Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Harvey Weinstein and The Clinton Protection Racket
www.anncoulter.com ^ | 5/30/2018 | Ann Coulter

Posted on 05/30/2018 2:37:23 PM PDT by scottinoc

Harvey Weinstein's recent perp walk reminds me of another great thing about Trump winning the election: Hillary Clinton isn't president.

A New York Times article on Weinstein's court appearance noted how the "ground shifted" last year, finally ending the "code of silence" surrounding powerful men. Why "last year," if this has been going on for decades?

The article explained that Weinstein's power was enormous, his connections extensive and his willingness to play dirty without bounds. Did Harvey lose his money and connections "last year"?

Nope. But "last year" was the first year of Trump's presidency, or as I like to think of it, the first year of Hillary not being president. Ever.

(Excerpt) Read more at anncoulter.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: coulter; hillary; weinstein

1 posted on 05/30/2018 2:37:23 PM PDT by scottinoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: scottinoc

Netflix is still showing Harvey’s flims.


2 posted on 05/30/2018 2:38:30 PM PDT by petitfour (APPEAL TO HEAVEN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: scottinoc
But as absolutely intellectually convinced as I am of the Clintons' demise, I'd feel a lot better if someone would keep a wooden stake handy

PDJT: The human wooden stake. Thank you for that, Mr President, even if you didn't do anything else (and he's obviously doing plenty, I'm just afraid he's going to work himself out of a job by 2020).

3 posted on 05/30/2018 2:40:18 PM PDT by scottinoc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: petitfour
Netflix is still showing Harvey’s flims.

THANK GOD Viacom has memory-holed all of Roseanne Barr's old television shows...

4 posted on 05/30/2018 2:49:37 PM PDT by kiryandil (Never pick a fight with an angry beehive)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: scottinoc

It’s hard to avoid the impression that a big part of the reason Weinstein was finally exposed is that the Clinton machine is dead. Trump killed it. Would anyone have called out Weinstein if his good friend Hillary Clinton were “Madame President”? I doubt it. The Clinton protection racket would have gone on and on and on.

Yup. Trump is like setting off a 50 megaton nuke on the establishment. The fallout is just beginning.


5 posted on 05/30/2018 3:07:28 PM PDT by Flick Lives (Suddenly someone'll say, like, plate, or shrimp, or plate o' shrimp out of the blue, no explanation.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kiryandil

As Limbaugh said on the air, you constantly hear the suffix “ardent Trump supporter” tagged onto every Roseanne story, but you never hear- “And noted Hillary/Obama bundler” tied to stories of Weinstein’s depravities


6 posted on 05/30/2018 3:28:44 PM PDT by mikrofon (+Memorial Day+ BUMP)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Flick Lives

Trump is the Tsar Bomba of politics.


7 posted on 05/30/2018 3:30:19 PM PDT by Catmom (We're all gonna get the punishment only some of us deserve.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: scottinoc

Ann is correct that Hillary’s defeat unleashed #MeToo because there was no longer any reason to protect Bill’s legacy. But she fails to mention the bigger reason why #metoo broke.

It was to attack Trump and hope that he would be engulfed in a #metoo avalanche. Several leftist sex offenders had to be sacrificed in the effort. Weinstein was the most indefensible so he was first.


8 posted on 05/30/2018 3:52:16 PM PDT by KyCats
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: scottinoc
But as absolutely intellectually convinced as I am of the Clintons' demise, I'd feel a lot better if someone would keep a wooden stake handy.

Many criminals never stop unless incarcerated or eliminated.

Father time is UNDEFEATED YOU CRIMINAL SCUMBAGS.

ESAD

Operation "Time Waits For No One"

9 posted on 05/30/2018 4:02:58 PM PDT by PGalt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: scottinoc
But as absolutely intellectually convinced as I am of the Clintons' demise, I'd feel a lot better if someone would keep a wooden stake handy.

Yeah, me too.

10 posted on 05/30/2018 4:05:45 PM PDT by Rummyfan (In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man. Support Israel.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: petitfour
I read, after Weinstein "left" the company, distributors were clipping the Weinstein logo from the films.

Don't know about the Miramax logo.

11 posted on 05/30/2018 4:23:33 PM PDT by Calvin Locke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All

Linda Tripp Laughs Last at the Clintons
Townhall.com ^ | January 19, 2018 | Suzanne Fields / Posted by Kaslin

What fools (and hypocrites) these mortals be. Two decades have passed since Linda Tripp blew the whistle on sexual hijinks in high places with her tapes of Monica Lewinsky, the young intern who described to her confidant and colleague the passionate ordeal of a sexual liaison with the president of the United States. She blew the whistle, she says, to protect her friend. Twenty years on, she’s still a villain for many women who remember those times.
But history’s on her side.

Tripp withdrew to a private life after the scandal, and now she comes in from the cold to reappear on a changed landscape littered with the likes of Harvey Weinstein, Matt Lauer, Kevin Spacey and Charlie Rose. She suggests that former President Bill Clinton should take his place on the pedestal of predators with current celebrities of stage, screen and politics.

“When the president gets a pass for something that egregious,” she tells DailyMailTV, “he essentially gave tacit permission to all those who followed to do the same.”
In the revival of memories of those dark days of revelation, Tripp emerges as the heroine before her time was ripe, who went out on a fragile limb to protect a friend who would hate her for what she was doing. “He was the leader of the free world and she was an intern, a kid, who happened to be extremely emotionally young for her age,” she says of Lewinsky. “This was part of his pattern where women were a means to an end. It was almost a servicing agreement, but she romanticized it.”

Although Bubba didn’t lose his job, as many of the current batch of exposed alleged offenders did, one U.S. senator, Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand of New York, now says he should have. She thinks he should have resigned in shame. Now armed with fresh attitudes about sexual harassment, other women are reassessing their earlier conclusions. The reassessment should put Tripp on the side of the good angels, but she told The Weekly Standard, “It’s a day late, and it’s a dollar short.” She wants to know what information the reassesors have today they didn’t have 20 years ago.

The reckoning isn’t about black and white, left and right, but about right and wrong. Anyone familiar with the record remembers hearing how Lewinsky naively asked Bubba, “is this just about sex ... or do you have some interest in trying to get to know me as a person?” The plaintive cry of the child emerges.

But she had no appeal to sympathy when The Drudge Report broke the story in January 1998 with the power of a rotten egg, or when Hillary Clinton went on the attack on NBC’s “Today” show in January 1998. The accusations against her husband, Clinton said, were merely the work of a “vast right-wing media conspiracy.” The abuse of a young woman by a male boss twice her age was reduced to partisan politics.

The even vaster left-wing media conspiracy joined the White House and closed ranks with the first lady and the president, as they treated Lewinsky and Bubba’s “bimbo eruptions” like clay ducks in a shooting gallery. Maureen Dowd of The New York Times called the White House approach “a slander strategy.” But she observed, “at least some of the veteran Clinton shooters feel a little nauseated this time around, after smearing so many women who were probably telling the truth as trashy bimbos.”

One reader says writing about the Clinton scandals is “so yesterday.” Why bother with a rehash of the Clintons in the White House? But news of the Clintons is never yesterday’s news. Their story demonstrates over and over how power and the press create villains and heroines with exaggeration, distortion and truth rearrangement.

When Lewinsky decided to go public with her remembrance of things past four years ago in Vanity Fair, she learned how personal humiliation fits with our culture of humiliation, where gossip and half-truths take root on the internet, where nothing ever dies and instead festers on social media, giving everyone an opportunity to revel in schadenfreude.

With a 24/7 news cycle hungry for something, anything, to feed the hysteria for tales of the lowest human experience, the world in which Monica Lewinsky lived 20 years ago is revealed as the same world we live in today, only more so. The power centers are occupied by a different cast of characters, but everything is familiar. Amazon Studios has acquired the rights for a movie to be called “Linda and Monica,” to explore the intimate, confidential recorded telephone conversations about Bubba. It’s coming soon to a theater near you.


12 posted on 05/30/2018 4:23:41 PM PDT by Liz ((Our side has 8 trillion bullets;the other side doesn't know which bathroom to use.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: All
As Linda said, not only was Clinton given a pass, the Hollywood glitterati ponied up bigtime for Clinton's sex mess defense.

Herewith, for your edification, are the Certified Democrat Degenerates......the scum that vilify and destroy America's Judeo-Christian ethics and values in movies promoted as being "diverse, politically correct, and socially relevant."

HOLLYWOOD'S CERTIFIED DEMOCRAT DEGENERATES
FINANCED BILL CLINTON'S LEWINSKY SEX MESS

According to FEC Info, an Internet Web site (www.tray.com) that tracks federal political contributions, 176 individual donors actually contributed $10,000 or more to the lewinsky-era Clinton Legal Expense Trust fund through Dec 1999. Another 21 donors gave $10,000 in the first six months of 2000.

Thanks to Hollywood's generosity, a total of more than $2.2 million was raised in six months, which was notably more than was collected in funding during the previous four years of his presidency—combined. Hollywood producers and stars made up the bulk of the most generous givers. They included:

<><> Universal Studios tycoon Lew Wasserman and his wife, Edith, gave $60,000;

<><>DreamWorks trio Steven Spielberg, David Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenberg, $20,000 each;

<><> producer Ron Burkle and his wife, Janet, $40,000;

<><> producers Peg and Bud Yorkin, $30,000;

<><> TV producer Norman Lear, $20,000.

Entertainment celebrities and executives giving $10,000 included:

<><> singers Tony Bennett and feminist Barbra Streisand;

<><><> actors Michael Douglas and Tom Hanks;

<><> director Ron Howard; producer Gail Zappa;

<><>Black Entertainment Television founder Robert L. Johnson.

cont ////// cont

<><> How did the Hollyood elite list payments to Clinton's sex defense fund on their corporate statements AND on their tax returns?

