Losing to the Clintons on a Sex Scandal

Losing to the Clintons on a Sex Scandal

American Spectator - Tuesday October 11, 2016

by Melissa Clouthier

The next shoe hasn’t dropped yet, but if one has learned anything about “The Donald” one knows that that drop is coming. The man is a veritable Imelda Marcos in that regard. We await the emergence of unwelcome recipients of the “Donald”, a sexual term I am hereby copywriting and submitting to the urban dictionary of sexual terms. (Lord, would that the man had been named “Ronald” instead.) 

How does one pull off a “Donald” you ask. Tic Tacs. Check. Uninvited and unannounced laryngeal intrusion with one’s tongue. Check. And of course the tricky coup de grâce, the genitalia grab.

Congratulations, you just pulled off a “Donald”. (Hoi Polloi warning: do not try this at home, the “Donald” is only recommended for “celebrities.”)

Celebrity. I recall the late, great (or at least “becoming great” as he was trending right before cancer took him) Christopher Hitchens’ observation about our “celebrity besotted” culture. Has this helped create Trump? Certainly, but one has only to think back to the oh, so hip Governor Clinton blowing sax on the Arsenio Hall Show, cool cat sunglasses and all, to understand that the pox of “celebrity” has infected our politics for some time.  

And that indeed is the bitter irony. The Republican Party, you know the squares, the nerds, the uptight set; their nominee is going to lose to the Clinton crime family on the basis of a sexual impropriety (albeit only construed to this point.)

And in an exposition of hilarious hypocrisy, those on the left that have mocked, with smirking disdain, our Jeremiads about the decades long predatory sexual behavior of Bill and the scorched earth follow-up re-victimization by Hillary of Bill targets (and I used the term targets correctly) now claim the moral high ground to bandy about phrases like “unfit” for the presidency, targeting Donald Trump.

Well, how the hell did that happen? It happened, of course, because of a compliant, coordinated, and corrupt media; one that is persistently blind to the behavior of Democrats, particularly the Clintons and is willing to hold others to different standards.

Consider Juanita Broderick’s account of the sexual assault by then Attorney General of Arkansas Bill Clinton. What stands out  is not the account of the actual assault. Though that is unbelievably ghastly. What stands out is her description of his icy behavior, of him smirking “you should put a some ice on that (swollen lip that I caused when I raped you)” and, especially, his slipping on his sunglasses and sauntering out of the room, not a care in the world. His post-rape behavior is especially diabolical. It’s sociopathic. I wonder, are these the same look how cool I amglasses that he used to woo the electorate with his hip appearance on Arsenio Hall?

The left will counter, of course, with the question, how can you stand by Trump’s behavior when you spent decades demonizing Bill’s? That is a superb demonstration of deflection, as if the “Donald’s” boorish behavior exculpates the history of the Clinton’s (both Clintons) evil.

At this point, Trump stands exposed as a creepy jerk. Perhaps he should have put his asinine comments to rhyme and then he could add a rap Grammy to his professional accomplishments. Then he could be a role model to kids like Democrat darlings Beyoncé and Jay Zee.

For Donald Trump to stand accused of cultural misconduct by the very same people, in the Democrat Party and entertainment community, who have defiled and degraded our culture, particularly in regards to women, is hilariously hypocritical and ironic at the same time.

It makes it possible, even for me, who has long viewed “The Donald’s” behavior and decorum as grotesque, to be sympathetic for the man.

Read More Here