Not Buying It: Linda Tripp Skewers Democrats Suddenly Speaking Out Against Bill Clinton

Cortney O'Brien
|
Posted: Nov 24, 2017 8:43 PM
Not Buying It: Linda Tripp Skewers Democrats Suddenly Speaking Out Against Bill Clinton

You may have noticed that Democrats are speaking out against former President Bill Clinton's history of sexual harassment - almost 20 years later. Sen. Kirsten Gillbrand (D-NY), for instance. While Gillibrand is doing some commendable work to address the increasingly hostile work environment on Capitol Hill, one in which sexual assault victims are loath to report misdeeds, she is guilty of a bit of hypocrisy when it comes to her suddenly condemning President Clinton's actions.

Clinton should have "resigned" over his relationship with intern Monica Lewinsky, Gillibrand declared last week. Her remarks were not exactly convincing, considering she's been a longtime ally of the Clintons.

“Things have changed today, and I think under those circumstances there should be a very different reaction,” Gillibrand explained.

By "things have changed," she may mean that accusers are becoming bolder to share their stories. Several alleged victims of sexual harassment have come forward to the press to reveal sexual misconduct from congressmen like Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) and Rep. John Conyers (D-MI).

New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio said much of the same. Clinton would have to resign if he committed the same crime in the Oval Office today, he suggested.

"It's a day late and a dollar short," according to Linda Tripp, a friend of Lewinsky's who unveiled the president's extramarital escapades in the 1990s.

In a conversation with The Weekly Standard, Tripp said she has no patience for those like Gillibrand and De Blasio who were silent during the Clinton scandal are now pretending to be women's rights heroes.

“What information do they have at their fingertips today that they didn’t have 20 years ago?” Tripp wondered. “What information has changed?”

She has her own pretty good idea as to why Democrats are now speaking out.

She’s unconvinced by recent calls in the press for Clinton’s deeds to be reconsidered in a more critical light. “They have nothing to lose, and this is now permissible,” she says. “The fact that the Clintons are dead in the water gives [the media] tacit approval to act like human beings. . . . It’s disingenuous.”

Do you agree with Tripp's assessment? Or is it better late than never?