from. He should have long left Hillary to live with someone he was truly attracted to. Feminists praised Hillary for not giving Bill a divorce at a time in his life when he had genuinely fallen in love with someone else. I never understood why. I am more of a feminist than Hillary ever was. I wouldn't want to be with a husband who is no longer in love with me. I would rather be alone. Bill and Hillary together have been a toxic combination. Had they operated independent of one another, perhaps they would have contributed more to our country.
6
The fact faux news seems to want to talk more about Clinton than the issue is beyond the pale. Fox “news” talking about sexual harassment is like having George Bush jr. Lecturing us about how to fight a war. Oh wait we are about to put in place a lot of the same bait and switch tax policies.
Republican deflection has become an art form.
4
In a way the antagonism and shade people throw at Juanita because they are uncomfortable with the politics is basically all the proof you need of why women have been silent for so long. Intimidation pure and simple. In many respects Clinton was like an OJ or Cosby. You kind of knew he did something but you gave him a pass. Now the time comes to ask yourself - why. Why did we give him a pass? And by doing so, contribute to a cultural climate that creates Weinstein etc...
40
We've given politicians and other in power a pass for centuries. JFK? The press corps was well aware of his many dalliances, and kept quiet. FDR? He had a mistress for decades and was with her when he died, and the press kept quiet. Heck, they even kept quiet and never photographed him with crutches or attempting to stand - always sitting - they knew full well he as seriously crippled, and that this might well affect his health, but nothing was said.
The bottom like is that people in power, well, they have POWER! And this often makes them immune to any criticism of any kind. Accept this. Mao and Stalin may have ruled Communist countries but they did it through POWER, not a general consensus.
As to anyone owing Monica Lewinsky and apology - oh please! She loved every minute of the attention and the intrigue. She just didn't like it when she was "outed" and shown for what she was. And she still doesn't.
3
He didn't get a pass. He was disgraced and impeached for lying, and never ran again for office. Trump got elected after his behavior became know; he got a pass. And Trump paraded Clinton's accusers around at the debate. Will the mall predator Roy Moore get a pass?
3
This is totally bogus, for a lot of reasons. I'm so sick of esp. the right wing trying to equate pedophila, actual harassment, etc., to Bill Clinton's behavior. There is no doubt that Clinton hit on women and had extra-marital affairs. Those women were consenting adults. So scrap those as being anything like Roy Moore being banned from a whole shopping mall due to predatory behavior toward teenage girls, let alone his pedophila toward a 14 year old girl, let alone none of his contact with these teens was consensual.
As for sexual harassment, not only was Jones propped up with funding from rabid clinton haters, Mellon-Scaife and Whitehead, but the judge threw her case out for "lacking merit", i.e.: she was unable to show any harassment. As for Broaddrick, not only did she sign an affidavit saying it never happened, then changed her mind, she had no corroboration evidence or witnesses, while Moore's have more than 30 and a mall ban, and the GOP, desperate to undo Bill Clinton, didn't themselves use Broaddrick! Why? Clinton was a horn dog, no doubt about it. His behavior was immoral - toward his wife. But the real immorality in that was a well-funded campaign to bring another human being down strictly for political reasons. What the GOP did to Clinton was FAR more immoral than anything Clinton did, other than to his wife, who herself was trashed and blamed by Republicans. These cases have nothing in common. Nothing.
4
Democrats don't have to go back twenty years to find a reason to criticize Bill Clinton. Sure, his behavior with Ms. Lewinsky was despicable. (The consensual defense seems weak. The President of the United States and an intern? The intimidation factor is glaring.) And his subsequent lying and `is is' comment revealed a nasty contempt for the truth. But Democrats and all progressives can blame Bill Clinton - and his co-conspirator, Hillary - for something that has the potential to hurt millions of people, not just a handful of Clinton accusers: Donald Trump. Yes, Donald Trump. For it was Bill Clinton who set the precedent for sleaze that allowed Trump to survive his own grotesque behavior. And it was the Clinton's sense of entitlement - something shared by Trump - that lead them to believe the 2016 election was a lock. The Clintons gave the nation Donald Trump, both at the ballot box and in the way they cheapened common decency.
2
Dear New York Times,
It appears you've gotten sidetracked and wandered off the Appalachian Trail (like former South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford! Y'all do know he's now in the House of Representatives voting with Mr. Trump all day long!)
Please think about getting back on track and hammering home that the judges being considered for the federal courts (there's more than that guy whose wife works in the White House) are going to be appointed for LIFE. And since many are in their 30s in age they will be wreaking havoc long after Trump/Pence/Ryan/Koch are gone. (Bill Clinton, too.)
To be more clear: Keep your eye on the ball and snap out of it - 'cause ain't nobody got time for this!
Your (paying) friend,
Erika
Trump’s Crazy Choices for the Courts https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/09/opinion/trump-judges-courts.html
"Leonard Steven Grasz, a nominee for the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals...has supported “conversion therapy” for gay youth and legislation that would allow employers to discriminate against gay employees under the guise of religious liberty."
"Damien Schiff...nominated to the Court of Federal Claims...has called the Supreme Court justice Anthony Kennedy a “judicial prostitute” because of his role as a swing voter."
"Amy Coney Barrett..has been confirmed (55-43) for a seat on the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals...stated that judges (below the Supreme Court) need not adhere to precedent if they believe a case was wrongly decided...opposes abortion rights."
5
Anything is good to deflect attention from the failing "presidency" of the most incompetent and repulsive WH host ever. How can he pass in front of the fireplace in the State dining room and miss the engraved 1800 prayer from President John Adams: "That none but honest and wise men ever rule under this roof"?
3
What about Bill? He was impeached for lying about his sexual misconducts. The real question is what about Donald? Using the same metric, he should be impeached for his conducts, too.
3
If Clinton had resigned, Al Gore would have become President. Running with the strong advantage of incumbancy, Gore would almost certainly have beaten Bush in 2000's close election. While any President would have had to respond forcefully to 9/11, it is unlikely that Gore would have invaded Iraq, an act that had everything to do with Dick Cheny and nothing to do with 9/11. Fifteen years of war and probably 1 million deaths would have been avoided.
But feminists who supported Bill Clinton aren't concerned about that alternate history, or those thousands of deaths of mostly male American soldiers, and the anonymous suffering of millions in Iraq and Syria. Nor did feminists in 1998 "worship" Bill Clinton. Although after Bill so publicly humiliated his wife, feminists rallied to canonize Hillary for the highly public and embarrassing betrayal by her husband, Hillary's most notable qualification for high office.
What feminists "worship" is abortion rights. But because Gore, without the boost he would have had from incumbancy lost, what feminists got was Roberts and Alito on the Supreme Court. They are two rock solid votes to overturn Roe and terminate abortion rights, coming sometime soon to a Supreme Court near you, probably before 2020.
There is some rough justice at work here.
1
Truth we are human beings and this behavior (almost exclusively men) however abhorrent has gone on forever, and women need to be respected and protected. Second truth consent is consent!! Third truth children are a complete violation, Roy Moore's behavior is a crime..it is absolutely not right to violate children!!
1
This kind of hypocrisy and corruption is exactly why I am not a Democrat any longer. When millions of people betray their own core values to protect a politician or party, it's a sad revelation about their real priorities: "power before principles, no matter what." How can I take feminists seriously when their outrage is so easily tempered by political expediency?
Very, very few feminists, liberals or Democrats addressed the credible accusations of rape, sexual assault and power seduction against Bill Clinton before "Hurricane Harvey" hit the media. Hillary, an avowed national leader of women, spent years actually attacking the women Bill raped or assaulted. Where is the justice in any of that?
(No, I didn't vote for Trump or HRC a year ago.)
2
Brave comment in these pages, Peter, but spot-on and good for you.
1
Oh, god. The guy was hounded by Ken Starr, faced impeachment for his behavior, he confessed, and the acts were consensual, and he worked it out with his family. But Fox News is relentless. the Clintons, the Clintons, the CLintons.
5
By the way, guys. It seems Senator Al Franken has been called out for his behaviour. Funny that, as he has publicly fingered Weinstein recently.
1
The Democrats were wrong to protect Bill Clinton, he should have been impeached "I did not have sex with that woman..." demanded impeachment.
Hillary Clinton aided and abetted her husband in marginalizing the woman he molested, she has never been held accountable, shame.
The Democrats set the low standard in 1998, that Trump and others have subsequently relied upon.
3
What about the transgressions of the man who now sits in the Oval Office? Shouldn't it be the first to be dealt with?
4
Bill Clinton? What about Donald Trump?
3
There is no point at which the Right, together with the Trumpists, together with certain Bible-thumpera, together with Roy Moore's supporters, together with the members of the Anti-Sex League, will ever, ever, stop hounding the Clintons.
Did this get investigated? Yes. Did Bill Clinton pay for what he'd actually done? Yes.
Is Broadderick believable? In my view, no. MIght I be wrong? Sure, but actual courts looked at her case. And may I just ask, who's been trundling the woman around the country and paying her expenses for the last twenty years?
And not that it'll matter to some, but the current President IS ON VIDEO bragging--bragging!--about direct sexual assault, there're accusations of even worse that go on forever, and not a single solitary peep from Trumpists and Bannonites. Nothing.
Meanwhile, Congress is trying hard to stick it to working people, women, kids, college students, disabled folks, everybody in a Blue state, and all the rest of their shabby shopping list.
And so, people need to go after Bill Clinton one...more...time.
7
I agree. I don't find Broaddrick to be believable, for a few reasons. My guess is that she and Bill had a one-night stand and she came to regret it, but that it was purely consensual. I don't believe for one second that Republicans would not have used Broaddrick and rape to get Clinton when they were on that rabid hunt of him. Really? Republicans used a fib, not even a lie, about a consensual affair with an adult woman to try to impeach him but left a rape charge alone?? Who is stupid enough to not figure that even Republicans could not have found Broaddrick to be credible? She also has absolutely nothing to back up her story. Nothing.
3
At the time it was happening, almost as demoralizing to me as Bill Clinton's behavior was his wife's obvious lying about Paula Jones. That a woman would trash another woman like that really bothered me - and it still did when I voted for Mrs. Clinton years later. Ditto for feminists like Steinem and others. They were wrong not to support Paula Jones at the time. (Monica really didn't seem like a victim but a participant so that seemed different - though Bill Clinton's behavior in that case was disgraceful as well.)
I feel the same way about the wives of Clarence Thomas and Bill Cosby. How do these women live with themselves - not too mention their husbands?
63
The election of Donald Trump reminds me every day, that we elect real people, who are flawed in many ways. Through a process of elimination, we might eliminate the most talented leaders. Then, we would have to settle for mediocrity.
I hope that potential leaders are not discouraged from entering politics, now.
I hope that candidates will come forward who are willing to make sacrifices to serve the nation. I hope they will show humility and dedication...
1
easy!!! the wives are there for the money
A "reality check" about Hillary Clinton and Bill's various sexual encounters: http://edition.cnn.com/2016/10/11/politics/hillary-clinton-donald-trump-...
Bill Clinton was clearly licentious, but the accusations that he harassed or even raped Juanita Broaddrick seem more likely to be blown up out of that.
Public figures are often accused of awful things, especially controversial people like Bill and Hillary Clinton. It needs to be taken with a grain of salt.
And people who are close to people who are accused, often stand behind them. They may be in denial, as Hillary Clinton was to some extent. She says she believed Bill Clinton when he told her it didn't happen. Hillary Clinton gets trashed a lot for doing things that are only human.
2
Clinton was a philanderer who cheated with grown women, he wasn't trolling a mall for 14-17 year old girls. There is no equivalency. Monica Lewinsky who the GOP tried to portray as a "babe in the woods" was just a "babe" who was 21 years old, a college grad who'd had an affair with here married professor while in college and who caught the eye of a man (Clinton) with a wandering eye and with whom she engaged in casual sex. End of story.
Moore is a pedophile and if was working at university presently instead of running for office in Alabama, he'd be fired for it and arrested for stalking teenage girls.
8
Perhaps feminists will start a lynch mob against Senator Franken?
Probably not though.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2017/11/16/al-franken-k...
1
Oh, watch the liberals Willy-Horton themSELVES, now.
If extramarital sex between consenting adults is an impeachable offense, a super majority of the entire Congress would have to resign.
Moore is a serial statutory rapist. PERIOD.
And his wife forged material for publication on social media.
There is no comparison.
The real crime was the hijacking of the country's only "left" political party by Arkansas Republicans named Clinton.
1
Not listened to !!! The Paula Jones case caused a change to presidential immunity!!! And Monica Lewinsky, a consenting adult, almost got him impeached! Not listened to, my foot. The republicans drooled over every detail of every claim they could find, while they were ignoring Anita Hill. Not listened to, what a history re-write! The Rutherford Insitute and Kenneth Starr are forever engraved in the nation's memory, because of the repubs diggin up everything they could on Clinton.
16
Well, what about all the raping and pillaging by our so-called Founding Fathers? What about all the slaves on whose bones this nation was built, especially in the South? They were raped and abused by the White Man, too. The U.S. has never had truth and reconciliation about this history, and it needs to. But not right now. It would not work under our current administration. Right now we face the worst, most dangerous president in our history. We need to focus on ending this regime. We must work against the Abuser in Chief and Moore, who would have a lot of power if elected.
There are creepy abusers and seducers on both sides of the aisle as well as in Hollywood, academia, coal mines and assembly lines. I’m a lifelong Democrat who once worked at a right wing think tank. The wife of my powerful boss used to loudly and snidely deride “slick Willie” in front of Russian guests, and I had to translate those words for them. Well, her hubby hit on me. Pretty slick, huh?
Bill Clinton is a creep, but he’s long out of office. Hillary isn’t in government any longer. The NYT should not dignify diversionary tactics like these. It should focus on fact-based, unrelenting coverage of the destruction of our country by these boorish, pseudo-religious, amoral misogynists. If and when people vote this slime out of power, we can really have Truth and Reconciliation, textbooks that tell real history and legislation that will protect any and all of us from sexual harassment and assault.
140
Your basic argument is similar to those who support Moore, despite his alleged misconduct. As long as somewhat supports your political position, then their character and actions are irrelevant. And the new York Times should not write articles exploring the flaws of those you are against, since that is a distraction not worthy of discussion. As long as you hate Trump, sexual harassment isn't an issue, in your view. Hopefully, you will never become the managing editor of the New York Times, because your motto would be as follows: Report all the news that supports my political positions.
1
It is not about who is in the government, but it is about hypocrisy. Those who defended Clinton are hardly in position to criticize the defenders of Moore. Actions have consequences, and defending sexual predators is the action. And the other side using your tactics is one of them.
2
The NYT already passes on articles that don't fit the editorial slant, which isn't much that much different from most for profit new organizations, but you seem to be saying to throw any claims of being unbiased out of the window. That is propaganda, even if every story passes some sort of fact check, as unbiased in part means covering issues even when your base doesn't appreciate it.
1
Bill Clinton is a sleazebag. I held my nose and voted for Mrs. Clinton because the alternative is what we got! Character matters. I guess we now know that the race to the bottom was won by someone literally "at the bottom of the barrel" when it comes to character.
11
The wife is not responsible for the husband's behavior, any more than you are responsible for your significant other's behavior.
2
Oh course Bill Clinton was/is a sleaze, but he is not up for election. And the women who sat front row staring with indignation at Hillary during a debate with a man who has repeatedly been accused of sexual misconduct, should rightfully be called hypocrites. Bill's accusers are real, truthful, but Donald's are not.
It looks to me like the press and political figures are trying to use Bill to defend the ilk of Roy Moore by saying "look you liberals are just as bad" This is so childish, but well, Donald got away with it.
11
I guess the question is at what point have you paid for your sins in America. Also when you continually and specifically say things like the "liberal side" or "liberals and feminists" the aroma of an agenda is going to be in the air.
4
Bill Clinton is despicable and his behavior should not be excused now, just as the behavior of other misogynists is being called out and accounted for.
And, while I will be happy to jump on the "Roy Moore is a despicable child abuser" bandwagon and demand that he remove himself from politics completely, I would also like to point out that allegations are now being made against left-wing favorite Al Franken, who is accused of forcibly kissing and groping model and actress Lee Ann Tweeden while she slept on a C-130 cargo plane on a USO tour in 2006:
http://www.kabc.com/2017/11/16/leeann-tweeden-on-senator-al-franken/
Where's the article about Al Franken, NY Times? It certainly seems that this kind of abuse should be called out loudly and immediately, regardless of the party of the person accused, right?
C'mon, NY Times -- We're waiting!
7
Why care about Clinton's sexual escapades decades ago when Trump and the republican congress are progressing in their destruction of the environment, clean water and air, and now the screwing of ordinary Americans with their tax plan? This is so much more consequential. Moreover, his accusers lack credibility and Monica was a willing participating adult. And yes, he lied about sex, but show me one person who has never lied about sex. Doesn't exist.
12
The "everyone does it" never worked when I was a kid and it certainly isn't working in your comment.
Moore escapade were 40 years ago. By your logic we should not be bother by it at all.
1
As we used to say, "Clinton lied but nobody died".
1
Ok fine, but what about Clarence Thomas?
30
What about him? Is it not obvious that he was the victim of a media lynching?
For allegedly making an off color comment to Anita Hill when they were both single?
1
They both are creeps. One creep was already punished. The other creep wants more power. Let's not give it to him.
And then there's the creep with the nuclear codes. Geez.
12
Govt: Creeps all the way down.
2
Let’s stipulate that the statute of limitations on these charges goes back to Clarence Thomas. So this includes Bill, Clarence and all the ill behaved abusers of power since them. Bill and Clarence had their “Roy Moore” moments. Was it enough? Was it complete? No, not for the victims of their abuse. Does this in anyway redeem Roy Moore? NO! The bottom line is as my mother taught “Two wrongs don’t make a right”
5
Bill spent his time in the hot seat, now it's Moore's turn, and hopefully he will get what he deserves. The hypocrisy thing works both ways - that simply the nature of politics. But hitting on teens and preteens is especially venal in relation to anything Bill was accused of.
74
There is visual proof Al Franken sexually assaulted a woman while she slept returning from an overseas trip.
When is the NYT going to demand his resignation?
There is no place for a man like him in The Senate (or anywhere except prison).
Or are the the attacks on Moore part of a political hit job (if he did what he is accused of, he should go to jail) to elect democrats? And the mea culpa by the media about the serial sexual predator Clinton a way to cleanse your souls knowing the Clinton's are politically finished?
8
Do you honestly believe that Franken photo constitutes sexual assault? If so, then we have radically broadened the meaning of that term.
2
What is the purpose of this Front Page NY Times story? It only serves to muddy the waters and serves the purpose of Fox News' and other conservatives' hypocrisy argument about the Roy Moore case. Is the Times trying to be even-handed? Will the NY Times run a front page story about sexual accusations against President Trump when a Democratic candidate 20 years from now is in trouble like Roy Moore is today? I doubt it, and certainly the Wall Street Journal would not run such a story. Let's focus on what is happening today and stop helping the Roy Moore campaign.
8
Good ol' boy Roy is just resorting to the same strategy as Hillary: smear the female accusers.
3
What about Bill' sexual aggressions? condemnable as well, of course. But don't be fooled for this renewed interest in Bill's sexual predatory practice of yesteryear, as it represents a distinct intent in distracting us fro the current thugs in power, Trump and , potentially, Moore. The fact that the current republican leaders in congress chose to believe the aggrieved women that came forward, the veracity of their sorrows, that Moore abused them sexually, why then did they not believe the women that denounced Trump, a self declared sexual predator, thus far escaping judgement, justice denied? Do you smell a whiff of foul smell, of hypocrisy, here?
2
Hey...you want to pick on a liberal, choose Weinstein. He makes slick willie look like an altar boy.
Moore is an alleged chid molester, Trump is a de facto admitted sexual predator.
Slick Willie was none of the above, just the run of the mill alleged sexual predator (never proven or admitted) and a mutual sex scandal with Monica.
3
Somehow it all comes out in the end.
A sexual predator is a sexual predator.
Their politics has nothing to do with it.
5
When his accusers produce some evidence that he assaulted them, THEN it will be time to stop defending Clinton.
Saint Juanita's story shifts.
Kathleen Wiley lied under oath to the FBI.
Paula Jones was so harmed she worked through it with Penthouse centerfold therapy.
On the other side, women who refused to be part of the "Get Clinton Anyway You Can" cabal, suffered legal and personal torture:
Susan McDougal spent 18 months in prison when she would not lie about having an affair with Bill.
Julie Hiatt Steele was threatened with jail, threatened with having her adopted child taken from her, and then put on trial because she dared to contradict Wiley's lies.
I realize it is now considered cool and hip to bash the Clintons so liberals can show conservatives that they are tough on their own.
This goes beyond the claim of mere hypocrisy (Gingrich, Hyde, Burton, Livingstone) over likewise GOP actions. Cheating on your wife is not a crime, but it is wrong. Consensual sex with an adult is not a crime.
Liberals need to stop all the self flagellation. ANY comparison of Bill Clinton's bad behavior with the actual crimes committed by Republicans is little more than sanctimonious navel gazing by the east of the Hudson River crowd.
15
Most people who are Hillary haters will cite her hypocrisy in defending and supporting Bill's "philandering,"(even that term that was so often used points the finger back at the woman accepting the behavior). She also disbelieved the accusers publicly like Moore's wife is. What is so pathetic about this ongoing situation is that we are so entrenched in the patriarchy that women have had to function in this backstabbing manner in order to save their dignity. If Hillary would have divorced him, would she be president today?
5
yes she would be.
Absolutely not. America would never accept a divorced president.
Oh, wait. America would never accept a divorced woman president.
Let's be perfectly clear about this. While Bill Clinton certainly was no saint when it came to extramarital amourous entanglements, it's odd that all this has suddenly resurfaced with the whole Roy Moore affair.
And it's the sheer timing of this "debate", which makes it seem less like a reckoning, and more like another distraction.
Of course, there's no doubt that Clinton's behaviour was indiscreet and reprehensible -- but at least Bill didn't get involved with minors.
93
Strange? Not at all. Bill Clinton set the high-profiled precedent. No wonder everybody remember him when similar cases arise.
1
Speaking of timing, the timing of the sudden attacks on Roy Moore, after sitting silent for forty years, is extremely suspicious.
pubescent teenagers as young as fourteen
2
We liberals are our own worst enemy. To show how pure we are let's investigate Bill Clinton who along with Hillary Clinton might be the most investigated people on this earth. Bill Clinton is not running for office and is not in a governmental position.
Donald Trump is the "president" a job he is morally and intellectually unqualified.
Clarence Thomas is on the Supreme Court for the rest of his life of job for which he is morally and intellectually unqualified.
Roy Moore is running for a senate seat for which he is morally and intellectually unqualified.
No Republicans are going to look back and revisit how Trump or Thomas were treated and that is why they win.
10
If we are now going to rethink Bill, while we are at it, can we rethink Clarence Thomas too?
14
It is so interesting to me to see how people are able to bend their arguments into any kind of convoluted shape in order to defend and justify the actions of the Clintons (both of them) for what appears to have been a pattern of malfeasant behaviour pretty and it pretty much says it all about the "moral high ground" taking its place along with "patriotism" as the last refuge of scoundrels.
7
Or, for that matter, bend backwards to justify endless persecution.
1
If you want to play what aboutism, and I really don't, what about donald Trump?
There is a reason Trump has largely stayed out of the Moore debacle. He does not want to put himself front and center in any debate that involves mistreatment of women. Trump is not bright but even he understands, on some level, where that would put him.
But the real what about is what about all the Republicans who find Alabama's women so trust worthy but the rest of the nations women who accused Trump, so untrustworthy. Particularly in light of his clear confession to the very behaviour many complained about. What about that?
What aboutism is a slippery slope but one that I fervently hope ends in the recognition that America has a pig for a president.
4
What about Donald Trump? Do you think that people who defended his behavior were right to do so? The problem is not so much politicians, as people who support sexual predators based on their party affiliation.
1
More deflection. In the case of Bill Clinton we were confronted with people seeking to impeach a president over sexual misbehavior with grien women. As appalled as I am about any such sexual misbehavior, I and I think very few Americans would want to impeach a president over such behavior and that would apply regardless of Party.
The case of Roy Moore is different. True he was more disgustingly misbehaving with children. But more important this is arising in the context of an election where there will be no great wound to the body politic if people do not vote for him regardless of the reason.
Discussing the Clinton case now is discussing history just as discussing the groping propensity of George H.W. Bush involves the discussing history. To me it is perfectly understandable that people would dismiss the idea of impeachment based on sexual Indiscressions but would now condemn past actions as deplorable.
I'm Liberal- more so as I've gotten older- and supported the impeachment and removal of Bill Clinton, but it didn't happen. After all these years later, the American voters haven't learned a thing. At least Clinton didn't brag about assulting women, he even seemed a little bit ashamed in his denials. Our current President was a known abuser before elected and bragged about it. Why aren't his accusers given justice?
5
I would be a lot more open to re-examining Clinton's actions, as Fox and Alabama repubs suggest, if they were repudiating Moore at the same time. Sadly and expectedly, they're just seeking to divert attention from Moore's lecherous ways. That said, all knew at the time that Clinton was a philanderer and likely an abuser, repubs and dems alike; but we all want those in power who will do our bidding regardless of their other weaknesses. And, frankly, things were judged by a different standard in the 90s than they are today. Even Bill would likely be run out of town today were he running for or was in office.
2
Bill Clinton resigning for his affair with Monica Lewinsky would have achieved three important goals.
First, it would have upheld a sense of honor and propriety for the Presidency.
Second, it would have put Al Gore in the Oval Office, and made it more likely for him to win election in 2000.
Third, it would now make it harder for Trump to avoid sanction for all of his sexual offenses and abuses.
4
The last time I looked, Bill Clinton was impeached in the House of Representatives making him only the second US president to have been impeached. He was not removed from office by the Senate.
It's time to impeach Donald Trump, is it not?
4
Republicans pointing out the Democrats brushing aside of Clinton's accusers is no vindication of the current situation. Republicans were all over the Clinton scandals, but they have been consistently intent upon brushing off Trump's accusers. They've pointed out that they are hypocrites while calling the Democrats hypocrites. Which I have no trouble believing, because that's what politics are. Pointing out the flaws in the opposing side in hopes of being reelected because they aren't quite so bad. As an aside, I remember being the only student in a political science class who thought Clinton should step aside for his sexual actions, and not just for committing perjury. People essentially said I was an unbearable prude. Leaders in other countries do it (be creepy?) all the time, so that makes it ok. I'm just going to sit back and feel smug for a bit.
2
For the Clintons, it's always been about entitlement. Entitlement for Bill to sexually harass and assault women, entitlement to use their celebrity and influence to drown in rivers of cash just for speaking a few words to the super rich, entitlement to be the first woman president and entitlement not to be challenged about their entitlement. As a result, these two have done more damage to the credibility and integrity of Democratic Party then anything else in my lifetime, which stretches back to Harry Truman. If they were true patriots and loyal Democrats, they would permanently vanish from from public life and allow the many decent, bright and baggage-less younger generation Democrats the opportunity to lift the party out of the deep ditch in which they and their ilk have driven it.
140
you nailed it - ENTITLEMENT, absolutely shameless behavior. I couldn't believe it when the Paula Jones episode came to light and the ClintonS (plural) refused to bow out of the race for the nomination. Up to that point, it would have been the absolute END for a candidate of either party to survive a scandal of that proportion, but the Clintons were absolutely and completely shameless, and showed themselves to be committed to winning AT ANY COST. They were (and are) willing to sacrifice any and all sense of personal integrity, grace, and shame to pursue their goal.
Sort of like republicans. Maybe they (Clintons) chose the wrong party, or maybe Bill won because he was actually a republican in sheeps clothing. Maybe Bill won because people could feel they were getting conservative behavior wrapped in Democratic wrapping.
I admit to voting for Hilary in 2016, but only because of her opponent. But she and her husband should disappear - please.
1
I disagree. With the Clinton's it was smart but not affluent people trying to make a buck. Clinton was dirt poor when he went to college. Hillary was barely middle class. Not entitlement at all. If you want to see entitlement look
at Trump.
2
Women's rights as well as LBGTQ and civil rights have advanced considerably from the early 1990's. Fortunately, that has placed a brighter spotlight on sexual assaults and political indiscretions. It also appears to have emboldened women who have been violated to forcefully speak out. It will only improve our society if Bill Clinton's, Roy Moore's and Donald Trump's alleged sexual assaults are openly discussed on a non-partisan basis. This is just the beginning. There are multitudes of men across the country who are currently quaking in their boots at the possibility of being unmasked.
2
Let's say all the accusers were consenting adults and willing participants. Let's put aside his adulterous behavior and ponder the most telling aspect of Bill Clinton's character. He used the Oval Office for trysts. What do his supporters say about that fact?
Anyone supporting Bill Clinton for his bad behavior should ask one question: "Will I be ok if Bill Clinton did what he did to my sister, mother, daughter, sis-in-law, lady friend, etc.? If the answer is no, stop supporting Bill. It is that simple. This determination should not depend on whether Trump/Moore paid for/is paying for his bad behavior. Each determination is separate.
3
Clinton was identified as a womanizer before he was elected and in spite of the performance that both he and Hillary offered on "60 Minutes," the two both knew what Bill had been up to for a while--hard to believe that Hillary was not profoundly hurt by his actions, but also profoundly ambitious in wanting him to win the election. Bill's behavior was reprehensible, but worse was the right wing's criminalization of Bill's bad behavior. That issue should have remained between him and Hillary. For goodness sake, the GOP impeached him over the issue. Even if the right wing is now bringing up this issue so many many years after it occurred to distract us doesn't mean it wasn't wrong to for the left to give Bill a pass. Nevertheless, it is important to note that without Bill's shenanigans, Al Gore would have probably won his election and Hillary hers. Insufficient punishment for Bill, no doubt, because while he emerged unscathed--at least legally--his vice president, his wife and the country suffered for his bad behavior.
2
Whataboutism. Ok, let's chastise all former US. Presidents, and their spouses, and children, friends, relations, staff, etc. It does not change the present or the current circumstances surrounding Roy Moore. If we are to get it right and eliminate sexual harassment moving forward, then let's move forward. "What about Bill?" is meaningless if no one is willing to apply the lesson to Moore and his ilk now.
4
This the essence of the "Fake News" movement --try to change the subject by accusing some one else of doing the same reprehensible things that you are accused of doing. As if that absolves you of the crimes or inappropriate behavior of which you are guilty. Trump has mastered this technique and got elected and now Moore hopes it will work for him.
3
As usual with all things Clinton the NYT reportage is odd. The headline has it that Conservatives are resurrecting the Bill accusations in retaliation for Moore. But the article reads as a Clinton indictment, complete with Trump's hypocritical photo-op from the debate.
Yes, Bill Clinton has gone on to continue making money - as will most of the other celebrities now being accused of abuse - because abuse isn't all they do. But they'll be justifiably compromised by these outings, and it's hard to imagine anyone who's already been more compromised than the Clintons. The fact they still walk the earth is a testament to fortitude.
A piece about how recent events are affecting Clinton supporters would have been an interesting, important read. But this seems like a rehash of the GOP's Clinton manifesto.
4
is President Clinton running again? I missed that.
OTOH, Roy Moore is running, I'm pretty sure.
3
I’m glad that liberals and Democrats (yes, this is in part about politics) are now willing to address the issue of Bill Clinton’s treatment of women. It should not, of course, be necessary to “revisit” Bill Clinton, this all should have been visited properly in the first place, 20 years ago. President Clinton was impeached, but he was not convicted by the Senate, and he should have been. Instead, he has been worshiped by the left, because liberals like his politics. His wife explicitly promised in the recent campaign that had she been elected, she would have given him a job and active role in her administration.
Bill Clinton’s sordid affair with Ms. Lewinsky may been consensual. But, let’s not forget that she worked as his intern, and was barely an adult; Clinton was over twice her age. This wasn’t about romance, this was about the gross abuse of power. And what about the other White House interns, especially the young women? I recall it was reported at the time that of all WH interns, only Ms. Lewinsky was offered a paying job. Did other interns, who surely knew what was going on, feel under pressure to have sex with the boss? This would be the very essence of sexual harassment.
And, of course, many of the numerous and highly credible allegations against Mr. Clinton are not about consensual activities. They are about frank unwelcome harassment.
It’s valuable to read this article in the Times. Better late than never, I suppose.
It’s too late to ask ‘what about Bill’. The damage to women’s groups was done when they refused to call him to account. No one asks the NOW or Gloria Steinem for an opinion any more and Hillary’s repudiation of Trumps behavior fell spectacularly flat during the campaign. Plenty of power and influence was lost when Bill went unscathed.
2
As John Oliver pointed out this week, "but what-bout" (e.g., what about the Clintons?) does not change current situations. Sure we can revisit the past, but that does not change the present
2
jeff - I'm curious if Mr. Peter Baker saw that episode of Last Week Tonight with John Oliver as well when I read the title of this article.
Why the NYT would engage in this deflection from a womanizing President and his Republican party's candidate for Senator of Alabama is beyond me.
Here is a what about for the Republicans, what about gun violence? Is five people in Claifornia being murdered by yet another angry white man with guns that he should have had in his possession, is that not enough of a slaughter for Congress to offer a moment of silence and their thoughts and prayers?
Nero fiddles.
Dems are the nice guy but a little too ready to fall on their sword. The liberal culture, indeed did sin for blaming the soldier for going to Vietnam. Frankly, to be truly reflective I can understand how it was reasonable to have some animosity in the early years. That’s another story. In the here and now, dems should not fall for a distraction and false equivalency. Be reflective and ready to follow the facts. Thanks to the hypocrisy of the gop for impeaching Clinton, our elected officials,Clinton and Bush, included, took their eye off their priorities of keeping us safe. The outcome was 911 and the Great Recession. Governance remains the priority for dems and repubs, alike. While fighting culture walls, let’s not get distracted and loose courage to put country first.
Absolutely.
What about Bill Clinton?
Tell you what, let's not elect him President again.
Same thing for FDR, because of the shameful way he treated Eleanor.
Now .. who is Alabama going to elect to the Senate on Dec. 12?
That does seem to be a more pressing question.
3
This is just another pay no attention to that man behind the curtain method by conservatives to distract from the fact that the current leader of the Republican party is over matched and under qualified.
To the GOP I ask about Warren G. Harding?
1
Here is what happened. At some point in the last year, a lot of us on the left decided that a symbolic victory for some women was more than enough to warrant a palpable loss for other, less important people -- rape victims like Ms. Broderick, for example. We simply mumbled "He's not running" and stopped short of asking why the person who was running had enabled him. When Trump trotted these women onto the stage, we were more aghast at the classlessness of the gesture than we were that there were five women willing to allege that the former president had either harassed or assaulted them. And while Ms. Clinton was out there fashioning herself the second coming of Elizabeth Cady Stanton, we did not want to pause to ask what her relationship with this predator said about that pose. And the myopia continues until this very moment. When Ms. Clinton came out to denounce Harvey Weinstein, you'd imagine someone would have mentioned that he is not substantially different than the predator she's enabled for decades. But yeah -- now that it doesn't matter, let's pause for some soul-searching.
Those who say that we should be concentrating on Trump don't seem to notice that Clinton's behavior made it much much more difficult to get Trump. If Bill Clinton had not been a sexual 'adventurer", or abuser, Trump's offenses would not have been shadowed by the defense of Clinton - a defense that gets more indefensible as the accusations seem very like those in other cases, such as Weinstein's. Clinton has never apologized, and tonight, he is one of the people invited to the National Book Awards ceremony. I wonder if someone will mention sexual harassment.
1
There are two issues here. The first is the comparison between Clinton as President and Roy Moore. The standard for whether something is serious enough to warrant impeachment is very different than deciding whether someone should be elected or appointed. There is nothing hypocritical about saying that Clinton's actions with Lewinsky, although deplorable, did not warrant impeachment, but that Moore's actions should be held against him when deciding how to vote or that he should not be seated if he wins.
Regarding Clinton's behavior before becoming President, that's another matter. 25 years ago, people did not view sexual harassment with the same disapproval as they do now. If Clinton were running today and Paula Jones and Jennifer Flowers made their accusations, I think his candidacy would be sunk. It thus is not being hypocritical to have supported Clinton back in 1992, but call for Moore's defeat now.
2
If only Clinton had resigned early in his second term, Al Gore would have run in 2000 as the incumbent. Gore's win would have been decisive, not a matter for the Supreme Court.
No W. Can you imagine!? Our nation's response to 9/11 would have been guided by someone with actual experience and exposure to the horror that is war, not by Karl Rove and W. Ponder where our nation could have been on climate change; on gun control; on equal pay.
1
Let me pick Clinton's most famous case - Monica. By all testimony, this mess was initiated by Monica, who wanted it to go farther than Clinton was willing to go. There is no controversy about this. Our recent harrasers have forced themselves on women, using physical force or threats. None of this applied in the case above. This case is about bad judgement, not about abusing anyone. Night and day difference.
2
I don't beleive this women accusing Bill Clinton on
Fox news. Fox is a propaganda platform against
liberalism. The women should appear on some
neutral program and be questioned throughly
or given a polygraph test. It is unblievable
so many women are coming out with accusation.
Voters didn't care when they voted for Mr. Trump
who was accused by several women.
1
The fact that Mr. Clinton had sex outside of marriage is his own business. The fact that he did it with someone over whom he had direct or indirect power makes it harassment, regardless of his intentions. Of course, as President of the country, that pretty much makes everything harassment, but that's tough.
Time to let the Clinton's retire. Bill had his shaming and punishment moments while he was still president, and the nation paid a price when Al Gore's presidential win was stolen from him. If any of the women who "suffered" from Bill's attentions wish to pursue criminal or civil actions against him, that is their right and privilege. In the meantime, let us not once again be blinded by diversionary finger pointing..."Yeah, mom, I ate the candy but did you see my sister eat the cake?". As many have said in so many words, we need not muddy the issues at hand by comparing apples and oranges. Bill is not in office (nor is Hillary), and as far as we know, his relationships were consensual and age appropriate -- Monica May be considered power over a younger woman, but at her age, I knew what I was doing. Roy Moore is in the position to sully the Senate and is basically a pedophile. Keep focused on the subject at hand. The many public figures who have made news by their inappropriate and sometimes illegal actions should each be judged individually. We should, however, move forward in our society's perspective of women. When they are portrayed in ads (sexy women and cars?), exploited in restaurants (Hooters) and more subtly as young, pretty, sexy women as newscasters, we still have a long way to go.
1
Yes, "What About Bill?" Republicans sought to and did move to impeach him; he was caught lying; he was a national disgrace; and his wife was caught in an impossible situation of "standing by her man" and thus condoning his adultery and being complicit in defending him, or leaving him and being seen by many as a disloyal shrew. And, the many women whose lives were tarnished and ruined like poor, young, naive Monica Lewinsky are the ultimate tragic victims. They didn't even have the minor solace of a million dollar settlement with a non-disclosure clause like so many of the more recent high-profile victims of Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reilly, and Harvey Weinstein. So, "What about Donald?" who gets completely off with exactly the same behavior as if we're now in an era of "immoral equivalence." It seems that only powerful male politicians get a pass and that is a truly gross injustice. All these women were victims; all deserved vindication rather than degradation and denigration; and, most importantly, all the male perpetrators deserve equal justice and equal punishment. So, as a life-long liberal, I "believe the women;" and I also believe that simple justice is yet to be rendered. It's time put aside the partisanship of "What about?" politics and "Lock them all up!"
Absolutely, the liberal defense of Bill Clinton should be reexamined. I am liberal and I never defended his actions. Clinton was a brilliant politician but rather than get help for his predatory sexual behavior, he decided to continue it while in the White House. Odd as it may sound, I do not think it is up to Ms. Lewinsky to define his behavior as predatory or not. She was an intern at the White House and he was the President. His behavior was absolutely and completely wrong. Defending one man's behavior and condemning the next, along party lines is not where we need to be on this.
103
Good points. But if woman who accuse men of predatory action are "allowed" to define their behavior, I see no reason why Monica Lewinsky shouldn't be given the same right. She is now over forty years old, and has been consistent in how she defined their relationship.
2
Quit beating a dead horse. Bill Clinton, like all past presidents is a footnote to history. Moore is here and now.
1
When people have affairs they wrong their family. That does not make him on par with a child molester. False equivalency.
2
I didn't defend him, his sexual assault or his crappy centrist policies in the 90s. Can we finally get a real liberal president in office?
1
What about Clarence Thomas?
Has anyone ever interviewed the other women accusers, in addition to Anita Hill?
19
In 1972 my brother was killed by a drunk driver. He had come from the bar and acknowledged drinking, but it was 1972 and law enforcement didn't bother with a field test, much less a breathalyzer at all because the driver didn't seem drunk. Still, my mother, a single mother, took him to court and lost. Mothers Against Drun Driving was forming.
Like my mother, Broaddrick, Wiley, and Jones, who made allegations against Bill Clinton, brought the problem to light. They lost in the eyes of the public, but the eyes of the public were opened to the problem, whether it was drinking and driving or sexual assault. Without that light being shed on an unacknowledged problem we would not make progress.
Broaddrick, Wiley, and Jones - are heroes of the #MeToo movement. Like drunk driving, sexual assault has taken time to sink into the social consciousness. Without them we would not be here. I don't know if there's a way to make it up to them, but what they did really was heroic.
7
The idea that there was no reckoning with the actions of President Clinton is patently absurd. It has been a national obsession for 25 years now, with no end in sight. In particular now, it's just another chapter in the ongoing saga of the Bernie Bros. and their hatred of the Clintons and anyone else who doesn't agree with them 100% on absolutely everything. Don't forget that Juanita Broadrrick testified under penalty of perjury in the Paula Jones case that Bill Clinton did NOT rape her.
As for the other alleged victims of Mr. Clinton, none of them helped their cases by the company they kept.They were either after money rather than justice, and/or aligned with the far right in attempts to do political damage to the Clintons. And I'm sorry, but it does matter.
We knew who Bill Clinton was when we elected him; we still know who he is. To associate him and his behavior in any way with Weinstein, Moore, or the current President is patently absurd.
6
Mr. Clinton was a great President, a skilled politician, eminently likable and jovial when he wanted to be. Mr. Clinton was also a mean spirited, vindictive, serial sexual predator who preyed on the young, the weak and the helpless. This paper and the left wing media ignored or ridiculed his multiple accusers with impunity. They did his dirty work. Shame on you. His wife, Mrs. Clinton, was particularly brutal to her husband's victims. This paper was mute. It is nice you are trying to rehabilitate yourselves, finally. Better late than never.
2
I'm with Mitt Romney on this one: "Innocent until proven guilty is for criminal convictions, not elections." Bill Clinton is not running for office. Although he will doubtless continue to be tried in the court of public opinion, it seems unlikely that he will face criminal charges again. That said, his transgressions have already been vigorously scrutinized and politicized and he, Hillary, and the country have paid a steep price. Shouldn't the transgressive behaviors of others be given a higher priority?
6
Bill Clinton is a liar. He is also responsible for NAFTA which allowed companies to move to other countries reducing their costs but costing millions of U.S. jobs and degradation of our country. He is only the tip of the iceberg for men behaving inappropriately. He is also a reason for Hillary not being elected. Perhaps the two of them can open a used car dealership.
2
Mr. Clinton's behavior was deplorable and he should be held accountable for his actions. Dems need to admit we made a mistake by defending his actions.
1
He was held accountable. He was impeached and his law license was suspended. What can they do to him now if there is no legal case in the works?
3
I don't recall defending his actions; I just didn't think it rose to the level of an impeachable offense. I may have been wrong, but the fact that Trump is President now proves that sexual harassment is not a disqualifying event on one's resume in Republican politics. Perhaps things will change; perhaps not.
1
He was impeached.
Admit for yourself; I've got no problems with him.
2
Hello? Clinton isn't president anymore.
8
Let's not forget Clarence Thomas!
5
Most of the journalists writing about the Clinton era are revising the history without the true historical context. In some cases, like Caitlin Flanagan's case, she has an anti-feminist agenda and her real target is less Clinton and more his feminist defenders. Yglesias meanwhile confuses consensual sex with assault and seems to be more bothered by an affair than a rape.
But understanding why so many rallied to defend Bill Clinton involves remembering the context. By the time the accusers came forward with their stories of assault, the Clintons had been accused of the most outlandish acts including the murder of Vince Foster. Back then, it was not irrational or corrupt to be skeptical of still more allegations. Political actors who wish to be believed when they discover dirt on an opponent would do well to not cry wolf continually. Doing that allows real predators to escape consequences because by the time the real dirt comes out, it will no longer be taken seriously. Repeat: don't cry wolf; don't make stuff up. Then when you discover real wrongdoing, people will hopefully believe. you.
7
Copied comment:
“1) Juanita Broaddrick (formerly Hickey): she made a rape allegation, then denied it in an affidavit and then recanted her affidavit. When pressed by Paula Jones' lawyers, she still denied any misconduct.
2) Paula Jones: Several witnesses disputed Jones's account of Clinton of him exposing himself to her, including her sister and brother-in-law. The witnesses contended that she had described her encounter with Clinton as "happy" and "gentle." A federal sexual harassment lawsuit was dismissed by Republican Judge Susan Webber Wright as lacking legal merit, in 1998.
3) Kathleen Willey: accused Clinton of groping her. Linda Tripp, the Clinton Administration staffer who secretly taped her phone conversations with Monica Lewinsky in order to expose the latter's affair with the President, testified under oath that Willey's sexual contact with President Clinton in 1993 was consensual, that Willey had been flirting with the President, and that Willey was happy and excited following her 1993 encounter with Clinton. Six other friends of Willey confirmed Tripp's account, that Willey had sought a sexual relationship with the President. Ken Starr, who had deposed Willey in the course of investigating the sexual history of President Clinton, determined that she had lied under oath repeatedly to his investigators. Starr and his team therefore concluded that there was insufficient evidence to pursue her allegations further.”
19
If the Democrats are to ever return to the White House, perhaps the Clinton's need to lay low during the next campaign season and not be a reminder to voters about cigars and human stains.
Surely they could find a dirt path that leads to a goat trail where they could find refuge.
5
This is not "deflection." Liberals defending and not believing accusers of Bill Clinton should do some soul searching. Lewinsky was the exception (the needy seducer) not the rule in Clinton's pattern of abuse. Disgusting, illegal sexual behavior against women has been perpetrated by both liberals and conservatives FOR YEARS. Read "Primary Colors". Underage girls for Bill? I believe it even if its a "work of fiction." I regretfully voted for the guy. Twice.
The partisanship about values has to stop.
2
where has the idea that the women in this article were underage come from?
1
news flash... Bill Clinton isn't running for anything.
8
There is no doubt that Clinton was a sexual predator and should rightly be called up on it. The main reason for his impeachment though was a willing intern egged on by a conniving "friend" who was taping every phone call with her. If that does not stink of a set-up I don't know what does. The outrage was the circumstance rather than the actual act. There is no doubt that Clinton was/is guilty of the "crime" he committed. I just wish he and his family just move out of politics and do something useful for fellow man, like President Carter! Clinton Foundation is a farce!
2
This was covered quite extensively back in the late 1990's when it happened. This is 2017, we are in the midst of a dangerous situation with our democracy, the current president, Trump, is dismantling our institutions and protections here at home and completely destroying our word and values abroad. We need the 4th estate to report honestly about where we are TODAY, not the 1990's.
6
Leave this man alone. He has to live with the disgrace of impeachment the rest of his days. What else can you do to him? He has seen the worst side of humanity personally and has sat silent while the Republicans ripped Hillary to pieces. ENOUGH.
118
And what about his victims? Have they been thru enough? You make no mention of them. Your compassion lies with the perpetrator.
2
Doesn't work that way. If you are going to say that a person who sexually assaulted someone should be given a break because he had a bad time when we was caught getting oral sex in the Oval Office by an eager intern. Well - gee - I would say we are setting a very low bar and Harvey should just be able to apologize and go back to trading Oscars for happy endings.
2
But he is now a multi-millionaire and still adored by his fawning Democrat admirers, while the women he sexually harassed are still called liars and worse. If you can't see the hypocrisy and shame in that, then there is no hope for you.
1
Democrats should formally apologize to all the women involved in the Clinton era scandals. Bill Clinton should accept responsibility, formally apologize, ask for forgiveness and then compensate these woman accordingly for thier damages, pain and suffering, humiliation etc.,. Make it right Bill, feel their pain and fix what you've done or provide proof to the contrary. After this is done the Democrats should then return their focus to the real and immediate threats posed by false prophets and misogynists like Donald Trump and Roy Moore. Clear the air, clean the slate, and move on.
5
Rather ironic that Republicans are pushing this, since logically, then all Trump's accusers are to be believed. As well as Roy Moore's. So this seems like a rather bone-headed move. And since Clinton has little political power these days, Democrats won't lose anything by now condemning him. So please proceed, Republicans. You appear to be shooting yourself in the foot.
10
If you turn on FOX news, you would think that the Clintons and Barack Obama were still in power. No matter what happens, the Republican newscasters, pundits, and politicians drag out the carcasses of some perceived Clinton or Obama indiscretion as though this explains away present Republican behavior. It doesn't. When we hear these people cite Clinton or Obama as an explanation of today's Republican shenanigans, we are reminded of the excuses offered up by a teenager caught red-handed doing something bad.
See:
RevolutionOfReason.com
TheRogueRevolutionist.com
5
Today's "whataboutism" journal. I see. No thanks, gop. You may remember BC was impeached. Moore shouldn't get any closer to office than his is now.
3
Maybe it's time to look at what age discrimination, whether it's sexual, racial or religious, becomes a problem and have a course in school to learn what it is and how to stop it. Where suppose to be in the 21st century but sometimes you wonder.
Meanwhile FOX NOISE refuses the accept the sexual harassment allegation against Donald Trump. Conservatives turn a blind eye Republican sexual Predators.
5
To those commenters that keep stating Bill Clinton was not on any ballot I have something to share.
Harvie Weinstein nor Kevin Spacey were or are on any ballot but that does change the gross disrespect for women or men.
Bill Clinton is the epitome of the abuse of power; disrespectfulness and mistreatment of women. The Clinton loyalists need to come to grips that the former champion of the DNC was a serial philander whom directly hurt not only his wife, his child, but numerous women. The more quickly people stop deflecting and start addressing these issues the more quickly our society will progress.
5
HW and KS attempted (or succeeded) in forcing themselves on women and teenagers.
Bill Clinton charmed his way into the beds and onto the couches of a group of willing women. That's the difference.
1
A philanderer is not the same thing as a pedophile. Clinton has been accused of being beyond a philanderer, but never a pedophile. I was (and am) one of those who believe that Clinton did have affairs, but not that he carried out sexual assaults or attempted to do so. At the time, the consensus was that he was being persecuted for his private life, and prior examples like JFK and LBJ (the latter may have gone beyond Clinton's level, though there is no solid evidence) were hoisted to suggest that private affairs were exactly that, private.
But the public is fickle on this subject, too. It did not condemn JFK or LBJ, or Clinton at the time. However, it refused to nominate Gary Hart ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Hart ). In Hart's case, his lying about and taunting of the press regarding his behavior may have been his downfall rather than his infidelity.
None of the politicians I have mentioned were known or thought to be pedophiles. As Ivanka Trump opined, there is a special place in hell for pedophiles.
But guess what -- the Rs are condemning Moore not for what he did with children and young women years ago, but for what they are afraid might happen because he is the candidate. They are afraid of ending up with a Democratic senator from Alabama, or almost as bad, a republican senator from anywhere who cannot be controlled by leadership.
2
"But her emails!" part 1,000,000,000.
11
This is another moment in which a valid question is being addressed through the lens of moral equivalence. Clinton got no pass, nor should he have; he "served his time" in the public impeachment process and the court of public opinion. Trump, Moore and the Republican Party refuse to be held accountable for their leaders' sexual molestation of women and children. For Moore, the double treachery is that he is a "God-fearing man" - what hypocrites the evangelicals are who support him! Jesus weeps at men like Roy Moore (or Trump) and those who excuse and justify such conduct.
12
Basic human decency is more important than political positions. Clinton is no longer president. Trump should be evicted from office. Roy Moore should not be elected.
