Ruth Marcus outdoes herself with a ridiculous column about Bill Clinton, but she forgets that Trump actually supported Bill in the Lewinsky affair.
December 30, 2015

Ruth Marcus is one of the most frustrating Villagers there is. A supposed left-leaning columnist for the Washington Post, she always gets much more attention when she's attacking Democrats.

And if those attacks were indeed warranted, a person wouldn't mind, but in typical Beltway fashion, she's the epitome of the "both sides do it" mentality. And she actually sticks up for Donald "the schlong" Trump, agreeing with his threats of going after Bill Clinton's "terrible record of women abuse."

As embarrassing as it was, having consensual sex is not abuse, Ruth.

I saw her on the Andrea Mitchell show yesterday, all radiant because of the Villager approval, but Digby really nailed her over her ridiculous column that makes all the Bill Clinton haters in the MSM (and there are so many) chortle with glee!

Yes, I'm talking about Ruth Marcus and her inane column today in which she says that Bill Clinton's past is fair game --- a column that is being eagerly shared by every villager in Washington who wants to experience the thrilling freedom of talking about blow jobs in the office all day long without anyone getting mad.

Here's the specific quote that really says it all:

Sexism isn't the precise word for his predatory behavior toward women or his inexcusable relationship with a 22-year-old intern. Yet in the larger scheme of things, Bill Clinton's conduct toward women is far worse than any of the multiple offensive things that Trump has said.

Marcus, like all Villagers of her generation, makes the assertion about Clinton's alleged "predatory behavior" based upon disputed facts. The facts that are not in dispute are those in which he confessed to a tawdry but consensual workplace affair while president. That's not anything to be proud of, obviously, but it does not rise to the level of exterminationist, fascist demagoguery. Sorry.

And that's what makes that statement so astonishing. Trump has said that he plans to torture and kill wives, girlfriends and children of people he thinks might be terrorists or "know something." When asked if would bring back waterboarding he said "you bet your ass I will", and "I'd do more than that because it works." ""And even if it doesn't, they deserve it for what they've done to us."

He has also said he plans to round up and deport 12 million or so people, including American children, and has spoken approvingly of what the government did in the 1950s --which is drop them in the middle of the Mexican desert so they cannot come back --- at least until he builds a wall to keep everyone out.

Perhaps Marcus doesn't find these ideas worrying. It appears millions of Americans think they're great so she's not alone. But I'd guess the rest of us find that just a little bit "worse" than Bill Clinton's tawdry past.

And as Digby reminds us, Donald Trump defended Bill Clinton when Republicans in Congress impeached him: Trump Defended Clinton During Lewinsky Scandal Against “Moralist” Hypocrites In Congress

Republican front-runner Donald Trump revived Bill Clinton’s past marital indiscretions this week, attacking Hillary Clinton on Twitter and on TV for playing the “women’s card” and saying her husband’s past affairs would be fair game.

Trump took a different tact in the late ’90s, when the scandal was at its peak, defending then-President Bill Clinton against the “moralists” and hypocrites in Congress and arguing that the scandal wouldn’t have been that bad if only Clinton had chosen to carry on an affair with a supermodel on

Can you help us out?

For 18 years we have been exposing Washington lies and untangling media deceit, but now Facebook is drowning us in an ocean of right wing lies. Please give a one-time or recurring donation, or buy a year's subscription for an ad-free experience. Thank you.


We welcome relevant, respectful comments. Any comments that are sexist or in any other way deemed hateful by our staff will be deleted and constitute grounds for a ban from posting on the site. Please refer to our Terms of Service for information on our posting policy.