Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Bill Clinton Scandal - SANITY CHECK -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (6205)	9/29/1998 9:43:00 PM
From: jlallen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 67261

And for the second time, I'm telling you I take and have taken no position on the issue with respect to the harrassment issue relative to Lewinsky. I'm also telling you I believe all her peers in the WH could probably fashion a complaint based upon the disparate treatment Lewinsky received. Did you miss this response before? JLA

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (6205)	9/30/1998 9:19:00 AM
From: j_b	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 67261

<<Are you, or are you not, saying that Clintons affair with Monica was sexual harassment because it was between someone and his subordinate>> FWIW - Since no one has claimed they were a victim of harassment, I don't see how Clinton's affair with Monica could be, by itself harassment. However, if another female WH employee were to claim that she did not receive a job, or that she was demoted due to her unwillingness to "perform" for Bill, I think the Monica mess would be used as evidence that Clinton maintained a hostile environment toward women. The affair would not be harassment, but rewarding people based on their willingness to "perform" would be. The issue of relationships between a supervisor and a subordinate will always look like abuse of power when you look at it after the fact. If Monica had come forward and claimed harassment, Clinton would have had a very difficult time proving otherwise. Bottom line - I don't think it was harassment, but I do think it was reckless and ill-advised.