Posted on 11/16/2017 8:13:18 PM PST by lasereye
Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, who holds the seat formerly occupied by Hillary Clinton, said today that Bill Clinton should have resigned the presidency after his inappropriate relationship with Monica Lewinsky came to light. That’s mighty enlightened of her.
But what took her so long to reach, or articulate, this view? The answer is, it took the fall of Clintons plus a crucial Senate race in which the Republican is being accused of serious sexual misconduct.
We know that Gillibrand would never have called out Bill Clinton if he still wielded influence. We know this because she didn’t when he did. To the contrary, just last year, she wrote: “I. . .was truly honored that President Bill Clinton campaigned for me in my first run for Congress in 2006.”
Attempting to explain her alleged change of heart about Clinton, Gillibrand said: “Things have changed today, and I think under those circumstances there should be a very different reaction.” This dodge is unpersuasive, as I argued at length here.
But even if we were to accept that “things have changed” substantially since 1999 with regard to how having sex with an intern and lying about it is viewed, surely Gillibrand isn’t saying that they have changed substantially since 2016. That’s when she gushed about Bill Clinton.
Gillibrand is guilty not just hypocrisy, but of intellectual dishonesty.
She’s also guilty of rank opportunism. Gillibrand says: “I think in light of this conversation, we should have a very different conversation about President Trump, and a very different conversation about allegations against him.”
Translation: I’ll throw a has-been ex-president, who can no longer help me, under the bus in exchange for having a go at a president I hate.
If President Trump has sex with a White House intern and lies about it (or commits serious sexual misconduct of any kind while serving as president), we should have a “different conversation” about allegations against him. But not with Kristen Gillibrand. She isn’t to be taken seriously.
Exactly..Monica Lewinsky, that was at least consensual..but Kathleen Willey, Paula Jones, and especially Juanita Broaddrick, they were raped and assaulted..but leftists, they like to mention Lewinsky so they can talk about cheating instead of assault
Real profile in courage there Gilly.
Someone has mentioned Gillibrand’s name in connection with presidential politics, and she is started to get intoxicated with that heady brew. In truth, she is Charlie McCarthy to Schumer’s Edgar Bergen. She is a true lightweight and she is making a complete fool of herself.
Monica was not merely a sex fling. She could have become compromised by the Russians, or the Brits or the Israelis. They all would have loved in and out of the Oval Office.
I will live to receive myself on his burial plot.
Better late than never. Given that Gillibrand is a Democrat, I give her credit for speaking up now. Most Democrats still remain silent about Bill Clinton’s many crimes. They continue to circle the wagons. At least Gillibrand is speaking out.
As I said earlier, better late than never. And who knows? Gillibrand could start an anti-Clinton avalanche. It could wreck half the D party. I applaud her!
It wasn’t about Monica. Bill could have banged Monica for the entire eight years of his presidency on the seal of the president in the oval office for all I care. It was about Paula Jones. Paula Jones alleged that Clinton had performed certain lewd acts against her. The Clinton team’s position was that Jones was A) Lying B)Crazy and C) a slut and that he would NEVER do those things. The problem was that Monica Lewinsky confirmed that yes, Clinton WOULD do those things (in Lewinsky’s case, she acquiesced), and that she had proof. Furthermore, the Clintons were willing to both commit and suborn perjury to protect themselves.
Gillibrand Fails to comdemn Hillary’s actions in attacking Bill’s victims.
I wrote to Boxer and Feinstein here in California when Clinton was impeached, asking them why, as women, they weren’t speaking out against his predatory behavior with a young, female underling. Boxer ignored me and Feinstein replied that his agenda was more important than this single act. That’s the day I became a Republican. She basically was saying the end justified the means.
The Democrat Party is throwing the Clintons under the bus because they know they are dead meat when all the truth comes out about the Clinton Foundation and Uranium One. They are trying to distance themselves from the coming disaster which is the Clntons.
I suspect Hillary and Bill will become residents in a nation without an extradition treaty.
Have her put her money where her mouth is.
Release all that evidence which none of the Senators and Representatives at that time bothered looking at for scrutiny now.
Asa—the current Arkansas Governor— is probably one of the few people who examined the evidence.
The "He should have resigned then" meme. Of course it's too late for him to resign the presidency, but the current occupant, who's accused of such boorish behavior, now he should resign. In chess you have to sacrifice some pieces to win, this is a good trade for the Dems - a former powerhouse now a used-up liability for the Repub's most valuable player. The DNC can throw lose Hillary too, and it's still a good trade.
Greenfield is saying the Clintons are trying to worm their way back into politics, setting up websites and PAC's that parallel the DNC's. The object is to control voter and donor lists, and divert funds into their own pockets. Clinton Foundation donations and speaking fees won't cover their expenses, they need new revenues. Also remember their long game, daughter Chelsea - they need the machine for the next generation of grifters (shudder).
Personal: Gillibrand holds Hillary's former Senate seat, right? And Hillary still lives in that district, and is available. Gillibrand can't be comfortable with that...
Too late! You get no points from me. You chose against the women back then. Now only reveals that you have a small shallow character to not to continue to be loyal.
Gillibrand is a phoney and political whore. She ran for the House of Reps. in upstate NY as a pro-gun conservative who bragged she and her husband kept rifles under their bed. Once she was appointed to fill Hitlery’s Senate seat she quickly became Chuck Schumers sock puppet and became a rabid leftist.
Exactly right. As Schumer’s poodle you know she has his blessing to stage this phony moral outrage.
When Bill Clinton expires will Sen. Gillibrand be the first to step forward and say that his body should not lie in state in the rotunda of Capitol? Why do I think not?
They don’t call her Silly Gilly for nothing - she may be intellectually dishonest, but her real problem is intellectual emptiness - absolutely nothing between her ears.
Never forget these people all wanted Hillary to win and Bill to be in the White House with her. They wouldn’t give a rats ass right now about Bills indiscretions if Hillary had won.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.