<><>How did the "DreamWorks" trio, Steven Spielberg, David Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenberg, list their 60,000 dollars to Clinton's sex defense fund?

<><>How did BET list its contribution to Clinton on its corporate statements?

<><> Did Harvey's company list these payments as "business expenses?"

The biggie is the tax element.

<><> Did donors deduct it as a “business expense”,

<><> was it included in assets, payments listed on organization balance sheets as a "liability?"

<><> Did Clinton document it as "income"?

<><> Were the donors given a tax-free certificate from the Clinton Foundation?

cont

13 posted on 05/30/2018 4:24:25 PM PDT by Liz ((Our side has 8 trillion bullets;the other side doesn't know which bathroom to use.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All
As Linda said, not only was Clinton given a pass, the Hollywood glitterati ponied up bigtime for Clinton's sex mess defense.

Herewith, for your edification, are the Certified Democrat Degenerates......the scum that vilify and destroy America's Judeo-Christian ethics and values in movies promoted as being "diverse, politically correct, and socially relevant."

HOLLYWOOD'S CERTIFIED DEMOCRAT DEGENERATES
FINANCED BILL CLINTON'S LEWINSKY SEX MESS

According to FEC Info, an Internet Web site (www.tray.com) that tracks federal political contributions, 176 individual donors actually contributed $10,000 or more to the lewinsky-era Clinton Legal Expense Trust fund through Dec 1999. Another 21 donors gave $10,000 in the first six months of 2000.

Thanks to Hollywood's generosity, a total of more than $2.2 million was raised in six months, which was notably more than was collected in funding during the previous four years of his presidency—combined. Hollywood producers and stars made up the bulk of the most generous givers. They included:

<><> Universal Studios tycoon Lew Wasserman and his wife, Edith, gave $60,000;

<><>DreamWorks trio Steven Spielberg, David Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenberg, $20,000 each;

<><> producer Ron Burkle and his wife, Janet, $40,000;

<><> producers Peg and Bud Yorkin, $30,000;

<><> TV producer Norman Lear, $20,000.

Entertainment celebrities and executives giving $10,000 included:

<><> singers Tony Bennett and feminist Barbra Streisand;

<><><> actors Michael Douglas and Tom Hanks;

<><> director Ron Howard; producer Gail Zappa;

<><>Black Entertainment Television founder Robert L. Johnson.

cont ////// cont

<><> How did the Hollyood elite list payments to Clinton's sex defense fund on their corporate statements AND on their tax returns?

<><>How did the "DreamWorks" trio, Steven Spielberg, David Geffen and Jeffrey Katzenberg, list their 60,000 dollars to Clinton's sex defense fund?

<><>How did BET list its contribution to Clinton on its corporate statements?

<><> Did Harvey's company list these payments as "business expenses?"

The biggie is the tax element.

<><> Did donors deduct it as a “business expense”,

<><> was it included in assets, payments listed on organization balance sheets as a "liability?"

<><> Did Clinton document it as "income"?

<><> Were the donors given a tax-free certificate from the Clinton Foundation?

cont

14 posted on 05/30/2018 4:24:25 PM PDT by Liz ((Our side has 8 trillion bullets;the other side doesn't know which bathroom to use.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: All
cont

When Bill Clinton was at the height of the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal, Hollywood was by his side, offering donations for his legal fees, and one significant donor was a man who is now going through his own sex scandal—Harvey Weinstein.

Billionaire Harvey Weinstein raised $1,422,683 for federal candidates and political entities between 1990-2016. That’s small potatoes for his 27 years of rank Democratism, sucking up to feminism and upholding so-called abortion rights as he rampaged and assaulted young women. Adds up to about $5300 a year.

Something tells me there are a lot of cash payments off-the-record being paid. (hat tip outpostinmass2) Crunching the numbers as outpost did does give us a sharper look at the political money game as played by the conniving Clintons.

Harvey also gave a bundle to the nefarious tax-exempt Clinton Foundation and perhaps to offshoots of the Clintons tax-free entities.

Did Harvey's donations to the C/F go to "do-good projects"? Or did they make a circuitous route? Maybe landing back into the Clintons eternal political scams?

15 posted on 05/30/2018 4:26:10 PM PDT by Liz ((Our side has 8 trillion bullets;the other side doesn't know which bathroom to use.))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: scottinoc

When I see this picture I can’t help but wonder just how many STD’s these people have among the three of them. It has to be a record.

16 posted on 05/30/2018 6:39:50 PM PDT by seawolf101 (Member LES DEPLORABLES)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Catmom
"Trump is the Tsar Bomba of politics."

Hopefully, not a suicide bomber.

17 posted on 06/01/2018 6:48:38 AM PDT by HangThemHigh (Entropy is not what it used to be.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson