Dems: Bill Clinton too toxic to campaign in midterms

[DonViejo]

Source: Politico




One of the party's top surrogates has been effectively sidelined by the #metoo movement.

By EDWARD-ISAAC DOVERE 02/14/2018 05:00 AM EST

Democrats are looking to embrace the #MeToo moment and rally women to push back on President Donald Trump in the midterms—and they don’t want Bill Clinton anywhere near it.

In a year when the party is deploying all their other big guns and trying to appeal to precisely the kind of voters Clinton has consistently won over, an array of Democrats told POLITICO they’re keeping him on the bench. They don’t want to be seen anywhere near a man with a history of harassment allegations, as guilty as their party loyalty to him makes them feel about it.

“I think it’s pretty tough,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.), vice chair of the House Progressive Caucus and one of the leading voices in Congress demanding changes in Washington’s approach to sexual harassment. His presence “just brings up a lot of issues that will be very tough for Democrats. And I think we all have to be clear about what the #MeToo movement was.”

After booting Sen. Al Franken precisely because they wanted to draw a clear contrast with Trump, Democrats across the party's ideological and geographical spectrum acknowledged the political trouble that any appearance with Clinton would cause.

Read more: https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/14/bill-clinton-metoo-backlash-campaign-407280

[GWC58]

1. Does this mean Bill will be told, come 2020,

to stay clear of the Democratic convention? Seems like it’s heading that way.

[Yavin4]

2. Yep. Esp. after Franken.

Bill is toast in the Dem party for a long, long while.

[GWC58]

3. I hope Hillary isnt asked to stay away, but in this

age she just might be. Both Clinton’s might be “asked” to stay away.

[DURHAM D]

6. The article says otherwise.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

76. As it should be... if Franken had to go, it's probably best to keep Bill on the sidelines.

[DURHAM D]

4. said one person

[ChiTownDenny]

22. Yawn....

Such a non-story.

[Hortensis]

61. Maybe. This may well be part of the Franken strategy.

The right has huge problems with sex abuse. Roy Moore put them front and center on the national stage IN THE RUNUP TO THE 2018 MIDTERMS.

Remember, the 2018 midterms will affect the 2020 census!

I think we should assume the right is investing the same highly sophisticated analysis and operations to holding power in 2018 as they did when they successfully flipped the nation right in the 2010 elections.

So they used the attention on the Roy Moore scandal to take out both a Democratic senator and a powerfully motivating speaker and campaigner in President Bill Clinton. And sent in bots and trolls to sow dissension over all this on social media.

I think we should expect them to unveil another sex scandal, real or 100% manufactured, between now and the election to further demoralize those who lack conviction on the left, they will. For too many vulnerable minds, mere allegation is as effective as indictment and conviction.

(And remember, Russia's strategy is to defeat Democrats by augmenting lies and division already promoted by our right and anti-Democrat left.)

[sinkingfeeling]

5. IMHO, there are idiots running the DNC.

[DURHAM D]

7. This article came from the "Democratic Progressive Caucus"

[ehrnst]

13. Makes total sense now...

[Cha]

35. No they don't..and this is from

the so called "progressive caucus"

[Hortensis]

8. That's a shame. Bill Clinton is famously a philanderer,

but he's also the kind of man who likes and enjoys the company of women out of bed. All the best men in my life have been that type. They're the gems who can be friends.

All of his accusers' stories have huge holes in them and/or conflicting evidence against them, in some cases to the point of effectively disproving them, such as Paula Jones', and their characters are all demonstrably questionable at best.

I resent tremendously the false equalizations of him with predators like Trump and Moore.

[BeyondGeography]

9. How about Franken?

This is the problem, isn’t it? No matter what you think of Bill you can’t say his conduct wasn’t many times worse than Franken’s. So if we’re to be consistent as Democrats (and 34 Democratic Senators said Franken should resign), Bill can no longer be one of the public faces of the party.

[Hortensis]

10. NO, I can't say that. How can you?! Bill's accusers

are virtually all disproven through investigation of their own too-elaborate claims and the various situations. They live through right-wing lies only. At least a couple of them had proven connections to right-wing swiftboaters.

Like the WH clerk who bragged to multiple coworker--who came forward as witnesses--that she was going to meet and have an affair with the president and grabbed every chance to put herself in his sight, then when that never happened claimed he made an unwanted advance to her. There are witnesses to all but the "unwanted" advance she'd been trying so hard to get.

I like Al also, but how do you PROVE his palm never cupped a buttock in a crowd? The simplicity of his accusers' stories is their protection. No meetings that were proved to have never happened, no distinguishing marks not found on a penis, no relatives who testified to very different stories told them.

Very different situations.

[DURHAM D]

11. Thank you.

[BeyondGeography]

15. You're a fan

Ask most people if they think Franken's conduct was worse than Bill's and guess what they'll say. The answer is why Bill will be way under the radar this fall.

[Hortensis]

17. I should ask "most people" so I'll know what

to think? Lol. Sorry, but I'm a fact-based person. All those who just believe those stories are captured by right-wing lies, when they'd do better to examine what evidence is available and make up their own minds.

I have, and Juanita Broaddrick's story of rape back in 1978 is the only one that has any credibility. That credibility is based 100% on a pair of friends much later saying she told them back then that it happened. She was also having an extramarital affair at the time with a man she later married, and he says she told him that also.

Her much later story of what happened when, she says, she went up to a hotel room alone with Clinton (leaving a bunch of reporters, security people and others in the lobby), where he raped her then returned to the people in the lobby, raises questions but can't be proven -- though special prosecutor Ken Starr and many others certainly tried -- or disproven. She said she locked the door, instead of calling the police or taking the elevator down for help, because she was afraid someone might be coming up to murder her (sent by Bill, of course).

Her behaviors over ensuing decades add more questions, mainly because her versions vary somewhat, which is understandable when they started 15-20 years later and continued to today.

At the point the story told among her friends got out to the Paula Jones lawyers, it became public, of course. She tried to avoid it, and when they subpoenaed she testified under oath that that the story was not true and that it never happened at all.

Later, Ken Starr promised her immunity from prosecution if she'd admit to perjury and say it did happen. Even Starr was unable to put the rape claim to use, though, and didn't include it in his report, merely passing everything his investigation had turned up to the Republicans to use.

She explained that she had recanted because was afraid (again; after all she was afraid first that Bill would have her murdered, and then Hillary), though notably the same swiftboaters who pushed the Paula Jones story were offering to help her, and they had billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife, the Republican Party, the MSM, and the rest of the right wing smear machine behind them.

Her story about Hillary somehow, amazingly recognizing a woman she'd never met (presumably Bill always shared his rapes with her) on coming on her in a gathering and threatening her in public--terrifying her with a mere evil glance into silence for many years, is of course not considered credible by anyone except the Hillary-deranged.

During 2015 and 2016 when she resurfaced, I didn't remember this stuff and wanted to know more about what kind of person she was. Turns out she was a right-wing Trump supporter, had developed connections with right-wing political operators (or reconnected with old the Starr era ones), and presided over her own very busy Hillary-deranged group on Facebook.

I checked that out and have never seen a nastier group of despicables anywhere. Far worse than Jackpines because all site's malicious energy was focused on Hillary. No lie was too viciously hurtful, too dishonest or disproven, or conspiracy too ridiculous for Broaddrick to push day after day, week after week, month after month.

Of course, being a profoundly dishonest, malicious, right-wing woman doesn't mean she can't have been raped. I don't expect to ever know the truth, couldn't believe a second recanting even if it happened, but being addicted to malicious political lies hardly adds to her credibility.

And, again, this is the only accusation that didn't fall apart on examination. Though many of the same names of lower-level smear machine operators show up in detailed examinations of her and other accusers. Regardless, of course, there'll always be the same hand-on-butt kind of problem Franken has.

[Lokilooney]

29. I live in the fact based world as well

Unfortunately investigations, facts or lack thereof do not seem to matter that much.

It's a bit anecdotal but I've been reading the Bloom Country reboot and here is one of the comics http://www.gocomics.com/bloom-county/2017/11/27 Clinton, Trump and Franken are basically lumped together and this is coming form someone who is pretty far to the left. Most here might not think that's a fair comparison but I fear it is becoming the new reality and I'm not sure it's because they believe the right-wing spin or the new dogma of always believe the accuser lack of evidence be dammed.

[Hortensis]

30. Truth is everything to everyone but fools. Don't want to

be a fool, with lies used like a ring in your nose to lead you around? Be a truth seeker. The real thing.

You're pushing a fake equivalency by claiming truth doesn't matter in so-reasonable terms, only whatever lie manages the most believers must rule.

Spit on that rationalizing. Zero tolerance for acceptance of a world ruled by lies because decency and democracy will always lose in that world. And that can't be allowed.

[Lokilooney]

31. I agree

I also don't see where you thought I was making equivalency's or said that the truth doesn't matter. I was lamenting on the fact that to some people it doesn't seem to matter.

[Hortensis]

42. Lokilooney, I'm so sorry I didn't recognize a lament.

Coming after a recommendation from someone else that anything should consult the mass mood of the moment for what to believe, I misunderstood. Too subtle for my mood of the moment. Lament.

And that's a good cartoon on all this. I'm going to have to check out the next one.

[BeyondGeography]

34. Fools have sex with an intern when their zipper control is already suspect

They also fail to appreciate when the ground has shifted underneath them and keep marching to the same old tunes.

[mercuryblues]

51. As you I wanted to refresh the Broderick

claims when they resurfaced. To me it boiled down to this. If she was paid for an interview she claimed Bill raped her. When she had to testify, under oath, she said it did not happen.

Like you she has recanted, claimed, recanted so many times, I find her hard to believe. the fact that Ken Starr didn't even believe her (a man who wanted to nail Bill in his coffin) says a lot.

[GWC58]

12. Agreed! Bill Clinton is so much better, more humane

than are those two. For that matter just about any other Rethug.

[still_one]

14. ok. As long as people are consistent, I don't have any issues with this

[Cha]

36. She didn't mind him then

when he was helping her career.. but now.. she's found another way, she thinks, for him to help her career.

Good find, still_one

[still_one]

39. Hey Cha

[Cha]

40. Aloha, still_one!

[R B Garr]

75. Exactly this! She had no problem with his help

when she needed it! Obviously she saw the value, and it was okay for her.

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

77. Does make one wonder.

[The Wizard]

16. The Me Too movement

will wreck the Democratic Party and not effect the Republicans. If the Democrats embrace Me Too without question, the Republicans win.
Like it or not men pursue women. I's how it's been since the beginning. By calling men predators for making advances toward women, Me Too is going down a slippery slope.
A few years back I was accused of sexual harassment for an innocent comment that some girl's sick mind tried to turn into a legal case. I said I'd be glad to before a Judge with her and defend myself against her wild assertions. She never mentioned it again.
This is not condoning unwanted advances. It's a warning to Democrats to proceed with good judgement or snatch defeat from the jaws of victory yet again.
Or is this story a plant by GOP / Russian bots or trolls?

[crazycatlady]

19. There's a way to pursue women without touching them

It is called opening your mouth and using your words in an appropriate situation (aka not at work, not to a subordinate). And be prepared to take no for an answer.

Your post reaks of 'boys will be boys.' The mentality that let generations of men get away with unacceptable behavior.

[The Wizard]

24. Maybe you missed the part about not condoning

unwanted advances.

[Egnever]

28. Sadly boys will be boys

it is undeniable and has been since the dawn of man. Does not make it right nor does it mean the behavior should be ignored.

We are hardwired to procreate the same as any other species and that drives some to cross lines that should not be crossed. I don't think it is possible to legislate it away. I do think it is possible to find ways to try to make it easier to address the behavior that crosses lines but it will never go away. It is our most fundamental instinct to procreate, mix that with mental instability and rape will always be there in my opinion.

I absolutely think more can be done to try to put better protections in place especially in the workplace but I think the behavior itself will be with us till the end of man. Sadly we can't seem to stop killing each other either.

I am not trying to suggest we should let people get away with it but like the drug wars it will never make the behavior go away. Sex is a much more potent addiction than any drug.

Our problem with the current me too movement in my opinion is the zero tolerance aspect. Any zero tolerance policy has problems as it does not understand nuance. Different people have different comfort levels with human contact as Franken's case makes very clear when one of his accusers felt violated because he touched her waist during a photo shoot she requested. Something done in thousands of photos every day. For that woman if she is to be taken at her word it was a physical assault. Zero tolerance would and in his case did make a mockery of sexual assault.

Very few men are going to be comfortable with any policy that has the potential to make taking a photo with someone criminal.

I completely support working to provide safer environments and tools to help those who are assaulted get the help they need and see that the behavior is addressed, that said a zero tolerance policy is just too open to abuse. It is attempting to solve a very complicated problem with a one size fits all solution. It sounds great on paper but in practice it is a nightmare.

There is evidence of this already in our schools where kids are being suspended for bringing sporks to school and other such nonsense.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-w-whitehead/zero-tolerance-policies-schools_b_819594.html

How many people meet their spouse at work? I met mine there and we are together now for over 20 years. Maybe I was the perfect gentleman our entire courtship and maybe I said things to her that others would have found offensive in our courtship. Maybe I touched her in a way that would have made someone else uncomfortable. I don't know. She seemed to have found my advances not only acceptable but welcome but at any point that could have been interpreted entirely differently under a zero tolerance policy maybe even not from herself but someone who was offended by how we related to each other and reported it.

Bottom line is human relations are not one size fits all and trying to legislate them that way is the road to ruin. It would be nice if it was that easy but it isn't and baring us deciding we no longer want to have sex as a species there are going to be fifty shades of grey in any relationship.

After all of that, my desire is to support the me too movement as I do think it is long overdue but it is a very complicated subject and if our answer is a simplistic zero tolerance policy I think we lose.

Here is an article that looks at the effect Zero tolerance is having on campuses and how it is changing the culture of college and not in the intended ways.

https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2017/09/the-uncomfortable-truth-about-campus-rape-policy/538974/

[EL34x4]

72. Thanks for taking the time to post this well-written reply.

I agreed with all of it.

[LanternWaste]

23. You'll of course, provide the objective source for that specific allegation, yes?

"By calling men predators for making advances toward women, Me Too is..."
You'll of course, provide the objective source for that specific allegation, yes?
Who of note or name is calling any man a predator simply for "making advances?"

"... a plant by GOP / Russian bots or trolls?"
Is that a clever reference to your own post?

[redstatebluegirl]

26. I don't think you realize how much of this is out there.

How many women have suffered in silence for so long they are bursting. It was not something you talked about. If you reported it to a supervisor you lost your job, I know a little about this process from the late 70's.

These women have been silent for so long it is impossible to be silent now that we are actually allowed to talk about it.

[TexasBushwhacker]

67. I fear it will all come back to bite women in the ass though

As it is, well qualified women of child bearing age sometimes don't get hired or promoted because "they're just going to work a while and then quit and have kids". Women with children, especially single moms, miss out because they might have to take time off to care for their children.

Now the fear of an unfounded sexual harassment lawsuit is making some male decision makers think it's just not worth it to risk hiring women. I certainly hope that sexual harassment in the workplace will decline, but I fear the cist to women will be significant.

[christx30]

69. Remember the story that came out a few months ago

where Mike Pence wouldn't have private conversations with women? It has to be in a group setting or in public. He's avoiding he-said-she-said accusations.

[TexasBushwhacker]

70. I think it's more religion based with Pence though

I think he fears temptation.

[zentrum]

18. Imagine if the Dems had dealt

….with this at the time. Clinton would have been asked to step down and we'd have had Al Gore as an incumbent to run against Bush in 2000.

Clinton was still very popular then and Gore would have won as a continuation—in a real incontestable landslide.

No Iraq War—even there still had been 9/11 and that's debatable. But he wouldn't have invaded Iraq. And we'd have had no Great Republican Recession.

[JI7]

20. Going after Franken was fucking stupid

And Clinton was investgated and only thing which they could prove was the consensual affairs.

Franken was not allowed any investgation.

It was always fucking stupid to think one could not go after fucking child molestor moore unless we got rid of Franken.

[Skittles]

38. correct

the people who condoned that can go fuck themselves

[RobinA]

21. Interesting

no one running for office has ever tried to distance themselves from Bill Clinton before. Wait, what? So how did that work out? Oh...

[apnu]

25. Fine by me, can we have Obama instead?

Bill is old news. Let him go. Let's have Obama out there. Please? Pretty please?

[LuvLoogie]

27. My feeling is that the people who promote this line,

rather than earn the support the Clinton's have among women, want inherit that support. Some would try to usurp it.

The Clinton's outshine other politicians, despite their flaws. They are more talented and work harder. We shouldn't let this become a wedge issue in order to accommodate a less talented field of politicians.

We have to show that we consider this a serious issue without turning it into a catch phrase, like dittoes or just say no. We need people pushing legislation and enforcement.

America has a lot of bad Karma to overcome. Currently, Democrats are the ones working toward a more perfect nation. And the Clinton's are some of the best pushing the cause.

[dembotoz]

32. never understood the love for bill...obama was way better

[Demsrule86]

43. As a person who worked on the 2012 Obama campaign, I can tell you early on we were in real trouble.

Bill Clinton campaigned tirelessly...for Pres. Obama ...called himself the explainer in chief and complained in a humorous way the Pres. Obama need to highlight his accomplishments, but by God if that didn't happen President Clinton would. Is is my belief and I am not alone in this opinion...others who worked for the campaign think so also, that President Clinton single handedly put President Obama back in office.

President Clinton refused to start a war by sending troops to the Ukraine, President Clinton cut the deficit and created a prosperous decade. He raised taxes because they needed to be raised. He was a good president. He had consensual sex with a White House intern...an unpaid volunteer. She was an adult. I could not care a less about this. And any who advocate trashing Bill Clinton who with Obama was our only Democratic president to win in the last 30 years help the Republicans. As for the Me Too movement looks like it is being used to take out Democratic politicians and left leaning media mostly. Why who would have thought?

[dembotoz]

45. no

it ain't about monica

its about his welfare reform

no

[Demsrule86]

48. You do remember this was the 90's right?

It was a miracle that Clinton was elected...and it only happened because of Perot.

[dembotoz]

57. I have standards he doesn't meet

Something I won't forget or forgive

[Demsrule86]

60. My standard is this...is he a Democrat...yes. There you go. Having such high standards enables

the election of Republicans as in 2000,2004,2010 and 2016 . In 1992 the choice was Bill Clinton or George Bush ...it should be easy for any Democrat to choose the candidate with the 'D' after his name

[dembotoz]

63. i voted for him, just saying i would not cross the street to shake his hand

[Demsrule86]

65. I actually met Bill Clinton during the 12 campaign ...He is really a great guy. He came into

Youngstown Ohio with Biden as Pres. Obama was in Jersey in the aftermath of Sandy. I met him more than once and Biden too. I like both Biden and Clinton very much. I am telling you the early inside polls of 12 for President Obama were dire. Clinton worked his heart out and became the 'explainer in chief'...he was going to tell the world about the president's accomplishments by God. And it worked. I will always be grateful for this;he saved us from Romney...and it is a shame that some are allowing the pubs to demonize an effective campaigner and someone who was a good president...we only had two in the last 30 years my friend. People should stop allowing the GOP to call the tune in regards to who we like or don't like.

[dembotoz]

71. Happy for u,

[Jedi Guy]

49. I wish we could go back to the 90s, honestly.

I remember the 90s as such a good time. Maybe I'm looking back through rose-colored glasses because I was in my late teens in the late 90s (class of 1998, woo!), but I remember it as a time of optimism and looking forward to the future. I was about to embark on my university journey, and overall the world seemed like a friendly, interesting place. I remember sitting on the balcony of my dorm room (only guy on campus with a balcony, it was the best) and thinking the world was this great huge mystery, but in a good way.

Fast-forward 20 years, and it's just... so, so different. We're waiting every day for another shoe to drop or another shooting to erupt. We're waiting every day for Trump to say or do something so morbidly embarrassing that it's painful. I live in Canada now, and let me tell you, going to work on Thursday morning was excruciating. People from other countries just can't grasp how America can be so dysfunctional.

Bill Clinton did a lot, I think, to set the tone of the 90s. If someone offered to bundle me through a time machine back to 1996, I'd be shoving them out of the way to get through the portal.

[Demsrule86]

50. I agree...they were better. Yeah Clinton did welfare reform with money for school and day care...it

did help lift women out of poverty...but then the GOP trashed the program as they always do. He was a good president... and yes he did things that I didn't agree with...so did Obama for that matter. You have to look at the totality of a presidency. It is fashionable now to pretend that a liberal was somehow denied the presidency because of Clinton...a liberal couldn't get elected in 92...Clinton only won because of Perot and he spared us another eight years of Republicanism...the GOP had held the presidency 12 years by 92.

[Jedi Guy]

52. Yup.

If Perot hadn't run and split the GOP vote, Dole might well have won in '96 and then the end of the decade looks totally different.

I just don't remember this... I can't describe it any better than existential despair. I think back to 20 years ago and how different the atmosphere of the country was back then. I remember people comparing 9/11 to Pearl Harbor, and I think 9/11 was much more traumatic to the nation in a lot of ways.

I dunno. Maybe I'm romanticizing those days as I close in on 40, but it just seems like a better time to me. Sure sign I'm turning into a grouchy old man.

[Demsrule86]

62. Nah not you! I think 911 was such a shock because in some ways we considered ourselves invincible.

In the 40's people had seen Europe attacked and knew they were vulnerable. It was almost expected that something would happen. I remember 911...it was a beautiful September morning. We were living in Georgia. I took the kids to school and got gas. As I paid the attendant said a plane had flown into one of the Twin towers. People in New York always worried about that when flying ( I went to High School in Connecticut). I know many people in New York so I went home and turned the TV on...a few minutes later, I watched as another plane flew into the other tower. I knew then, we were under attack. I couldn't believe it. And during that time when I went out, I remember how quiet it was...hushed. Everywhere was like that. Hubs went to school at Manhattan in New York...after 9-11, there were six pages of obituaries all dated 911. Entire families wiped out. It was a terrible shock.

[Jedi Guy]

68. Yeah, it was just unreal.

I was in Arizona at the time so it was really early for us and I was sleeping. I got a message from my roommate about planes hitting the WTC, and I turned on the news. It felt like I was watching a news clip from an alternate reality. It just didn't click for a while.

I was going to school at the University of Arizona, and for several days afterward the campus was just like you described, hushed. On 10 September, it was business as usual. On 12 September, the world had changed.

I really hope that there isn't another event comparable to 9/11, either in scale or in trauma. But given the goon we have in the White House, well... let's just say I wake up every morning expecting to see headline news of a nuclear detonation somewhere in the world. I think we'll all rest a lot easier once he's gone, however it winds up happening.

[MFM008]

55. Me 2!

I was a lot younger!!!

[aka-chmeee]

58. Looking at posts from the Clinton haters

gives reason to re-imagine the scene subsequent to Jesus' invitation for the first stone to be thrown.

[Demsrule86]

59. That is a great line. Clinton was a fine president. The idea that somehow he thwarted liberalism is

such bullshit. He saved the courts by preventing George Bush's reelection. It was considered so certain that many Democrats chose not to run. We have had two Democratic presidents in the last 30 years...you would think that instead of attacking them, Democrats would celebrate what was good about their presidencies. Democrats have demographics or so we hear, but we will snatch defeat from the jaws of victory if we don't stop expecting perfection from our candidates and elected. To make matters worse everyone's idea of perfection is different so you will never have one universally loved candidate.

[milestogo]

33. That's a shame. He's a great campaigner.

[Cha]

37. We'll see what happens

when the time comes.

[oberliner]

41. The Democratic Party should be running primarily African-American women

The dominant voices in our party should not be white men.

[CTyankee]

47. I think you are right. AA women really got the job done by saving us from Roy Moore.

it''s impressive what they have done.

Use Bill sparingly. Use Michelle more (if that's what she'd like to do, of course). Kamala, too.

[David__77]

56. Whats the principle involved in that?

I think some groups argued for black leadership because the white people, including working people, were bought off by an imperialist system and so black people were uniquely positioned to fight an imperialist system.

[oberliner]

64. I think the respondent above nails it

[Maxheader]

44. Liberals are pussys..

enough said.

[Squinch]

53. Did you say this because you are unable to make your point without a gender slur?

Or do you think it's funny?

Just FYI: it isn't.

PS: Your spelling sucks too.

[Maxheader]

66. yes

[Skittles]

74. pussies are much stronger and tougher than balls

just sayin'

[hamsterjill]

46. Why dont we ask Al Gore about that?

Big Dog is still much revered by many Dems, and the party would do well to give him the respect he deserves. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but was he ever accused or forcing himself on a woman? Monica has never said she was not a willing partner.

[Squinch]

54. Not feeling positive about Democrats tonight don?

[Skittles]

73. bullshit