Inglorious Rapist Weinstein Found Guilty of Sex Crimes

Harvey Weinstein expected to be cleared of sex crimes, telling friends: “I pray the tides are turning.” But today he’s a convicted rapist—and faces 25 years in jail.

TOM LEONARD
in New York

February 25, 2020

When Jessica Mann was invited to Harvey Weinstein’s Manhattan hotel room in November 2016, the aspiring actress believed she was there to provide a shoulder to cry on following Weinstein’s mother’s death.

She, too, had recently lost her father, and so would understand his grief, he said.

Instead, she found Weinstein lying naked on the bed, wanting to do ‘something sexual’, she told a court this month.

What sort of a man would exploit his mother’s death so cynically for sexual gratification?

The same man who was yesterday found guilty of raping Mann in 2013 and sexually assaulting former production assistant Mimi Haleyi in 2006.

The movie mogul’s conviction on two out of the five charges he faced came after a landmark three-week trial that was part circus and part freak show.

Shivering journalists and the public had queued from long before dawn each day for a seat at New York’s most hotly anticipated trial for decades — and they weren’t disappointed as lurid claims of Weinstein’s deformed private parts and depraved sexual habits were aired.

For his victims, it was retribution indeed to witness both the humiliation of the brutish former Hollywood power broker — nicknamed ‘The Punisher’ — and his punishment.

The man who once swaggered in black tie on red carpets around the world had shuffled to and from the courtroom each day pushing a walking frame (his lawyers insisted he has back problems), a shrunken husk of his once 21st bulk, in an ill-fitting suit and unironed shirt.

He’d hung his head in shame as images of his bloated, naked torso were passed among jurors as proof that his accusers were telling the truth about his anatomy and its ‘heavily-scarred’ state. And the shocks kept coming as Weinstein’s accusers went into excruciating detail about his behaviour.

At the same time, the defence made good on its promise to challenge the assumption that his accusers were all simply victims, producing emails to show that some had carried on friendly relationships with him after he allegedly assaulted them.

The shadow of Hollywood’s casting couch has loomed large over the trial and may help explain why the jury’s decision was only a partial victory for the prosecution.

That’s scant consolation for Weinstein, whose career notched up 300 Oscar nominations for films such as Shakespeare In Love and The King’s Speech.

His career and personal life are in ruins; Miramax, the company he founded with his brother Bob and named after their parents, is no more, and his second marriage to British designer Georgina Chapman, mother of two of his five children, foundered in the wake of the allegations.Prior to his trial, Weinstein was already damned in the court of public opinion.

The assumption was that this was an open-and-shut case offering no new insights into the vile behaviour that kick-started the #MeToo movement — how wrong that assumption was.

More than 90 women have accused Weinstein of harassment, assault or rape, many recounting a familiar horror story of going to discuss business in his hotel room only for him to greet them wearing just a bathrobe.

Some of the tales were truly stomach-churning, such as journalist Lauren Sivan who said he once masturbated into a potted plant in front of her in a deserted restaurant.

During the trial, six accusers — two whose allegations were the basis of the criminal charges against him and four who were allowed to testify to prove a pattern of ‘prior bad acts’ by Weinstein — gave often startlingly similar accounts of the way he would trick and trap them.

Four of the women admitted to staying on friendly terms with Weinstein after the alleged assaults, so bolstering the defence case that his behaviour was the norm in Tinseltown.

In response, prosecutors called an expert witness who warned that the psychology of abuse victims is complicated, and they may continue to associate with their abuser as if nothing has happened.

The testimony of Jessica Mann, both the strongest and weakest witness, was both compelling and puzzling in this respect.

Ms Mann, 34, a highly emotional witness at times, had an on-off five-year relationship with Weinstein. They met at a party in 2012 shortly after the aspiring young actress arrived in Los Angeles.

Raised in an abusive home in Washington state, she had fallen on hard times and at one point had to sleep in her car. When Weinstein showed an interest in her, Ms Mann (pictured) thought he was a ‘blessing’ from God.

It proved not much of a blessing when Weinstein started grooming her, she said, breaking down her reserve by initially just asking for a massage. She agreed to knead his ‘blackspot-covered’ back in his hotel suite.

