therealjm12 said:
I think most Americans don't care about his sexual habits as long as they are legal.
I agree but this is the kicker, were they legal? Was it sexual harassment? If so I can see how a woman could be pushed into a situation where she'd try something like this. Now that doesn't mean she's innocent. Oh no she'd guilty as hell, but so it is Letterman IF it wasn't consenting.
Unfortunately this woman's behaviour is awful for others. Supposes Letterman used his position to get sex out of others. Now he comes across as a total victim and anyone else he may have harassed are screwed.
Now I'm not saying it was sexual harassment, I don't know, but it needs to be looked into.
You can't just say "I used my position to get sex from my staff, but it's fine if that worker is a scum who proved it by blackmailing me."
If it was sexual harassment, he should be fired. In every company I worked for Quid Pro Quo sexual harassment means immediate dismissal.
Now if it was a consenting relationship, well fine that's between the parties involved.
It always amazes me a man of Letterman's fame, means and money can't find someone outside of the workplace have sex or a side relationship with.
So I'm not saying Letterman is at fault, but I don't think he should be cleared till we know if this was an abuse of his position