I think the RNC is just showing that if Clinton had an R behind his name he would have been just fine.
That doesn't even make sense. Except to just weave the accusation out of thin air.
Trump's accusers were certainly not just from decades ago btw.
All the ones I heard were from the late 1960's. Such as one lady who said Trump groped her on a passenger flight. And by the wildest of coincidences, her and 8 or 9 other women randomly decided to collectively accuse him right after the Access Media bus tape (ALSO from 12 years ago) right before the election. Trump's legal team blasted lots of holes in the inconsistencies of their stories as well.
Republicans accused generally resign quickly, and are roundly condemned and pressured to do so by their peers. And I've always been one to join that call. (Rep Mark Foley, for example. Which while true, was also orchestrated a year in advance as an October surprise blanket attack on the entire GOP.)
But as in the case of the Duke Lacrosse team alleged rape, and the 2015 Rolling Stone manufactured fake expose, there >>>ARE<<< cases where the allegations are not true. Timing accusations in the final weeks before an election, of people who have been in the public spotlight for more than 4 decades, seems to ring false, and to be rather maliciously timed.
