As gross and cynical and hypocrtical as the right's "what about Bill Clinton" stuff is, it's also true that Democrats and the center left are overdue for a real reckoning with the allegations against him.
— Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) November 10, 2017
With politicians saying they’d vote for Roy Moore even if he made moves on a 14-year-old, I’m willing to grant that some of the “What about Bill Clinton?” cries coming from the right may be cynical and hypocritical. But it’s not fair to tar everyone who raises Clinton’s name in these conversations as doing so from a cynical motive.
In fact, you could just as easily turn this around and say it’s actually the left, or that portion of the left that ran interference for Clinton and is still doing so, that is “gross and cynical and hypocritical.” What’s rare on the left is what Hayes is doing here, introducing Clinton’s name into this national discussion and admitting it ought to be reckoned with instead of downplaying and pretending it’s old news.
There are a lot of us who lived through the Clinton era, myself included, who clearly remember the vicious attacks on his accusers (liars and trailer trash). We also remember the general mood of the national media which quickly shifted from taking the accusations seriously into “everyone lies about sex” mode. Bill lied to all our faces and many on the left applauded him for him. He was the victim of the “vast right-wing conspiracy.” It was a disgusting display, one undeniably worse than the one surrounding Roy Moore right now. Why worse? Because in Clinton’s case there was a credible allegation of rape.
Read this account, in light of all we've been hearing and reading this last month, and ask yourself if it's credible. https://t.co/8jymWjFpiF
— Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) November 10, 2017
With sexual assault allegations against Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein, James Toback, Louis C.K., and many others dominating the news, some of us have been genuinely mystified that the discussion never seems to circle back to Slick Willy. And even when it does occasionally come back to Bill, the whole thing is quickly dismissed and generally just ignored by the national media. That’s true even though the details seem strikingly familiar to some of the stories we’re hearing now:
Does this sound familiar? pic.twitter.com/eCby6bxsGS
— Chris Hayes (@chrislhayes) November 10, 2017
As Mary Katherine Ham suggested today on CNN , one reason so many Republicans find it easy to dismiss claims like the ones made against Roy Moore is that we’ve seen the national media do something similar for Democrats in the past. Not just Bill Clinton but Ted Kennedy and others. As Ham points out, NBC News just killed a report on progressive champion Harvey Weinstein a few weeks ago. The media can’t keep giving the left a pass on this issue, over and over, and then expect the right to play it straight when one of their own is accused. There’s a point when “whataboutism” isn’t just a cynical tactic but a genuine cry of frustration by people who can see there are clearly two different standards being applied simultaneously.
At some point, in the midst of all of these other allegations, Bill Clinton must also face the music. He shouldn’t be immune. His accusers, especially Juanita Broaddrick, shouldn’t be dismissed. Chris Hayes deserves credit for saying so today.
So where's the picture of Trump and his 13 accusers plus the woman who claims Trump raped her at age 13 back in 1994?
I didn't vote for Bill Clinton in either of his elections, I happened to believe some of the accusations even though it was just his word against theirs. I certainly didn't vote for Donald Trump, but apparently Trump supporters have a double standard when it comes to Bill Clintons accusers and Donald Trumps accusers. They believe Bill's accusers are all telling the truth and should definitely be believed while Trumps accusers should be ignored even though Trump himself verified on tape how he treats women, just grabbing them by the genitals, "I don’t even wait." he said, "And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything.". If that tape had been Bill Clinton saying those things do you think conservative Republicans would be defending him saying "Hey, it's fine because he said that 'they let you do it', that means it was always consensual...". Would they ignore the fact that men in power have some implicit control over women who may feel extremely uncomfortable and are not agreeing to being groped but don't feel like they can slap a billionaire or Governor in the face when the men in power are being totally inappropriate? Would they be defending a Democrat Senator accused of assaulting a 14 year old even if it was 35 years ago? Conservative Republican hypocrisy knows no bounds.
Wasn't that the two time failed presidential candidate that told us that women who have been raped or sexually harassed should be listened to and the appropriate actions taken?
Uh no. Democrats are having their revelation concerning Bill Clinton after many years of denial and blaming the victims. They don't deserve any credit for anything.
And what about the Speaker of the House? (The Honorable & Many Veneered Paul Ryan, R-W.I.):
Paul Ryan Says Moore Should 'Step Aside,' Allegations 'Are Credible'
Republican Roy Moore “should step aside,” joining top GOP leaders who are trying to push the Senate candidate facing sexual misconduct accusations out of the race.
"These allegations are credible," Ryan said. "He should step aside. "
What office is Bill Clinton running for?
So a man who assaulted women and a wife who threatened them should only be held accountable if they're running for office???
Man is Bill Cosby going to be pissed when he hears that.
Where are the police reports these women filed?
Why aren't the police investigating?
Or do you feel that because his name is Clinton he should be singled out and treated differently than every other private citizen?
What office is Weinstein running for? Cosby? Spacey?
It's the difference between right and wrong, not just another political point to be made.
I agree completely.
Rape should not be a political issue, Nor should rapists be in elected office. Rapists belong in prison.
The Clinton supporters have taken defending a rapist to a level that made it possible to elect a rapist to POTUS for 8 years. Feeling giddy by that success, they then had the audacity to turn on any woman who did not support Hillary, who had vilified her husband's rape victims.
Justice for rape victims depends on our society's ability to know right from wrong.
Mocowgirl, we don't know if Bill Clinton raped anyone, but he was accused of raping someone. In the trial of public opinion some convicted him and others didn't. He did go on to become President after all the accusations against him and we still don't know if he is guilty or innocent.
I do not care too much for this Roy Moore and don't agree with a lot of his hardcore ideas, but he says he's innocent and of course the accusers say he is guilty. The Establishment proclaimed him guilty right from the start while during the meantime the Establishment went to back immediately for Clinton and the Bob Menendez supporting them while they took an entirely different direction with Roy Moore.
I say report the news, let the MSM and Establishment do whatever they want understanding everyone has an agenda and their agenda is quite obvious, even without any accusations against him millions have been spent to keep anyone who wasn't either a Democrat or McConnell's lapdog out of Congress. This works out pretty well after 40 years in the closet for all these accusers to come out against him for the Establishment. I have little faith in the Establishment because of their corruptness in reporting and trying to control the people with it.
What is the rape victims' agenda?
Report it!
They are now. Stop trying to shame women who didn't do it when they were kids.
Just like Donald Trump, yet conservatives lined up to vote for the accused rapist just a year ago. And Bill Clintons accuser was an adult women who had been married twice, while Donald's accuser was just 13 at the time when Trump and Jeffrey Epstein may have raped her. Katie Johnson actually sued in court while Bill Clintons accuser never sued and later recanted her accusations.
"After being approached by the FBI, Broaddrick consulted her son, a lawyer, who told her she could not lie to federal investigators. After Starr granted her immunity, thus assuring that she would not be prosecuted for perjury regarding her affidavit in the Jones case, Broaddrick recanted the affidavit. However, she insisted that Clinton had not pressured or bribed her in any way, and so Starr concluded that the story was not relevant to his investigation and his report only mentioned the recanting in a footnote."
Note that Katie Johnson has never recanted her claim of being raped at 13 by Trump and Jeffrey Epstein, her case was dismissed in California because they didn't have jurisdiction and dropped in NY because Katie didn't have enough physical evidence since it was 22 years after the claimed rape. I doubt a 13 year old who had just been raped by two billionaires would have had the wherewithal to gather physical evidence at the time.
Personally, I believe both the accusers of Bill and Donald, and just because Bill seemingly got away with it doesn't in any way clear Donald of culpability. One does not justify the other.
That's fine, after all this time you believe the women who came forward against Bill Clinton. Right now that carries no consequences for the Clinton Presidency or even Bill Clinton himself. At the time (the late 90's), when he was being accused, the left was steadfast in denial. As a matter of fact Bill Clinton has continued to be a major fundraiser & spokesman for the democratic party in all the years since. Your belief in Clinton's accusers may be far too late.
Except only 1 of those 2 openly admitted to it on television .
That doesn't even include the woman who accused Bill Clinton of raping her at Oxford while he was a failed "Rhodes Scholar".
Have you ever met a "failed" Rhodes Scholar?
That's my business, not yours. Perhaps you should research Bill Clinton's one year at Oxford. Due to his sexcapades, drug use, and lackluster grades, Oxford kicked him out of his two year Rhodes Scholarship program and didn't allow him to return. So, although I've never met Bill Clinton, he is a "failed" Rhodes Scholar based upon documented information.
I'd like to believe the Dems have started to take this seriously but I doubt it. They've always given a pass to their politicians unless they had no plausible denial (Anthony Weiner photos, etc..).
