I'm not convinced that blackmail is even effective today. You're assuming that politicians have a sense of shame. Maybe they did in the 1950s, but it's clear they don't today.
Smoking marijuana, using cocaine a bit? Admitted in an autobiography, there are even pictures of the former.
There are the usual rumors he's homosexual, although his daughters would indicate he's at "worse" bisexual. After getting reelected, this would result in exactly what???
To paraphrase Edwin Edwards, he'd only be in danger if "caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy".
Bullshit.
A guy who the MSM regularly photographs with a halo, or publishes such pictures as supplied by the White House (there's a bit of a tiff right now about all that). Who's described as "sort of a god" by Newsweek's Evan Thomas. Etc. etc. ad nauseam.
The scandals for which we have firm evidence, and actual bodies (dead boys, as it were, but a number of dead girls in Mexico too) are so numerous that we can be very sure the dominate culture that makes or ignores scandals will continue to do the latter.
As for future prospects, you really believe Obama could have done something that only the NSA knows that will keep him off the speech circuit, unlike Clinton??? He's set for life ... or perhaps only until the Federal government runs out of money, but that's a very different thing. The scandal of "trillion dollar deficits as far as the eye can see" is not in the least hidden.
Your Clinton example again fails to impress, plus moves the goalposts (considerably less damage; heck, Hillary! becoming Secretary of State did more damage to his opportunities and income than anything else, Obama's low cunning WRT to that was much remarked on at the time).
I'm not aware of any damage that did to what Clinton worked on during his presidency (although I could have forgotten), you're going to need to expand on "affected leadership in the House of Representatives" since as I remember the Republicans captured it in 1994, halfway through the 1st term (although, yes, scandals were a part of that, e.g. Waco), and I suppose the razor thin margin of 2000 means that any single thing like that could have flipped it to Gore. Joining a crime family does have its downsides....
Now a case can be made that all this will harm Hillary! ... but that's complicated by the palpable desire of a lot of Democrats to avoid having her on the ticket, e.g. she doesn't have a fraction of Bill's political skills.
But I think all this still falls substantially short of the impact you claim is possible, I still maintain he's in Edwin Edwards territory.
Many important political figures have been involved with adulterated sex and illegal drugs. Mass surveillance can uncover these scandals and use them as leverage to coerce and blackmail. The FBI put MLK under mass surveillance, uncovered evidence of his sexual deviancy, and sent him threatening letters in an attempt to suppress his civil rights activism.
BTW, what is "adulterated sex"??? Adultery? Only seems to matter in the military, where it's still a crime and grounds for discharge, at least for officers. And for many Republican politicians, but certainly not all, Mark Sanford being only the latest infamous example I can recall.
Try again.
That has nothing to do with my example. I don't believe you are really that naive.
adul·ter·at·ed: to corrupt, debase, or make impure by the addition of a foreign or inferior substance or element;
You could have easily looked this up. You are being purposefully obtuse and it's not fooling anyone. I'll call a spade a spade.
I could also add "look at the Abscam aftermath" if you think these potential targets are toothless.
And of course I know what adulterated means, I've just never seen that formulation with sex; Google comes up with 4,600 entries, perhaps I'm just behind the times. However I'd use "scandalous", which is in common use, and alliterates.