I suppose you could make the same argument about Thomas Jefferson who’s crimes involved at least one under aged girls whom he “owned”, but you surely won’t.
I won’t? :-)
First off, there’s a rather large difference between Mr. Clinton and Mr. Jefferson, that being that they’re separated by a couple of hundred years. You can’t go back in time and suddenly insist that they live up to the social consciousness of the current era. That’s just nonsensical. So, I can continue to respect Mr. Jefferson at the same time I wish he made different choices.
(For the record, that’s the same metric I would use for Mr. Clinton. I can respect certain political decisions and outcomes he made, while wishing he made different choices. BUT, in Mr. Clinton’s case, his bad choices were more egregious because of the hypocrisy involved.)
But more broadly, you’re right that Mr. Jefferson, because of the extenuating factors involving Ms. Hemings, missed a huge opportunity to advance some premises of equality, in that Ms. Hemings herself was of mixed race, and obviously the children he sired with here were only a quarter black. And, since he provided for the future of those children OUTSIDE the slave states, it indicates that he had abolitionist thoughts that, considering his position of repect, had he voiced them, might have moved emancipation up several decades.