December 30, 2015

"Can Trump’s Clinton-Sex-Scandal Revival Hurt Hillary?"

Asks Margaret Hartmann (in New York Magazine).
While several of his rivals have tried and failed to turn Bill Clinton's decades-old sex scandals into a 2016 campaign issue, Trump is actually making it happen. After his complaint about Hillary calling him "ISIS's best recruiter" morphed into a debate about sexism just before Christmas, Trump changed the conversation again, tweeting on Monday "If Hillary thinks she can unleash her husband, with his terrible record of women abuse, while playing the women's card on me, she's wrong!" Tuesday on the Today show, he added, "there certainly were a lot of abuse of women, you look at whether it's Monica Lewinsky or Paula Jones, or any of them, and that certainly will be fair game."
Hartmann quotes Washington Post columnist Ruth Marcus who said that "in the larger scheme of things, Bill Clinton’s conduct toward women is far worse than any of the offensive things that Trump has said." And Marcus contended that what Bill did should be held against Hillary, because: "She is (smartly) using her husband as a campaign surrogate, and simultaneously (correctly) calling Trump sexist."

And Hartmann points us to a Wall Street Journal opinion piece that calls Bill Clinton "a genuine sexual harasser in the classic definition of exploiting his power as a workplace superior, and the Clinton entourage worked hard to smear and discredit his many women accusers."

Over on Facebook this morning, my son John had linked to a CNN piece: "Trump: It's OK to talk about my personal life, too."
Trump didn't go into specifics.... But his personal life at times has been tabloid fodder, most famously in the early 1990s when his marriage to his first wife, Ivana Trump, fell apart after he had an extramarital affair with model and actress Marla Maples. Trump eventually married Maples in 1993, and the two divorced six years later. Trump married his current wife, Melania, in 2005.
John commented: "I love the subtly sardonic phrase 'his current wife.'" That prompted me to type this out very fast over there at Facebook, and now I want to reprint it here. I said:
Trump is in a good position here: 1. The bad stuff was already exposed like hell in the tabloid press back when it happened. 2. That was over 20 years ago. 3. He's been with his current wife for more than a decade. 3. His kids turned out great (including the one with Maples). They are beautiful, smart, respectful, and productive. 4. There are so many people who know him and have had a motivation to speak ill of him this year and there's been silence. 5. He's not resting his case on personal rectitude. 6. He hasn't flaunted his religion and being quiet about religion is one way -- a good way -- to seem sincere and respectful toward religion. He's not asking to be seen as a religious paragon and to be voted for on that ground. 7. He isn't saying much at all in the social conservative realm, but he needs to fend off his competitors who are doing that big time. I think subtle prods to regard them as insincere are fine and I agree with the insinuations. 8. Hillary is vulnerable and he's signaling to her that efforts to paint him as sexist will be met with criticism about what she did toward women in defense of her husband. She deserves that criticism.

82 comments:

Meade said...

Well done, Current Wife.

Bay Area Guy said...

Yes. Next question?

The reason is simple. GOP criticism of Clinton's sexcapades are ignored or dismissed by Dems and the mainstream media. Nobody cared then, few care now.

But, Hillary and the Dems are pushing the bogus "War on Women" nonsense for political purposes, so Trump's rejoinder stings, gets play and blunts Hillary's raison d'etre for running. Smashing glass ceilings for women -- by the power mad woman who smashed the women her husband sexually harassed. Yeah, right.

Well done, Trump! Another reason to appreciate the Donald's entry into this campaign.

Achilles said...

Hillary as a candidate is going to wilt under the scrutiny she will be put under. She is a terrible human being and her only hope was a cowardly Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio who wouldn't point that out.

Trump had far more difficult targets in Rubio and Bush. Bush particularly actually accomplished things while elected and is a decent human being. Rubio is a liar and a betrayer but he was actually a good campaigner.

Hillary has none of that. She is a failure at every position she has held. Not one accomplishment of hers has ever been uttered with a straight face. She is nasty to the people that work for her. She has been caught lying multiple times.

This is going to be glorious.

Henry said...

I'm pretty much banking on the "his kids turned out great" defense myself. So far, so good.

Sebastian said...

You left out: 9. Regardless of Bill's rapes and sexual harassment, no way Hillary! can lose me.

MadisonMan said...

criticism about what she did toward women in defense of her husband. She deserves that criticism.

She certainly does.

But will it affect the election -- does it matter to people who will vote for her anyway, no matter what?

eric said...

If my kids turn out great, it'll be because of the current wife.

I'll be happy to share in the credit though.

traditionalguy said...

Baby Boomers respect a serial Monogamy. Being totally committed to one wife at a time and all the children was about all you could ask when mid-life crisis wives knew they could take the money and run and Pre-nuptual Agreements had not been recognized yet.

Bill Harshaw said...

re: 4
Trump has shown in the current campaign that he will go nuclear in response to criticism. I assume that's part of his personality, or maybe he was just influenced by Connery in The Untouchables. Anyway, that might account for the absence of criticism from his past co-workers (I'd write friends, but does he have any? Hillary has some Clintonistas, does Trump have Trumpeters?) Or maybe he is a real sweetheart of a guy behind the bluster?

Dan Hossley said...

The problem for Hillary isn't what Bill Clinton did. Hillary's problem is that she attacked the women that claimed Bill assaulted or otherwise molested them in an effort to destroy their credibility.

Hillary was commander in chief of the war on women during the 90's.

grackle said...

Trump tried to warn her but the war on women meme has been such a successful part of the Lefty arsenal for so long that it is reflexive at this point. It’s like a pistol that shoots backwards but it’s the only pistol they have.

The MSM’s first tactic was to say that Hillary is not responsible for Bill’s sexual antics, which is a pretty good defense if that was the issue. But it’s not. Her problem is that she was smearer-in-charge of the “bimbo eruptions.”

It’s one thing to be the cheated-on wife standing resolutely by her flawed but likeable sexual predator husband – it’s quite another to ruin women because her hubby was exposed.

I think Trump may destroy her even before the election.

exhelodrvr1 said...

It appears that Trump is willing to go after opponents to a degree that neither McCain or ROmney were willing to do. And at least so far, it isn't being done to an inappropriate degree.

David Begley said...

Does the American public want the Clintons back in the White House and Bill has no power and little to do? The new reality show: "Clinton Chaos: The Drama Returns."

AprilApple said...

Our hack press won't let anything hurt Hillary. She'd be done for if she had an R after her name. She would have been laughed off the stage eons ago. Indicted, and sent to prison for a while, too.

Mr Wibble said...

The MSM’s first tactic was to say that Hillary is not responsible for Bill’s sexual antics, which is a pretty good defense if that was the issue. But it’s not. Her problem is that she was smearer-in-charge of the “bimbo eruptions.”

It’s one thing to be the cheated-on wife standing resolutely by her flawed but likeable sexual predator husband – it’s quite another to ruin women because her hubby was exposed.


I disagree here. She knew he was a predator, and enabled him to continue for her own personal gain. She wanted access to power and was willing to allow him, nay help him, destroy other women to do gain it.

David said...

"She deserves that criticism."

And more. Until it became obvious that Bill's sperm was on the dress and that supposedly stupid Monica had had the sense to tell someone about what happened in detail, they were preparing a destructive liar-nut-slut campaign against her. Two of the most powerful people in the world against a 20 year old woman.

And I always like to go back to that"missing" Whitewater tax file that was found in the Clintons' personal quarters in the WH. If that wasn't a smoking gun, nothing is. Lying about possession of a crucial file that was discoverable pursuant to a court order is a pretty big deal. Nearly everyone who does something like that suffers big legal, personal and vocational consequences. But not the Clintons. Not them.

Trump will not destroy her. Only the voters can do that in an election booth. So far the depraved dishonesty of the Clintons has had no consequence to them. Those who might act fear them too much. Only the collective will of the voters can end this.

Kevin said...

Hillary is caught in a time trap. She's been in politics so long that her history is finally catching up to her.

How many young voters don't know the story of Bill and Hillary - the early years? And how many of them, hearing it for the first time in 2016, are going to think favorably of such behavior? The Dems have profited politically from the 'war on women" meme for so long, they never imagined it would come back to make them look bad.

Unfortunately, for Hillary, it's not 2000 or 2008 anymore. The dogs have been let loose so many times to protect the Obama Administration from any criticism, they've forgotten they're not supposed to bite the sexual predators and their apologists who happen to be Democrats.

She can change her position on NAFTA, gay marriage, harsher sentences for criminals, and a whole host of other issues. But her husband's behavior and her behavior in response aren't going to be so easy to sweep under the rug.

Who would have thought it might be Bill's exploits as President, and not Hillary's as SecState, which could be her undoing?

FullMoon said...

Where is James Carville? He was the most admirably disgusting bimbo baher the Clintons employed.
In a face to face, one on one, insult competition, I think Bill Clinton would best Trump.
Twitter back and forth evens the playing field.

If the MSM does not repeat Trumps comments and revelations about Hillary,
voters will not abandon her. I am surprised at intelligent aquantances who know nothing of sniper fire, bimbos, Hillarys contribution to middle east chaos.

Most people do noy get news from the internet.

Virgil Hilts said...

The reason this is all coming up (obvi!) is that so much of the electorate (maybe 50 million potential voters!) are and were too young at the time to have our intimate knowledge of Bill's philandering.
Go ahead and ask an educated 22 year old about Jennifer Flowers or Paul Jones. Who? They might recognize Monica's name. And this younger generation is kind of uptight when it comes to professor-student or boss-employee sex. What would Yale Shrieking Girl think about the lack of safe spaces around Bill Clinton's pants.

Virgil Hilts said...

A 20 year old voter was 3 years old when the Monica scandal broke, and probably never even heard the cigar story.

Ambrose said...

He's never really had to pay the piper for what was truly despicable behavior. I mean, come on, with an intern?

Mac McConnell said...

Without Hillary's marriage to Bill Clinton, she doesn't get book deals, she doesn't become a Senator, she doesn't run for President. Yes, Bill's humping Monica's face, his alleged rapes and sexual harrasments are an issue if Hillary's campaign is based on vagina.

Pookie Number 2 said...

Does it matter to people who will vote for her anyway, no matter what?

It depends. If you're talking about Garage Mahal-level idiots, then no amount of demonstrated corruption will matter.

But I think that we may see people project their suppressed anger over Bill Clinton's serial harassment on the charisma-free Hillary!, somewhat like the way they projected all of their well-founded concerns about Obama's ineptitude on the defenseless Sarah Palin.

robother said...

If The Donald is the nominee, this will not turn out well for Hillary. I keep reminding myself that it was Bill who encourage Trump to get in the race. This revives all that speculation in 2008 that Bill didn't really want Hillary to win the Presidency, but couldn't do anything too obvious to undermine her candidacy.

Guildofcannonballs said...

The most devastating moment in political history will be Trump playing "In The Air Tonight" and spotlighting Hillary.

"It all been a pack of lies!!!"

Drums!

Trump!

chuckR said...

Jeffrey Epstein

Tie that convicted sex offender to the presumptive First Gentleman. Looking forward to the fireworks. Trump is just the guy to do it.

readering said...

It must be so frustrating for the other candidates that Hillary and the Donald can suck all the oxygen out of the air on this dead horse of an issue.

Fabi said...

How was your trip to Pedophile Island, Bill? Those eighteen year old girls really make you forget all about Monica, don't they? Smoke any good cigars while you were there?

dustbunny said...

I'm irritated by the feminists who have no problem with Bill, it seems to me a huge blind spot, but they seem to believe in what they call the bigger picture. I doubt being attacked by Trump is going to change their minds, rather they'll dig their heels in deeper and defend both Clintons more vociferously

TWW said...


What's the difference between Bill Clinton and Bill Cosby ?

That's a really difficult question; can you start with an easier one?

Okay, what's the difference between Bill Cosby's wife and Bill Clinton's wife?

That's difficult too. Is there more than one way to spell enabling?

HoodlumDoodlum said...

Geez, can't we all just MoveOn already?

Sabinal said...

I think people actually think Hillary will step aside and let Bill govern and we will get the 90s over again.

Daniel Richwine said...

I understand that Trump effectively neutralized H. Clinton's best weapon. Not Bill, but the threat of Bill. By raising this issue, team Hillary will have to reconsider whether Bill is an asset or liability in the long run, that by itself is an astonishing feat.
Trump neutralized the GOP establishment by simply pandering to a very hard core base and threatening to go third party, reviving nightmares of 92 and 96 (the only reason we remember who Bill is anyway). Trump has neutralized the media's natural inclination to denegrare and underreport the presumpting republican nominee.
The man is a much better candidate than I ever imagined. At this point I'll be kind of shocked of he's not the next president.

BN said...

Don't get cocky, y'all. Chester the Molester had no problem with impeachment--hell, it made him even stronger! Some of us were reading walls right then and there. And the current Pretender in Chief then got elected--twice!--based on nothin but "cruel nutrality" or voter stupidity or voter fraud or whatever.

Point is, smart money's on The Beast. Yes, we are that far gone.

JAORE said...

"Hillary as a candidate is going to wilt under the scrutiny she will be put under. She is a terrible human being ..."

Well, yes, yes she is. And in a just world Hillary as a candidate would be a punch line, not a concern.

But there are millions of motivated voters that, no matter the acts by a (D), will say, "But the policies of the (R)s are EVIL!" And millions more will say, but a vagina steering the ship of state . Finally there are all the editors, anchors and (left leaning) pundits that will be in the don't blame Hill for Bill/ old news/ Trump is a pig too/ without Hill women will be chattel again or other CHA (cover her ass) mode.

BN said...

Maybe then comes Trump... the Anti-Christ?

Rick said...

Meade said...
Well done, Current Wife.


If you were bolder you'd refer to your "then wife" or X-wife [sorry, I don't know if she is first or not] when referencing things you've done together.

Bob Boyd said...

"Trump's Clinton Sex Scandal Revival"

Makes the Donald sound like a tent preacher....kinda.

Meade said...

Has there ever been a greater splooge stooge than Bill Clinton?

Michael K said...

"(I'd write friends, but does he have any? "

There are several people I respect who have written positive things about Trump. One of them is Conrad Black all of whose books I have read.

Michael said...

Michael K

Conrad Black is the only person I have ever taken the time to write while they were in prison. Nice note back. No one has been treated so poorly by our justice system as you know if you have read his book on the topic. Went to see him in Vancouver earlier this year when he was touting his new book on the history of Canada. Having been abandoned by a lot of famous names he is not one to be disloyal himself, especially to people who stood by him. Donald Trump being one of them.

JAORE said...

Interesting that the reason Cosby is thought guilty by so many is the number o women that have come forth. Clinton's numbers are smaller, although still large. But considering the power that Team Clinton held, and USED, to stifle the victims....

wildswan said...

Millennials don't think women should be mistreated and they don't know how many women came forward to say Bill Clinton abused them. They think that there was one case involving one "consensual" intern. The LameStream is of course protecting Bill and so is Hillary. Now - what will Millennials think about enabling going on in real time right before their eyes which is what Hillary will be doing? That is another unknown in this campaign. The fight in this campaign as it will be fought "has not yet begun to fight."

One thing I feel is that pretending Donald Trump is somehow terrible and worse than Hillary-the-rape-enabler, is a lie that will not wear well. A rapist in the White House? Again? The same one as before?

Limited blogger said...

Charles Krauthammer pointed out something important here. With Trump confronting Hillary directly regarding this issue, and Hillary responding, we are in a defacto general election debate. Trump has assumed the mantle of the GOP nominee and is fighting the Dem candidate directly.

The guy is a total genius.

traditionalguy said...

Trump is getting there firstest with the mostest. He makes Hillary look like a cigar store Indian just standing up and waiting to be exposed for having no creative thoughts and no life in her except that Clinton, Inc scares people off with patented threats.