6
Monica Lewinsky is correct - it is not the sexual acts between her and Clinton that should condemn Clinton for life (although, I think the power imbalance in that "relationship" was severe enough to make it a problem) but, instead how he and his people tried to make her into a psychopathic lier. If she had not saved that blue dress, he would have continued to state that he never had sex with her. It was the blue dress that made him tell the truth, and then only because he couldn't dispute the evidence. For that alone I condemn him.
5
Are we really relitigating the Clinton scandal in the midst the far more serious charges and threats to our democracy from lying, subversive Trump and his blatantly corrupt regime? This article comes close to carrying Trump's water in his efforts to distract from the Russian collusion investigation, which has already revealed numerous lies and coverups. We have a Putin puppet in the White house, but sure, let's discuss Clinton's behavior nearly twenty years ago.
9
One reason I could never vote for the wifie pooh was her role as enabler... and indifference so it seemed to Monica's plight. Suppose it had been Chelsea. Had she booted him out of her bed/house/life I would have respected her so much moe than when she went on about women who stand by their men vowing she was NOT one of those!! (Liar, liar pants on fire.) IMO she should start a foundation for all abused women.. (physcially, emotionally,psychologically) - anonymous counselors (phone lines) and shelters. It is not the woman's fault that the man cannot say NO.. as God knew when he admonished Adam for eating the apple.
That said the worse sins that Clinton committed.. were
1) Getting rid of the LUXURY TAX
2) Deregulating banks and Wall Street
3) Supporting the idea of putting minor criminals in jail for extended perioed (creating a whole new industry)
4)Disbanding various forms of Federal Welfare (family support)
5) Not taking out Osama bin Laden..
A Repug in Dem's clothing.. OTOH they are all wolves pretending...IMO - of course that's too broad a brush nonetheless...
2
Politics is testosterone driven and has been for centuries. Most presidents ( and politicians) cheated and were hyper sexual until perhaps Bush Jr. The 90s were disgusting. We were not worshipping at the altar of Clinton, rather we were outraged at ongoing hourly news and the right wing sucking all the oxygen out of the air and we had to endure stories of cigars etc, while the country needed to be tended to. At that time, Newt was cheating on his wife and god knows how many other overly testosterone pumped men in office were being abusive to women. It is GOOD news that groping and sexual abuse finally come to light on all sides. Let us hope that it vanishes from news, because men now know they will be caught! TRUMP INCLUDED!
6
Moore is a pedophile. Big difference.
11
No difference. Wrong is wrong. A victim is a victim. This is about what the victims went thru.
"Moore is a pedophile. Big difference."
By your standard then Harvey Weinstein gets a pass, too?
So exactly who set up this secret "special fund" within the Treasury Dept to handle sexual harassment and discrimination charges (taxpayers footing the bill). The fund was set up by the Congressional Accountability Act, the 1995 law that created the Office of Compliance. Maybe no surprise that this secret fund was created during the Clinton Presidency. But it was a "congressional accountabilty" office. According to Wikipedia, Newt Gingrich, Speaker of the House, was in the middle of his 6 year affair with his current (third) wife, Calista, when this secret fund was set up by his Congress.
5
There is an important distinction here -- Bill Clinton has been out of office for 17 years while Roy Moore is a candidate for Senate. The verdict on Bill Clinton will be up to history and should be discussed in that context. The need for action on Roy Moore is more urgent. He is a sexual predator who is not fit for office. If he will not withdraw his candidacy, the voters of Alabama should deliver their judgment that he has no place in the Senate.
254
Bill Clinton was a sexual predator, accused by multiple women while he was running for the presidency. Why was that less urgent than the case of a man running for the U.S. Senate today whose alleged actions took place decades ago? The ability of Democrats to selectively prosecute sexual predators based on their political affiliation is amazing and disgusting simultaneously.
1
Bill Clinton is a philanderer who cheated on his wife with other adult females. Yes, he romanced women outside of marriage.
Not rape, not pedophilia.
Kathleen Wiley accused Hillary of having her husband and cat murdered. Juanita Broddrick legally retracted her charges.
Yes, Monica Lewinsky suffered in awful ways thanks to the media.
Bill Clinton was impeached by Republican hypocrits for lying about an affair which is about as bad as it gets.
But this is false equivalency at its worst.
14
Trump elected President:
As the Roy Moore sexual harassment story unfolds, Donald Trump has yet to comment on the issue. Hmmmmm
Clinton elected President:
As the Roy Moore sexual harassment story unfolds, Bill Clinton has yet to comment on the issue. Hmmmmm
1
Please avoid what-aboutisms. It solves nothing and muddies the water. What about JFK? Johnson? Bush 1? Thomas Jefferson? The issue before us is who is qualified to serve, now. People who are currently in or seeking positions of power are fair game. People who are no longer in play are history. Re-write the history books, change the monuments, but do not compare Clinton to Moore. Clinton is history. Moore is the future. Totally different.
2
Well, we can all hope that Moore is not the future. Sad future.
1
Clinton was almost now. If Hillary had gotten 270 electoral votes, Bill would be back in the White House performing official duties while his wife (and apologist) would be sitting in the Oval Office where he did have sexual relations with a young intern. Let that sink in.
The most interesting thing of all with Broaddrick was, where she said after Clinton raped, HIllary Clinton came to mollify her.
A rapist tells his wife he has raped a woman and the wife goes to see her.
Both of them were Democratic candidates for President.
4
The key word being "were." And Juanita Broaddrick admitted under oath that she was lying.
1
What about Trump. He is president and is somehow not being held accountable?!?
4
The country has failed. No one in their right mind would think it is salvagable. It's time for the states to go their own ways. #calexit
Another political diversion by the GOP, FOX, and Trump...Bill was a good President. He is also a man who is salacious and lacking sexual scruples. He has already served. His presidency and political career are over. What are we going to do to him without an overwhelming burden of proof? Nothing. Is he a predator...probably (I'm a huge Bill Clinton fan, but I do not condone his promiscuous lifestyle). The hypocrisy of the right and left is real, but there are things we can do now. Trump is recklessly profligate and has been caught on film admitting, bragging, about his abilities, dare I say "conquests." He is a sleazy individual who doesn't have the right to point fingers. And now, we have an issue with an individual attempting to gain entry into the Senate who isn't only a predator, but also, a pedophile. Yes, I believe Christianity can atone for the sins of those who are truly penitent and faithful. Yet, Roy Moore's actions speak loud. He uses religion as a punchline for political ascent, not for salvation. If he truly believed, he'd care a little more for the sick, the destitute, the widowed, the lost and the persecuted. He'd follow the foot steps of our redeemer the way he walked. He cares about the rich, gaining prestige and wealth at the expense of the poor and molests the innocent, naive, and young. Roy Moore is what is bad about this country and is the epitome of hypocrisy. You can't point at Bill without fingering Roy.
2
Bluntly put, horny isn't predation. Grabbing women by their genitalia, kissing them without permission and firing on teenagers is.
That's why Clinton gets a pass, because he should. And that's why Moore and Trump don't.
2
Fair to a write story, where is your Trump story and his accusers that he said lied.
3
I got hit at the left side of my face pretty hard with a baseball bat at CSSM on the beach at Ipperwash Beach on Lake Huron in Ontario, Canada in the 1960's when just a child standing behind the counselor at bat. Later received a book "The Pilgrims Progress" by John Bunyan signed by all the leaders of that summer gathering. Later I brought my two nieces to a church gathering like I went to in the 1960's when they were just children in the 1980's on Ipperwash Beach. They preached and taught bible classes. An unofficial gathering in the 1960's and the 1980's of those who either lived there in the summertime or just visiting that attended.
Now, I'm 63 years of age and many believe that the 1960's generation of free love and birth control and the forthcoming of Roe vs Wade with abortion rights in 1973 when I graduated from high school in Detroit that January I turned 19 years of age. Women and girls back then were pioneers like the generation before them and like today's generation like the generation before them who were role models and yes men role models that they must realize that years from now what they say or may not say or what they do or don't do and even what they see or don't see will come to haunt them. No matter where you live and no matter what faith you believe in God and Jesus and Mother Mary will be there to protect you! In the court of public opinion today with the Internet and the First Amendment in 2017 that will be put to the test.
You couldn't very well have a president whose husband was in jail or under a massive cloud of shame, but now that Hillary's career is over, Dems have no reason to try and protect Bill. The attitude towards the accused in all of these situations seems to be about politics and other issues, rather than about their likely guilt or innocence. I, for one, favor due process. A world in which people can be destroyed by the point of a finger seems fantastically expedient - instant justice - until someone randomly points their finger at you.
4
The Clinton years reveal the hypocrisy of Democrats, liberals and progressives. They outright refused to play by their own rules, having excoriated Clarence Thomas for unproven claims of sexual harassment against Anita Hill, while totally excusing Bill Clinton despite many complaints by credible women of actual rape and his perversity while in the White House. You people own your hypocrisy, the disgusting acts of the president you elected, and the knowing complicity of his own wife during his administration, and while she was a candidate for president.
5
The best essay on Bill Clinton's behavior--and feminists' reaction to it--was written in May, 1998, by the late Marjorie Williams. "Bill Clinton, Feminist" was reprinted in 2005 in a compilation of her essays, "The Woman at the Washington Zoo."
Williams excoriated feminist leaders who excused Bill and alibied for him. She said their complicity increased as they became part of the media and political elite.
"It seems appropriate to say here that I am a feminist and a registered Democrat..."
"To be sure, it is possible to find a reason, consistent with at least some brand of feminism, to dismiss every allegation that has been made against [him].... In each woman's case, there is enough that we don't know to support a respectable claim of ignorance. The individual pieces of the Clinton saga are complex, snaky things with their own tawdry confusions. But these are precisely the complications that Clinton has capitalized on."
"...feminists have a special responsibility to loathe the lies, implicit and explicit, with which [he] has consistently tried to cover his tracks. Feminism, at its core, is about helping women to respect what is true over what is convenient."
"...since when did feminists see their mission as defining and denouncing only that which is illegal? Didn't the phrase "men acting like pigs" once describe a fair portion of what feminists were trying to change?"
Twenty years later, we feminists need to own up to our behavior, too.
106
I am not sure I buy that feminists share a collective guilt. If you go back to the times and the context, by the time Broderick and even Jones came to public attention, the Clintons had already been targets of a bunch of outlandish accusations, many of which were debunked but would not die. There really was a hard right wing group of people determined to bring Clinton down, as documented in David Brock's book, Blinded by the Right. He was one of them who grew ashamed of his actions, publicly apologized to Hillary, and changed sides.
The Whitewater Investigation, headed by political hack Ken Starr, began as an investigation of a corrupt real estate deal. Then it broadened into an inquiry into sex scandals. But the Clintons were even accused of murdering Vince Foster. Given the constant barrage of false allegations, it was not irrational to stop believing all accusations. In retrospect, I do believe Broderick and Jones. But although Jones' story was credible, the fact that she was housed by right wing supporters, who funded her lawsuit and even paid for her plastic surgery, at the time, it was easy to doubt even her. And Willey's story was always riddled with inconsistency.
But the fact remains, if you want to be believed, don't spend years crying wolf first. And that is what happened then. And that is why I am not sorry for being skeptical in the past.
1
Bravo and well stated.
1
Predators are predators. They come in all shapes, sizes and political affiliations. Bill Clinton was impeached and his wife twice rejected for the office of President. Some may that's not enough but it's a heck of a penalty. Roy Moore has paid nothing until now. He is exposed. So if Alabama stubbornly rejects the truth from 9 (and growing) of their own citizens and stupidly elect this sleazebag out of spite, they will get what they pay for.... a permanently shunned, powerless representative who will constantly remind them of how ineffective he is and how badly they were conned.
4
As a liberal Democrat I voted for Hilary through gritted teeth precisely because I thought she had been entirely unfair to the women her husband had certainly harassed and because she so obviously dismissed them because they were less well educated. I doubt Bill was as bad as Harvey Weinstein but he was no saint, and she stayed with him because it benefitted her own quest for power.
1
this former president should be held to account. we have indisputable proof of his unacceptable behavior with ms. lewinsky and his other accusers were/are just as credible as those stepping forward with regard to weinstein or judge moore.
president clinton benefited from the same culture of power-fueled silence that allowed weinstein/moore to thrive. a good first-step would a non-self-serving apology to all of these women. mr. clinton needs to own his past behavior to prove that he is capable of taking responsibility for his actions and that he is truly remorseful.
at least for this brief moment, women are pouring forth to say that these experiences are not the exception. the dam cracked with the cosby verdict. i am in my 60's and don't know of a woman in my acquaintance who has not experienced this uninvited male behavior, either at the workplace or at university.
"no means no" only works if someone hears you.
2
His "unacceptable behavior?" He had sex with willing adult women.
We don't need morality police for adult relationships. Real harassers and rapists need exposing.
2
Clinton, JFK , LBJ, Gingrich, Bush sr., Trump And on and on and on.
The germaine point now is that Moore and Trump are elected officials serving in public office. Now. Today.
Certainly any woman or man that has been assalted or coerced or harrassed should be heard and should have the full protection and reparations of the law.
However, our willing election of serial abusers, our understanding as voters that this uncontrolled violent invasion of less powerful persons is a continuing and unrepented or acknowledged behavior that puts elected officials at risk for blackmail and coersion has serious consequenses for democracy.
That is aside from the morally reprehensible action of putting sexual preditors in positions to abuse those less powerful.
The big difference between Bill Clinton and Moore is that Clinton didn't support or propose policies that harmed women. Rather Bill Clinton was a champion of women's rights, women's health issues, equal pay, anti-discrimination policies, etc.
I don't give Bill a pass for his personal life behavior, but you can't compare Clinton with Moore.
4
A man learns to love or hate women from his relationship with his mother.
2
You can see right through the liberals and the liberal media.
They are doing this to justify going after Moore.
No can do.
For the liberals a rapist with the victim openly on TV to say so was nothing but something said or done 40 years earlier which did not involve rape as defined for the previous thousands of years is the biggest deal in the world.
1
Butwhataboutisms abound in the age of Trump.
President Clinton's accusers appeared alongside Trump prior to the debate with Secretary Clinton. Their presence in this context cements their position as shills for the right.
Notice how Roy Moore's victims are vetted for their political leanings to indicate whether or not these allegations are politically motivated.
Trump supporters' willingness to look past and elect a self-proclaimed sexual predator ensures the Senate's fake shock at Moore's behavior rings hypocritically hollow. Small wonder Trump is uncharacteristically silent, but no doubt cooking up some outrageous thing to tweet to catch the next news cycle.
3
Monica Lewinsky engaged in seductive, flirtatious behavior. She was a willing participant.
Bill Clinton should have had the strength of character not to engage with that flirtation.
End of that story. He was impeached.
We should not get into this game of, well, look at him...this is distracting us from the Russian inquiry.
Bingo.
7
This is nothing but a desperate cry from the shameless right wing, the people who are faithfully standing with their man Judge Moore , a creep who liked to force himself onto little girls.
The comparison is not even there, a grown man coming on to grown women vs a grown man using his position as an adult to overwhelm young girls, forcing himself unto an unknowing child.
Not to mention, Bill Clinton is NOT in politics anymore, is not seeking office....this creep Moore wants to be a member of the U.S. senate. He'd be a disgrace.
5
Yes we should have listened to them at the time, and I for one am glad the conversation is coming up now. It's easy to think that some accusers are coming forward for a chance of fame and some sort of fortune--it may even be true in a few instances (although I doubt it). But in all cases, from Weinstein, Spacey, CK, Moore and back to Clinton, we need to listen to the victims stories and work toward a new mode of acceptable behavior, whether or not it diminishes the achievements of the perpetrators in their respective fields.
2
First, when the Billy Bush tapes came out, and the "Hillary Bubble" news media thought Trump was "done for," I was astonished that they had all forgotten that AMERICANS DON'T CARE about sex, as long as it is not rape or genuine quid-pro-quo ("screw me or lose your job") sexual harassment.
And it is astonishing to see the current spectacular prudery and anti-sexual hegemonic discourse blind the "media elites" to the fact that the gauche and rude and "excessively zealous" sexuality of many people just does not matter.
Second, Bill Clinton's behavior was NOT like Harvey Weinstein's or Bill Cosby's -- behavior which DOES matter to most Americans.
As I watch all the "cluck, clucking" of the media, CONFLATING genuinely bad behavior with bad manners, I worry that a reaction against all sexual complaint is brewing.... and I am reminded that we got Bush the Second because Al Gore kept Bill Clinton at arms' length, while Gore ran as the anti-Clinton Prig-in-Chief (and lost).
This wild current hysteria is conflating valuable distinctions, is discrediting what should be a moment of progress against real sexual harassment. This priggish blindness represents the "Hillary Bubble types" simply having no idea (again) of how most Americans think.
I ask that valuable distinctions between crimes and real harassment on one hand, and bad manners on the other, be maintained in this discussion of power and sex.
4
I'm a "Hillary Bubble-ite" I guess, but I agree with you utterly.
rethink what?
that he's not corrupt?
and loose with the truth since birth?
Why are the Clintons at fault for all to infinity? Any of us who were there in DC working during this time know how men, across the board, acted badly. Bill Clinton was 1 of thousands taking advantage of their prestige & power. While many young principled women were smart to acquiesce only w/ smiles (also at times feeling flattered that power turned his head) yet luckily it was a lot of show rather than bite from what I saw/endured. For those whom had more negative experiences, if we are going once again call out Bill Clinton - we must call them ALL out. Clinton will go down in history as 1 of our BEST Presidents. He made his way from nothing to a World change-maker. Yet, he is a man/not nearly perfect. DONALD (disgracing-a-nation) TRUMP, however, continues to get a pass. He has proven to be the most deplorable actor re: woman. No rights, respect, and uplifting. He calls accusers liars, cheated on his wives in public, bragged crassly of his power to do so (access hollywood)...and REALLY it is Clinton on your mind? Shame on you all, focus on Trump he is the most evil, immoral, racist, and unintelligent leader the modern US has ever seen. Repubs stop your immorality - call him out and kick him out of office. Show the US can be a moral leader once again.
