Weinstein was charged on Monday with three more counts of felony sexual assault.
The Manhattan district attorney’s office announced Monday that a grand jury has charged the once-powerful Hollywood producer with a criminal sexual act in the first degree for forcing sex on a third woman in 2006, as well as two counts of predatory sex assault.
Weinstein has already pleaded not guilty to a New York grand jury’s three May charges of rape and a criminal sex act involving two women. If convicted on the new charges, he would face from ten years to life in prison.
If he is convicted, will any of the actors who appeared in his movies and PSAs such as this or the politicians who took his money be asked for comment on their silence?*
As Paul Rahe wrote last December, our imperial elites have been unmasked:
I quote Caitlin Flanagan at inordinate length for a reason. What she says about Hillary Clinton can be applied to virtually every woman (and man) who has been at work in the last couple of decades within our imperial liberal elite – whether it be in Hollywood, in journalism, or on the Hill.
Meryl Streep, Kamala Harris, Kirsten Gillibrand, and the other members of the sisterhood have turned their backs on Harvey Weinstein, Mark Halperin, Charlie Rose, John Conyers, Al Franken, Glenn Thrush, Matt Lauer, and the like. They say that they didn’t know or that, at most, they had heard a rumor or two. They are for the most part lying. Nearly all of them knew, as did Gloria Steinem and the liberals who defended Bill Clinton. The scale and the scope of these men’s misconduct were too large to have been anything other than an open secret.
Moreover, those who knew were all complicit. Meryl Streep is a case in point. She did not give a damn about the antics of Harvey Weinstein. She was a public defender of Roman Polanski, whose taste as a rapist ran to underage girls. He was, after all, an artiste – a man beyond good and evil.
If you doubt my claim that nearly everyone in our imperial elite was complicit, read Fox News’ report regarding the Friars Club dinner given in honor of Matt Lauer nine years ago. Everyone who was anyone in New York media circles was there, and the roast to which Lauer was subjected was a celebration of his . . . er . . . “accomplishments” with the women with whom he came into contact while doing his job as a journalist. I would quote snatches of what they said in their speeches were they not too graphic to pass the Ricochet Code of Conduct. In any case, you can read it for yourself, and you can read the account published in The Village Voice back in 2008 on which it was based.
When you next see any one of these people engaged in moral posturing, pinch yourself and remind yourself that they are all – especially, the politicians – in show business.
“You know the old joke about Washington: That it’s Hollywood for ugly people,” Lee Smith wrote in October when the Weinstein story first broke, in a powerful article titled, “The Human Stain: Why the Harvey Weinstein Story Is Worse Than You Think.” “But it turns out that the joke works in the opposite direction: Hollywood is for ugly people, too. That was Harvey Weinstein’s essential insight, and how he managed to combine the worlds of politics, entertainment, and media. They’re all repulsive—and I know they’re disgusting or else they wouldn’t be courting, of all people, me.”
Why are leftwing-dominated industries such cesspits of sexual abuse and exploitation?
* Of course, that was purely a rhetorical question: