Tuesday, December 12, 2017

I'm OK with investigating Trump

It happened quicker than I thought, but I'm fine with looking into things.  As I say, when Bill Clinton was accused of an infinite number of wrongdoings, I said they needed looked into.  I was taken by the press's obvious reluctance to cover these scandals, when I remembered the zeal with which the press threw itself into covering charges of wrongdoing against Bush or Reagan before him.  Despite that, I was willing to wait and see if wrong had been done. 

Of course when it was shown that Clinton, to cover his tail, lied under oath about having an affair in the Oval Office with an intern, all while under suspicion of having sexually intimidated/assaulted other women, I felt that was enough for him to step down.  It was the Left's sudden insistence that morals, character, values, truth and perjury no longer matter, that sex is a moral void of no importance, and it's fine to assassinate the character of women who say they were assaulted, that caught me off guard.

Today, some have come out, well after the fact, and said Clinton should have stepped down.  Big whoop.  The Left needs to come clean about its defense of immorality, sexual assault, no values, no character, no ethics, or anything other than political victory at all costs.  When it has done so with weeping and trembling, covered in ashes and sackcloth, then I'll care what they have to say about current issues.

Nonetheless, I only ask for due process.  The shift to women accusing Trump likely has to do with the fact that the Russian probe is yielding little that appears able to be linked to Trump.  You never know.  There still could be something.  But after a year of the most ruthless scrutiny I've ever seen against a sitting president, we know more about how the FBI botched things, or wrongdoing on the side of the Democrats, than anything linked to Trump stealing the election.

Why did they not lead with the women in the first place?  My son asked that.  Why not start there last November?  That seemed far more credible given Trump's own statements about women over the years.  My guess is because the Russian angle would explain the loss.  If they could prove that Trump, with the help of Russia, "stole" the election, then it would help salve the humiliation that the Western Left experienced after one of the most embarrassing defeats in political history.  Having women say he assaulted them leaves the election as is, and just says that the most propped up candidate in modern memory lost to a man guilty of assaulting women.  But it's better than nothing.  It might still get him forced out of office, which is the goal.

But we'll see.  I still say innocent until proven guilty.  As I've said before, women have every right to be heard, but no right to be believed.  It's not like this is an arena devoid of ulterior motives or partisan sensitivities.  But that also doesn't mean we should assume people making accusations are influenced by partisan designs.  Best to wait and see.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Let me know your thoughts