6
well he did technically get impeached for it
4
Wrong. He was impeached for lying under oath, the same reason he was disbarred in Arkansas.
And that makes what difference, precisely?
As John Oliver said last Sunday night, when addressing the trend of "whataboutism" now prevalent among Republicans and many in the media:
“A defense attorney could not stand up in court and say, ‘Maybe my client did murder those people, but I ask you this: What about Jeffrey Dahmer? What about Al Capone? What about the guy from Silence of the Lambs?’”
7
Clinton's sexual shenanigans and subsequent pooh-poohing by Democrats was very bad for the Party. But worse, to me, was Clinton's perjury on the matter. Had he told the truth we could think that, at least, he upheld the power and dignity of our justice system.
110
But that's the Clintons. They never apologize until they're absolutely forced to, and when they do, it always comes off as insincere. Probably because it is. I've had enough of the Clintons.
2
Give us a break. If Congress had been investigated the way Clinton had been then Gingrich, Hyde, Livingstone, and many others would be resigning or lying.
And look what the reward is from the religious right for adultery when you are a Republican--Sanford returned to Congress and unwavering support for Moore.
2
This is true. Mr. Clinton testified under oath that he and Monica were never alone together.
2
Oh sure. You’re safe to to admit your past hypocrisy and double standard in supporting Bill now that the Clinton reign is over. The question is whether you’ve learned anything about truth and moral integrity going forward. We’ll see.
2
Clinton lied to a judge while under oath, that was the basis of the impeachment not his "affairs" interesting to note that the "factual " NYT and many of its readers ignore that fact, but boy would they jump on a Republican who did the same .. so much for a double standard.
3
He lied about a consensual sexual relations...not about colluding with Putin to win the Presidency
4
True, Democratic party logic when a lie is not a lie if it is about sex how about rape ? According to you thats ok !
1
This resurrection of the witch hunt against Bill is ridiculous. Bill didn't have to harass women. He was expert at simply seducing them, without even trying. Without making promises, with no even implied quid-per-quo: He just had that magnetism.
I was in a small social group in San Francisco some decades ago, the only man in the midst of five or so women who proclaimed they were ultra liberated. One five minute discussion was a debate over which was wearing the lowest heeled footwear -- that being a mark of refusal to be dominated by men. Minutes later, the subject of Bill came up, and one volunteered that she had been at a gathering where he was present and had an opportunity to exchange a few words with him. "When he put his hand on my arm, I just melted!" And the others were openly envious.
No harassment from Bill. Just a manner that made almost any woman ready, willing, and able. They virtually lined up for the chance.
I so envied him.
8
That is absolutely correct. I am an avowed feminist in a career which has historically been male-oriented. I'm also 59. All of my female friends are also in demanding, testosterone-laden careers.
We would all have slept with Bill, for exactly the reason you've identified.
3
The biggest loser in the Clinton fiasco was Ms. Lewinsky. She is now an unmarried middle aged woman with a negative international reputation. I'm certain that her life has not unfolded as she once thought it would.
3
I've read interviews with her. She seems fine and happy. I'm not sure that being middle-aged or unmarried mandates misery.
3
She accurately stated recently that about Linda Tripp that "she ruined my life."
2
If we're going to revisit Bill Clinton's history of misconduct, then we are also obligated to dig deeper into Trump's more well-documented (by his own locker room talk) harassment and serial philandering. Even more distasteful, however, was when Clinton's accusers became Trump's political stage props at that presidential debate, forfeiting what credibility they might have had.
12
Oh, surely, if we dig more into Clinton's past, then we should definitely investigate Eisenhower for screwing around with Kay Summersby.
2
Bill Clinton is not running for office. Can we please focus on current events and not history?
11
What about Anita Hill? Are we ready to treat her with dignity?
14
It is in the former President's self interest to issue an open, honest, heartfelt apology, to help reconcile his past for the sake of his legacy and for the future of progressive politics. The Clinton's have nothing to loose. What was once excused as men having fun will hopefully, hereafter, be seen as inexcusable no matter who the individual is and no matter what the degree of abuse is. Leaving his chapter open allows the current president to live by the same standard set nearly 20 years ago. It is time.
1
People will have affairs until the last man or woman dies from global warming. I don't want to know about them, no matter who is having them, unless they constitute a crime or threaten national security.
Bill Clinton owes us nothing.
2
There is a real double standard here.
2
The sleeping with adult women vs. attempting to sleep with teenagers double standard? Yeah, no.
3
At a certain point it's difficult to dismiss all of the accusations leveled against Clinton, particularly in light of his affair with Monica Lewinsky. The Lewinsky affair showed incredibly poor judgment on his part, and it leaves the door open to questions about what else he might have done. When allegations really start amassing a time comes where they lend credibility to each other.
That said, the accusers repeatedly tarnish their credibility when they associate with wack-a-doodle Republicans hellbent on destroying the Clintons. Regardless of why they do it, the optics aren't good.
2
In a new world where our "president" has bragged about sexually molesting young ladies against their will and is a serial divorcer (not to mention his being the subject of fraud investigations and lawsuits that were settled as a "courtesy" to him in light of his election), I have no patience for this predictable attempt at moral equivalency from the right. Clinton undoubtedly sullied the office, but beyond that there is no real evidence (except in the fevered imaginations of Fox viewers) that he ever knowingly did anything besides that (not to minimize it) to betray our trust.
5
If your standard is "no real evidence," and you allege that this exonerates Clinton of the many charges of rape, predatory behavior, and abuse against him, then Roy Moore is off the hook - by your own logic. As much as you wish to give Clinton a pass for doing nothing more than "sully(ing) the office" (really?), Clinton is the same breed of reptile as Roy Moore; he just happens to be the reptile we on the left have decided to worship. That his wife chose to ignore, tolerate, subsidize and excuse his predations against so many women other than she, is one of the reasons she's not President.
Nonsense; his accusers were discredited then (Jones when it turned out that she was hired by a conservative group, Broaddrick when she said under oath that she was not raped, and Willey when there was considerable corroborating evidence that she had a great time), and they were all adults.
Hillary received three million more votes than the faux president. She's not the president because of the Electoral College and 80,000 votes.
Moore is a fake Christian who used his office to fire on and touch and force himself on teenagers.
I'm glad I could clear that all up for you.
2
..... and he was impeached. WHAT ABOUT TRUMP??
25
Some personalities can get away with doing and saying things that if said or done by an other would give you the creeps. Bill Clinton is if anything , charming.
2
mickeyd8: Yes, Bill Clinton is VERY charming, but if he did sexually assault women, his charm is irrelevant. He is not only charming, but he is very, very smart. Sexual assault and adultery are neither charming nor smart.
1
As far as I recall it was only proven that Monica Lewinsky was involved with Bill Clinton. I also recall that Ms. Lewinsky was not a minor and for all intents and purposes was the equivalent of a president groupie and sought to have a relationship with Bill Clinton.
I'm not justifying President Clinton's behavior. It was very poor judgement on his part and not befitting a president, but it was nothing like Moore's creepy and illegible behavior.
21
.... illegal behavior.
1
Not helpful for the Times to be indulging in this. Duped again, when will you learn?
1
I believe Paula Jones and Juanita Broderick. But what bothers me about Matt Yglesias' article is that he completely misses the point, which is that a consensual affair between two consenting adults (Monica Lewinsky) is very different from the assaults and unwanted advances those two women described.
Writing that Clinton should have resigned because of charges of assault would be defending women and their rights. Believing that Clinton should resign because of his consensual affair with Lewinsky, who always rejected the notion that she was a victim, only makes you a puritan who can't tell the difference between sex and abuse. Hint: sex is about enjoyment. Abuse is about hostility, anger, and asserting power. It's an important difference and one no man should ever confuse.
13
No person named Clinton could get a fair trial in the USA after 30 years of Republican and FOX NEWS media propaganda.
2
Have you noticed that 99% of the commenters piling on here are men? Again, they've missed the point. If an adult woman wants to sleep with a powerful man, that's between them. If he forces, threatens or browbeats her to sleep with him, that's among everybody.
I never thought that I would feel like we're over-sensitizing men, but we can fight our own battles, OK? Just stop getting in the way, and don't be a pig. That's what we are asking.
Bill Clinton was a hound, but he wasn't a pig.
1
Good. I'm tired of the Democrats continually feeding Trump and the GOP fodder so that they can credibly play the "whataboutism" game. When the left collectively decides that they are now for outing every sexual assailant, they should be prepared for the fall of some of their idols, Clinton included. I for one am relieved. Maybe the Clintons will finally lose their influence on the left. For too long, their centrism, their dubious ethics, their greed, have defined the Democratic party. No more. Christopher Hitchens was right about the Clintons all along.
"Obtuse righteousness is inscribed in every move, physical or political, that the Clintons make. Neither ever offers -- for all their tin-roof 'humility' -- a word of self-criticism." -Hitchens, No One Left to Lie To. The Triangulations of William Jefferson Clinton
5
oh, yes, centrism has always been a big crime in the USA.Darn centrists, all they wanna do is compromise and get along.
1
The way that the Whitewater investigation was conducted is what lead to these women not being taken seriously (by myself included). It was a blatant attempt at "getting" a popular president and once they found evidence of the affair with Monica every sordid detail was shamelessly paraded out in public. It was a despicable display of hyper-partisanship. After that, other accusers simply seemed like part of an orchestrated effort to pile on and further damage Clinton. It doesn't help their cause that they showed up at a Trump rally either. Because of that, I still don't know exactly what to think.
12
Well, just consider that every accusation against Clinton was extensively investigated, both by the press and by the best and brightest that the RNC and the billionaires who support them could buy. The RNC was desperate to use these allegations against him and even their special prosecutor had to admit they weren't credible. We are now just rehashing the past without actually taking context or previous investigations into account, as if something that has been extensively documented since it happened decades in the past is now suddenly new, just like all the brand-new allegations surfacing about current politicians. The RNC, like all things, just kept hammering home the message they couldn't actually prove with facts or evidence in the 90s until people believed it, and here we are in 2017 acting like it's all new, and focusing again on the political rivals whose legacy they are still trying to tear down.... for what purpose? In 2017 we don't defend people accused of sexual impropriety, and a significant chunk of voters now couldn't have voted for Bill anyway (and many who did are no longer with us)
2
The issue now is Roy Moore - not Bill Clinton.
18
No. You are incorrect. The issue, according to the author who created the article we are commenting about, is Bill.
Both have women issues, historically...
1
.....the issue is Women's rights!
I'm a feminist and 59. Clinton's accusers were so inconsistent and non-credible that even Ken Starr and his global investigative inquiry (from Whitewater to the blue dress, he left no stone unturned) wouldn't utilize their testimony.
Most important, they were adults.
Moore's accusers are consistent and credible. They haven't wavered and they haven't allowed themselves to be props for Doug Jones. They were teenagers as young as 14.
Bill Clinton was, no doubt, a hard dog to keep on the porch and I think Hillary had her hands full with him. Don't fall into the false equivalence trap; we don't judge presidents on their sex lives or half of our favorites--Eisenhower, FDR, Kennedy--would be out of the running.
Trump is a pig not because he cheated on his pregnant wife (definitely between him and Melania) but because he assaults women and brags about it.
579
I'm a lifelong Democrat, but this is a classic example of willful ignorance.
The evidence brought against Bill Clinton by Juanita Broaddrick is easily as credible as anything against Moore, and details a violent rape.
A "hard dog to keep on the porch"? Come on.
1
You aren't a feminist, you are a Democrat.
If you were a feminist, you would recognize that Bill Clinton has been credibly accused of sexual assault or rape by numerous women, many of whom were his political supporters and so have no political motive to lie. Hillary Clinton helped to silence and intimidate them.
Ken Starr didn't use their testimony because Clinton's previous sexual assaults weren't the subject of his investigation.
1
Let us not forget Newt Gingrich while we're discussing sexual hypocrisy.
2
Are the allegations corroborated like they are in Roy Moore's case? If so, by all means, scream about them and hold Clinton accountable. But as many in the article have stated, the situation with Monica is not sexual harassment. Wrong, yes. Harassment, no. We must be able to distinguish between a seedy affair and luring women to a hotel room an chasing them around while naked, between consensual sex and molesting a 14-year-old. These distinctions matter.
So, bring it all out in the daylight by all means. Make sure when you're done with Bill your prepared to call out the current occupant of the White House.
2
Bill Clinton didn't even get laid. Compare that to Dennis Hastert, molesting teenage boys and paying millions of dollars in hush money. Or Newt Gingrich, cheating on his first wife with his second, and cheating on his second wife with his third. Or Pete Domenici (R-NM), who voted to remove Clinton from office knowing perfectly well he had an illegitimate kid with Paul Laxalt's daughter.
The right-wingers have been demonizing Bill and Hillary for at least 35 years with one lie after another and endless "investigations" that went nowhere and cost the taxpayers millions. No matter how bad Trump or Roy Moore or GHW Bush may be, attacking one Clinton or the other is always the right wing's fallback position. And it probably will be even after both of them die.
Knowing that Monica Lewinsky was an adult and that no actual "crime" was committed, the right-wingers solemnly proclaimed that it was really all about "lying under oath." These same people are now trying to defend Jeff Sessions for, umm... lying under oath.
Republicans are far more disgusting than either of the Clintons ever dreamed of being.
5
My memory of the Clinton years is that every left-wing feminist in my circle denounced Bill Clinton and pointed out for the nth time that the system is built on patriarchal privilege and the abuse of women by men of all parties. These voices were not heard, but there were plenty. Only liberal feminists who had already arrived in the corridors of power or gotten a foot into the door (Steinem, Faludi) defended Clinton or expressed ambivalence. I can't recall what Katha Pollitt wrote at the time but I don't recall a full-throated condemnation. However, there was plenty of condemnation from rank-and-file feminists on listserv threads, and plenty of analysis of hypocrisy from men in office.
1
Well Democrats have a second chance to make it right. ABC is reporting that Sen. Al Franken sexually assaulted a woman in 2006. I expect more accusers to come out of the woodwork. The only conclusion is believe the women. Franken needs to be driven from office as much as Moore needs to be prevented from getting office.
1
. . . and Clarence Thomas is still on the Supreme Court! When does that fiasco get reviewed?
3
How about now?
3
The Times does its "fair and balanced" dance. The article suggests liberals are hypocritical condemning Roy Moore, as well as Trump, because "Bill" did it too. What's hypocritical are GOP attempts to distract attention from illegal acts by dredging up Clinton's picadillos.
Ironically, as Ms. Lewinsky points out, the Times and other media outlets were instrumental in turning Clinton's sex relationships into a GOP political hammer.
She wasn't coerced and wasn't a minor, and yet Republicans used her relationship to almost impeach Clinton. Trump grabbed women sexually without consent, and Moore went after minors.
A balanced view would say if Clinton was almost impeached for consensual extramarital sex (because he denied it) then Trump and Moore should be run out of town for illegal sex (which they deny.)
It's a myth to suggest Paula Jones wasn't heard. She made headlines, with high priced lawyers and spokespersons from conservative donors. Hers was the story David Brock peddled, and its excess turned him against the GOP itself.
The Clintons are finished politically, so liberals can throw them under the bus if they want. But people concerned about sexual harrassment should resist, because the right wants to muddy waters. Hypocracy, thy name is Republican, whether it be deficits, patriotism, or harrassment.
3
Presidents Clinton and Kennedy seemed to have largely gotten a pass on their behavior. Seems obvious--when we look at the Justice Thomas hearings, that some of us liberals think "our" guys are really special and deserve understanding. The other guys? Not so much.
2
The Justice Thomas hearings? He got one of the biggest passes in history, by both sides.
2
I agree that liberals were wrong—I now believe the women but isn’t it THEY who politicized it—but I know we were certainly wrong about Bill Clinton! To see him up there, preening, with Pete Petersen, is punishment enough, for me anyway.
1
Fellow democrats, we got this one very wrong, and it contributed to our defeat last year. Inexpicably, our party insisted on backing the spouse of A PRESIDENT WHO HAD BEEN IMPEACHED FOR GOOD REASON. Let that sink in.
1
Actually, it was totally explicable. She was the most qualified candidate in the world.
Are you responsible for what your husband does at work?
2
If there was a good reason to impeach Bill Clinton, the Republicans missed it. ThaT IS WHY NOTHING EVER BECAME OF IT.
2
Obviously, Bill Clinton was a sexual predator who abused his power.
But will the hypocritical religious right ever admit that Bill Clinton's Republican Kafkaesque impeachers were Henry Hyde (infidelity), Newt Gingrich (multiple extramarital affairs), Bob Livingston (extramarital affairs) and Dennis Hastert (convicted pedophile), an award-winning cast of 'Christian' sexual conquistadors who could barely keep their own genitalia in their own pants ?
The destructive partisan hypocrisy and denials of the right-wing are the dominant traits of modern right-wing nihilistic America.
77
Please don't lump extramarital affairs with sexual assault or pedophilia This nees to be a discussion of inappropriate or criminal behaviour, not a manifesto by the morality police.
