Steven Crowder - Popular Right Wing Conservative
- Thread starter patrick jane
- Start date
WizardofOz
New member
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/10/06/opinion/harvey-weinstein-democrats.html
For years, Harvey Weinstein, a film and television producer at the apex of the American entertainment industry, has lavished money and attention on the Democratic Party’s biggest names and causes.
Mr. Weinstein has given more than $1.4 million to candidates, parties and political action committees since 1990, Variety reported, citing figures from the Center for Responsive Politics. Among his biggest beneficiaries are President Barack Obama, whose daughter was an intern with Mr. Weinstein’s company this year. At a career workshop for high schoolers at the White House, where Mr. Weinstein was a guest several times, Michelle Obama called him “a wonderful human being, a good friend and just a powerhouse.”
Mr. Weinstein is also a yearslong friend of both Bill and Hillary Clinton, for whose 2016 presidential campaign he was a major contributor and driving force, holding a fund-raiser in his home at one point. He’s raised money for Planned Parenthood, helped endow a faculty chair at Rutgers University in Gloria Steinem’s name and distributed a film, “The Hunting Ground,” about campus sexual assault.
But while Mr. Weinstein’s stature as a liberal lion grew, so did the number of accusations of harassment of female employees, actors and job applicants, The New York Times found. On Thursday, a Times investigationdescribed in sickening detail how, over three decades, young women have accused him of sexual harassment and unwanted physical contact, reaching at least eight settlements with him.
The report described Mr. Weinstein’s efforts to meet women in hotel rooms, where he touched them, asked them to watch him shower or massage him while he was nude.
Continue reading the main story
RELATED COVERAGE
The report revealed Mr. Weinstein to be a big-screen version of what working women encounter every day: a boss who thinks he can take what he wants from them, and cover his tracks with money when he’s caught. There’s little doubt his power encouraged his brazenness and helps explain how he got away with it for so long. Mr. Weinstein controlled many avenues to advancement in his industry and could kill the career of any woman who didn’t hush up.
But while Mr. Weinstein’s stature as a liberal lion grew, so did the number of accusations of harassment of female employees, actors and job applicants, The New York Times found. On Thursday, a Times investigationdescribed in sickening detail how, over three decades, young women have accused him of sexual harassment and unwanted physical contact, reaching at least eight settlements with him.
The report described Mr. Weinstein’s efforts to meet women in hotel rooms, where he touched them, asked them to watch him shower or massage him while he was nude.
Continue reading the main story
For years, Harvey Weinstein, a film and television producer at the apex of the American entertainment industry, has lavished money and attention on the Democratic Party’s biggest names and causes.
Mr. Weinstein has given more than $1.4 million to candidates, parties and political action committees since 1990, Variety reported, citing figures from the Center for Responsive Politics. Among his biggest beneficiaries are President Barack Obama, whose daughter was an intern with Mr. Weinstein’s company this year. At a career workshop for high schoolers at the White House, where Mr. Weinstein was a guest several times, Michelle Obama called him “a wonderful human being, a good friend and just a powerhouse.”
Mr. Weinstein is also a yearslong friend of both Bill and Hillary Clinton, for whose 2016 presidential campaign he was a major contributor and driving force, holding a fund-raiser in his home at one point. He’s raised money for Planned Parenthood, helped endow a faculty chair at Rutgers University in Gloria Steinem’s name and distributed a film, “The Hunting Ground,” about campus sexual assault.
But while Mr. Weinstein’s stature as a liberal lion grew, so did the number of accusations of harassment of female employees, actors and job applicants, The New York Times found. On Thursday, a Times investigationdescribed in sickening detail how, over three decades, young women have accused him of sexual harassment and unwanted physical contact, reaching at least eight settlements with him.
The report described Mr. Weinstein’s efforts to meet women in hotel rooms, where he touched them, asked them to watch him shower or massage him while he was nude.
Continue reading the main story
RELATED COVERAGE
-
Company Scrambles as Weinstein Takes Leave and a Third of the Board ResignsOCT. 6, 2017
-
Opinion Op-Ed Contributor
Will Liberals Give Weinstein the O’Reilly Treatment? OCT. 6, 2017
The report revealed Mr. Weinstein to be a big-screen version of what working women encounter every day: a boss who thinks he can take what he wants from them, and cover his tracks with money when he’s caught. There’s little doubt his power encouraged his brazenness and helps explain how he got away with it for so long. Mr. Weinstein controlled many avenues to advancement in his industry and could kill the career of any woman who didn’t hush up.
But while Mr. Weinstein’s stature as a liberal lion grew, so did the number of accusations of harassment of female employees, actors and job applicants, The New York Times found. On Thursday, a Times investigationdescribed in sickening detail how, over three decades, young women have accused him of sexual harassment and unwanted physical contact, reaching at least eight settlements with him.
The report described Mr. Weinstein’s efforts to meet women in hotel rooms, where he touched them, asked them to watch him shower or massage him while he was nude.
Continue reading the main story
"Hoisted on their own petard"
Yes. :thumb:
The same consequences? How do you figure?
What has happened to Weinstein since he was publicly outed as an abuser?
1. He lost his career.
2. He lost his job.
3. He lost control of his company.
4. He was kicked out of his professional guild.
5. No one is likely to want to work with him in the future.
What has happened to Trump since he was outed as an abuser?
1. He secured the Republican nomination for President.
2. He was elected President of the United States by a minority of the voters, albeit a large one.
3. He was elected President of the United States by the electors of the electoral college.
4. He was inaugurated President of the United States.
5. His business continues unabated.
6. He has conservatives and religious leaders lining up to kiss his butt, some of whom condemned him only a year ago.
7. He's earned your unwavering support.
8. He's nominated many federal judges who may sit in judgement of him someday, including a Supreme Court Justice.
9. He's signed actual bills into law.
10. He's given most of his family and half his friends high-powered government jobs and allowed them to enrich themselves off of public office.
How can you even pretend that they've received anything resembling the same treatment? Nothing bad has happened to Trump. Nothing. Weinstein is finished. Weinstein was the beneficiary of an enormous amount of privilege to get away with what he did for so long, but the limit was eventually reached. Trump seems to still be looking for what the limit is when your position of privilege is US President and conservative heartthrob.
Doesn't he at least deserve to lose your support? Do you not have any dignity?
Except that it's not hypocritical, because the Left isn't continuing to enable Weinstein. That's the whole point. That's why you were so resistant to laying down a consistent standard. You know it wouldn't hold up. As far as Weinstein is concerned, I'm not in his corner. Nor am I in the corner with anyone who enabled him. Can you say the same with your guy?
Right, you're here to discuss the evil Left and how liberals are all hypocrites. I get that. But you're wrong. That's what I'm here to show you. And also, since you've implicitly set up the standard, either you have to now abandon your man Trump or be shown to be the kind of hypocrite you baselessly accused the Left collectively of being. Or make the case that Trump is somehow innocent.
I have a modest proposal: Don't knowingly enable abusers. That's what you could do.
I don't see this as a liberal cause. Sexual assault is one of those areas where there's normally a lot of bipartisan consensus. It astonishes me that so many people seem so willing to forgive Trump's behavior on this or any number of other points, but that's only new since a little more than a year ago. What makes the whole thing seem partisan is that the Right has abandoned so many positions that were previously so strongly agreed by both sides, and you just assume that the opposite of where the Right currently stands is the Left. But two years ago, there would be very, very few people who would make the kinds of excuses that you now make for Trump, even on the far Right.
Trump faced the same possibilities of loss that Weinstein has but half the country decided that the last minute pre-election accusations lacked credibility and evidence of crimes. Of course the left isn't enabling Harvey's crimes since he got busted, and according to your logic you should never watch a movie again because you are enabling Hollywood sex crimes. Do you have no dignity? Don't knowingly enable abusers.What has Trump been found guilty of? If he is found guilty of a crime I will not support him.
Exactly what "excuses" am I making for Trump, as you try to paint the picture that I am morally reprehensible for voting Trump and supporting him? The left has been abandoning positions for years. The democrats lost 900 plus seats under Obama. 900. Don't forget who ran against Trump, she was rejected. How can you talk about morals with the people you support?
rex: "Nothing bad happened to Trump" :baby: - That's what this is really about isn't it?
Last minute allegations? How about his pleadings at Billy Bush's Bus-borne Confessional?
Many of these allegations date back many, many years, and they include his first wife "First Lady" Ivana. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/oct/13/list-of-donald-trump-sexual-misconduct-allegations
...and also of course, you are still enabling Trump even despite all the allegations.
That's certainly not the bar I set. I just asked you to stop defending Donald Trump the man. Now, a more determined person might say that you should boycott the movies that he might profit from, or that you shouldn't buy Trump-branded products, but that's a different standard, and not the one I set out to you.
Dignity, yes. But I don't think it's necessary to go to extreme measures.
You're right. Trump has been found guilty of exactly the same things as Weinstein. Oh, plus running a fake university. And discriminating against black tenants. Oh, and that time he was caught taking an illegal advance on his inheritance. And that time he settle a sexual harrassment lawsuit.
So, a couple of differences. But yeah, if you aren't convinced yet, that's one thing. If you're serious about it. If you don't think he actually does the things he claimed on tape that he does.
I'm not trying to cast you as morally reprehensible, but I am trying to lead you to a moment of moral clarity. You still seem to think that Trump is great, so I guess that.
Yes. Much to the country's detriment. But I would think you'd celebrate that. Of course, a fair evaluation would acknowledge the role of gerrymandering and voter suppression.
Hard to say she was rejected when she got more votes. Sure, some people rejected her, and the undemocratic nature of American elections doomed her, but more people liked her than liked Trump.
The fact that you and a bunch of other people rejected someone doesn't make a moral or legal case against them. I understand that you don't like Hillary, but you can't justify that with anything like an objective reason.
You're the one who claimed that he faced consequences. I'm just pointing out "no, he didn't."
There's no point in debating with you anymore, you've shown your true motives in each post. Trump faced the same consequences that Weinstein does now, the difference is that the consequences are turning out worse for Weinstein. Yes, last minute allegations, right before the election, do you have no memory? The allegations surfaced in a very timely manner indeed, none of which led anywhere. You did your duty and regurgitated some old news about Trump that you feel Americans should have acted on. They did. The bottom line is that your candidate is deemed more deplorable than Trump by half the nation. Get. Over. It.
A consequence is an outcome Pat, not a risk. They can't have faced the same consequences if it turned out worse for Weinstein.
I remember. I also remember that they came out just shortly after the Access Hollywood tape where Trump bragged about committing sexual assault. Women are often afraid to speak out because they aren't sure they will be believed, and here you are reinforcing that. But it makes perfect sense to come out with an allegation at a moment where it might be better heard. Do you really think they were all making it up?
That reflects poorly on them, not on Hillary or her supporters. This is how irrational Hillary hatred is. It leads to moral blindness.
I stated earlier that they both faced the same possibility of loss, career, freedom, companies, money, etc. IOW consequences. Try to understand what I actually say, not what you think it implies. I also stated that the consequences turned out worse for Weinstein. Do you dispute that they both suffered consequences and the possibilities that the alleged actions include? I can't explain why Weinstein is paying a steeper price than Trump although Weinstein's actions seem more serious right now, seemingly much to your chagrin.
Remind me again, what consequences has Trump faced?
Well let me help you figure it out then: by and large, conservatives don't care in enough numbers to actually exact consequences on Trump.
Let's try this again. Trump faced the same possibility of consequences. Here's another way to put it. The POTENTIAL for the CONSEQUENCES of both men exist or existed. I'm tired of repeating myself to you.
Oh, the consequences Trump paid was lost votes, lost support, lost respect and lawsuits. I can only assume that there is more evidence against Weinstein than Trump given the steeper price Slimestein is paying.
Ah, ok. So it just so happens that the group of people he's chosen to surround himself with are more forgiving of such transgressions? Would you say that's fair?
It just so happens. No that's not a fair assessment. I could say that Trump "surrounded himself" with the American people and they apparently forgave him enough to vote for him. Other than that, he is surrounded by his family, friends and the most ruthless biased media in the history of mankind. He is also surrounded by the Swamp of obstructionists and the liberal entertainment industry.
Do you think Trump gets special treatment from law enforcement officials that are responsible for prosecuting crimes? You know for certain that if there was any crime confirmed he would be charged and prosecuted, right? Don't worry, Mueller is working his fingers to the bone to find something, be patient. Do you think there was a sinister conspiracy to make Trump's alleged crimes go away? Nobody is protecting Trump except the Secret Service.
Not all the American people. A subset. Specifically those who are white, evangelical, and conservative. Those folks forgave him, or gave him the courtesy of never seeing it in the first place, because they just don't care much. That's the only way you can absolve such conduct.
Because he's never stoked that conflict...
Everyone thinks there are obstructionists everywhere when they're in power and they find it hard to do whatever they want. The truth is, it's not supposed to work that way. When Obama and the Democratic Party held all the power, yes, they passed the ACA, but just barely. And they were competent. The government isn't designed to do an about-face just because of one election. There is institutional depth. There are minority prerogatives. That's as designed, and it's part of what makes our government stable. You may hate it, but it's how the system works.
He's literally the only American for whom there are legal arguments that he is immune from indictment. So, yes. And apart from that, the wealthy tend to be able to skirt the law for a whole host of reasons, and the same systems of silence and deference that protected Harvey Weinstein protected Trump even before he ran for office.
That's always a judgement call, Pat. Sometimes, it's just too hard to prove up to a criminal burden of proof.
So he is. But probably not for this.
Just the usual ring of immunity for powerful men who do wrong.
Yes, unfortunately for you that's how the law works.
Familiarize yourself
https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/amendment-14/59-burden-of-proof-and-presumptions.html
https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/amendment-14/59-burden-of-proof-and-presumptions.html
You just agreed with what I said...and then said "familiarize yourself"....