Yet because he was on their team, they all ignored it, even though they all seemed to know of it, just at they ignored Bubba's and Teddy Kennedy's philandering and sexual assaults on women, often using the power of their offices to do so.
Yet the left loves them all and worships them because they were supposedly great on women's issues.
Go figure!
I guess that's true as long as killing women (Mary Jo Kopechne), you were hoping to have sex with then leaving them to drown while you called your attorney raping them (Juanita Broaddrick), or getting blow jobs from lowly interns (Monica Lewinsky) when you were the most powerful man in the world comprises 'being great on women's issues' is what you consider as being pro-feminist.
Yes....she's a "NASTY" woman, don't you know!
It's plain and simple.
Lisa Bloom is a Whore.
Not a whore for sex, but a whore for money.
Just like her mother.
A whore indeed!!!
Isn't that sweet of them? Buncha azzcaverns......
Where did all the Trump accusers go after the election? Funny how they disappeared into the wind (sort of like Russia).
I know it hurts your feelings when people say ugly things. But, those are WORDS. Get it?
Lex,
If he doesn't he should......
Note where we all also noted the NYT story!
Yet where else have you seen this story from the msm, you worthless POS?
Or at least it would for someone who had even a shred of integrity, which you do not.
Ben Affleck apologized to actress Hilarie Burton for groping her during an appearance on "TRL" in 2003.
Old Clip Resurfaces of Kimmel Having Women Guess What’s In His Pants: Maybe ‘Put Your Mouth On It’
Terry
Where I came from if someone like Polanski came back he would NOT be celebrated like some kind of hero. They'd probably find his remains in a gully somewhere....if the coyotes and crows left anything.
Kelly said, “One of my main takeaways from 2016, everything that happened in that campaign, is that we as women have a long way to go, a long way to go. And this is further evidence of that — you know, it’s like how many of these do we have to go through before industries become introspective? Why did the press have to break this? Why wasn’t it someone at the Weinstein Company?”
“If they didn’t know, why didn’t they know?” she continued. “How many more do we have to go through? How many women is it happening to right now until we can affect a real sea change? We might be at the beginning of that, but I don’t think we’re even close to the middle.”
God bless, Steve
We used KPC's critical thinking. The alternative to Trump was much much worse.
;^)
Matt
Perhaps a month without weed might clear one's brain. In this case, highly unlikely.
Deadline, Variety, Hollywood Reporter Circle Wagons to Protect ‘Buttman’ Ben Affleck
Good faith searches reveal that, as of this writing, nowhere on the home page of either Variety, Deadline, or the Hollywood Reporter will you find a headline with the words “Ben” or “Affleck.” How is this possible in a news cycle where Hollywood’s Batman is being dubbed “Buttman” due to a whole new round of groping allegations? On Wednesday, after Affleck apologized to actress Hilarie Burton for a groping incident in 2003, another groping allegation surfaced, this one from 2014, this one from make-up artist Annamarie Tendler, who wrote: “I would also love to get an apology from Ben Affleck who grabbed my ass at a Golden Globes party in 2014.” She added more details:
Annamarie Tendler ? @amtendler Replying to @amtendler He walked by me, cupped my butt and pressed his finger into my crack. Follow Annamarie Tendler ?@amtendler I guess he tried to play it like he was politely moving me out of the way and oops touched my butt instead of my lower back? 1:23 PM - Oct 11, 2017 38 38 Replies 618 618 Retweets 2,295 2,295 likes
This allegation resulted in television writer Jen Stacy accusing Affleck of groping a number of women that night: “I was also at this party and *multiple* friends had this same exact experience[.]”
And thus the nickname “Buttman” was born.
Important point: These allegations surround the year 2014, that was only three years ago…
So why would the same Hollywood new outlets that are breathlessly covering every detail of the Harvey Weinstein sex scandal, circle the wagons to protect Affleck?
The answer is quite simple: Harvey Weinstein’s time has passed. The 65 year-old is reportedly in serious financial trouble, has not had a hit in nearly five years, and has not won anyone an Oscar in that same amount of time.
Harvey Weinstein is no longer useful to anyone, so scores are being settled. If he was still useful, his predations would be allowed to continue unchallenged.
Moreover, outlets like Deadline, Variety and The Hollywood Reporter will not make any advertising money from Weinstein. Oscar season is Black Friday to these outlets. Weinstein no longer fills these coffers.
The same is not true for Affleck.
Not only is two-time Oscar-winner Affleck one of the hottest directors around, he is Hollywood’s freakin’ BATMAN — he is the tentpole holding up a tentpole, the Warner Brothers’ Justice League franchise, and what is probably a $250 million to $300 million investment that will hit thousands of screens in less than five weeks.
Does anyone believe Warners is not leaning hard on these entertainment news outlets to cover up these allegations, is not using all that Justice League advertising money as both carrot and stick?
And let us never forget that Affleck is a leftwinger, a lifelong Democrat. And when you think “correctly” there is nothing you cannot do, nothing our media will not cover up. Just ask Ted Kennedy and Bill Clinton.
Bottom line: the same mentality that allowed Harvey Weinstein to get away with what he did for three decades, is still alive, kicking and protecting Buttman.
Weinstein Board Knew About Harvey’s Payoffs In 2015
Twitter Suspends Rose McGowan, Actress At Center of Weinstein Scandal
NBC News passed on a story by contributor Ronan Farrow that it allegedly possessed in August about three separate rape allegations against Harvey Weinstein that eventually appeared in the New Yorker Tuesday, according to a report.
.. ..
.. ..
. . . . is a rube higher on the totem pole than a peon?
;^) LOL !
UFB!
From COTR:
"Harvey Weinstein’s Contract With The Weinstein Company Basically Allowed For Sexual Harassment
Hannah Bleau (Red Dawn), October 12, 2017
I cannot believe this is real, but it totally, unequivocally is.
According to a report from TMZ, Harvey Weinstein’s company may have fired him ILLEGALLY. As it turns out, they had a contract which stated that he could be sued for sexual harassment REPEATEDLY as long as he covered the costs.
TMZ is privy to Weinstein’s 2015 employment contract, which says if he gets sued for sexual harassment or any other “misconduct” that results in a settlement or judgment against TWC, all Weinstein has to do is pay what the company’s out, along with a fine, and he’s in the clear.
Again. This was in an ACTUAL CONTRACT.
According to the contract, if Weinstein “treated someone improperly in violation of the company’s Code of Conduct,” he must reimburse TWC for settlements or judgments. Additionally, “You [Weinstein] will pay the company liquidated damages of $250,000 for the first such instance, $500,000 for the second such instance, $750,000 for the third such instance, and $1,000,000 for each additional instance.” The contract says as long as Weinstein pays, it constitutes a “cure” for the misconduct and no further action can be taken. Translation — Weinstein could be sued over and over and as long as he wrote a check, he keeps his job.
In other words, Harvey Weinstein could win in a lawsuit against his OWN COMPANY. According to the contract, the Board of Directors could fire the perv if he was “indicted or convicted of a crime,” but as TMZ notes, “that doesn’t apply here.”
There’s another provision … he can be fired for “the perpetuation by you [Weinstein] of a material fraud against the company.”
The question … where’s the fraud?
Lance Maerov, the board member who negotiated Weinstein’s 2015 contract, said in an interview — and we’ve confirmed — the Board knew Weinstein had settled prior lawsuits brought by various women, but they “assumed” it was to cover up consensual affairs. The Board’s assumption does not constitute fraud on Weinstein’s part. And here’s the kicker. Even if Weinstein had committed fraud by not fully informing the Board of Directors, the contract says before he can be fired he has a right to mediation and if that doesn’t work, he’s entitled to arbitration. He got neither. He was summarily fired, and sources connected with Weinstein tell TMZ he was never given a specific reason.
A source connected with TWC tells TMZ, the company had a right to fire Weinstein if he didn’t notify the Board of Directors of settlements. We’re told there have been no settlements since the contract was signed, so it would seem this clause does not apply.
This is insane. The Weinstein Company knew about his pervy behavior all along. It was so expected it was placed in a contract."
