Media doesn’t want to tarnish the myth.
As long as there are journalists in the U.S., there will be apologists for Bill Clinton.
With the exception of the Obamas and the Kennedys, few in public life have enjoyed as much protection and support from the U.S. press as America’s 42nd president.
Yes, the Clintons have endured unflattering coverage, but usually only when it’s unavoidable. It takes an FBI investigation or articles of impeachment to attract national media scrutiny. And even then, many in the American press are perfectly content to dismiss, downplay, or explain away whatever legitimately awful or terrible thing the Clintons are caught saying or doing.
Take, for example, CNBC’s John Harwood’s generous spin of former President Bill Clinton’s disastrous appearance on Monday’s “Today” show.
“Through the lens of ‘Me Too’ now, do you think differently or feel more responsibility?” asked USA Today’s Craig Melvin, referring to former White House intern Monica Lewinsky’s claim she suffered PTSD following the intern sex scandal.
Clinton responded in an interview that aired Monday, “No, I felt terrible then. And I came to grips with it.”
“Did you apologize?” Melvin continued.
“Yes, and nobody believes that I got out of that for free. I left the White House 16 million dollars in debt,” Clinton responded. He had to clarify later that no, he never actually did apologize personally to Lewinsky.
He continued, taking aim at the press, saying, “But you typically have ignored gaping facts in describing this and I bet you don’t even know them. This was litigated 20 years ago. Two-thirds of the American people sided with me, they were not insensitive to that.”
Asked whether he thinks he owes Lewinsky an apology, Clinton said, “No, I do not. I have never talked to her. But I did say publicly on more than one occasion that I was sorry. That’s very different. The apology was public.”
This is amazing. Only Clinton could play the victim in case where he preyed on, abused, and scapegoated someone else.