1
I confess that my defense of Bill Clinton over the years was that he was the only thing between women and the Republicans who would have taken away the right to choose abortion through Congressional action while he was in office. http://articles.latimes.com/1996-04-11/news/mn-57381_1_birth-abortion
I certainly did believe Monica Lewinsky but a Clinton resignation would have done damage to the rights of women to make their own medical decisions and would have interjected the state into those decisions.
I was never fond of Bill Clinton's other politics, but voting is always a choice between two candidates, complete with warts and pimples.
I felt sorry for Lewinsky, but not Kathleen Wiley. I feel sorry for any other women involved with Bill. I really feel sorry for Hillary whom I have always liked and who was destroyed as the first female president by the dirt thrown at her husband.
I don't know about the other women, but Lewinsky admits to working to get Bill Clinton's attentions. He didn't prey on her. She preyed on him. She was not a victim except to her own young girl fantasies. I do feel sorry about the way this has upset her life, but it is not unusually to make stupid decisions about sexual matters in one's youth.
I admit to defending Bill Clinton, the President, but not Bill Clinton the man. He has a brilliant wonderful wife and he destroyed her career with a lot of help from vicious and well funded Republicans.
9
Sexual misconduct of any kind is wrong, but the lines are much brighter when that conduct is by an adult toward a child. Clinton's misdeeds were damaging to the country. It is not wrong, however to decline to believe every claim. Judgment of the truth about conduct between adults is a difficult task, is often colored by the experiences of the person(s) judging, and, in the end is never certain.
Clinton is no longer in public office and the energies of the public may be better directed to making sure the claims of those in office are seeking office are given full and open consideration.
1
At least you are honest.
1
A lot of women including myself, were torn between two opposing views - that Bill Clinton was a sexual harasser and a good president. Both seemed true but how could they be? And if they were, did Clinton deserve impeachment for a consensual affair with an intern? And complicating it all was the extreme partisanship of the Republican Party, who right from the beginning were intent on bringing Clinton down in any way they could, whether or not it was warranted.
So, what should happen? I'd like to see Bill Clinton make his peace with these women privately. That way we could all get on with our lives.
Due to the extreme partisanship of the Republican Party
3
Things fall apart when one hasn't had enough coffee. Please ignore the last sentence!
2
Bill Clinton was impeached on two charges, one of perjury and one of obstruction of justice.
He was not removed due to the extreme partisanship of the Democratic Party.
Would you want your daughter to intern in the Clinton White House? I would not want my daughter intern in a Trump White House.
Balance is what the country needs not extreme polarization.
1
To be clear, I'm not defending Bill's behavior.
How would feel about your daughter working for Donald Trump? There are over a dozen allegations of his groping and harassing women, and he even admitted on tape that he enjoyed it.
2
What about John Kennedy and the drugs and women or Nixon who was crazy. Why do people think that because someone is successful they are saintly. Usually the people who are willing to sacrifice to make it to the top are not nice people or often sane. We need to watch people more carefully and hold them to account for their misdeeds and not make them our surrogate saints.
104
Historical fact: Mr. Nixon's conduct toward women, throughout his life, was impeccable.
I think you owe it to the truth to remove Mr. Nixon's name from your comment.
LBJ was much worse. Nixon was not a sexual harasser.
I don't recall anyone defending Clinton's conduct in the Lewinsky affair or any of the other instances that were well know before and after he became president. He did not escape consequences. His punishment was a politically motivated impeachment trial and the associated public humiliation.
6
And JFK.
1
We should be mindful to keep the focus in the present, on the current president, not on a past president from the last century.
11
Clinton was impeached and he hasn't held office for more than 20 years. Let's get back to the real story.
What about Trump?
18
2001 was not 20 years ago.
Let's start by disqualifying any Kennedy, Bush, Clinton or Trump family member from holding office...no judgment here, just an admission that we've all had enough of these families and it's long past time to move on.
And then let's see if we can work our way through all these partisan shouting-matches and refocus on what's best for the Republic. We need to have leaders who can communicate a vision that resonates with our ideals and then have the character to turn that vision into a reality that unites us.
And maybe, just maybe, we can get to the point where we're comfortable enough with our differences so that they help us grow instead of condemning us to being Lilliputs of our selves.
2
Regarding the accusations of Ms. Broaddrick, Ms. Willey and Ms. Jones, journalist Nina Burleigh is quoted as saying: "Was [Mr. Clinton] a Harvey Weinstein? I doubt it, but I have no evidence either way." That is simply not so. There unquestionably is evidence: at a bare minimum, the statements of those three women. To say there is no "evidence" is patently wrong.
Of course, it is one thing for there to be evidence, and another for there to be credible evidence. Are the statements of Ms. Broaddrick and Mr. Clinton's other accusers credible? I cannot weigh in on that question because I simply have not invested the necessary time to read what exactly has been said, to objectively consider whether any inconsistencies fatally undermine the core claims, and to also consider the importance of any other corroborating statements, documents, events or the like. I doubt most other people -- evidently including Ms. Burleigh -- have either.
Given the partisan whirlwind that surrounded Mr. Clinton, many are reflexively skeptical of such claims -- which after all, particularly in Ms. Broaddrick's case, would constitute a serious crime of violence. Others are only too ready to accept such claims at face value. I'm not sure this is any less true in 2017 than it was in 1997.
Facts matter. But, alas, sometimes politics matters more.
Juanita Broaddrick recanted her claims under oath. Ms. Jones was hired by a conservative group to forward her claims. I think Katherine Willey was probably just a garden-variety girlfriend (the adult kind), in light of the length of the relationship.
Each of them was so incredible that even Ken Starr, who never met a scandal he didn't like, wouldn't use them. Kind of ironic how he turned out, huh?
1
"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."
"Opposed his removal from office," "partisan nature of the attempt," obviously nothing but "the side" has changed between then and now! Pot meet kettle.
2
We've already been through this with Clinton's impeachment. He is ancient history and not currently running for office. It's time to stop with the childish antics and focus on the issues at hand, including our sorry excuse for a president and this predator who doesn't deserve to be dogcatcher in Alabama. Republicans should be embarrassed.
5
How can I sympathize with Bill Clinton accusers who supported Trump, someone who has assaulted women? The optics of political egregiousness completely negated their claims, even if they were true.
3
Has anyone noticed how QUIET 'loud mouthed Trump' is with regard to Moore?Perhaps that's because there are 17+ women awaiting him behind the curtains in the White House.
3
Why is one obvious name missing from this article, Hillary. What was her role, starting with the Jennifer Flowers affair going public early in the 1992 presidential campaign.
3
Since we are using the wide "smear" tool "What about..." - then What about Trump's current and former wives - what were their roles in his sordid life?
3
The only, and I mean only, benefit of Hillary Clinton losing was not returning Bill Clinton to a White House that he disgraced with his sex scandal.
4
GREAT SCOTT!!! When will the GOP find something other than the Clinton(s) to blame for their complete and utter failures of TRYING to govern? This is 2017 - not the 1990's!
11
As a liberal I stopped supporting Clinton during those sex scandals, at the same time I experienced a growing dislike for the Republicans who dragged the most graphic evidence into the news, exposing children and teenagers to Monica's semen stained dress and oral sex. I suspected some of his Republican accusers of the same; they reminded me of a drunken preacher getting a little too graphic about fornication. They seemed excited. Maybe it was just political blood lust. Maybe a few of them were talking from experience.
His other victims? I felt bad about them. Still I voted for Bill Clinton though in my political conversations with friends and relatives I would often remark; he could have been a great president. Instead his personal behavior greatly inhibits any political accomplishments and diminishes his ability to govern. Little did I know back then that the biggest circus of all was coming to town, the clown car to be driven by a real estate mogul who back then was busy evicting tenants Christmas week and keeping Black folk out of his buildings. Well that circus is now in town, much more dangerous, with all the animal cages unlocked...
Still, Blessings and support to all the victims of assault, may their wounds eventually heal on every level. And may we eventually become a more just and compassionate nation with each of their revelations.
4
Ms Broaddrick's statement "all women deserve to be believed" should be amended to say "all women deserve to be heard." Believing their stories is up to the listener(s).
As for 'whataboutism,' if you want to bring up old hurts, note that Clarence Thomas is a SC justice, thanks in part to Joe Biden, who refused to hear other women's complaints.
5
Before the 2016 election Jill Abramson wrote a piece for The Guardian identifying Juanita Broaddrick as a "nursing home worker". Actually Ms. Broaddrick owned and managed the nursing home and was thus a prominent local businesswoman. Apparently Ms. Abramson thought it would be easier to shoehorn Juanita into the "nuts and sluts" category if readers visualized her emptying bedpans. I'm female; I volunteered and voted for Hillary Clinton. But the intellectual and class snobbery of liberal feminists of my generation can really turn my stomach.
1
I didn't realize Bill Clinton was on the ballot! Oh, he's not? He's already been shamed over and over and over. Yes, he's a hound dog. He was both shamed and re-shamed and impeached. Hillary was pilloried for staying with him. I guess that means Roy Moore is fine and his wife's loyalty is to be commended. Got it.
35
"Whataboutism". One of Trump's favorite devices to muddy a discussion.
1
Men come in all sizes, shapes, ages and political persuasion. After all, they are nearly half the population of the world.
Men have been taught, for thousands of years, that they are "superior" to women - particularly white men. Women have been brain-washed to believe they are "less than" and have no rights over their own bodies.
Both are fallacies. Every, single human being came/comes from exactly the same place in exactly the same way. Any "better than" and/or "less than" concepts are human constructs meant to give people power over others.
Women, particularly young women, are attracted to "powerful" men. The President of the United States is arguably the most powerful person on the planet and you can bet that every single one of them has been enticed by women. Bill Clinton simply got caught. The opposing political party blew it out of proportion while some, like Newt Gingrich, were behaving exactly the same way.
The bottom line is that sexual harassment and abuse must end NOW! #METOO allowed women to speak out and realize how widespread it is. Good Women of America and the World do NOT stop demanding and end to abuse. Keep speaking up and demanding legal protection.
NOW IT THE TIME TO PASS THE EQUAL RIGHTS AMENDMENT TO OUR UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION! "No law shall be passed by any government or governmental entity in the United States of America and/or it's territories that discriminate based on gender." NO law.
4
Clearly you have never spent anytime outside of the United States if you think that "particularly white men" are taught that they are "superior" to women. In the Middle East, Latin America, South America, Asia and Africa young men are frequently taught that they are superior to women and can take that superiority to a physical nature without repercussion.
This is a global problem, not one restricted white men only.
1
Yes, I have spent time outside the United States, Jason, but only in Europe. I agree that it is a world-wide problem but since the white race is generally better educated than other countries I expect more.
I believe Juanita Broaddrick--- but I also cannot support her.
Not when she willingly used herself as a political prop to defend Donald Trump after he had been accused of sexual assault.
juanita Broaddrick asks, "What about Bill Clinton?"
I've not heard her once say that she believes the women who accused Donald Trump of sexual assault.
I've not heard her once come to their defense.
526
You don't need to believe her. Under oath she said that she had lied.
3
I never once heard Hillary say that she believed the women who Bill sexually assaulted.....crickets
1
Refreshing comment! I absolutely agree. While I don’t dispute her story, her support of another predator baffles me.
Not noted in this article are the facts that 1) Paula Jones account was disputed by both her sister and brother-in-law; and 2) Linda Tripp and 'Six other friends of Willey confirmed Tripp's account, that Willey had sought a sexual relationship with the President. Ken Starr, who had deposed Willey in the course of investigating the sexual history of President Clinton, determined that she had lied under oath repeatedly to his investigators.' (Wikipedia) Yet we are subjected to Ms. Willey outrage in this article. This whole area in history is gray.
15
Kathleen Willey also alleges the Clintons ordered the murder of her husband and her cat.
Clinton, Trump and any other american man loves every second of locker room machismo. The stories of misconduct entertainment are media products, sorry to say. These stories are attention paid by the curious, if NYT didn't print, other publications would revel in their success. This is the sorry state of our american experiment and it's twisted path. Live it well, with hypocritical gusto, or vote your conscience at your next opportunity.
The entire Clinton family is sleazy and has been for decades. Bill's decades long cheating on Hillary, Hillary putting up with Bill because he was her ticket to power, Hillary's self dealing and treatment of staff, and the whole Clinton Foundation thing run by Chelsea which was nothing more than a big money laundering scheme.
The best outcome of all these investigations would be a two for one deal: Both Clinton and Trump indicted.
2
I do not excuse Bill Clinton's behavior. It is obvious that he had a serious problem. If all of his accusers believe that all victims should be believed, why on earth would they sit there in the company of Donald Trump? Do they believe that his victims who spoke out during the election ought to be believed? There are abusers in both parties and all walks of life. If their issue was truly to champion victims than they should not have allowed themselves to be used. It does cast doubt on their accusations. They allowed themselves to become part of the Trump never ending circus.
6
Republicans use flawed logic to intimate democrats. Whenever that is the argument used say the following:
1. Clinton was impeached and he should have been removed from office.
2. If someone previously, committed a similar act, and a defense is made that they did not suffer the full consequences that the act demanded, than no one is ever guilty of anything.
Note to democrats: Do not get defensive, flawed logic is not an excuse to defend illegal, or unethical behavior.
1
As satisfying for his political opponents as it is to re-litigate the issue of a living ex-President's behaviour in sexual harassment matters, it is worthwhile to remember that the impeachment of President Clinton was a political matter. No evidence was presented that his conduct with any woman while he was president or before he was elected put the national security of the US in danger or was used to affect how he performed the duties of the office of the President (except as a distraction by his opponents from his policies).
President Clinton and Sec. Clinton have both paid heavy personal and professional costs of his actions with women whether proven or not, whether consensual or not, whenever the actions occurred. In this sense his opponents won. That Newt Gingrich and other prominent political opponents were conducting extra-marital affairs with staff members at the time of Clinton's impeachment says much about the decades long hypocrisy of the Republican party.
Many of us who became strong opponents of the impeachment process did so because of its weak connection to official duties and obvious political motivation. Our opposition to impeachment said and says to this day nothing about our opinions of sexual harassment in the workplace. Nearly all women experienced harassment ourselves in the 1990's at work.
What is different today is more women have more power; not that more women oppose harassment at work. We opposed impeachment; We didn't support harassment.
4
The statements by the Democrats and even Ms. Lewinsky herself that Monica was a willing participant does not exonerate Bill Clinton for his abuse of power in enticing her to engage in sexual activity. The power differential itself removes her choice in the matter. This is why men are held to a higher standard and, as such, constitute 100% of those currently being held accountable. Yes, the Democrats excused Bill Clinton for his sexual misconduct since he advocated their policies; however, in doing so, they set the tone that sexual misconduct is permissible except for Republicans, conservative Christians, and those opposed to their political viewpoints. It has taken almost 20 years since Bill Clinton's issues come to light for the Democrats to see that they also have a problem. How many women have been hurt in the meantime?
4
You "misremember", Jim - Ms. Lewinsky has stated, on numerous occasions, that she was the one who instigated the affair. There is no contrary evidence, nothing that says that Bill Clinton was deliberately "enticing" her. Perhaps he should have resisted, but that unfortunately was not in his character at the time.
4
Sure. I say let's go all the way back to Washington and Jefferson.
However, in the utility of time, let's start with the newest first.
That would be, start with Moore, then move back one slot to Trump and then...
Oops!
And, then we run out of time!
Oh, that trump!
An investigation of him would suck all of the time in the universe out of the room!
And, just out of curiosity, when did the NYTimes become the mouthpiece for Fox?
5
The great failure of the Democratic Party has been in not realizing that many voters would never support Hillary due to her part in defending Bill and trying to bury the accusers. She was never electable on a national level. The baggage was there and nothing she did could overcome it. Twice the party let her carry the banner and twice the voters rejected her. Hopefully they finally get it.
16
jsfedit – do you have any information that a significant percentage of people voted against HRC due to her defense of Bill? And if that was such a big issue for anybody, how could they then possibly justify supporting a serial assaulter of women?
1
Don’t distract your readers by changing the subject from Moore to Clinton. Clinton admitted wrong, paid a personal and political price for misbehaving and apologized in front of the US public on national tv. Moore on the other hand—in true Republican fashion—has steadfastly denied any and all wrongdoing even with mounting evidence against him, and has gone as far as to accuse these women of making these stories up. What a class act! If Clinton were running for office, this subject might be fair game, but he’s not, so what about shelving your whataboutism in favor of staying on topic NY Times? Moores’a running for the US Senate, not Clinton.
32
I voted for Clinton twice after these accusations came out,hope I would not vote for him again.In the case it was blatant before the election what a sleaze he was.Woman in particular who voted for him are shameful.
As I read this column I thought of what Anita Hill went through during Clarance Thomas's confirmation hearing. Her accusations were "blown off" by both Democrats and Republicians on the Senate Committee at that time.
As one person noted earlier, back then sexual misconduct was for the most part kept hidden and accusers if they came forward were considered liars who an ulterior motive.
Nowdays our standards are changing and victims who come forward are beginning to be believed. However, we still have a long way to go.
18
I believed Anita Hill when she testified against then SCOTUS nominee Clarence Thomas, but many people did not believe her then. The result is a SCOTUS Justice who asks no questions, disavows the affirmative action that got him where he is and believes corporations have first amendment rights. When we don't believe women, we only get more problems. It is time for us to believe women when they have the courage to come forward and give testimony about the abuse of power.
10
This is the problem with demanding that women have to be believed regarding allegations of inappropriate sexual conduct no questions asked. The same conservatives screaming we must believe Juanita, Kathleen and Paula are silent on Trump and Thomas. The liberals demanding Roy Moore's head are mostly silent on Bill Clinton. The only honorable way of evaluating these claims are to look at each individual accuser and the contemporaneous information and make your decision based on facts. When dealing with multiple accusers it is quite possible to have one accuser telling the truth and several others lying. We seem to be on a never ending loop of partisan recrimination with each side blaming each other for behavior that has been going on since the founding of the republic. And certainly since the days of Strom Thurmond and Wilbur Mills.
1
The media gave Bill Clinton a pass and people have been paying $250,000 to hear him speak--except in Moscow it's $500,000. Why do I not see these wonderful speeches printed somewhere?
5
It seems outrageously high. I once googled the speaking fees of a number of celebrities and was surprised that many got that much for a speech.
Do you have $250,000? Send in your request. Otherwise, why would you? He's a private citizen.
1
As a high school student during the impeachment process I remember thinking that the Democrats were playing a very dangerous game by supporting Clinton en bloc. They were in a sense ceding any moral high ground when it came to similar issues that might arise in the future involving politicians of either stripe. The world has certainly changed over the last twenty some odd years and along with it our social mores and attitudes, but it looks like these chickens may finally be coming home to roost. More than money, the thing we need to get rid of more than anything else in our politics is our collective hypocrisy.
10
CTR you were prescient young lady.Though at that time because hypocrisy shown by the Republicans the polls strongly favored Clinton.Henry Hyde and the Speaker having had indiscretions for starters.But if Clinton was forced out,a competent Al Gore would of come in and had two terms out of it.The Country would be a head for doing the right thing and a sleeping GWB would be in Texas in Sept.
1
I am very uncomfortable with the idea that "all women" and "all children" should be believed. I believe in weighing accusations on credible testimony and evidence, including witnesses whenever possible. Witnesses are often absent from questions of rape and other sexual abuse but other s can provide testimony either supporting or refuting the credibility of accusations. Mr. Moore presents as less credible at this point because he claims he can't recall dating teenage girls in his 30s. This is a bizarre response to me; he either did or he didn't view teenage girls as acceptable dating partners; that boundary should have been really clear. It was not until I read this response that I came to that conclusion; the further revelations that he was banned at a mall further erodes his credibility. I was and remain much less convinced of Bill Clinton's guilt, given the inconsistent stories of his accusers, Monica Lewinski's rejection of the victim label, and the lack of any outpouring of other women or potential witnesses supporting their claims. It seems to me that the Clintons, now including Chelsea of long be accused of criminality without any actual evidence of criminal behavior and their resulting outcomes, only a perception of probable criminality carefully nurtured by the hard right.
10
Eugene the polls were highly in favor of Clinton durning the investigation,America was doing good and Ken Starr,Henry Hyde and others didn’t invoke confidence in there cause.
This is a distraction from the elephant in the room: Mr. Trump.
470
It is not a distraction. It is a reckoning. I voted for Hillary (held my nose), and think Bill was a good president. I am not right wing. But times, thankfully, have changed. Bill Clinton, as obviously as Harvey Weinstein, Bill Cosby, Kevin Spacey, the odious Roy Moore (the list goes on and on and on) abused a power relationship for sex. The reckoning is long overdue and Bill Clinton's reputation is (really always had been) badly tarnished. Bill Clinton is an abuser. Face it.
2
It is not a distraction, but a part of the conversation. BUT, Trump needs to be a part of this discussion also, not just Bill Clinton, Moore, Weinstein, O'Reilly, and all of the men who believe it is ok to put their hands on another person without their consent to show their power over that person. Bill Clinton needs to be added, but not to the exclusion of Trump or others.
So, why are we not talking about the 16 women who came forward in 2016 with their stories of Trump violating them? We cannot forget these 16 women now.
1
Ooo, careful. That kind of attitude will make sexual assault a partisan issue. It all matters, whether it's a sitting president or a former one. Trump needs to go, but our credibility diminishes if we only seek out certain predators of a political stripe and not others.
Ok, fine. Dredge up Bill Clinton to make the conservatives feel better -- John Oliver said it well last week when he coined the phrase "whataboutism" -- but then please go after Trump who has already admitted to sexual assault (Access Hollywood tape), has many accusers who attest to his gross behavior over the years, and is pretty much raping the country each and every day from many vantage points. There's a warped standard -- Sarah Huckabee Sanders can get up and say that all the women who accused Trump are not telling the truth? Come on. Clinton was already impeached. Maybe it's time for you-know-who.
10
What about Trump?
11
I need a definition of machine feminism please. Google didn’t help
Wait a minute!!!! America not only heard from the mouth of Trump how he sexually harassed women but he also explained his technique in doing so. Over 60,000,000 million people could have cared less. So now everyone is up in arms about Clinton. I'm living in an alternate universe called American politics 2017 and it's ugly.
8
Well, not really. There is a literal physical stain on the Clinton presidency that was dismissed by Democrats and aggressively covered up by Hillary.
Anyone with a trace of moral and ethical consistency would find both of these sexual predators reprehensible.
1
Who really cares about Bill Clinton,,, he is not the president. Leave the tabloid stuff to the tabloids. Moore may yet be elected,, that IS of concern,, especially if a pedophile. If true,, and with four accusers all telling the same tale,, what piece of stinking dog manure,, and an astounding hypocrite. Prosecute him.
Trump, is a sexual dog, well documented. "Yeah, grab them by the p***y. They all like that." 'They' ?
We should have elected Hillary Clinton,,, or Biden,, or Bernie.
Pursuing Bill Clinton 40 years,,, 40 years later,, by accusations of someone who has changed their story under oath multiple times,,, sorry, that dog don't hunt.
4
Hypocrisy isn't male or female or religious or atheist or liberal or conservative.
It's human. It's been with us for thousand of years and it will be with us through the end of time
Liberals choose to believe Anita Hill but not Juanita Broderick. Conservatives dismiss the Roy More's accusers as politically motivated and point back to Paula Jones and Monica Lewinsky.
There's only one side to stand on here. And that's the side of the victims who have been harassed and assaulted
5
Why stop with Bill Clinton? Why not re-visit the bacchanal that was the Kennedy White House? Or even further back to the "date rape" and illegitimate child of Grover Cleveland? I'm sure we could find plenty of "dirt" in every administration if we care to look. Washington, himself, was very fond of the ladies...married or not. This continual "witch hunt" through the past is getting tiresome...and pointless. What matters is the present. If we know enough beforehand about a candidates fitness for office we will know which way to vote. Oh, but we did...and it didn't matter.
15
Many powerful men are disgusting hound dogs. They grab, talk dirty, fondle, even rape (although might think of it as aggressively overcoming a "no" that meant "yes"). They laugh about it later among themselves or write about it in their diaries. So I guess we might as well vote for the disgusting hound dog whose policies we support, eh? Using that yardstick (no pun intended), Moore will win.
I think Warren Harding had sex in WH closets and fathered a "secret" child. Let's throw him in there too.
1
Great. Let's condemn Clinton for his sexual proclivities. What office is he to be removed from? Perhaps we can do that posthumously?
In the meantime, can we do something about the sexual predator in the White House and the pedophile running in Alabama? At least with those two, we can save ourselves from the current calamity.
4
What about Donald? Seems to me he’s gotten a pass on this matter...
6
and Al Franken.
We are giving Women a 'loaded gun" to point at any man they wish.. If you are guilty or not it does not matter your life will be over. By the time you prove whatever the women accused you of is not true you will have lost your job, your home, your marriage etc.
This is wrong.. Google "women falsely accusing men of rape" and you will see that it is a epidemic. This should be a felony and these women should be fully prosecuted.
Has anyone at the NYT asked Secretary Clinton about her position on the current state of sexual harassment revelations? She's probably the most recognized feminist in the world and her silence is not going unnoticed.
2
No, no one that I know is, in any way, comparing Bill Clinton to Roy Moore.
In fact, not even the telly is screaming about that child abuser Bill Clinton.
It, the telly, is still pointing out the sexual abuse of trump.
Yes, trump and Moore, that's about it.
You heard this, where?
5
BILL CLINTON Should be called to account for alleged wrongdoings. But it is essential that his potential legal problems not become a distraction for the extremely dangerous problems caused by Roy Moore. The guy was hounded from his office as a Justice by his fellow justices. He was banned from the Gadson mall for stalking and assaulting underage and young females for two years. Yet he still protests his innocence. If he truly can remember none of his long years of sexual predation then he has no business in any public office, as that would mean that he has such severely impaired memory functions that he could not even begin to comprehend the work he'd have to do in the Senate.
4
What about Trump?
10
I believe it is high time to reckon with grave harm done to the progressive movement by Bill Clinton. His irresponsible and predatory behavior toward women is significantly responsible for Al Gore's defeat and the ascendancy of the Republican party.
The Clinton era was time of economic expansion and progress in domestic initiatives and international relationships. All of this squandered by the dishonor he brought to the White House. I can forgive him for being the flayed human being that he is, but he should be held accountable for his actions and the shady dealings of recent history such as the incredibly stupid meeting with Loretta Lynch.
6
You know. All things considered, I wish the Clinton's would just go away. Just go away.
5
Dems support of Clinton has come back to damage us all, big time. If we had supported the women who came forward against Bill, maybe we would have done the same for the accusers of Donald, and He Wouldn't Be President, Now. Kinda hard to blame the Republicans for Donald when we did the same damn thing! It is way, way past time to drop the partisan thing and expect our leaders to have at least a modicum of propriety. I blame the Democratic Party and everyone who blindly supported the Clintons-Whitewater, rape charges-all of it for the absolute mess we are in today.
6
Strange that you don't blame the republicans for their blind support of Trump. It wasn't the same thing. The women who came out against Clinton were supported and paid by a powerful right wing machine. Those who came out against Trump took great personal risks and received nothing for it.
3
He was impeached for his actions. Conservatives need to get over the Clintons. I know it's low hanging fruit (no pun intended) but c'mon. They've spent billions of dollars persecuting these people over the last three decades, let's do some honest journalism instead. Whataboutism is what gave us Trump. If you want to go after Bill, then do an exposé. Seriously. He's a philanderer for sure, but Roy Moore is a pedophile, and everyone who lived in his area knows it and has known it since the 90s. But just like Trump (who was involved in the sex trade via his "modeling" company) no one is really paying attention.
15
This morning, before seeing this article, I heard a report about the National Book Awards, telling how President Clinton was one of the presenters. We should rethink whether we want to continue to honor and reward him given his history of sexual impropriety and harassment.
136
wvb – sure, how about right after DT is impeached?
2
His harassment case was thrown out by the judge for lacking any merit.
I do wish people would put their critical thinking caps on and learn the differences between hitting on adult women and taking no for an answer, having consensual affairs, having cases tossed out for lack of evidence, and pedophilia, being banned from a mall, for cripes sake, for predatory behavior toward teenage girls, actual political witch hunts paid for by virulent haters of the target and investigations not by political opponents but by legitimate journalism outfits like the WaPo, etc.
Bill Clinton is hardly a poster boy for sexual impropriety. But just as with Hillary Clinton, even limp minded liberals and Democrats bought the drumbeat created by Republicans.
1
Certainly the Democrats and liberals of various stripes aren't speaking up for Houn' Dawg Bill Clinton now. This has become a real issue. For example, does anyone think that NO ONE KNEW about the sexual harassment and rape that was going on in Hollywood? Really. The "casting couch" has been a public feature of Hollywood since the 1930s. Hypocrisy writ large. In the same way, all these Dems, libs, and others who are so aghast at Roy Moore (and he may or may not have done that of which he is accused--not only did not speak out about Bill Clinton's conduct, many of them, such as Nina Burleigh (are you SURE she was joking?) as well as the Democrat Senators, openly supported him ('cause he was the prez, and they wanted to keep him there to promote their agenda). [I would add that the performance of the Dem Senators was a far, far ethical distance from Howard Baker's forthright statement, "I'll dig for the facts, and I'll follow wherever they lead," and his forthright question "What did the president know and when did he know it?" during the Nixon Watergate investigation. Remember James Carville's statement "Drag a hundred-dollar bill through a trailer park, you never know what you'll find?” A direct slap at victim Paula Jones. Slick Willie is no longer in a position to promote their agenda, so the Dems, liberals, and "feminists" who so adamantly supported him back when are keeping their heads 'way down now. To his defense they do not rise. Classic hypocrisy.
1
The tendency for Liberals over the last 20 years has been to stick by their man when it came to the personal behavior of Bill Clinton. And it continued through the last Presidential campaign where Liberals chose to stick by the woman who stuck by her man. This was problematic as both Bill and Hillary Clinton's actions ran counter to Liberal sentiment on the matter. It is probably accurate to attribute much of the landslide of cases we've seen over the past couple of months to the fact that the Clintons are finally out of the picture and Liberal can join all decent people in speaking up against this harassment in all cases and forms.
2
The Republicans will stop at nothing to continue their characterization of the Democratic Party as that "of the Clintons." Now, especially, when their moral bankruptcy is evidenced in their choices for candidates and their willingness to gut Medicare to pay for tax cuts for the rich, they need to beat the dead Clinton horse to distract their base.
I do sincerely hope that the Democratic takes a hard left and becomes the ardent champion of Medicare for all, higher taxes for the ultra-rich, putting Americans back to work on real, life-improving infrastructure programs instead of stupid border walls, and stewardship of our Earth.
1
I have always felt Bill Clinton brought disgrace on himself with his tawdry affair with Monica Lewinsky. Once that became public he should have had the decency to leave office.
I'm a Democrat, by the way.
2
Bill Clinton's behavior with Monica Lewinsky was indefensible. The behavior of the left-liberal feminists in defending Bill was indefensible and hypocritical. The behavior of the two Clintons with respect to selling their influence on government decisions by selling their foundation has been indefensible. They are a walking RICO conspiracy. Investigate them or not, will/can the Democratic Party please move on?
2
I've heard enough about Bill Clinton's misconduct to last ten or twenty lifetimes.
3
Another difference...the Moore women don't want money.
As I recall, all or most of the Clinton women wanted and or got money.
Clinton was wrong and faced impeachment. How about the same for Trump?
Let it go to court! Trump and Moore said they'd sue. Go ahead guys, I dare ya!
3
The Clinton sex scandals were litigated and he paid a price financially, personally and in . Some Democrats supported him and others did not. He is not in public office nor is he running for public office. The question I ask is this: does the life that he has led since the scandals count for anything? He has dedicated himself to the Clinton Foundation which saves lives worldwide and does immeasurable good. I realize this is all GOP mudslinging to distract from the pedophilia of Roy Moore and Donald Trump, but at some point - the distinction must be made between affairs between adults and adult men preying on children.
5
Democrats who denied, didn’t want to believe or just decided to overlook Bill Clinton’s abuse of women understand how republicans do the same today with Trump and Moore.
1
What about Clarence Thomas?
10
Ah, if we could remove him from the bench it would be terrific. Even if trump got to pick the next guy, it could hardly be worse.
2
Only sex and God and our tabloid gossip cravings are so American these days.
These are real issues, but, must they be front page ?
Then there was a piece on Bill Clinton some time ago and women surveyed stated they would give him a bounce. We know about the sexes and instincts-
Just didn't think the national discourse would be this in a troubled world. And remember- a bragging ego manic who did assault women and maybe more is the President. Clinton was too. I don't feel this flame needs fanning by front page headlines. Editors- come on!
2
He was not a pedophile, end if story
10
Bringing up Bill Clinton, what about .... whomever, is a classic tactic to deflect the discussion away from the matter at hand, in this case, Roy Moore. Okay let's agree that both engaged in sexual misconduct. That does not mean that today, this week, Roy Moore should not be held accountable. It should serve as a reminder to everyone that going forward the same rules should apply to everyone, that no one should be let off the hook. That of course means holding currently elected officials accountable, most notably, the predator-in-chief, Donald Trump.
5
Whether or not Bill Clinton is guilty of sexual misconduct and possibly rape (all very possibly true accusations) does not in anyway vindicate the conduct of trump or moore. 'He did it too', is a child's defense not a defense of molesting a child.
6
BILL CLINTON is the poster boy for what not to do as president.
I often thought that when you elect younger men to the presidency this is the type of problems that could arise.
Nature has its own way of calming men as their testosterone levels retreat.
However that does not excuse the blatant abuse of powers that Bill Clinton demonstrated the sexual abuse of employees that worked for him and the pushing of sexual gratification on unknowing women.
Hillary stood by her man, I recall her using a metaphor of an old dog staying on the porch. Hillary and Bill have a common thread, it is not a sexual thread but one of power and money, they need each other and therfore protect each other.
The liberal press fell in love with the Clinton's years ago, Bill's folksy accent, Hillary's shrewd level of understanding of politics and push for the power they both craved. It is an American Horror story of mythic proportions, and to this day, no to this moment they deny and obfuscate.
History will write their story and it won't be ending " happily ever after ".
3
Yeah and junkmen spew out junk
1
All this “what-about-ism” doesn’t matter one bit. Conservatives are trying to muddy the waters.
Roy Moore is unfit for office (especially since he’s a child molester- these are not young women, these are girls). It doesn’t matter what Bill Clinton did or what liberals or Democrats think about it.
And all this stuff about investigating the Clintons (again- ugh): who cares?! They are not in public office.
And, if Louis CK, Spacey, Weinstein, etc have to go away, then so does Trump. HE BRAGGED ON TAPE THAT HE SEXUALLY ASSAULTS WOMEN!!!! Not to mention his 16 victims who have come forward. Why does HE get to be President while everyone else has to go?
5
If these folks think that the climate today is the same as it was 25 years ago, they're just wrong. Conceding that what happened to them by Clinton is accurate, I just don't know what they want Democrats to do. Re-litigate with an eye to incarceration, what? I feel as bad for them as I do for the current Moore accusers but ladies these are just different times and people today are doing the best they can to make sure that mistakes of the past are not repeated.
3
I think there's a good argument to be made that starting in the 1990's, the #1 goal of the Democratic Party and many supposedly issue-based liberal organizations became shielding Bill Clinton from allegations of abuse, affairs, bad business deals, etc. There's even a good argument to be made that some of Hillary's baggage (e.g. the private email server and the thousands of emails she deleted in defiance of a subpoena) might have been because she was trying to protect Bill.
Especially now, though, the question is: Why bother? What does anybody not named Clinton gain from this knee-jerk defense of Bill's actions? Both Bill and Hillary are now retired. To trot out the likes of Gloria Steinem to defend them does more to tarnish Gloria Steinem and harm the ability of feminist groups to reach out to conservatives than it does to help the Clintons. It doesn't help any progressive causes. It doesn't help Democrats.
If either Bill or Hillary Clinton end up in court, they have millions of dollars and the best lawyers money can buy to defend themselves. The Democrats should cut them loose, at least politically.
5
Holding Hillary Clinton responsible for Bill Clinton's philandering is one of the tragedies of our time. It is part of the scapegoating of women for the sins of men that has gone on for millennia and it is a human tendency that needs to be loudly declared, sexist. Bill Clinton's sexual misconduct has nothing to do with Hillary. Blame him, not his wife.
5
Never mind what about Bill?
WHAT ABOUT TRUMP?
89
Beyond a clear pattern (over decades) of irrefutable abuse of power and sexual abuse by Mr. Clinton is the complete lack of ethics employed by Clinton and his political entourage, and, more importantly, Hillary Clinton (the alleged feminist and protector of women’s rights!! ) to discredit and threaten these women who spoke out.
It’s disgusting.
I don’t give a damn if it is 25 years later. That’s a sham argument.
If Weinstein, Moore, Spacey and others are being held accountable (& rightfully so), then let’s collectively - at long last - shine a spotlight on the fact that the Clintons’ obsession with ambition, power, and money led them to behave as complete monsters.
Anything less is cowardice and selective partisan hypocrisy.
So what’s it gonna be? Real change?...or more of the same? The Clintons should be held accountable.
7
I was a teenager when the Clinton scandals were going on. I can't say that I believe Juanita Broderick. Her behavior has undermined her credibility. I am agnostic in that case. I have always felt sorry for Monica Lewinsky. Her name literally became a joke while Bill Clinton seemed to go from glory to glory. It never felt right. Yes, she was old enough to know better than to mess around with a married man. But, he had all of the power and life experience and should never have had any type of relationship with a White House intern. There are things to admire in him, but I think he should have resigned. It was a sad, sorry episode. Maybe we should learn from it and stop giving out passes to powerful men versus holding the "Bill Clinton got a pass so everyone else should" attitude.
10
Now that many Democrats think Hillary caused them to loose an election against a horrible candidate, how convenient for the Democrats and the mainstream media for the first time to face the fact that Bill Clinton not only frequently molested, but also occasionally raped, women over a period of decades.
It would also be appropriate for them to mention that their party and the mainstream media never demanded to get to the bottom of the substantial evidence that Bill Clinton was co-opted by Communist China -- every bit as much as Trump has been co-opted by Russia. Not only did he receive large amount of illegal campaign contributions from multiple direct and indirect Chinese sources (which would make him blackmailable), he appointed an employee of the Lippo Group, a Chinese-Indonesian company with huge contracts with Communist China as an Undersecretary of Commerce. In return Bill Clinton did many favors for his communist patrons, including trying to allow the Chinese Communists to purchase one of the largest port facilities in America (something that would have made it much easier to get people, weapons, and intelligence in and out of America, and he was one of the major people who paved the way for getting China into the WTO -- despite their history before and since of cheating on trade -- something that has helped China suck many trillions of dollars out of the US economy, to the point that it now has an economy that produces more goods and services than America's.
2
What about Nixon? He started all this with China.
1
Yes, but there is no evidence he took money illegally from those representing the Chinese Communists, nor that he ever suggested anything so detrimental to U.S. interests as allowing the Chinese to own and totally control one of America's largest port facilities.
About time! A sexual predator is despicable whatever his profession or political leanings. Bill Clinton remains an egregious example of the species. The fact that so many people who call themselves liberals and progressives (not to mention most of the mainstream media) have worked feverishly
to protect him is particularly shameful.
4
This is how the Time contributed to the election of Donald Trump. They like to play the "what about..." game, and by placing Trump on a higher pedestal than he deserved - false equivalence. Roy Moore. Donald Trump. Louis CK. Harvey Weinstein. That's the current issue. Don't let the right change the story, again.
19
What about Clarence Thomas? Why is he still on the Supreme Court? What about Donald Trump? Why is he still president?
331
Agrre completely. Not ust "what about Clarence Thomas" but why didn't we respond at the time to the same barage of testimony against him? And can we correct our historical error?
2
at least Clinton and his wife are not in public office...
1
What about President Trump?
More to the point: what about you?
In defense of the Democrats at the time, Republicans were trying to pin anything and everything on the Clintons. The preponderance of crazy conspiracy theories made the harassment accusations against Bill more suspect. At any rate, "whataboutism" will not save us from the real and present dangers of the Trump presidency: collusion with a hostile foreign government, pathological lying and a total ignorance of history and the workings of government.
24
I did not realize that Bill Clinton was running for a Senate seat in Alabama. Bill Clinton and his particular form of sexual misconduct was adjudicated years ago. Whenever a sexual predator the likes of Roy Moore is revealed as such the conservatives begin to should Bill Clinton! Bill Clinton!. There is no satisfactory defense of any crime to claim that other people have done it too. The country has become so tribal, the loss of 'white privilege' so imminent, that an accused pedophile is preferable to a Democrat in Alabama and elsewhere. And to distract from that dispiriting fact, the Republicans begin to shout Bill Clinton!
38
alprufrock - "I did not realize..."
Nothing to see here, just brush that hypocrisy under the rug, right?
2
So now Bill Clinton must resign from........retirement
4
Bill Clinton who womanized WOMAN.....not, took advantage of unknowing underage girls. BIG DIFFERENCE. It's sick to try and compare and excuse Moore's behavior when it's obviously not the same thing.
5
I was utterly amazed by the NYTmes opinion piece that Gloria Steinem wrote defending Clinton back then as well as all the women I knew that defended her bizarre reasoning. Worried more about her brand I guess than the women she purports to represent.
Sounds like many democratic and republican politicians today ......
5
This article neglects to mention that Paula Jones was PAID by a conservative political foundation to pursue the accusation against Mr. Clinton. This was, to me, a key point to consider regarding the decision whether or not to believe the parties speaking out.
35
Not everyone has the money to pursue a legal recourse. In the end they settled out of court. Paula got paid $800,000 and Bill got his law license suspended for 5 years for perjury. As Paula noted, just because she is not a college graduate and does not wear designer clothes, does not mean she was not a creditable witness. No doubt HRC going down to defeat and spoiling the big moment for the Clinton's and the Women's Groups who failed to help Paula, was sweet, sweet revenge.
Thank you NYT for finally looking at the broader picture. One thing the Trump era has done is unmask the massive hypocrisy on both the left and the right with respect to sexual assault against woman. The comment section making excuses for Clinton shows that fundamentally sexual assault is still not seen as that big a deal if it is committed by someone on your own team. Frankly it is disgusting.
3
Bill was slime, for sure, but two key points that differ from the Weinstein/Moore/Spacey/Rattner situaitons: Monica was an adult and there was no physical force. Still stinks, but a little less.
We all - Democrats and Republicans alike - should have condemned it at the time. Loudly. Forcefully. We should have said STOP. NOT ACCEPTABLE. I don't know what sanctions would have been available but a public shaming and denunciations by leaders should have happened. As a result of the failure then, we are suffering a worse situation now. And even worse, some people in Alabama actually said "well, Clinton did it and the country survived, so what difference does it make if Roy Moore did it too?" Yes, let's just give up on doing the right thing because someone was wrong in the past and we didn't stop it.
This is one of the many reasons why the Clintons should have stepped off the public stage long ago. I don't care about HRC's qualifications. Her qualifications were never the issue. The Clintons are damaged goods and our country is now suffering because they put their own goals ahead of the country.
1
There were allegations that Bill forced himself on women.
1
I find your statement over the top....was bill clinton a womanizer, yes....but, in most of those situations the women were willing..happily.
Monica instigated her affair....and, it took a Republican operative to get her to come forward..to reveal it. BIG DIFFERENCE.
THEN, there's the point that Clinton is not seeking any office, this creep Moore is....then there's the current creep in the WH.
2
All of those saying "it happened so long ago" or "he's already been punished" should be ashamed.
6
Time to pull down all those statues of Thomas Jefferson!
1
I think it's more a question of there is nothing that can be done at this point because it is beyond the statute of limitations. And he has been punished or doesn't that count?
3
...Or we could at least be honest in our assessment of both Thomas Jefferson and William Jefferson.
It was not that long ago, and it was not that different of a time.
1
Goes with the territory, JFK, FDR, IKE, men in positions of power seem to consider it a prize bestowed upon them by society for being who they are and achieving what they have, the alpha male syndrome. We have outgrown that now and must be held accountable but there was a time, not so long ago, when it was not only acceptable but expected.
4
Juanita Broaddrick filed an affidavit denying any allegations regarding Mr. Clinton.
So, which is it? Lying now, or lying in the affidavit?
36
Agreed:
http://www.politicususa.com/2016/10/09/sworn-affidavit-juanita-broaddric...
1
Those of us who said during the campaign that we will not be voting for HRC because she would move a sexual predator back into the White House were vilified by her followers. Instead of addressing this issue, we were told that there is a special place in hell for women who do not vote for HRC. She and the DNC did not realize that this was going to be an issue costing her plenty of votes. And no, I didn't vote for Trump either because I do not vote for ANY sexual predator to live in the White House. Many democrats, however, do not seem to possess the morals to take a stand.
7
Florida or Russia?
I have long felt that one of the reasons Hillary struggled with issues of trust and likability stem from her husband's scandals from his presidency. You confirm what I thought privately. People would have dismissed it at the time last year, but I think it's a reverse halo. The Clintons lost so much credibility that even when Bill's reputation seemed to be rehabilitated, the aura of distrust clung to him and by proximity to her too. That's why so many people are willing to believe any negative about either of them no matter how often it is debunked. The emails were a proxy for those past transgressions.
1
Good move. You refused to vote for someone whose husband is a predator and by doing so you ended up helping to elect an admitted predator.
3
What about Donald?
69
What about him? We went through all of this in 2016. He won, you lost.
2
What about Donald? What evidence is there? A bawdy conversation on a bus ten years ago? If Democrats are willing to forgive Bill Clinton of his past sexual behavior and abuse of authority while in office then they certainly can forgive Trump for a conversation, not actual abuse, that occurred ten years ago. Has Trump sexually abused anyone recently while in office? If Bill's defenders can ignore and discount his accusers as liars and opportunists then they can also discount Trump's accusers as well.
Using one's security detail to procure women for sex while in office is still an abuse of authority and it's already on record that Bill did that while governor. Ask the Secret Service, some agents have written a book, about his activity in the White House. Has Trump done any of that as president?
Today I feel ashamed for not speaking out more about Clinton's despicable behavior with women. I almost feel like what's happening to our democracy now is some way a consequence for this silence.
155
Hardly. What is happening to our democracy now is about a long-term strategy of the Republicans, starting with Reagan, to gerrymander, use wedge politics, signal racist leanings, et al.
8
I'm glad you "almost" feel that way because that means you have a likelihood of revising that view. Never forget that Clinton was impeached for lying under oath about sex that was nobody's business --- while today we have a president who aids and abets Russia and hires Russian employees for his campaign and his WH staff ... but nothing happens. So the Clinton argument was not all about sex.
4
"Feelings" mean nothing. If you bother to read in detail the whole history of the Clintons and Lee Atwater through Kenneth Starr's utterly biased and vindicative efforts to find anything on them you will see that there no nearly as much there as people assume.
If the United States Congress had been investigated to the extent that Bill Clinton was the special prosecutor would have been handing out subpoenas like traffic tickets and they would be removing GIngrich, Hyde, Livingstone, and numerous other moral scolds and crusaders at that time.
2
The hypocrisy of the left is astounding. Now that the Clinton's have no power, they decide that they were wrong about Bill Clinton. Hillary and her supporters enabled this despicable man. They should be ashamed.
3
I have long felt that because of Bill Clinton's behavior, Republicans were able to ignore the access Hollywood tape of Trump. Hopefully this is a time going forward in politics that women and men will stand against this and realize it is about power not sex.
3
If that's the case, though, Barbara, they can't use it to also tar Bill at the same time.
1
I promise I'll never vote for Bill Clinton again.
Happy?
31
And the most current revelations about sexual predation in the Congress? Where's the investigative reporting into this?! If Roy Moore is unfit for office, let us look into Congress and see who's left standing.... Name the names!!!!
6
Ask the Secret Service.
I had my own encounter with Bill Clinton in 1992.
=====================================
Bill Clinton came to Rochester, NY, where I live, to campaign. I asked him about being left-handed. He turned to me and said he was "not in his right mind." That is a joke about left-handed people and the right side of the brain.
Now, these concerns about Bill Clinton's attacks on women, suggest that he was not in "his right mind". So, yes, he needs to be help accountable for his behavior.
Perhaps, if Democrats started to take more responsibility for their own craziness, they would be able to win elections and take back the White House.
Thank you, Peter Baker.
==================
1
Oh to be a fly on the wall at the Clinton HQ engineering the response to all this!
2
Fair enough.
Our former president, Bill Clinton, was/is a sexual predator.
Our current president, Donald Trump, was/is a sexual predator.
Let's have at . . . encourage all victims to step up . . . and see where this leads.
I'd wholeheartedly urge a debate on stage between these two men on this issue.
Bill Clinton & Donald Trump.
Anyone else support this ? A very significant issue addressed by two significant historical leaders of America.
Come forth, gentlemen . . . you both feel you are/been "transformational".
Let we Americans see who we truly elected . . . .
3
If Clinton’s paying a price for his womanizing means Trump will have to pay for his, then I say: Bill, this is what you can do for your country.
6
I never thought highly of Bill Clinton's morals but there was a huge, heavily funded campaign against him at the time. These women were paid to come out against him and that does make a difference. Willey even claimed he killed her husband and her cat. Paula Jones couldn't accurately describe any details about him. Monica's interaction was consensual. Richard Mellon threw millions of dollars into the campaign to destroy the Clintons. From Whitewater to the well paid women, he was determined to bring them down and hopped on any rumor that came up. He even started a newspaper whose whole purpose was to bring them down. The atmosphere was vile.
33
If I could recommend this multiple time, I would. Bill hits on one of the key, essential points: other than Monica (who was unwillingly dragged into the spotlight), all those women were courted and paid by conservative entities eager to undue Clinton and his presidency. The women accusing Moore or Trump have all come forward through either dogged reporting or criminal/judicial complaints, not because they were being funded as part of a smear campaign.
2
The question should be “What about Trump?”
5
The very serious rape allegations of Juanita Broaddrick always in my mind stood out above the many others as deadly serious and too rich in detail and pain to be inauthentic. I still remember her description of lying on that hotel, bed clothes torn, lip bleeding looking up to see Clinton departing through the hotel room door placing his sun glasses on while jauntily noting about her lip; "You should get somebody to look at that". That's stayed with me for years. Imagine what it's done to Ms. Broaddrick.
3
You sweep your side of the street, I'll sweep mine.
Hopefully this reckoning of fairness ushers in an era of political moderation.
1
Reckoning with Clinton's legacy as a harasser is probably important for the Democratic party. This is a moral obligation, but it may not help us win elections. In order to win elections we may have to do something far more difficult--look at the Clintons' (the plural possessive is intentional) economic policies. Clinton's gutting of welfare, his policies of economic "triangulation," and the consequences of Hillary's own unwillingness to move left in response to Bernie Sanders have been nothing less than a national and perhaps a global tragedy.
While a takedown of Bill over his personal behaviour may be in order, at the same time it is important not to be distracted from the important work of calling out the incestous relationship between politics and business that the Clintons both aided and abedded (intentional typo) and that has allowed an avowed sexual harasser to take his place at the head of what was at one time a powerful nation but is quickly becoming a cesspool of venality.
3
I’ll paraphrase an important question David Brooks posed earlier this week:
What impact did the media/Hillary/Democrats allowing Bill’s behavior to go unabated while slamming his accusers have on our current culture?
I think the impact is huge, almost immeasurable. Hillary remaining married to such a man is a bad optic as well. And James Carvil’s “drag a $100 bill through the trailer park” comment was particularly awful in terms of stereotyping accusers.
5
There's one guarantee in the conservative Right Wing's playbook: When the heat is turned up on the GOP, just say "Obama", "Obamacare" or "Clinton" (either Crooked Hillary or Bill will do) over and over again.
No person who victimizes another should ever get away with it. Using past alleged sexual abuses of a past president as a political football to take the pressure off of active politicians including Moore, however, is absolutely disgusting.
25
The difference here is that Bill Clinton was prosecuted/impeached. He was acquitted. Should he have been booted out of office? Well they tried. And he was acquitted. Paula Jones got her settlement. The others had no case or you can be sure that would have been added to the special prosecutor's efforts. Were the women treated badly? Yes. As they most often are when they speak up. Was Clinton punished? Yes. As was his wife.
54