Titus said...

So this election will be about sex and affairs and marriage and more sex.

I want to hear all the details too-nothing will be held back-dick size-uncut-cut; positions and where the cum flew!

Excellent!

tits.

Gahrie said...

Has there ever been a greater splooge stooge than Bill Clinton?

Nope.

Alex said...

Hillary's goose is cooked.

2 words - "bimbo eruptions".

PBandJ_LeDouanier said...

Trump is making me think I may not have fully understood why BHO was the first D I ever voted for.

Toward the end of the W years I started to believe that Bubba may not have been so bad: with Bubba the economy was good, the federal budget look good. I thought I shouldn't have been such a Clinton hater.

But, now, when I hear Trump I completely agree w/ him. Back in 2008, somewhere in my pea brain, my B Clinton animus may have pushed me toward the H Clinton adversary. (That, plus the fact that W had proved con-philosophy run amok was less than ideal.)

Ironically, Trump needs to argue that it's best to choose someone who gets stuff done rather than worry about that person's personal flaws. Of course, being an obnoxious tyrant is not as bad as being an obnoxious womanizer. Right?

Michael K said...

" especially to people who stood by him. Donald Trump being one of them."

I was impressed by his piece. He is well past the point of trying to make a media presence.

I agree with him completely about the US justice system.

cubanbob said...

I beginning to wonder if the wiser Democrats at the top of the part really want Hillary to win. Perhaps they figure a two-step forward one-step backward move is the best way to go. The country is in a mess and it looks like things are going to get worse before they better and the next president is going to get the blame so perhaps the party elders figure that is it better that the Republicans take the hit. And from that perspective who would be the best Republican? Not someone who in their opinion might actually be politically competent. Oh no! How perfect would it be from their perspective a loud mouth buffoon, an amateur, a guy almost guaranteed to fail like a Jesse Ventura or ultimately harmless and a buffer for them until better (for them politically) times like Arnold Schwarzenegger? I suspect they see Trump as that guy and they get a twoofer by clearing out the old deadwood ( the Clinton's) and the rest. I know its tinfoil but considering that Hillary is arguably the worst candidate either party has run in decades maybe its not so crazy a proposition.

chickelit said...

readering said...
It must be so frustrating for the other candidates that Hillary and the Donald can suck all the oxygen out of the air on this dead horse of an issue.

12/30/15, 5:47 PM


Yes, in part. But the current situation is more the fault of the leadership behind the DNC. The DNC allowed this dangerous situation of one unpopular and tragically flawed candidate. The dearth of other viable (D) candidates is their fault, not the people's fault.

Michael K said...

The story is put out there by Ann Coulter and she has ahold of this like a bulldog. the Clinton types will not escape eventually.

Trump will make this a huge story.

rehajm said...

Bill's charisma is waning. He looks tired and frail. Blue hair, neck waddle, raspy voice. He is not a secret weapon, though he may score geriatric sympathy points.

The Godfather said...

The MSM are touting polls showing that Hillary! would beat Tromp in the general election. Tromp is setting out to show that the MSM is wrong, because he can and will attack Hillary! in ways that Republican candidates NEVER attack Democratic candidates. It's not that it's all about sex. Romney had a chance in the debate to show that Obama was a liar, and let Candy Crowley back him off. Can you imagine Tromp backing off?

Paul said...

If the MSM does not repeat Trumps comments and revelations about Hillary...

That's just it. Trump bringing it up is all that is needed to ensure media coverage. He can force a spotlight on anything he wants just by talking about it. The media's ability to bury whatever threatens the narrative has been neutralized by Trump's irresistible presence.

Jim said...

Hillary the feminist icon. Yet...she made a 1950's type agreement. Bill got to run around, she got power and money. The two are really disgusting people. vile, corrupt, and sleazy. Yet they are icons in the Dem party. Trump taking the fight directly to Hillary is brilliant. The media will try to minimize the damage, as they have successfully done repeated for those two scumbags.
bill thought, and no doubt thinks, that his penis is more important than his country, or his oath of office. hillary supported, covered for, and enabled him. in return, she expects the brass ring. Unfortunately for her, obama is even sleazier and more corrupt, so he got the prize. but she is owed, big time. I think as trump begins to attack her, she might just fall apart. It is so frustrating to lie, cheat, steal and connive for all those decades, only to be undone by trump. lol, its going to be a great show this election cycle.

Howard said...

The early limited hangout that will lead to "this is old news" and "it was dealt with in the primary". IOW, this is a feature of the Hitlery campaign, not a bug. Thank You, Donald!

el polacko said...

...and trump is doing all this without slapping a fake presidential seal on the podium. imagine that !

dreams said...

"There are several people I respect who have written positive things about Trump. One of them is Conrad Black all of whose books I have read."

I like Conrad Black too.

dreams said...

Donald Trump is a respected business man in NY city and the fact that Carl Icahn is willing to join his potential cabinet carries a lot weight with me. I have a lot higher opinion of Carl Icahn than I do of Warren Buffett.

dreams said...

"I'm irritated by the feminists who have no problem with Bill, it seems to me a huge blind spot, but they seem to believe in what they call the bigger picture. I doubt being attacked by Trump is going to change their minds, rather they'll dig their heels in deeper and defend both Clintons more vociferously"

And these are the same type of women who are currently lusting with vengeance after Bill Cosby for his allege sexual abuse.

jr565 said...

Hillary made Bill Clinton's dalliances an issue by tweeting that women who accuse men of rape should always be believed. She then compounded this error by making an issue out of Trump saying she got shlonged as if that was an attack on her as a woman, as opposed to a description of her her getting shlonged when she lost the election she was supposed to win by the upstart Obama.
Now, he has a great avenue to attack her by pointing out a true assault on women AND rape charges that she not only didn't believe but went out of her way to villainize those women making the charge.
Clinton is actually the repubs best weapon against Hillary. Because if she takes the default liberal position on pretty much anything, Clinton is there coming up in opposition.
Pick an issue. trade agreements - NAFTA
Drug war - prisons exploded under Clinton as did the drug war.
Gay marriage - DOMA
Gays in the military - DADT
Housing crisis - propping opus Fannie Mae, deregulation of banks and forcing banks to loosen standards as part of bank deregulation
War on women - oh boy......
If Hillary wants to run on any of those, she has to denounce Bills position. And then explain why she didn't speak out before.

The only thing Hillary has going for her, and it is a pretty big thing, is the the media will be in the tank for her, and many liberals have literally no principles and will sweep all this under the rug. The same way they did for Obama.

Mom2Es said...

More like "Well done, boarding school."

dreams said...

And of course there is this as in even more.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/video/2015/01/07/coulter_lambastes_media_over_epstein_rape_case_this_is_what_media_thought_uva_rape_case_was.html

grackle said...

I disagree here. She knew he was a predator …

You are misreading my comment.

… dead horse of an issue.

I think we’ll find that the horse is very much alive. In fact the horse has already perked up and has run around corral for a couple of days. The horse will be saddled up and ridden vigorously every time Hillary tries the “Trump is a sexist” meme.

I'm irritated by the feminists who have no problem with Bill … I doubt being attacked by Trump is going to change their minds …

The issue is not really Slick Willie’s past sexual proclivities – at this point. The issue is Hillary’s participation in the smearing of those women who came forward at the time. And the target is not “feminists.” The target audience is independents, millennials, possible crossovers and other voters.

Don't get cocky, y'all. Chester the Molester had no problem with impeachment--hell, it made him even stronger!

Yeah, but Chester isn’t running for office; his wife is. And I do not believe she will benefit from her enthusiastic participation in the whack-a-bimbo eruption back when Slick Willie was POTUS.

damikesc said...

I still love NBC calling the Clinton/Lewinsky affair "alleged".

I'm irritated by the feminists who have no problem with Bill, it seems to me a huge blind spot, but they seem to believe in what they call the bigger picture.

Especially when you compare the feminists' treatment of Clinton to, say, Clarence Thomas. Didn't Steinem give Bill a "one free grope" rule where if he grabs a tit and the woman says no and he stops, then it is OK?

Gahrie said...

Especially when you compare the feminists' treatment of Clinton to, say, Clarence Thomas. Didn't Steinem give Bill a "one free grope" rule where if he grabs a tit and the woman says no and he stops, then it is OK?

They protected Bill Clinton not because he was a feminist, but because he was a Democrat.

Look at what they did to Bob Packwood. He was a loyal feminist. He submitted the first bill in the Senate to legalize abortion. (Before Roe V Wade) He voted against Bork and Thomas. In fact if you look at his record, if he had a "D" after his name he would be lionized by the Left like Ted Kennedy.

The feminists dropped him like a hot rock, all because he had an "R" after his name, and the Republican Party forced him to resign. (Where have I heard that before)

(By the way, just for the record, what exactly is the Democrats' beef with Nixon anymore?)

alan markus said...

Damikesc - if I had meme generator skills I would take a picture of Gloria & Hillary and caption it - "Hey young fellas, first grope is on us".

grackle said...

This Cosby trial is coming at a bad time for Hillary. Now Trump can say that Slick Willie was/is a sexual predator just like Cosby. Even if Trump himself doesn’t, many will on their own. I’m thinking Hillary’s handlers will want her to drop the “Trump is a sexist” remarks. Whether she has the smarts to follow such advice is another question.

carrie said...

I wish Trump would focus on what Hillary did to ruin Bill's accusers. It doesn't matter what Bill did, it matters what Hillary did. Trump should give out free copies of the book "Primary Colors" too.

Todd said...

Achilles said...
Hillary as a candidate is going to wilt under the scrutiny she will be put under. She is a terrible human being and her only hope was a cowardly Jeb Bush or Marco Rubio who wouldn't point that out.

Trump had far more difficult targets in Rubio and Bush. Bush particularly actually accomplished things while elected and is a decent human being. Rubio is a liar and a betrayer but he was actually a good campaigner.

Hillary has none of that. She is a failure at every position she has held. Not one accomplishment of hers has ever been uttered with a straight face. She is nasty to the people that work for her. She has been caught lying multiple times.

This is going to be glorious.

12/30/15, 4:29 PM


Remember, all of that was also said [and was/is true] of three-putt and look how that turned out. The stupidity of the average American can not be over estimated what it comes to elections.

damikesc said...

I wish Trump would focus on what Hillary did to ruin Bill's accusers.

He likely will. But you have to BRING the accusations up again first to begin to deal with what she did. Trump's campaign is doing a great job of slowly building up a case with almost all of his pet obsessions. I don't know who's running the campaign, but that person is a damned genius.

They protected Bill Clinton not because he was a feminist, but because he was a Democrat.

Look at what they did to Bob Packwood. He was a loyal feminist. He submitted the first bill in the Senate to legalize abortion. (Before Roe V Wade) He voted against Bork and Thomas. In fact if you look at his record, if he had a "D" after his name he would be lionized by the Left like Ted Kennedy.


Oh yeah, I remember all of that. I LOVED watching Packwood go down. Fucking douchebag loved doing douchebag things to get Leftie love and what did it get him?

Why Republicans don't seem to learn the lesson that the Left will hate them NO MATTER WHAT is lost on me. We've seen it repeatedly. They tried to spin John McCain as a far right wing guy in 2008.

We will watch, in the end, feminists again discredit themselves by defending a serial harasser again. It's why feminism effectively died as a serious movement in the 90's.

Luke Lea said...

“I’m owned by the people,” Trump declares in a new cover story in Rolling Stone. “I mean, I’m telling you, I’m no angel but I’m gonna do right by them.” http://goo.gl/QXnBjU

An intuitive political genius maybe?

Todd said...

Luke Lea said...
“I’m owned by the people,” Trump declares in a new cover story in Rolling Stone. “I mean, I’m telling you, I’m no angel but I’m gonna do right by them.” http://goo.gl/QXnBjU

An intuitive political genius maybe?

12/31/15, 11:02 AM


As it is in "Rolling Stone", is there any proof besides [you know] it being in Rolling Stone that any of it actually happened? Was it really Trump? Was it a real interview or did some anonymous or fictitious source go to RS with the story?

/snark off

mikee said...

Nobody cares that Bill got BJs and had mistresses. We know he's a scamp like that.

People care that he abused women and lied about it under oath, and that he used his attack-dog wife to cover up his affairs via further abuse of the women he'd abused.

The Clintons are a two-person War on Women all by themselves.

HoodlumDoodlum said...

mikee said...People care that he abused women and lied about it under oath, and that he used his attack-dog wife to cover up his affairs via further abuse of the women he'd abused.

Counterpoint: a whole hell of a lot of people DON'T seem to care about that at all, and that's one of the things about the Clintons that so frustrates the Right.

ken in tx said...

Trump seems like a good Presbyterian. He marries his mistakes. Eventually you find one that's not a mistake. In America, you can have as many wives as you want as long as you only have them one at a time. It's probably better than arranged marriage.

mikee said...

HD: Correct, it is frustrating that half the country will buy snake oil, drink it, get sicker, and yet go back for more.

Sammy Finkelman said...

Trump isn't really reviving it. He's just mentioning it offhand.

There was more tahn one rape allegation in Bill Clintos life.

The following was written in 1999:

http://albertpeia.com/oxfordassault.htm

Sammy Finkelman said...

Besides Juanita Broderick, raped her in 1978, we have:

1) Eileen Wellstone, 19-year-old English woman who said Clinton sexually assaulted her after she met him at a pub near the Oxford in 1969. Clinton claimed it was consensual.

2) In 1972, a 22-year-old woman told campus police at Yale University that she was sexually assaulted by Clinton, a law student at the college.

3) In 1974, a female student at the University of Arkansas complained that then-law school instructor Bill Clinton tried to prevent her from leaving his office during a conference. She said he groped her and forced his hand inside her blouse. Clinton claimed the student ''came on'' to him. There was more than one such accusation. Not quite a rape.

4) As many as 7 complaints during Clinton's first term as governor of Arkansas 1979-1980.

In 1979, Carolyn Moffet, a legal secretary in Little Rock in 1979, said she met then-governor Clinton at a political fundraiser and shortly thereafter received an invitation to meet the governor in his hotel room. he asked her to so something she didn't even do for her boiyfriend and tried to push her into it.

5) Elizabeth Ward, the Miss Arkansas who won the Miss America crown in 1982, told friends she was forced by Clinton to have sex with him shortly after she won her state crown. But in 1998, she said it was consensual.

6) Paula Corbin Jones,

7) Sandra Allen James, a former Washington, DC, political fundraiser says Presidential candidate-to-be Clinton invited her to his hotel room during a political trip to the nation's capital in 1991, pinned her against the wall and stuck his hand up her dress. She says she screamed loud enough for the Arkansas State Trooper stationed outside the hotel suite to bang on the door and ask if everything was all right, at which point Clinton released her and she fled the room.

8) Christy Zercher, a flight attendant on Clinton's leased campaign plane in 1992, says Presidential candidate Clinton exposed himself to her, grabbed her breasts and made explicit remarks about oral sex.

9) Kathleen Willey, a White House volunteer, reported that Clinton grabbed her, fondled her breast and pressed her hand against his genitals during an Oval Office meeting in November, 1993,

Sammy Finkelman said...

When Hillary was asked the other day about how does her statement that womnen should be believed jobe with (not) believing Bill Clinton's accusers, she said that's when there is no evidence they are lying. As if there was some there.

http://www.mediaite.com/online/nh-woman-to-hillary-you-say-rape-accusers-should-be-believed-what-about-your-husbands/

The woman pointed out how Clinton recently said all rape victims should be believed, and then asked, “Would you say that about Juanita Broaddrick, Kathleen Willey, and/or Paula Jones?”

....

Clinton responded by saying, “I would say that everybody should be believed at first until they are disbelieved based on evidence.”


Now tgheer;'s no evidemce to disbelieve them.