I think we ought to study the facts before jumping to a conclusion.
This is what Politico says:
“The sources — which include the recollections of close associates and other documentation — describe episodes that left the women upset and offended. These incidents include conversations allegedly filled with innuendo or personal questions of a sexually suggestive nature, taking place at hotels during conferences, at other officially sanctioned restaurant association events and at the association’s offices. There were also descriptions of physical gestures that were not overtly sexual but that made women who experienced or witnessed them uncomfortable and that they regarded as improper in a professional relationship.”
Really? How the hell do you defend yourself against stuff like that. They’re basically saying “oh we can’t show or prove anything but it was harassment”