Within a month, they were meeting again at a Beverly Hills hotel with Weinstein telling Ms Mann and another woman that he was considering them for lead roles in a vampire film.

He invited them up to his suite to read scripts. ‘I am a harmless old man,’ he said when Ms Mann expressed reservations.

In the suite, Weinstein separated the two women and pulled Ms Mann into the bedroom.

‘You accepted my invitations to parties. You aren’t leaving until I do something for you,’ he allegedly told her.

Fighting back tears, she claims she sat on the bed as Weinstein committed a sex act on her by force.

‘I sort of ‘locked up’ and got really quiet,’ she said. ‘I was worried about my friend out there by herself. I faked an orgasm to get out of it. He asked me how it was, if I liked it. I was nervous, so I told him it was the best I ever had.’

Although she felt ‘horrified and confused’, Ms Mann said she decided to have a relationship with Weinstein, naively convinced it would be ‘real’. Instead, she said, it was ‘extremely degrading from that point on’.

Weinstein would ‘talk very dirty to me about fantasies and compared me to other actresses he said were doing kinky and dirty things’, the court heard.

‘The first time I saw him naked I thought he was deformed or intersex [a person born with sexual anatomy that doesn’t fit the typical definitions of female or male],’ she said. ‘I didn’t know if he was a burns victim but it would make sense. He does not have testicles and it appears like he has a vagina.’

He also smelt rank, she added.

But Ms Mann didn’t just feel revulsion, she was ‘filled with compassion, absolute compassion,’ she testified. ‘It seemed his anger came from a place of pain.’

There was no physical attraction on her part, she admitted, although ‘his approval would have meant so much to me’.

In court when reading out an email to a former boyfriend in which she called Weinstein a father figure who ‘validated’ her Hollywood dreams, she started sobbing uncontrollably, left and was heard screaming in another room.

Later, she described how their sexual trysts became more humiliating. In 2013, Weinstein separately invited Ms Mann and Emanuela Postacchini, an aspiring Italian actress, to his Beverly Hills hotel suite and he told them he wanted a threesome, the court heard.

Weinstein ‘orchestrated’ events, told them to undress and then instructed them into what positions he wanted them to assume, said Ms Mann.

She said she fled in tears while Ms Postacchini, 28, testified that she’d been ‘tricked’ into the situation and had no idea another woman would be there.

A more degrading encounter took place in another LA hotel room. ‘He asked me to come into the shower and then he said to me, ‘Have you ever had a golden shower?’ ‘ Ms Mann testified. He performed a sex act on her. ‘I was in shock by it. It was gross,’ she said. ‘I turned into the corner of the shower and just looked away.’

Ms Mann said she didn’t dare break all contact with Weinstein for fear of what he might do to her and her family. In March 2013, she was due to have a breakfast meeting with Weinstein at a New York hotel but ‘panicked’ when she saw him booking a room.

When she asked why, he warned her not to embarrass him and to go upstairs. The night manager at the hotel that day testified that Ms Mann’s body language was so negative that he advised security to check on the room to ensure she was safe.

Up in the room, Weinstein allegedly told her to undress and blocked the door when she protested. Disappearing into the bathroom, he re-emerged naked.

He then raped her, she alleged. Later, she went into the bathroom and discovered a syringe in the bin which she later discovered was to boost erectile function.

Eight months later, Ms Mann said, when she was working as a hairdresser — a job Weinstein had got her — she visited him at his LA hotel and told him she had a boyfriend, a ‘well-known’ actor. Livid, Weinstein allegedly screamed: ‘You owe me one more time!’

He then dragged her into the bedroom, violently ripped off her clothes and raped her again, she said. She passed out and woke to find him performing a sex act on her that ‘choked’ her.

Weinstein apologised and told her: ‘I just find you so attractive I couldn’t resist.’

Despite this catalogue of demeaning abuse, the court heard she went to see him again in 2016 when he claimed to be mourning his mother.

—   §   —

The defence cited friendly emails Mann sent Weinstein even after he allegedly assaulted her, including one just a month after the New York rape incident in which she gushed: ‘As always happy to see your smile and I hope to see you sooner than later. I hope some of your genius rubs off on me.’

For her part Mann explained she was ‘too scared to confront him’ and prosecutors argued she had ‘buried her trauma’ and was trying to navigate Weinstein’s powerful hold on her.

During the case, five more accusers painted a similarly damning portrait of him, although jurors rejected the predatory assault charges. In particular, the testimony of model Lauren Young echoed Jessica Mann’s claims about the producer’s physical and sexual deformities.

In February 2013, Ms Young (pictured below) claims Weinstein performed a sex act in front of her in an LA hotel bathroom.

Ms Young, 30, became tearful as she accused Weinstein’s friend, Mexican model Claudia Salinas, of closing the bathroom door and trapping her inside with him.

Ms Young protested but he told her: ‘This is what all actresses do to make it.’

As she laughed nervously (‘I was worried and scared that he was going to hurt me’) he unzipped her lace dress, groped her painfully and pleasured himself.

The following day Weinstein offered her a part in his TV reality show America’s Next Top Model, which she declined.

LD: Four other women gave testimony against Weinstein in court: Mimi Halevy (42), Annabella Sciorra (59), Tarale Wulff (43), and Dawn Dunning (40). The Hollywood stars whose careers Weinstein helped to promote include such celebrities as Nicole Kidman, Renee Zellweger, Uma Thurman, Judi Dench, Keira Knightley, Sienna Miller, Kate Beckinsale, Gwyneth Paltrow, Catherine Zeta-Jones, Kate Winslet, Scarlet Johansson, Jennifer Lawrence, Amanda Seyfried, Julia Roberts, and Emma Watson. How many of these women were prepared to undergo the thrilling adventures of the casting couch to advance their glittering careers is of course a matter of pure speculation. [LD] 

—   §   —

Harvey Weinstein’s catastrophic fall from grace cements not only his shame but that of an industry that fawned over him, even though rumours of his rapacious sexual appetites were widespread.

Admired, feared and loathed in equal measure, he was notorious for his monstrous ego, and a volcanic and uncontrollable temper that could tip into physical violence. Stars chose to tolerate all this, largely because Weinstein won them the adulation they craved.

But in the end Weinstein found few rallying to his side when hit by an avalanche of accusations. In recent years he has cut a lonely and isolated figure.

Looking at up to 25 years in jail, Weinstein also faces another trial in LA and possible criminal charges in Britain and Ireland.  His conviction yesterday may not bring his accusers the crushing penalty they hoped, but any dreams of a career comeback have been obliterated.

Source

VIDEO   :   3.43 mins

41 thoughts to “Inglorious Rapist Weinstein Found Guilty of Sex Crimes”

  1. And I always thought that my not making an impression on the world’s most beautiful women was because I did not have the good looks and charisma of Harvey weintstein

  2. I don’t understand these women, calculating women? They say they were raped, violated etc but they keep visiting or contacting him AFTER. Why didn’t they complain directly after the incidents? It’s all about did the women give consent during the incidents and not about having regrets AFTER. These women are adults not children. I don’t say this to come to rescue the jew Weinstein but right is right and wrong is wrong.
    Or am I missing something.

    1. Dumb as you are, you’re indeed “missing” the circumstance of contemporary trendiness of “victimhood” among today’s wannabe female celebrities. For example, how could a pretty young woman be a “rape” victim when, before-the-act, she had joined the old geezer on his bed when she first encountered him lying naked thereon?? Shouldn’t that have been a clue? 🤔 Apparently his reputation preceded most of their encounters, but the lure of stardom was greater than prudish discretion. Considering the list of female celebrities at the end of the article, it may be concluded that it paid-off BIG for some; and the ones who testified against ol’ Harvey were the result of disappointing careers.

      1. Yes, dear Gilbert. You’ve hit the nail on the head. Your comment, while offensive to the feminist lobby and liable to get you accused of “cynical misogyny”, is rooted in pragmatic common sense and worldly wisdom.

        The long list of female Hollywood celebs LD provides at the the end of the above article, in a side comment, can only mean one thing: these women probably opened their legs willingly to Weinstein who put them on the path to fame and fortune. They never complained once, as long as the great parts and the $$$ came rolling in. What we have here in LD’s helpful list is in fact a gallery of strumpets, a Hollywood clique of whores.

