dtg at work
As a rule anything that Don Surber writes interests me but this piece concerning Senator Robert Menendez and underage hookers…

Democratic Senator Robert Menendez is on trial for taking bribes from a Florida eye doctor, who committed $105 million in Medicare fraud.

Among the payoffs to Menendez were trips to the Dominican Republic, where he may have slept with underage hookers, federal prosecutors said.

I am not saying he is guilty, but he is a supporter of Hillary — just as perverts like Bil Clinton, Harvey Weinstein, and Tony Weiner are.

…brought back a few memories.

It reminded me of this piece at DaTechGuy blog in 2012:

Any person who thinks democrat women who still kneel and worship at the altar of Bill Clinton are going to care about Bob Menendez paying for sex from women in the Dominican Republic has not paid attention to the Democrat party and where they have gone in the last 15 years.

I have no doubt as long as Mendenez votes the way Ms. Ledbetter and the media wants she and they will have absolutely no problem with any thing he does with any woman.

And this one from January 2013

I suspect this was the strategy of Senator Robert Melendez as he appeared on ABC’s THIS WEEK two days after news of the FBI investigation of a sexual scandal involving underage Dominican Hookers broke.

Alas for the Senator ABC News’ Martha  Raddatz totally foiled that strategy by cleverly choosing to refuse to ask a single question on the subject 

oh and this one also from Jan 2013

The senator’s alleged underpayment of these young ladies apparently was an effort to limit the degree of their victimhood.

Furthermore his continued silence on the matter in the face of a FBI investigation is clearly an effort by the senator to keep the embarrassment of these young ladies victim status away from the national press

and this from March of the same year:

CNN in fact didn’t touch the story until they could spend twenty minutes attacking it. At the Washington Post the Sunday of CPAC a long story defending Menendez appeared. The very suggestion that these outlets would be part of a conspiracy to frame Menendez when they’ve done their best to ignore the guilty pleas in New Jersey concerning dirty money is so laughable it’s a wonder anyone would make them.

Or rather it would be laughable to anyone who knows how US media is.

Plus one from 2015 noting why Menendez was suddenly of interest to a Democrat partisan “Justice” department

Menendez was defending Israel and expressing suspicion of Iran long before this month.  The Kirk Menendez Amendment putting sanctions on Iran dates from 2011 Why were his speeches and critiques not enough to cause a break?

That’s actually easy. He wasn’t expendable then.

Before Barack Obama’s re-election in 2012 a high profile hispanic was vital. Before the 2014 with the prospect of control of the senate hanging by a single seat, every person with a “D” next to their name was vital.

And even a few weeks ago with the first test of the Democrats ability to shake down Mitch McConnell & John Boehner it was vital to make sure there was party unity.

But now that all the elections are over, now that the amnesty money is secure and now that the Democrat party knows that 41 united democrats can bend Republican leaders like a yoga instructor Robert Menendez becomes expendable.

And this final retrospective piece from 2015 noting Stacy McCain’s coverage

While some like Robert Stacy McCain covered the scandal in some depth, it being 2013 a year the democrats still hoped to keep the Senate Gavel in Harry Reid’s hands and Martha Raddatz being Martha Raddatz didn’t find the War on underage Women theme newsworthy enough to ask Senator Menendez about it:

and drawing this conclusion:

The Mainstream media first priority is, and will always be serving the needs of the Obama administration in particular and the Democrat party in general.  No story from the Planned parenthood protests to crime involving people with the wrong perp victim racial or religious mix is going to be considered national news if it contrary to any liberal meme.

Or put let’s put it another way.  If Robert Menendez had been a Republican when this story broke in 2012 the media and the left would have forced his resignation the fact that five years later a solid newsman like Don Surber is still writing about this story concerning Menendez as a sitting senator tells you that just because the left is running from Harvey Weinstein the protect Democrats at all costs meme is still going strong.

Oh and always trust content from DaTechGuyblog


Normally you would see my tip jar pitch here and while I would encourage to at all times to hit said jar I’d like to pitch the GoFundme campaign of old friend conservative journalist Warner Todd Huston or rather his son whose campaign to raise money to replace his father’s car that was torched by “parties unknown” is, as of this writing,  still six grand short

Of course if you want to do that and still hit DaTipJar




Or subscribe


Choose a Subscription level



or buy my book

I’m fine with that too.

There has been a lot written about the silence of various people on the Harvey Weinstein business but there is one point that nobody seems to be interested in making.

Harvey Weinstein was a powerful man, he was a connected man. He knew Hollywood actors, journalists and pols. He had decades of success in the industry and became a powerhouse within it.

As a producer it is very likely that he was aware of all kinds of issues concerning his films, concerning stars, concerning journalists that might have an impact on his bottom line. It’s also very likely that he not only had such info on journalists and pols but might have even enabled such people in activities that they might not want made public.

This is my opinion the reason for the current silence by some and the long history of silence by others

So let me end this short post with an obvious question:

At what point does it become more profitable to Weinstein to share this three decades of info with the public than to keep silent now that everyone his going after him?

It is the answer to that question that terrifies hollywood most of all.


As I have no sexual secrets of rich liberals to keep for a price I have to make my buck by going places and doing interviews all the time hoping people like it enough to pay for it.

If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)

An interesting followup to yesterday’s post suggesting that if Hillary Clinton had won in 2016 Harvey Weinstein would not today be exposed as the man he has been for years.

Two days ago just as I arrived for work Red Sox left fielder Andrew Benintendi hit a two run homer off of Astro Ace Justin Verlander making his first relief appearance ever giving the Sox a 3-2 lead in the bottom of the fifth of game 4 of their series. I walked in smiling and when I told my lead the score, at he confidently predicted an Astro win so we bet a candy bar on the result.

Yesterday I was running late and found myself, thanks to Houston’s late comeback rushing into Shaw’s in Leominster to buy the bar to pay off that bet. I found myself stuck in a line behind a woman who was visiting her daughter who had just had her first child. The conversation in the line and with the cashier was Trump vs Mexico. At this point I interjected, “Well consider this, if Donald Trump isn’t elected there is no way that Harvey Weinstein is exposed by the NYT as he was a vital ally and fund raiser for Hillary Clinton.” The cashier agreed that this was true but the woman ahead of me had a slightly different take, while she agreed with my premise she stated quite emphatically: “Still isn’t worth it.”

Given that Mr. Weinstein preyed on woman (which she was) I found that opinion interesting and as I was leaving it hit me that not only would her daughter be of the age that Weinstein would go after but there is no reason to believe that if that new grandchild of hers wanted a career in movies a Harvey Weinstein or someone like him, would in 15-18 years be making the same demands on her if she wanted to get ahead in the business.

This is how crazy the left has become, a liberal women so dislikes Trump that she would have been willing to not only let Weinstein’s crime be unexposed and unpunished but would have been OK with him being allowed to obtain new victims for the sake of keeping him Trump of the White House.

So for those who you Hate Trump but are outraged over Weinstein I have two questions for you:

Would the price of Weinstein never being exposed have been worth it to you if it meant Hillary Clinton beating Donald Trump in 2016?

If the answer to the first question is yes: At what number of new women victimized by Mr. Weinstein would that price become too high?

I think these two question really give this story the perspective it deserves don’t you and I’d love to see a roving reporter asking these question to a bunch of women’s studies majors at liberal universities across the nation wouldn’t you?

I’ll give the last word to Thomas Wictor


As I have no sexual secrets of rich liberals to keep for a price I have to make my buck by going places and doing interviews all the time hoping people like it enough to pay for it.

If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)

Harvey Weinstein image by DAvid Shankbone via Wikipedia
An important point needs to be made concerning the continuing exposure of Harvey Weinstein’s sexual crimes and the finger pointing of leftists over the wall of silence.

If Hillary Clinton had been elected none of this would have come out.

Do you think for one moment that the NYT which had killed the Weinstein story once already would have dared to move forward knowing that a friend an ally of Mr. Weinstein was in the White House, running the justice department etc etc etc. Would they have dared to expose a story that would have crippled a Hillary Presidency?

I think not.

Every single woman who now has the courage to come forward about Weinstein owes Donald Trump the man they hate, the man they demonized, the man they did all they could to defeat, a huge thank you because without his election there is no Times story and they do not have the ability to openly say the truth about Weinstein.

And I submit and suggest that every one of us in the new media on the right should remind them of this fact every single day.

Update:
A question for the Hollywood left and feminists: Even if it meant that Harvey Weinstein was not exposed and would still preying on women do you still wish Hillary Clinton had won in 2016 instead of Trump and why?


As I have no sexual secrets of rich liberals to keep for a price I have to make my buck by going places and doing interviews all the time hoping people like it enough to pay for it.

If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)

That’s what we all do when we sin in any way. We go to confession with a firm purpose of amendment and start over with God’s help.

Fr. Z

An important point to make concerning Weinstein / Murphy et/al

Harvey Weinstein and his enablers who knew what was going on have at the very least been a cads and at worst has violated the law.  Furthermore his very pubic backing actions as a champion of liberal women’s causes ring hollow given his actions.  The various fallouts from these actions, financial, legal and social that will him and those who enabled him all are on them and are not unjust.

Congressman Tim Murphy of Pennsylvania finds himself in a similar situation in terms of reputation.  One the one hand portraying himself and running as a champion of the pro life cause while pushing abortion on his mistress when she turned up pregnant.  Murphy is of course not facing any criminal jeopardy as these actions are not unlawful but he has been forced to resign as his voter base is rightly disgusted at this immoral behavior.

However that is only half of the equation.

In eternal terms Mr. Weinstein’s and his enablers sins and former Congressman Murphy’s are in the same boat.  They have sinned but Jesus Christ has paid the price for them said sins thus they are subject to the ,  same binding and loosing power of the Church that Christ granted his disciples.

If Mr. Weinstein and/or Congressman Murphy has actual constriction for their sins and possess a sincere purpose of amending their ways, they can repair the break between them and God and through the ministry of the church be absolved of those sins, meaning that while they might be subject to criminal, civil or social penalties here on earth the’d be on the right track eternally.

That’s the great thing about the church regardless of the nature of man, we can always get another chance, if we’re willing to ask.

Harvey Weinstein image by DAvid Shankbone via Wikipedia

At first glance it’s looks like the Harvey Weinstein story, from a journalistic standpoint  seems more and more like the John Edwards Story, where liberal journalists were uninterested in telling a story that might harm their allies

An explosive scandal had been kept out of the press for months at a time when the man at the center of it was an important player in national politics. Why? Young thought it was because the Edwards camp so tightly controlled information that journalists weren’t able to find sources to corroborate the Enquirer’s reporting. Perhaps that was part of it. But the fact was, many editors and reporters just didn’t want to tell the story. They admired Elizabeth Edwards. They saw no good in exposing John Edwards’ sordid acts.

Journalists saw no good in exposing the sordid acts of a former, senator, vice presidential and presidential candidate.

And while there is certainly a bit of that in the Weinstein story the more I think about it the more it seems that this was all about capitalism in the Tina Brown vein.

About five years ago I did a series of piece of Tina Brown at Newsweek and Salon and her ability to coax millions out of liberals for magazine empires that never seemed to make a buck:

Unless I’m missing something all that happened is an attractive blond managed to convince some man into spending a lot of money to stake her in a business, she used said business to enhance her reputation and when she proved unable to succeed in it dumped it on the first sucker willing to take it off her hands.

It looked a lot like liberal were willing to throw away money to advance liberalism 

Alas, there’s only one Tina and probably lots of would-be media moguls out there with millions of dollars to throw away on glitzy media operations. Send me an e-mail and we’ll do lunch.

But if you decide instead to hit Vegas and blow your millions on blackjack and hookers, I’ll understand.

A while back a few of us thought that if liberals were willing to play angels to advance liberalism conservatives should think about it too:

Jimmie has calculated — and I agree with his calculations — that you could run a pretty spiffy little conservative New Media operation for $500,000 a year if you knew what you were doing. But the problem is connecting (a) people with $500,000 to (b) people who know what they’re doing in terms of online news.

If you grant that Jimmie and I are correct about this estimate, do the math yourself: For the $4 million that the permatanned RINO Charlie Crist collected during that single three-month span of 2009, you could fund eight spiffy little New Media operations for a year (or four such operations for two years). And FEC contribution limits do not apply to people making “investments” in news operations, so that the rich Republicans would not be restricted in their generosity toward New Media, as they are toward political candidates.

Soros has figured this out. Rich Republicans have not.

…figuring it would be a better investment than say 15-30 mil on  Luther Strange

But all the arguments that folks like us were a better investment than a Tina Brown presumed that the motive for such investments were to advance ideas rather than sheer capitalism.  For the establishment a guy like Strange was an investment in keeping the gravy train, a very capitalistic motive and as Stacy McCain noted yesterday the whole “liberal angel” thing with Weinstein seems to be all about capitalism too. (emphasis mine)

Rebecca Traister of New York magazine recounts her own confrontation with Weinstein’s violent abusive behavior — her called her an epithet and shoved her boyfriend down the steps at a party in 2000. She tries to explain why Weinstein’s behavior was never previously reported, including the fact that “there were so many journalists on his payroll, working as consultants on movie projects, or screenwriters, or for his magazine.” Talk magazine, with Tina Brown as editor, was published 1999-2002: “The cover story of the debut issue was an interview with Hillary Clinton.” In less than three years, Talk lost an estimated $50 million. This was simply another aspect of Weinstein’s power. He was willing to throw away money on a slick magazine with a big-name editor in order to buy influence among journalists. And guess what? It worked. Contrary to their own smug opinions of themselves, the journalistic elite aren’t the most ethical people on the planet.

That fifty million makes a whole lot more sense now.  Apparently this wasn’t a question of spending money as a “liberal angel” helping the cause of women, gays  and the left, it was paying the price for being a “lecherous devil” buying off journalists who readily decided their silence  was worth it for the job, the office, the prestige, the access , the parties etc etc etc all the while telling themselves they were fighting to save the world from the evil conservatives who were trying to oppress women et/al.

This was sheer unadulterated Capitalism and apparently Mr. Weinstein got his money’s worth for decades.

Update: accidently put a gallery from a previous post at the bottom and fixed two sentences with redundant words.


As I have no sexual secrets of rich liberals to keep for a price I have to make my buck by going places and doing interviews all the time hoping people like it enough to pay for it.

If you like the idea of new media on the scene at for these time of things and want to support independent journalism please hit DaTipJar below.




Please consider subscribing, Not only does that get you my weekly podcast emailed to you before it appears either on the site or at the 405media which graciously carries it on a weekly basis but if you subscribe at any level I will send you an autographed copy of my new book from Imholt Press: Hail Mary the Perfect Protestant (and Catholic) Prayer


Choose a Subscription level



(or you can buy one here)

There are two stories out there that are winding the irony meter to 11.

The first is the one that everyone is talking about, that is Hollywood Leftist and kingmaker Harvey Weinstein’s outing as a serial Sexual Harasser by the New York Times.

The idea of course that a Hollywood exec would use his power to bed actresses etc is not much of a surprise (as they say, what else is a private island for?) but the real irony is his advocacy for Hillary on down and various “women’s” causes that gave him a pass from those on the left who doubtless knew this was going on and said nothing are now rushing to return the funds  he  gave em over the years although I doubt Obama will be in a rush to give back the $600K plus he bundled for him after all this time together.

I don’t know if Weinstein’s “I’m a liberal Maybe give me a pass” defense will save him, but Bill Clinton isn’t being shunned by anyone these days

I’ll give the last word to Iowahawk

Irony #2 involves this Budweiser

The same day that the Wall Street Journal declared Cornoa the new King of Beers Budweiser is still taking calls like this:

Anheuser-Busch is asking NFL fans for their opinion on the National Anthem issue. NOTE: This is legitimate. I personally called and they have option 1 solely for this issue.

1-800-342-5283 (Option #1)

This is the number to Anheuser-Busch in St. Louis. They want to know how you feel about NFL players kneeling during the anthem and if they should continue supporting the NFL through advertisement dollars. When you call you will get an automated response and it asks if are calling about the NFL. Press 1 and then leave your message.

Budweiser is running ads like this during the Baseball playoffs

Does anyone see the irony of running ads with an “America” can while the NFL is protesting during the national anthem and complaining about police and getting responses like this:

“To the brave NFL players that ran into a hotel with an active sniper… Nevermind, those were police officers…”

I don’t think the problems for Budweiser and the NFL are going anywhere.