Not an apt comparison because the Arbuckle case depended upon highly unreliable testimony from one dubious 3rd-party “witness” (the victim in question was dead). In Weinstein’s case, there are now DOZENS of first-hand testimonies, and a digital recording of Harvey admitting one assault. So far Weinstein admits to causing “much pain” though he still pretends all physical contact was consensual. Still, this is far beyond the Arbuckle case, just in the evidence that is already available to the public. There seems to be no possibility that Harvey is “innocent” of sexual harassment in many cases, or of sexual assault (groping) in the case with an audio recording confirming it in his own voice and words.
I think you misunderstood the obvious sarcasm. Arbuckle was innocent, Weinstein not so much.