        I make exceptions of course. Not ALL those women were on the quid pro quo bandwagon. Some may have climbed to the thespian Mount Olympus by sheer force of their talents. Their histrionic genius. But not all, given the fact that many of those actresses who succeeded in climbing the greasy pole of fame are really lousy actresses. And the world meanwhile is full of aspiring unknown actresses who could do a far better job but were never given the chance.

        Maybe the actress who says “No!” to the command “Open your legs!” doesn’t stand a hope in hell’s chance of a successful career in Hollywood.

      2. “contemporary trendiness of “victimhood” among today’s wannabe female celebrities”

        Yeah Gibby. Got it there. As much one may hate the rapist, these “Meetoo” clever damsels also want to hog the limelight and bask in the sunshine of “victimhood” for now. The only victim here, probably is Truth, dignity, integrity, decency, and civility.

        ……….”disappointing careers”…..Huh, good one.

    2. No, you are not missing something. IMO your comment in valid and you have a just cause for finding fault with these women. There is something defective about their psychology. If a woman is raped, she should cry “Rape!” straight away — not wait 20 years!

    3. Allen –

      “Why didn’t they complain directly after the incidents?”

      In a word – MONEY!!! ($$$$)

      Now they will get $$$$ Millions in the civil suits – WIN-WIN!!

      1. The problem is for men after we have had a good time with a nice woman can be liable for criminal and civil proceedings? Where is the line for us nice, normal, men? Must we record our
        meetings with these women to exonerate ourselves? Crazy world.

      2. Allen –

        Chaos like this IS the jew plan!!! Always has been!

        The banks and jews make $$$$$$$$ on more chaos & volatility in all arenas.

  3. For some perspective a comment from a guy called “cornelius from kings lynn” on a TruthSeeker article – ‘Meryl Streep Targeted by Street Artists With “She Knew” Posters’

    “Film watchers say the 3 most extravagantly beautiful hollywood women Elizabeth Taylor, Marilyn Monroe and Natalie Wood all suffered this and to stop it Marilyn Monroe became a jew, she is on record as saying “now i wont have to suck any more jewish cock”. Elizabeth taylor became a jewess to stop it. Natalie Wood refused and threatened to expose it so was murdered. Jewish child actor Corey Feldman to his credit has been exposing the child rapists of hollywood, such as Charlie Chaplin, Roman Polanski, Phil Spectre etc, etc.”

    1. Former child actor Macauley Culkin has claimed that a yet un-named studio-suit had bragged to him about his shoes. That they were made from the skin of child-actress Heather O’Rourke. The question is who raped and murdered her. I’m willing to put a few coins on Spielberg. After all he produced the Poltergeist movies that made her famous.

  4. Miss Mann declares Weinstein has a sort of a vagina. How can he rape all these women?. Am I missing something, mr. gilbert your turn again.

  5. It’s about lawyers attacking wealthy people and big institutions, for tons of money… Corporations, churches, boy scouts, gun manufacturers, airplane makers…… there’s never any shortage of lying bimbo gold diggers following Hollywood moguls and pro football players around, waiting to get in close and take their shot… the more there are, the less his chances of surviving the ordeal…. there should be a hard fast rule that says if he’s found not guilty, his accusers all have to get whatever his sentence would have been, especially in these cases where none of them opened their mouths about it at the time…. did i miss something? Because I didn’t hear where any 1 of those 90 ‘victims’ went to the police at the time..
    Ms Mann – FAKED THE ORGASM!!!!!! AYSM?????
    Sounded like Ms. Mann broke down into sobs and ran from the courtroom , was heard screaming in another room… I guess she had Big Talent after all…
    She was IN SHOCK by the Golden Shower…. oh yeah, and she kept going back time and again to be subject to these humiliating encounters over and over again, because she wanted his approval..
    She’s just a LITTLE GIRL, you see…
    Of course he couldn’t make stars out of all of them… so they all got together on the Gloria Alred HOTTIELINE and put their stories together, so as to not have any overlap… now they’re all getting rich off the poor fool anyway..
    Cartainly he’s DEFORMED, and SMELLS BAD TOO…
    THAT FITS for an inhuman monster DON’T IT…
    Here’s the Real Problem, the Real Problem is LAWYERS..
    none on poor stupid Harvey’s defense team were about to indict the system that allows these kinds of cases to be heard in first place… All Lawyers preserve the Golden Courtroom Extortion Goose, first and foremost….. and if the stories are getting more and more ridiculous, that’s ok for business.. it’s a business..
    The idea is to make you settle out of court, in other words PAYUP and make it go away.
    Whoever he really was, Hitler was right about 1 thing- seeing a lawyer hanging from every light pole in Germany.

