I was separating the instances of rape from the "mere" womanizing. Although the article indicates that Juanita Broaddrick was possibly a cheating spouse and admitted to lying under oath, and I do not find her credible because of that, in no way am I apologizing for Clinton's behavior.
I am not saying that Clinton has a right to rape, just that a woman has all the information she needs about a man's character if she knows he is married but willing to become involved with another woman. If she is willing to become involved with him, they are both "bad guys," not just the cheating husband, and she has to face the consequences just like he does.
On the other hand, she is not responsible for his actions and of course he should pay the price for his own behaviors or crimes. The full price. Clinton will not, but the women will. That's the way the world goes round.
"I am not saying that Clinton has a right to rape, just that ... if she knows he is married but willing to become involved with another woman. If she is willing to become involved with him, they are both "bad guys," not just the cheating husband, and she has to face the consequences just like he does. "
I certainly agree with you on that. But there is something very dangerous about a POTUS engaging in illicit behavior requiring a coverup by his staff. It leaves him open to blackmail or even grave physical harm from an infiltrator. The idea that a young woman could enter the Oval office by flashing her thong at him just makes me weep for the chances he took with the security of our country. The responsibilities of the office of the President should weigh heavier on him than on a garden-variety cheater, man or woman.
On the other hand, her behavior in attempting to seduce a president should also be regarded as a reprehensible security breach.