I believe the left stopped being hypocrites when the Clintons are perp walked into prison and all portraits, statues, buildings etc named after woman murderer Ted Kennedy are removed or changed.
It appears to me they've already started chopping the heads off the very elite Democrats. You know there's nothing a Democrat won't do if they see they can get someone else money.
I think they are running for cover.
there are a bunch of sealed indictments recently filed in the DC
tick - tock +++
So now you need proof? I thought accusations were good enough for you.
And yet the Left has already prosecuted and sentenced Roy Moore based upon allegations and not a shred of proof. "LOL fail" is the label that the Left has taken.
Projection
Good try, but no gold star for you, LMM. LOL back to you.
Don't flatter yourself. You didn't "prove" anything.
If you get to do that with Clinton there's a retroactive impeachment waiting for Reagan and Cheney/Bush, too. it's funny that you think your scummy politicians are pure.
Never said they were pure. But the press never took their side or covered up for them like they did with the Democrats.
btw- it's funny that you left out Bush 41 when there's been news even he groped women post presidency.
I'd like to believe Republicans wouldn't stand for a candidate who'd been accused of sexual assault, sexual misconduct and rape considering they demonized Democrats so vociferously over Bill Clinton. But the fact is, Republicans have given Trump a pass even though he had more accusers than Bill had and the accusation of rape was of a 13 year old and not a twice married adult woman as Bill Clintons rape accuser was.
The 13 year old being raped story is so phony even CNN and MSNBC wouldn't touch it. If I remember right the cops couldn't even find the address it supposedly happened it and the case kept getting thrown out.
Bill Clinton's accusers got their days in court. Verdicts were rendered. Unless there are new accusers, it's history now. If there are new accusers I have a feeling the rightwing will treat them quite differently than they are Moore's and Trump's accusers now. But so will liberals. I doubt Clinton would find comfort anywhere today.
What day in court? It took a SCOTUS decision just to allow Paula Jones a chance to sue Clinton. And when exactly will Roy Moore get his day in court? You think it'll happen before the election??
Very good point!!! I don't know. Let me check the Republican rule book in cases like this.
In the Democrat rule book they get a merit badge and go on to win the election from there.
Remember the impeachment trial? Jones got her trial, too, and decided to take the money. She didn't have to. Were you the one who thought that Clinton should have let it go all the way? Do you really think Roy Moore would do that if any of his accusers would take money to go away? When Roy Moore's day in court comes is up to him. He's the one who's threatening to sue so I say go for it Roy Boy.
Thanks for that! It going to come in handy for the women accusing Trump. The case moves forward.
What did that have to do with Bill's rape victims?
Hopefully, our society is finally ready to quit backing pedophiles, rapists and men who assault girls and women so they are never elected to office in the first place.
None of them filed charges or sued him. Juanita Broaddrick made a claim then recanted and then kinda-sorta made it again. She refused to be to testify on Jones behalf in her trial at a time when there was no way she could be intimidated. Jones was the only one who sued him and it wasn't for rape but "sexual harrassment." That case was thus dismissed. Six months later Clinton was found in contempt of court for that case. That's when his law license was revoked. Don't you remember all the celebration over that? It was a big deal to the Clinton-haters (even if it didn't matter at all to Clinton anymore). If you guys only did a bit of research outside of the bullshit echochamber of rightwing media you'd know this stuff.
So you are saying that women who are raped are only to be believed if they are not accusing Bill Clinton?
This is not acceptable on any level.
Rape should not be a political issue, but as long as it is, the rape victims will never receive justice.
Looks like the rightwing is doubling down on it, though.
It is was no big deal to the Clinton backers that their political leader waved his penis to Jones in the first place and then paid her money to shut up and go away.
Facts and emotions rarely mix well. None of this is about hating the Clintons. It is about wanting justice for rape victims and creating a society where the rapists are no longer above the law.
As long as sexual assault is relegated to partisan politics, the men, guilty of committing sexual assault, are supported and their victims are silenced if they don't want to be vilified by the assaulter's support group.
Clinton didn't have to pay out and could've made his case. Liberals took it as proof positive when O'Reilly paid out. Double standards do abound and the left will twist itself into a pretzel trying to work their way out.
The Trump accusers couldn't even remember what year their assault supposedly occurred. Good look with that.
Sorry- meant that response for lib50. Don't know it came up for you.
