Again, catch up gramps:jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 4:11 pmHow did she abuse her power sparky? Exactly what did she do? What you have is YOU assume she abused her power. The fact that a relationship exists/existed does not prove abuse of power. Has the "girl friend" complained? Has she even spoken? Maybe Hill did abuse her power, but you have ZERO PROOF.kramerica.inc wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 3:29 pmDoing her job well. Except for the whole abuse of power thing, right?jhu72 wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:51 pmkramerica.inc wrote: ↑Fri Nov 01, 2019 1:38 pm I got it, but was referring to others without the sarcasm font on.
Hill did resign. But no need to move on. This thread is about progressive ideology. And Katie was one of the "young risers" shaping democratic, progressive ideology.
I guess she showed that creepy sexually abusive relationships outside of marriages aren't just for men like Clinton anymore. How very woke and progressive of her!
"Shaping democratic progressive ideology" -- hardly. More like she was doing her job well as a freshman congresswomen, regardless of her sexual proclivities.
There are multiple examples of this exact same thing over at the Me Too, thread.
Sexual proclivities do not include abuse of power. Who knows, was she a "Weinstein in training?"
Was that wrong? Should I not have done that? If I knew that that sort of thing was frowned upon...
“I know that even a consensual relationship with a subordinate is inappropriate, but I still allowed it to happen despite my better judgment,” Hill wrote in a letter to her constituents.