Legal consenting adults do have a constitutional right to engage in consensual relationships, regardless of laws and moral codes otherwise. And history amply shows they will do so regardless.

Case in point - Clinton/Lewinski. That was a textbook case of sexual harassment according to Federal regulations, except that Lewinski maintains to this day that the only abuse she suffered was from the media.

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.

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.

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

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

> poor definition

What's your definition?

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.

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.

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.

> No

The quotes I provided a link for. They happened.

> not sexual assault

And she repeats that it was consensual.

I didn't say it was sexual assault either. Sexual assault and sexual harassment are two different things. On this thread, we are talking about the latter.

That's nice, but completely irrelevant.

Oh, it's completely relevant to the claim that there cannot be consensual affairs between people at different power levels, and it doesn't get much more different than literally the most powerful man in the world and an intern.