I'm with you on that mocowgirl. It's not just women as you know. It's all children.
hahaha...It isn't over. The Democrats would love nothing more than this to go away soon. Just like Hillary's embarrassing and incompetent presidential run. But, it truly is never over the women.
We are not relitigating. we are looking at how far wev'e come when Republican congressmen are now asking Roy Moore to step down. You may recall how democrats defended Clinton, even were united & instrumental in the Senate vote of acquittal.
It bothers me a lot that Republicans are calling for Moore to remove himself.
To me and I say this with all sincerity .....I am disgusted with them. They are falling in line like a bunch of sheep for not having the balls to say.....wait, just a minute ...we don't know that this is true!
Impeachment is a political, not criminal, matter. If Trump were impeached, do you think any Senate republicans would vote to convict him? It's hardly to be imagined.....unless.....unless.....Mike Pence got in their ears. That's the only way I'd see that happening. And it's entirely possible that would be the way Pence could manipulate his way to the presidency. Of course, that would take the cooperation of Dems to get to 67 votes and I don't think any Dem thinks Pence would be an improvement--in fact, maybe even worse.
You guys stood behine Clinton Rev. 1 and 2, and re-Clinton rev. 1 and 2. You supported both of them. Live with the revelations now.
'by people who can see there are clearly two different standards being applied simultaneously.'
The crux of the matter, right there.
Right back atcha for Trump and Moore. Not to mention 8 years of the Cheney/Bush criminal enterprise. We can play this game for eternity.
Why do you say things that aren't true?
How can you be so uninformed? Oh, right. The rightwing internet sewer. Nevermind.
When did Juanita Broaddrick get her day in Court?
Soooo glad you brought her up. Here's her story as it unfolded from when Clinton ran in 1990 for governor, emphasis added (from Wikipedia ):
This is why in another comment I said she sorta-kinda accused him and then didn't and then did. In any case, the poor woman was trying to put whatever happened behind her and the anti-Clinton people just wouldn't give her peace. They even taped her interview without her permission. Whatever Clinton did, Trump makes him look like an amateur on the sexual predator/offender circuit.
This is the closest any Clinton accuser got to having her day in court.
The standard liberal response to any allegations towards one of their own. Are you sure you are not Hillary? First you try and discredit the victim and then you try and claim he is not such a bad guy.
Stay true to your King and Queen at all cost.
And stay true to your sexual predators who never seem to be brought to task by any of you.
Tessy, mocowgirl linked the article in her comment. Knock, knock .... Hello????
It's good to see some of the more honest liberals start to try and deal with their blatant hypocrisy on the issue. Here's another that came out today in the liberal Atlantic:
Of course, it's easy for liberals to come clean now when Clinton's day is past. But it's encouraging that they are at least perceptive enough to realize their present outrage at Moore cannot be squared with their actions over the last few decades. It's a step in the right direction for some to see how corrupting the Clintons were of their supposed ideals.
As the discussions here make clear, the more hardcore, brainwashed partisans continue with their attempts to deflect, lie about and simply ignore the allegations against Clinton rather than admit to their own double standards and hypocrisy. They are simply parrots to whom pure hypocrisy in the name of partisanship causes no danger of the cognitive dissonance that troubles the honest. Since being a partisan is all that matter, they can continue to be dishonest and hypocritical without the least bit of discomfort.
Amen.
Here's your paragraph again with a couple of minor changes (emphasized) and it's at least as accurate:
You almost pulled off the illusion of your being impartial until you wrote original version of that.
Still refuse to acknowledge your hypocrisy on the rape and harassment allegations against Clinton. You play to type, I'll give you that.
And let's not forget President Grover Cleveland-- I have always thought that he was long overdue for a reckoning as well!
(And don't get me started on Pres. Millard Fillmore
)
"also true that Democrats and the center left are overdue for a real reckoning"
Funny thing....this "Reckoning" halleluiah moment Chris says the Democrats should have.
Just NOW ? Fucking REALLY ?
What the Fuck have Democrats been doing since the 2010 start of the "YOU SHOULD HAVE A HALLELUIAH MOMENT" back then ?
Typical digging deeper holes and "IGNORING" ?
They sure do have very, very, very SHORT memories....don't they !
The Left Wing Media, rarely attacks a Democrat.....unless there is a underlying reason to do it. This is interesting......I think there is more to this than meets the eye.....
Thanks Six!
Have a Good One Brother!