Bill Clinton Wrote the Book for Trump

After lamenting Donald Trump's "penchant for sexism" last week, Hillary Clinton announced to supporters that her former-president husband -- her "not-so-secret weapon" -- will be hitting the campaign trail for her in January. Characteristically, in all capital letters, Trump struck back on Twitter, where he observed Bill Clinton himself has "demonstrated a penchant for sexism." The it-only-hurts-when-you-laugh part about this tiff is that The Donald and Bubba have so much in common.

Discussing the GOP front-runner's style with The Des Moines Register, Hillary Clinton lamented that Trump has "no boundaries" and "keeps pushing the envelope." But both men have degraded the public lexicon. Bill Clinton turned "Lewinsky" into a verb. Trump hit another low when he said the former secretary of state "got schlonged" in the 2008 presidential race. Wink, wink. The Donald tweeted that the term just means "beaten badly."

Both men seem to come out of central casting for "Mad Men." Despite their starring roles, they're both maestros at playing the victim card so ably that their followers are driven to defend their every misstep. They tell lies and get other people to justify their falsehoods. Clinton made up his own version of the meaning of "sexual relations" -- which spurred legions of Democrats to argue dutifully that oral sex isn't (sex). Trump made up seeing Muslims celebrating 9/11 in New Jersey. There's no video, no evidence that stands up, yet his groupies insist the tall tale is true. Clinton was absolved, supporters argued, because everyone lies about sex. For Trump, his falsehoods rang true because there were Muslims rejoicing somewhere else in the world.

Penchant for sexism? Where to begin? Trump has been known to brand women who aren't ornamental as "losers." When Fox News anchor Megyn Kelly asked him tough questions -- starting with his, er, penchant for calling women fat slobs, pigs and animals -- at the first GOP debate, Trump suggested that she had "blood coming out of her wherever." (Minions dutifully went on cable news to argue Trump didn't mean to suggest Kelly had been menstruating.) Trump seems to think that women exist to serve him.

Both men have had to pay to play. The billionaire paid divorce settlements to his exes. The former president paid tort damages and legal fees to mop up after his penchants. There was an $850,000 settlement in Paula Jones' sexual harassment suit. Then there's the affair with former intern Monica Lewinsky, which led to his impeachment. Clinton gave intentionally false testimony during the investigation, which led to his disbarment. Like Trump Republicans, Clinton Democrats always had excuses for their man's poor treatment of women. The list includes Hillary Clinton.

Trump shares another trait with Bill and Hillary Clinton: All three brazen it out through scandals -- and live to thrive another day. When opponents on the left or the right attack Trump, his fans take the approbation as proof that Trump is anti-establishment. He can lie. He can make faces during a presidential debate. They applaud Trump for being his own man.

Bill Clinton dragged this country through months of discord because he would not admit he had cheated on his first lady. Through it all, Clinton rose in the polls. Voters disapproved of Clinton's detractors more than his crude behavior. The wronged wife won a U.S. Senate seat in a state where she had not resided before Lewinsky. The thicker the muck the stronger the Clintons emerge.

So when Trump tweets that Bill Clinton is "fair game," my guess is that both Clintons are thinking, "Bring it on." Or do they recognize the peril in charging into battle against someone who plays shamelessness as ably and recklessly as they do?

Trump has been known to brand women who aren't ornamental as "losers."

He's been known to say things like that about men too. Case in point: Jeb Bush

What rubbish -- comparing a divorce settlement with a huge payout for a sexual harassment claim? Puh-leeze. Give me a break.

Besides, as far as Bill Clinton goes, it goes WAY beyond the sex assaults and bimbo eruptions, and it all will be fair game for Trump the minute Bill starts campaigning for Hillary, especially if he is injudicious enough to attack Trump.

For those who may have forgotten what kind of a President Bill Clinton was:

1) Clinton’s own words show his often expressed innate hostility to, and utter contempt for, the core principles of the American founding:

``If the personal freedoms guaranteed by the Constitution inhibit the government’s ability to govern the people, we should look to limit those guarantees.’’ -- President Bill Clinton, August 12, 1993

``The purpose of government is to rein in the rights of the people’’ –- Bill Clinton during an interview on MTV in 1993

``We can’t be so fixated on our desire to preserve the rights of ordinary Americans…that we forget about reality.’’ -- President Bill Clinton, quoted in USA Today, March 11, 1993, Page 2A, ``NRA change: `Omnipotent to powerful’’’ by Debbie Howlett

