Everyone has seen and most have weighed in on the Trump campaign's knee-jerk false-equivalency bullshit. Any time Trump is accused of something, and a Trump surrogate is asked to comment, he/she IMMEDIATELY pivots to a false or semi-true story about Clinton as a means of evening the score, or denying that Trump is any worse because of assertion of a similar Clinton action, etc., etc.
The Trump grope story even takes that tack, as we've also seen, by invoking Bill Clinton's past, even though he's not running… saying "Well, Hillary enabled" or "Hillary viciously attacked Bill's alleged victims," or some such other bullshit… to the point of Trump's bringing four former alleged victims from Bill's past into the studio for the 2nd debate last Sunday night. (One story reported Steve Bannon was off stage grinning hideously. He’s such a shit.)
What's wrong with this picture? (Not that I believe this will change anything…)
(Forget for a moment it's Hillary, not Bill, running against Trump, and allow the false-equivalency to stand. I know it's a stretch, but bear with me for just a second.)
The Trump campaign offers Bill's actions as some kind equivalency justification for Trump's actions, making everything OK, or at least "Trump's no worse than Bill." "Well, Bill did it."
BILL CLINTON WAS IMPEACHED!!!
Hello?
Bill got impeached! So Trump's campaign sells Trump's actions as being beyond reproach by comparing them to Bill's similar actions that resulted in his impeachment! In what universe is that a route forward?
Hello?
Trump’s actions are so odious that to “justify” them, his campaign has to advocate illegal, impeachable actions.
Or, as the song goes, “Limbo lower, now… Limbo lower, now… How low... can you go?”