I would do the same as I did with President Bush. I would review what the circumstance of the photo taking was, then what subsequent contact there was. As it turns out, President Bush's DOJ had Al Arian arrested.
I would not, as you assume, blame President Clinton for appearing in a photo alone. As I explained before, context and previous and subsequent activity involving the person matters. Not plucking events out of context and demanding that both be evaluated and the same conclusion reached if it isn't warranted.
And your "plain and bland enough" is beyond silly, since the above has been explained to you on this thread yet you ignore it or, more likely, didn't understand it. You are a broken record on the "blindly following" line when it has been demonstrated to not be the case. I have an idea why you relentlessly regurgitate your talking point despite its baselessness.
I have constantly had to 'regugitate' because no one seems to be answering that - it is been everything else.
Forgive me, - but to say that Clinton would not have been questioned based on one picture and would not have been royally raked over the coals is just a little disingenous. Since you are making your judgements based on the history of the two men - I will make my judgement of that statement based on the past history of how all of us felt about Clinton. It's nice to sit here and say - well if it was just one picture and we never found out that he got anything or did anything I wouldn't have said anything. Really? We both know that is not true - there would still be conspiracy threads going on today had that happened.