      1. I think he is relegating it to “The goose that laid the golden egg”, perhaps.(?)
        The “mass tort” lawyers seek out common torts and circumstances by which they can file class-action suits on behalf of many, against a defendant who has deep pockets from which they can extract a commensurate fee (often as much as 50% of damages).
        There have been numerous legislative motions to put ceilings on tort liabilities, but the lawyers’ lobby has always successfully opposed them, and the sky’s the limit.
        Three things are required for a “successful” filing: 1) damages 2) liability, and 3) ability to pay. The lawyer who can get ten or more complainants to file a damage suit against a defendant MIGHT luck out and get the defendant to “settle out of court”, thereby collecting an immediate fee of 25-50% of the settlement – which, if in the millions, is quite significant. A golden egg!

  6. DMITRY
    The Golden Goose was one of the Fairy Tales, from Grimm maybe, about a Goose that laid Golden Eggs… Tasty and nourishing as she might be, you wouldn’t want to kill her for Christmas Dinner…
    Courtrooms are totally set up and controlled by Lawyers for profit…
    Judges could make things a lot better, but they’re Lawyers too… So are Legislators…
    Actually there are no Lawyers… We have only Attorneys at Law, probably because there is no Law, only Legalities…
    Anyway, as I have learned, if you are accused of some kind of transgression, you can easily spend a fortune on your Defense long before you ever get to trial, where you will spend another fortune…
    If it’s a Civil case, that’s bad… Because the rules are different from Criminal Court… All that is required for a verdict in a Civil Case is a majority vote in the jury… And all the other guy’s lawyer has to do is Confuse the Jury, at which point it becomes all about their personal prejudices…
    Of you’re a rich Mogul like Harvey WAS, the system is set up so you will be milked white long before the trial even starts… Nobody looks to see if the complaint is a pack of lies, not until it’s already cost you a million bucks… The person who sues you might be penniless, but there’s no rule saying she has to put up anything to cover your costs in case she loses, nor will she ever likely be charged with perjury… No threat of prosecution for perjury – means there’s no Fair trial… If there was a rule saying the complainant has to be able to cover your costs in a Civil Trial, or her Lawyer, before she can sue you, like what happened to OJ and Bill Cosby, then there would be a lot less of this kind of chicanery going on…
    The Courtroom is the golden Goose that keeps laying millions on creepy lawyers, who are using it to extort money from hapless victims… it happens all the time…
    It’s interesting too, so far everybody on this blog sees through the scam…
    You have Hollywood, where everything is made-up, and there have now attached this entire Quackery Culture…
    Harvey’s trial was just a production, not a lot different from jesse Smollet’s caper… They make stuff up…
    The Lawyers DON’T CARE whether the broads are telling the truth or not.. It’s all about acting…
    And so far here, worth noting among all these anti-semites, nobody automatically throws down on Harvey W. for his mazaltavl… These commentators all get the Feminist Angle, every bit as schmultzy…

  7. Ugly as Weinstein is, this case is terrible for common sense justice, as pointed out by Irish Savant:

    Because his case dramatically ratchets up the subversion of our legal system in that the most fundamental Western judicial principle, that of innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt, has been demolished. Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. admitted as much: “This is a new day, Rape is rape whether the survivor reports within an hour, within a year or perhaps never. It’s rape despite the complicated dynamics of power and consent after an assault. It’s rape even if there is no physical evidence.”

    Conviction in a criminal case on the basis of uncorroborated verbal testimony has, or had, been anathema to our legal system. In fact traditionally no prosecutor would even bring a case on such a basis. But that was then, this is now. And as L.P. Hartley noted, the past is a foreign country. In this new country TPTB have acquired legal precedent to come after you based on uncorroborated testimony. Think about that. Think of the power that gives them. What if they want to take out – and of course they do – some rising figure on the political right like Nick Fuentes? Just magic up some whore who claims he raped her. Based on the Weinstein precedent Fuentes would be convicted. So he’s out of the way. Now who will we take out next? You see how this can be used? Bad law is often introduced in response to a public outcry. Hence the prevalence of false flags by TPTB. Think 911 and the Patriot Act. The fact that Weinstein is a deeply unsympathetic figure blinds the public to the dangers inherent in his conviction.

    http://irishsavant.blogspot.com/2020/02/be-careful-what-you-wish-for.html

    From now on, any male opposing the TPTB may be brought down without the slightest shred of evidence or justice.

  8. @Nothing but the truth

    Please illuminate us on the “crimes” of Charlie Chaplin. I know he married relatively young but I am not aware of any impropriety. Or is he guilty on say-so, like Weinstein?

    1. @ ALL POSTERS

      I have enjoyed reading these comments immensely, as I am sure LD has. You may not know this but LD, unlike most women, is a pronounced anti-feminist. She has written a series of anti-feminist articles, still unpublished, largely because she does not wish to give offence to her female friends. As a woman, however, LD cannot be expected to be a misogynist; or a woman hater. How could she hate hate herself, after all, for the crime of being a woman? And how could she hate her beloved mother, a role model of true femininity?

      So LD, like myself, distinguishes sharply between misogyny — not permissible, because indicative of mental sickness and a personality disorder — and feminism, which it is permissible to attack and deplore, especially when advocated by a bunch of essentially stupid and obnoxious radical feminists who would like to castrate all men. What woman in her right mind would belong to a feminist organisation called SCUM (= The Society for Cutting Up Men).

      I am basically concerned, as is LD, that most of the men commenting here on this website appear to sympathise more with Weinstein than with the hundreds of women who have complained about him.

      This shows that most of the men here have chips on their shoulders about women in general, and regard all women with contempt and suspicion. Sad to think that so many more men nowadays are what one might call “classical misogynists”, like the pessimistic German philosopher Schopenhauer who said that no women should be allowed to give testimony in court since no woman could be trusted to tell the truth.

      So what next, my friends? You want women to be deprived of the vote? Only men to have the vote in future? Including the male village idiot?

      Should members of the jury all be male in future, to suit your prejudices? Should no female ever be allowed to say she has been raped? Are all male rapists “innocent” because, like Weinstein, they insist they are?

      Come, please do tell me if you think Weinstein is spotlessly innocent! — and if the hundreds of women who have accused him of rape and sexual assault are guilty of making it all up! 🙂

      That’s what you seem to be saying in springing the defence of the Jewish serial rapist Weinstein. Your misogyny is even more potent than your antisemitism. Beware, my friends, of adding women to your list of scapegoats.

      1. @ Sister Monica

        Come, please do tell me if you think Weinstein is spotlessly innocent! — and if the hundreds of women who have accused him of rape and sexual assault are guilty of making it all up! 🙂

        That’s what you seem to be saying in springing the defence of the Jewish serial rapist Weinstein. Your misogyny is even more potent than your antisemitism. Beware, my friends, of adding women to your list of scapegoats.

        Well said, Sister! You won’t win any plaudits by outing all these mentally sick woman haters who throng this site! 90 percent of these sickos honest believe that if a woman is raped she’s “asking for it” ! — and the other 10 percent believe that, even if she’s NOT “asking for it”, she still deserves to be raped! 🙂

  9. Weinstein is a criminal!! No doubt!!

    He knew that many women who seek careers in Hollywood are easily swayed and hypnotized by money and shiny jewelry and fame…. and he took advantage of them!!!

    For those seeking damages, he dangled a paycheck in front of them, and they grabbed it… instead of running away like some did.

    The lawsuits prove it. No mystery.

    Disclaimer……
    Do NOT accuse me of writing “ALL” women!! 🙂

      1. CM –

        Yes, indeed! About time.

