Recently, liberals and feminists have been tying themselves into knots by calling for a reckoning for the serious and credible allegations of sexual misconduct levied against Bill Clinton while he was president. The reason they twist themselves into pretzels is that they want to have it both ways. Now that people are listening to and taking seriously the recent cascade of credible allegations of sexual misconduct against degenerate powerful men who have shamelessly abused their power, partisan liberals must address the disgraceful history of the media in conjunction with feminists and the entire Democratic Party when they dismissed outright serious allegations of misconduct, including rape, made against Bill Clinton. It is intellectually incoherent to argue that credible allegations of sexual harassment and assault for misconduct ought now, in the age of Harvey Weinstein, to be taken seriously, but in the same breath, assert that ignoring Bill Clinton’s accusers was defensible.
Yet, liberal Michelle Goldberg, makes a thoroughly specious attempt to engage in this exact sophistry when she excuses those who dismissed the highly credible accusations of Juanita Broaddrick. Goldberg claims that conspiracy theories concerning the Clintons allegedly fomented by certain right wing sources was sufficient cause to doubt the veracity of allegations, including Broaddrick’s, that were made against president Clinton. So, according to Goldberg, it was perfectly acceptable, indeed warranted, to be skeptical about the stories of Broaddrick, Kathleen Wiley and Paula Jones because their tales were a phantasmagoria manufactured by the Clintons’ enemies, the vast right wing conspiracy. In the same breath, Goldberg welcomes the new environment of a presumption of credibility that now attaches to complaints about harassment. This is a rather futile attempt to square the circle.
One of the reasons Donald Trump is in the White House is that the Clintons are and the Democratic Party are solely responsible for defining deviancy down when it comes to establishing a standard for moral turpitude sufficient for a politician’s disqualification for higher office. Those former liberal defenders of Clinton, who now in a penitent moment decades after Bill Clinton’s infractions, still don’t understand why the idea that Bill Clinton’s conduct was off limits during the recent election was one of the issues that many voters found utterly incoherent and monumentally hypocritical.
What many voters realized was that by incessantly attacking Trump yet proclaiming Bill Clinton’s serious misdeeds irrelevant because the matter had already “been litigated” the media was merely acting as Hillary’s Praetorian Guard. Voters saw through the ruse and expressed their disapprobation with the Clinton campaign and the Mainstream Media-Democratic Party-Complex.