General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsKPN
(15,587 posts)Are we trying too hard to look reasonable, circumspect, and mindful of long-term consequences? Of course we are in light of a GQP party that has been at war with Dems covertly for decades and quite openly the last 12 or 13 years. WTF?
Lunabell
(5,920 posts)If you're referring to Clinton, it wasn't exactly "consensual". He was her boss. Yes, she was an adult, but he shouldn't have used his position of power for a sexual relationship.
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(107,112 posts)She initiated it not him. Should he have refused? Yes. But it was still consensual.
Don't infantilize women.
Lunabell
(5,920 posts)It was a workplace situation. Candy coat it if you will, but he was in a position of power and he abused it.
Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin
(107,112 posts)I said he shouldn't have. Can you read?
She bragged to a friend before beginning her internship she wanted to have sex with him. She knew what she was doing.
The point I was making it was not an impeachable offense.
Lunabell
(5,920 posts)I never even came close to saying that. If he were a ceo of a corporation, HR would have become involved, regardless of her consent to the relationship. The ceo probably would get a slap on the wrist, but a sexual harassment case would have paid out for it. Clinton was wrong.
On edit: no need to throw shade at me. Yes, I can read. That was not neccessary and you really owe me an apology.
StevieM
(10,499 posts)Ken Starr made it clear that when someone would not commit perjury in the Whitewater investigation, and falsely implicate the Clintons, he would find a reason to claim that they committed perjury and obstructed justice and indict them.
SoonerPride
(12,286 posts)That is painfully obvious.