[tptacek]

Your case in point is not in fact on point. Lewinsky described what happened to her as a "gross abuse of power", just a few months back. Moreover, what happened to Lewinsky served to corroborate the stories of several other women, most of whom have stories about WJC far darker than hers.

[skookumchuck]

Monica describes it as "consensual" and a "consequence of my own poor choices."

http://time.com/5130921/monica-lewinsky-now/

Monica's story doesn't "corroborate" anybody else's story about affairs with Clinton. She's not a witness to any of those others.

[tptacek]

I'm quoting her directly, and you're using a poor definition of "corroborate."

[skookumchuck]

My quotes are direct from her, per the cited article.

> poor definition

What's your definition?

[tptacek]

Your quote doesn't contradict mine. Lewinsky does not think that what happened with her and WJC was OK, and she doesn't think that just because of how the press reacted.

Regarding the word "corroborate": "to strengthen by evidence" would do nicely.

[skookumchuck]

The quotes I presented amply support the idea she did not see it as abuse of her by Clinton, now or then.

> "to strengthen by evidence"

The Lewinsky case offers nothing to support other claims against Clinton. For one thing, Lewinsky never accused Clinton of anything. For another, she has no personal knowledge of the other alleged incidents.

[tptacek]

No. March 2018, Lewinsky:

There are even some people who feel my White House experiences don’t have a place in this [MeToo] movement, as what transpired between Bill Clinton and myself was not sexual assault, although we now recognize that it constituted a gross abuse of power.