O.K., Prince Andrew's out of public life. Why isn't Bill Clinton?

[Geee]

American Thinker

The press is making a big deal out of Britain's Prince Andrew now being ousted from public life, based on his pretty gamy associations with pedophile Jeffrey Epstein. He had his hand draped around the bare midriff of a 17-year old, in one photo. He kibbitzed with Epstein after his Florida slap-on-the-wrist conviction and there's a photograph there, too. Flight records show he rode the Lolita Express. And incredibly, he claims he never knew anything untoward was going on.

A little rich there, old chap. Or very, very, naive...

U.K.'s Daily Mail has this comprehensive report, reasonably explored from a U.K. perspective. But the U.S. press has been all over it, too. Here's CNN, Washington Post, Vanity Fair, CNBC, Time, Fox News... 

It's good clean fun for the American press, given that the British royal family is unimportant here, and relies on a pristine public image to maintain U.K. public support which is pretty incompatible with jetting around with Epstein, but it also raises questions about why that other famous friend of Epstein's, Bill Clinton, who rode the Lolita Express again, and again, and again, isn't getting the same pariah treatment. Fact is, the press hasn't brought the disgusting thing up at all, even as Clinton's wife (and daughter) gallivant around the country on a thinly disguised campaign for Hillary as president.