“Of All the Gin Joints….”

You know what the problem with this universe is?

It has too much synchronicity in it.

First, had any other Republican won the nomination, he or she would probably have stayed away from Bill Clinton’s sexual misconduct.  Instead, we have Donald Trump, who is willing to bring up every scandal connected with the Clintons, especially the ones involving sex.

Second, Bill Cosby has just been told he will have to stand trial for raping a woman by drugging her first, which naturally reminds people about the sexual assault charges made against Bill Clinton, as underscored by Steve Kornacki.

Third, we now have this scandal concerning Ken Starr for his failure to handle sexual assault cases properly as president of Baylor University.  Ken Starr, of course, was the man that investigated Bill Clinton during his presidency.

The occurrence of these three things all about the same time is too significant to be just a coincidence.  It must be synchronicity, that mysterious, meaningful connection between causally unrelated events.

Now, we also have the State Department’s report on Hillary’s improper use of emails, but that doesn’t count, not because sex is not involved, but because there is a causal process that led to this report’s being released at this time.  It’s a problem for Hillary, of course, but we cannot call it a coincidence.

Nor does the documentary Weiner count either.  It will remind us of how Anthony Weiner took pictures of his genitals and sent them to adoring women, which reminds us of his wife, Huma Abedin, the assistant to Hillary Clinton, but a causal analysis can explain why this documentary is being released at this time, so there is no need to invoke synchronicity.

Some might argue that Donald Trump’s attempt to smear Hillary with the scandals of the past will not work, especially the one about Vince Foster.  In fact, it might be argued that by bringing up Vince Foster, the one scandal most people, left and right, are willing to dismiss as a crazy conspiracy theory, Trump is actually undermining the other charges he has leveled against her and her husband.  And others might argue that the scandal concerning Ken Starr undermines his credibility as an investigator of various Clinton scandals.

But just as synchronicity is coincidence between meaningful events not causally connected, so too is the association of ideas a meaningful connection between thoughts not connected by logic.  Logic and causation don’t matter.  True, false, justified, unjustified, fair or foul—it doesn’t matter.  It all adds up to that queasy feeling we get when we think about the Clintons being back in the White House.

I am not given to spooky theories like those involving Carl Jung’s concept of synchronicity or to similar notions of luck or fate, but there are times when it seems that events not causally connected come together in a way that mere coincidence could not possibly support.  And right now, Hillary must be wondering how Donald Trump, Bill Cosby, and Ken Starr have all managed to come together by mere chance, just months away from the presidential election.

On Donald Trump’s Threat

From what I have seen on talk shows and have read online, it seems that most people think that Donald Trump is threatening to bring up Bill Clinton’s adulterous affairs if Hillary attacks Trump for sexism.  A few have noted that Trump’s divorces can be thrown back in his face if he makes such an attack.

But let us not forget the kind of man Trump is.  He will not be content to talk about Monica Lewinsky, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, and the related charges of sexual harassment, perjury, and obstruction of justice, though he will probably mention these women and those charges as a way of warming up his crowd.  If Trump gets the Republican nomination and Hillary accuses him of sexism, he will go for the jugular.  He will bring up the rape of Juanita Broaddrick.  And as he recounts what Broaddrick alleged, it will lose nothing in the telling.  He will go into graphic detail about the way Bill Clinton allegedly held her down, biting her lip to keep her from trying to get away, and then telling her to put some ice on her swollen lip as he walked out the door.

Many have argued that Hillary should not be held accountable for the sins of her husband.  But the association of ideas is a more primitive form of thinking than reason and nice moral distinctions, which is why Caesar’s wife must be beyond reproach.

However, there is a deeper problem that Hillary must confront that cannot be dismissed simply by saying that it is unfair to hold a wife responsible for her husband’s behavior.  At some point during the campaign, Hillary will be asked this question:  “Do you believe Juanita Broaddrick?”  It is unthinkable that she will say, “Yes, she is telling the truth.  Bill raped that woman.”  Therefore, she must say that Broaddrick is lying.  This will put her in an untenable position.

One aspect of the war on women with which Republicans are often charged is their tendency not to take women seriously when they claim to have been raped.  We Democrats often argue that women are afraid to come forward when they are raped, fearing they will be vilified, accused of being a slut, of wanting attention, of lying.  We further argue that we must encourage women to come forward when they have been sexually assaulted and not let the men who violated them go unpunished.  And I am sure that Hillary would agree with all that, in general.

But what will she say when asked, “Why don’t you believe Juanita Broaddrick?”  And I don’t mean, what will she say if asked that question on Meet the Press?  I mean, what will she say when Donald Trump asks her that question during a presidential debate?

Hillary should back down from Trump’s threat and refrain from accusing him of sexism, however deserved the charge may be.  He is too dangerous.