Harvey Weinstein Convicted? Thank Donald Trump

Robin Hood: My own men will escort my Lady. But before you take leave of her, it might be as well if you thanked her for saving your life.

Sir Guy: My life?

Robin Hood: Do you think you would’ve left this forest alive if it hadn’t been for her presence here?

The Adventures of Robin Hood 1938

In all of the media platitudes concerning the justice of Harvey Weinstein’s conviction yesterday there is a single name that is being left out.

That’s Donald Trump

Never forget that Harvey Weinstein was a great friend of Democrats in general and the Clintons in particular.

If Hillary Clinton had been elected in 2016 there is a zero possibility that Weinstein would have been facing a jury anytime soon. After all if the media had not considered his actions (actions they knew about) newsworthy for twenty years they certainly were not going to do so when such revelations might hurt a Clinton presidency.

It is only the election of Donald Trump and the declawing of Hillary that made any of this possible.

So if you are happy that Harvey’s reign of terror make sure you thank President Trump and the voters who sent him to the White House, because without their actions Harvey is still on the prowl (and I suspect Jeffrey Epstein with him).

Unexpectedly of course.

One thought on “Harvey Weinstein Convicted? Thank Donald Trump

  1. His conviction is being widely celebrated in the media, and is being cited as a precedent that many more such prosecutions may now go forward because, to use my own phrasing, “a new reign of terror has now been unleashed, in which evidence is no longer required for conviction.”

    He was convicted because, to quote several newscasts, “the jury believed her story,” and did not believe his claim that the sex was consensual. I don’t know the truth, but if on the jury I would have had to vote that the prosecution did not prove its case.

    Trial can now be one person’s word against the other, however, no actual evidence required, and conviction based on which witness (actor) the jury finds believable. Will this form of trial be limited to “sexual misconduct” in the future?

Leave a Reply