One of the most fascinating aspects of the current spate of accusations is the treatment of former President Bill Clinton. Mr. Clinton has been stoutly defended by almost every member of the mainstream media against all the charges for over twenty years – but the shock of the Harvey Weinstein case and the accusations against Alabama Senate candidate Roy Moore have made it extremely tricky for Mr. Clinton’s defenders to keep defending him, lest they sound too selective and hypocritical. After all, when the man you have championed has done worse things and more of them over a longer period of time than the person you want to attack, something has to give. Even Hillary Clinton has acknowledged (perhaps unwittingly) that had Fox News been around when his scandals broke, her husband probably would not have been elected.
As to Roy Moore – it certainly appears that he dated, or tried to date, girls 18 years of age or less when he was past 30 – not in and of itself illegal, but creepy nonetheless. Of course, such instances took place 40 years ago, and we are free to speculate that his accusers must have known that he held the position of state judge in Alabama as well as other lesser offices, and yet never brought such charges to light. Again, we easily can question the truth of a charge so old; that does not mean it is untrue, but it is curious why it would never be brought forth during the first 40 years of a man’s public career, and Mr. Moore’s candidacy in a US Senate race makes the scandal not only more juicy, but also raises the stakes for both Mr. Moore and his accusers.
Well, the truth will come out – perhaps, as in the case of the last Senator Ted Stevens of Alaska in another type of scandal, after the election is safely lost. Many Republicans wish that Mr. Moore would withdraw from the Senate race; but, he denies any wrongdoing and swears he will not step aside. We are sure more and more evidence and counter-evidence will come out before the December 2 election.
As to Mr. Clinton, a long list of his accusers have alleged a great deal more than mere “dating”, and all most of them got for coming forward was to be called “trailer trash” and otherwise slimed by the Clinton machine – led by the recently defeated candidate for President herself. The fact remains that Fox News or no, Mr. Clinton’s alleged escapades did not prevent his election and re-election to the offices of Attorney General and Governor in Arkansas and President of the United States, so it seems there are conditions under which such offenses are mitigated.
It may be unfair to lump all of these people together, but Harvey Weinstein’s career has been perhaps irreparably harmed by his behavior; Charlie Rose has been dismissed by two networks; Bill O’Reilly by one; movie and TV stars have been fired from or resigned from plum roles; and several present or former elected officials are facing new scrutiny over their past behavior. Roy Moore may lose his senate race, and Al Franken may be forced to resign from his senate seat. Who knows what else may happen.
Men (or women) in public life should not be assumed guilty, nor should they be assumed not guilty, but our legal system does give the presumption of innocence, and sometimes spurious charges are made. The circumstances, the evidence, the history of the accused (and yes, that of the accuser as well), and the time that elapsed between the alleged offense and the public accusation all should be taken into account.
The lesson here is, check the reliability of the charges and if they are found to be true – do not tolerate that type of misconduct from politicians from your political party, or from the other guy’s, either. There are plenty of politicians or actors or newspeople who do not misbehave around women. Let’s support them instead of supporting the ones who do.