Did she not? She says it “constituted a gross abuse of power”.

“Now, at 44, I’m beginning (just beginning) to consider the implications of the power differentials that were so vast between a president and a White House intern,” Lewinsky said.

“I’m beginning to entertain the notion that in such a circumstance the idea of consent might well be rendered moot. (Although power imbalances — and the ability to abuse them — do exist even when the sex has been consensual,)” she wrote.

“But it’s … very, very complicated. The dictionary definition of “consent”? ‘To give permission for something to happen.’ And yet what did the ‘something’ mean in this instance, given the power dynamics, his position, and my age? Was the “something” just about crossing a line of sexual (and later emotional) intimacy? (An intimacy I wanted — with a 22-year-old’s limited understanding of the consequences.)

“He was my boss. He was the most powerful man on the planet. He was 27 years my senior, with enough life experience to know better. He was, at the time, at the pinnacle of his career, while I was in my first job out of college,” she said.

https://apnews.com/article/ab9adc492bf54cd4abcf8d162ed099b3

Do you think maybe the problem is your entire argument hinges on a 2014 article and as she grew older she changed her view on the matter?

“Sure my boss took advantage of me, but I will always remain firm on this point: it was a consensual relationship,” she wrote for Vanity Fair in 2014.

Four years later, she wrote for the same magazine changing her position on whether that consent was relevant given the power imbalance between an intern and a president.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/monica-lewinsky-calls-bill-clinton-190025758.html