“When we got organized as a country and we wrote a fairly radical Constitution with a radical Bill of Rights, giving a radical amount of individual freedom to Americans, it was assumed that the Americans who had that freedom would use it responsibly… that they would work for the common good, as well as for the individual welfare… However, now there’s a lot of irresponsibility. And so a lot of people say there’s too much freedom. When personal freedom’s being abused, you have to move to limit it.” – Bill Clinton, April 19, 1995

2) Clinton inevitably pursued his own political advantage at the expense of American interests and national security. Here is just one of many possible examples:

It is well documented that Clinton and the Democrats took illegal campaign money from groups and individuals tied directly to the Chinese People’s Republican Army. It is therefore not surprising that In January 1998 Clinton went against the advice of then-Secretary of State Warren Christopher and Pentagon experts by lifting long-standing restrictions against the export of American satellites to China for launch on Chinese rockets. Not only did he move control over such decisions from the more security-focused State Department to the Commerce Department, but he intervened in a Justice Department investigation of Loral Space & Communications, retroactively enabling Loral to sell critical missile technology to the Chinese. Interestingly enough, Clinton’s decision was made at the request of Loral CEO Bernard Schwartz, whose earlier $1.3 million campaign donation made him the single biggest contributor to the Democratic election effort.

The result, as stated eloquently by syndicated columnist Linda Bowles, was that “the Democrats got money from satellite companies and from Chinese communists; China got supercomputors, advanced production equipment and missile technology; Loral got its satellites launched at bargain basement prices . . . and the transfer of sensitive missile technology gave China [for the first time] the capability of depositing bombs on American cities.” Incidentally, Loral ultimately failed to benefit from this permanent injury to America’s security interests: in July 2003, the company filed for bankruptcy protection, and in order to raise cash was forced to sell its most profitable business – a fleet of communications satellites orbiting over North America.

3) On two occasions, Clinton used military action for the specific purpose of distracting the American public from the fallout of the Lewinsky affair:

• On August 20, three days after Clinton finally admitted publicly to the Lewinsky affair, the news media was poised to focus on that day’s grand jury testimony by Monica Lewinsky. That same morning, Clinton personally went on national television to gravely announce his bombing of a Sudanese “chemical weapons factory,” and a terrorist training camp in Afghanistan. It was the first time most Americans ever heard the name of Osama bin Laden. The factory bombing in Sudan killed an innocent night watchman, but accomplished little else. It later was proven that the plant was making badly needed pharmaceuticals for people in that poverty-stricken part of the world, but no chemical weapons.

Several months later, the U.S. Center for Nonproliferation Studies, part of the Monterey Institute of International Studies, stated: "...the evidence indicates that the facility had no role whatsoever in chemical weapons development." Kroll Associates, one of the world's most reputable investigative firms, also confirmed that there was no link in any way between the plant and any terrorist organization. As for the Afghanistan bombing, it failed to do any damage at all to bin Laden or his organization. Clinton’s action was accurately characterized by George W. Bush when he said right after 9-11: "When I take action, I’m not going to fire a $2 million missile at a $10 empty tent and hit a camel in the butt.

Clinton’s pointless and murderous military actions did not make Americans safer that day, although they did destroy an innocent life, and for all the good they did certainly could have been delayed in any case. But they did succeed in diverting media attention from Lewinsky’s grand jury testimony for a 24-hour news cycle, which was the main point. So I guess, they weren’t a total loss.

•On December 16, 1998, on the eve of the scheduled House vote on his impeachment, Bill Clinton launched a surprise bombing attack on Baghdad. As justification for this exploit, he cited the urgent threat that Saddam’s weapons of mass destruction posed to America, and the need for immediate action. Almost immediately, the House Democrats held a caucus and emerged calling for a delay in the impeachment proceedings. House minority leader Dick Gephardt made a statement: "We obviously should pass a resolution by saying that we stand behind the troops. I would hope that we do not take up impeachment until the hostilities have completely ended."

Conveniently, a delay so near the end of the House term would have caused the vote to be taken up in the next session – when the newly elected House membership would be seated with more Democratic representation, thereby improving Clinton’s chances of dodging impeachment.

The Republicans did, in fact, agree to delay the hearings, but only for a day or two. Amazingly, Clinton ended the bombing raid after only 70 hours -- once it became clear that in spite of the brief delay, the vote would still be held in the current session.

Once the bombing stopped, Clinton touted the effectiveness and importance of the mission. As reported by ABC News : “We have inflicted significant damage on Saddam's weapons of mass destruction programs, on the command structures that direct and protect that capability, and on his military and security infrastructure,” he said. Defense secretary William Cohen echoed the point: “We estimate that Saddam's missile program has been set back by at least a year.”

Whether or not one buys Clinton’s assessment of that mission, it is difficult to believe that its timing was so critical that it required commencement virtually at the moment the House was scheduled to vote on the impeachmentÂ¬Â¬Â¬Â¬Â¬Â¬Â¬Â¬. I think the most reasonable conclusion is that Clinton cynically deployed US military assets and placed military personnel in harm’s way for purely political reasons.

4) Clinton’s reckless sexual behavior was a threat to American national security:

Clinton and his supporters have been very effective in persuading large numbers of Americans that the Lewinsky scandal was “only about sex.” But I see a bigger issue here, because Clinton is on record as saying that he would have done anything to keep knowledge of the Lewinsky affair from becoming public.

To me, that statement raises a very serious question: What if, instead of sending her recorded Lewinsky conversations to Ken Starr, Linda Tripp had instead secretly offered them for sale, say, to the Chinese government? Or to the Russians? Or even to agents of Saddam?

What kind of blackmail leverage would those tapes have provided to a foreign government in dealing with America on sensitive trade, security or military issues? One of the few things Clinton ever said that I believe is that he would have done anything to keep the Lewinsky affair secret. Given his demonstrated track record of selling out American interests for personal or political gain (and there are more examples that I could have cited here), how far would he have gone in compromising America’s real interests in order to protect his own neck when threatened with blackmail?

Pretty far, I believe. Equally distressing is the prospect Clinton might, in fact, have succumbed to foreign black mail on other occasions in order to hide different sexual episodes that ultimately did not become public. There is no way to know, of course, but I prefer presidents for whom such a scenario is not a plausible possibility.

And don’t even get me started on the war crime in Kosovo.

WAR IN KOSOVO

During Bill Clintonâ€™s 1999 NATO-led war in Kosovo â€“ which according to some estimates cost as much as $75 billion â€“ we bombed Belgrade for 78 days, killed almost 3,000 civilians, and shredded the civilian infrastructure (including every bridge across the Danube.)

We devastated the environment, bombed the Chinese embassy, came very close to engaging in armed combat against Russian forces, and in general, pursued a horrific and inhumane strategy to rain misery on the civilian population of Belgrade in order to pressure Milosevic into surrendering.

Why did we do all that? The US did not even have an arguable interest in the Balkans, and no one ever tried to claim that Serbia represented any kind of threat to our nation or our interests.

But for months the Clinton administration had told us that Milosevic was waging a vicious genocide against Albanian Muslims, and needed to be stopped. The New York Times called it a â€œhumanitarian war.â€ In March 1999 â€“ the same month that the bombing started â€“ Clintonâ€™s State Department publicly suggested that as many as 500,000 Albanian Kosovars had been murdered by Milosevicâ€™s regime. In May of that year, as the bombing campaign was drawing to a close, Secretary of Defense William Cohen lowered that estimate 100,000.

Five years after the bombing, after all the forensic investigations had been completed, the prosecutors at Milosevicâ€™s â€œWar Crimesâ€ trial in the Hague were barely been able to document a questionable figure of perhaps 5,000 â€œbodies and body parts.â€ During the war, the American people were told that Kosovo was full of mass graves filled with the bodies of murdered Albanian Muslims. But none were ever found.

BILL CLINTON ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE

During the election cycle of 1992, George H.W. Bush lost his job after Bill Clinton hammered him relentlessly for having caused the â€œworst economy of the last 50 years.â€

In fact, as CNNâ€™s Brooke Jackson has reported: â€œThree days before Christmas 1992, the National Bureau of Economic Research finally issued its official proclamation that the recession had ended 21 months earlier. What became the longest boom in U.S. history actually began nearly two years before Clinton took office.â€ See (See http://www.cnn.com/2001/US/10/31/jackson.recession.primer.otsc/).

By the same token, Clinton is generally perceived as having a stellar economic record during his own presidency, in spite of the fact that the economy was already starting to decline during the last year of his term after the stock market crashed in March 2000.

According to a report by MSNBC: â€œThe longest economic expansion in U.S. history faltered so much in the summer of 2000 that business output actually contracted for one quarter, the government said Wednesday in releasing a comprehensive revision of the gross domestic product. Based on new data, the Commerce Department said that the GDP â€” the countryâ€™s total output of goods and services â€” shrank by 0.5 percent at an annual rate in the July-September quarter of 2000.â€ See: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3676690/ns/business-stocks_and_economy/t/gdp-figures-revised-downward/.

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.