        All auditions are criminal today in Italy where the major cities are on government lock-down. Even the Pope has to stay home!
        https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8051083/Pope-cancels-visit-Rome-priests-slight-illness.html

        CORONAVIRUS patients in Britain could be turned away from hospitals if medics cannot cope with the amount of cases they have on their hands, a doctor has warned

        The NHS woud adopt a so-called “three wise men” system if the number of infected Britons reached catastrophic levels. Three senior consultants in each hospital would be forced to ration care such as beds and ventilators if hospitals were unable to cope with the sheer scale of the crisis.

        The protocol would mean weaker patients who stand less of a chance of fighting off the sickness would be pushed down the pecking order!
        https://www.express.co.uk/news/world/1248032/Coronavirus-latest-updates-news-coronavirus-outbreak-uk-government-contingency-planning

        Scientists Discover HIV-Like “Mutation” Which Makes Coronavirus Extremely Infectious
        https://www.zerohedge.com/health/coronavirus-hiv-mutation-suggests-nearly-1000x-more-likely-sars-infect

  10. @ Sister Monica

    By far the most significant issue is: legal proceeding based on witnesses without physical evidence. I got the impression that Madame Butterfly appeared appalled but you did not pass comment. Most significant because love, truth and justice are a hierarchy. Destroy justice and the world crumbles.

    About the complaining women – don’t care – far too late to come now without evidence. Society must be based on an objective rational world, not emotions. And evidence is so easy to procure nowadays: digital tracking of our every move, a fibre of clothing in the wrong place, a sample of a few cells …

    Emotions cannot rule over society if we wish for a harmonious world.

    The Tribe have already thrust Hate crimes upon us – whereby only the accusation counts. The above case is just more of the same chaos for the Goyim

    1. @ Flan O’Brien

      This was not the point Sister Monica was making. Not for a moment was she suggesting that “legal proceedings should be based on witnesses without physical evidence”. Where did she say that? Of course we all want convincing “evidence” of guilt. Who doesn’t?

      The point Sister Monica was making is that most of you men posting comments on this site — almost without exception — seemed more concerned with bashing these abused women as potential “liars” than with expressing horror at the rape allegations against Weinstein. Would you have preferred it if Weinstein had been discharged for “lack of evidence”? Yes, it seems you would!

      I’m sorry, but the chances of Weinstein’s guilt far outweigh the chances of his innocence, given all the evidence stacked up against him and reaching back to the beginning of his Hollywood career. One or two women might lie or exaggerate, but surely not EIGHTY WOMEN!!!

      What do you think the female sex is? — A Witches’ Club for Pathological Liars?

      I wouldn’t like to be your mother, sir. Or a female relation of yours. You show little respect or understanding for the female sex, without whom you would be totally lost. You need women to survive. Never forget that.

      We are not all whores and harpies planning to cut off your balls! Shame on you and your misogynistic malevolence!

      1. Madame –

        For one, I, myself, am not condoning Weinstein’s deplorable conduct any more than I condone these women’s’ tendencies to consciously place themselves in harm’s way and then, long after, attempt compen$ation for their foolishness. Only a female would dare it. A man would be made laughing stock. I can’t help but notice that the starlets who became rich and famous through Harvey neither defended him nor condemned him. They were markedly silent, and avoided any scrutiny. (They already HAD their $$…) Accusations of “misogyny!” aside, the evidence screams a skewed design.
        I believe you have sense enough to realize it. 😉

      2. Yes, I accept what everything you say, Gilbert, because you say it wisely and well. You make the right distinctions. You have the sense to realize that these “starlets” (as you call them) belong to a sub-section of the female sex from removed from the good women you have actually loved and known through the years. Women like your daughter, for example.

        Not all women have $-signs in their eyes or sleep around with rich and powerful men to advance their careers. They would rather “fail” and keep their honor and dignity. These are the women we should all respect.

        Misogyny blinds so many men and prevents them from seeing the goodness of the many women around them who are NOT feminists, but who are truly admirable females doing their best to survive in an increasingly wicked and dangerous world.

      3. My words to Barkinfdeer were perhaps needlessly harsh. But he is he type of person who winds me up with his combination of cocky arrogance and ill-informed stupidity. It is this glib assumption of superiority that I find so repellent in men of this type.

  11. We all love and respect the Female, much more than you understand…
    But there’s no doubt whatsoever that women in general do not consider themselves bound to be truthful…
    It’s because they view their existence as an exigent situation… rules of war apply, whereas there’s only one rule- you win, the other guy loses… and, they’re goddesses, and they know it…
    But it’s completely clear in this case and many others this was an abuse of the court by the lawyers who essentially robbed HW, they used the court to do it.
    And yes you better believe all 90 of them would have lied…. any woman who could show she was ever with the guy will make the accusation, and get paid… he’s a pig anyway, right?
    Are you saying otherwise that Harvey raped all 90 of these women and none of them reported it?

    1. @ Barkingdeer

      We all love and respect the Female, much more than you understand… But there’s no doubt whatsoever that women in general do not consider themselves bound to be truthful…

      Brilliant! How perceptive of you. To which I can only add: We all love and respect the Male, much more than you understand… But there’s no doubt whatsoever that men in general do not consider themselves bound to be truthful…

      Wasn’t Pinocchio a male, the guy famous for his long nose who never stopped lying?

      And wasn’t the boy who cried “Wolf!” also a pathological liar? 🙂

    2. Are you saying otherwise that Harvey raped all 90 of these women and none of them reported it?

      Jump back in in your box, you woman-hating wanker! And get your facts right. No one ever said Weinstein raped 90 women — even the women didn’t say so. In most cases it was SEXUAL ASSAULT, i.e. forcible groping, indecent exposure, masturbating into a potted plant while the woman had to watch his disgusting “handiwork”.

      I guess that’s why you defend this creep. You probably think it’s hilarious masturbating into a potted plant. Just the kind of thing you’d do yourself, right?

      1. The plants will be OK, Ruth. Our spunky Madame Butterfly has dissuaded his urge to wank. (She’s made him a pliant noodle! ☹️ )

  12. Everybody can become corrupted…
    Money does that..
    Maybe if we had system without money we’d be less corrupt…
    It happens when you give up your identity and let someone else “take full responsibility ” for what you are doing… usually you’re part of a trend.. and the girls are trendy…
    If we’re extremely sceptical of the accusers in this case, it’s not an indication 9bigotry…
    Try not to call people names, too much, too much of that and you make yourself look stupid…

  13. That dirty Jew hired an Israeli security firm(mainly former IDF soldiers) firm to assist him in hunting down the women accusing him of sexual assault and rape, as well to intimidate journalists from publishing the accusers’ stories?

    No where is mentioned of witness intimidation and death threat by members of the ISISraeli security firm aginst US reporters as well as the victims of this bastard.

  14. I was quite a surprise when I read way back in the news that Ehud Barak, the former Israeli Prime Minister, had helped the disgraced Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein find an Israeli security firm to assist him in hunting down the women accusing him of sexual assault and rape, as well to intimidate journalists from publishing the accusers’ stories. The Israeli firm involved was Black Cube, and it is run by ex Mossad agents.

    Shortly after, Mr. Weinstein invited the head of Black Cube, as well as Mr. Ehud Barak, to one of Hillary Clinton’s fundraising events the last Presidential election. My research of the two Israeli guests indicates that they were not US citizens, nor do they reside in the US.

    Since it is unlawful under US law for a foreign national to make a donation of money or any other thing of value, or to make an express or implied promise to make a contribution or donation, in connection with a Federal, State, or local election, that begs the question, why were neither of these two Israelis nor Hillary Clinton’s campaign questioned? Why has no one accused Israel of interfering in our election?

    On June, 2017, Oliver Stone addressed the very same subject on The Late Show with Stephen Colbert by eloquently stating, “Israel had far more involvement in the US election than Russia.” Nevertheless, US lawmakers summoned only representative of Facebook, Twitter and Google and demanded to know why they allowed Russians to run paid political ads during the last Presidential election. Neither the US media nor US lawmakers blasted Israel for it’s election meddling or in interfering in the US internal affairs.

    Keep in mind, attending a fund raiser for Mrs Clinton in the past by former Israeli Prime Minister is equivalent to former US president Jimmy Carter flying to Israel and endorse the opponent of Prime Minister Naziyahu. Like many patriotic Americans citizens, I am also sick and tired of reading about ISISrael and APAIC blasting Presidential candidate Barnie Sanders. If that does not qualify for an Israeli election meddling, I do not know what is!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *