SAN JOSE, California –
The most infamous blue dress in the world, associated with the most sensational Presidential scandal in recent history, has reared its ugly head once again.
The garment, stained with the DNA provided by former President Bill Clinton, was originally purchased by Lewinsky from the GAP clothing store, and showed up on the online auction site BetMe.net last week. An online bidder known only as ‘William J. Slickton’ of New York, entered the winning bid of $288,050.10.
“Slick Willie” was the nickname given to Bill Clinton, a reference to his deal-making skills while Governor of Arkansas from 1979 to 1981 and from 1983 to 1992.
The question of the day is, could William J. Slickton actually be William Jefferson Clinton, 42nd President of the United States? Although BetMe.net does not disclose personal member details beyond those provided by the user in his or her profile, what is known so far offers clues as to the identity of the winning bidder:
William Slickton has been a member of the BetMe community for 3 years. Previous winning bids have been for golf equipment, a vintage saxophone case, several crossword puzzle books, and an antique pre-Civil War hand-drawn map of Arkansas. The items link to hobbies, activities, and interests enjoyed by the former President.
Professional Hacker ‘LindaTrippster@safecrack.net’ obtained the unique IP address of William J. Slickton’s computer in order to determine the location where the auction transaction took place. The locale was Chappaqua, New York, site of the Clinton’s home.
Will this disclosure hurt former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s chances to become the 2016 Democratic Presidential Nominee? Empire News asked presidential historian Hedda Parsons to offer insights. “There’s always a risk of damage when bringing up a scandal,” said Parsons. “The question remains, would the former President actually be so bold as to use an online identity so closely related to his own nickname? And why would he want a dress with his DNA all over it in the first place? Everyone knows that in Washington you can’t wear the same outfit twice – let alone re-wear a dress that someone has … well, we all know the mess that was made all over that dress.”
Questions about Clinton’s judgment are indeed valid. Many feel that the choice to initiate a liaison with a 22-year-old intern in the Oval Office demonstrated a severe lapse in judgment, and it lead to Clinton’s impeachment in 1998.
As to who put the dress up for auction in the first place, Monica Lewinsky remains tight-lipped. In a statement provided by her attorney, Ms. Lewinksy said “The dress was used as evidence during Prosecutor Ken Starr’s trial and was no longer in my possession. The events in question occurred during a very dark period in my life. Since then, I have washed my hands of the whole affair and have continued to move forward.”
No comment has been issued by the former President.