Harvey Weinstein: That Time When We Decided To Smash Cultural Marxism Once and for All

[Speaker to Animals]

When you hate women so much that you'll jump to the defense of a billionaire hollywood elite

I am not defending him. He might be guilty for all I know. I am attacking this ridiculous story. How many times does the NYT have to burn you before you realize they are lying sacks of shit?

I just showed you without a doubt that they deliberately left out details to this story that damn one of the accusers. They don't seem to have anything substantive on this guy.

[Dand]

Weinstein seems to be a guy you would hate though. He ticks all the boxes as a degeneracy peddler, cultural marxism/progressivism supporter, gun grabber, etc but somehow being a man accused of sexual harassment by women overcomes all of those things.

The women got paid off and kept their mouths shut when/if these things happened so they're not totally virtuous but it doesn't mean they are liars either.

[Speaker to Animals]

Weinstein seems to be a guy you would hate though. He ticks all the boxes as a degeneracy peddler, cultural marxism/progressivism supporter, gun grabber, etc but somehow being a man accused of sexual harassment by women overcomes all of those things.

The women got paid off and kept their mouths shut when/if these things happened so they're not totally virtuous but it doesn't mean they are liars either.

I definitely don't like him. This is about principle and truth in the media. This story stinks royally. Why would you take anything that newspaper publishes at face value? I just flat out showed you that they left out damning details that undermined their narrative against this guy.

He might be guilty or innocent, but the NYT is obviously full of shit.

[BjornP]

How is one supposed to prove or disprove that someone groped a woman on the tits, outside of the witness testimony of the implied parties?

[Speaker to Animals]

How is one supposed to prove or disprove that someone groped a woman on the tits, outside of the witness testimony of the implied parties?

Good question. Related question: If you cannot prove an allegation one way or another, why in the world would you assume guilt instead of innocence, especially given the relentless wave of false allegation stories published by the MSM?

Another related question: Since it turns out that the police already determined one of the accusers was full of shit, and it turns out she has a history of making baseless allegations against successful men for settlement money, would that not further cast doubt on the story, especially when the NYT deliberately left out this damning information to make the allegation seem more legitimate than it really is?

[Montegriffo]

This is about principle and truth in the media.

My mistake, I thought we were talking about your double standards.

[Speaker to Animals]

This is about principle and truth in the media.

My mistake, I thought we were talking about your double standards.

It would seem that you also are mistaken as to what double standard actually means. If I displayed a double standard in this case, I would make like Breitbart has done and assume guilt simply because I am politically opposed to this guy in every way, while defending the presumed innocence of men whose politics I do support. Instead, I take a position based on principle and healthy skepticism for that matter.

Breitbart defended Trump when NYT published that now debunked hit piece where random women accused him of the same types of things, and where one woman claimed they outright fabricated her "allegation", only to run wild with the NYT's latest salacious hit piece because the target is a huge democrat.

[pineapplemike]

Fashion designer Donna Karan comes to Harvey Weinstein's DEFENSE suggesting his victims may have been 'asking for it' by the way they dress calling the shamed mogul and his wife 'wonderful people'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ctims.html
She told a reporter: 'I think we have to look at ourselves. Obviously, the treatment of women all over the world is something that has always had to be identified. Certainly in the country of Haiti where I work, in Africa, in the developing world, it's been a hard time for women.

'To see it here in our own country is very difficult, but I also think how do we display ourselves? How do we present ourselves as women? What are we asking? Are we asking for it by presenting all the sensuality and all the sexuality?

'And what are we throwing out to our children today about how to dance and how to perform and what to wear? How much should they show?'

[de officiis]

Fashion designer Donna Karan comes to Harvey Weinstein's DEFENSE suggesting his victims may have been 'asking for it' by the way they dress calling the shamed mogul and his wife 'wonderful people'
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... ctims.html
She told a reporter: 'I think we have to look at ourselves. Obviously, the treatment of women all over the world is something that has always had to be identified. Certainly in the country of Haiti where I work, in Africa, in the developing world, it's been a hard time for women.

'To see it here in our own country is very difficult, but I also think how do we display ourselves? How do we present ourselves as women? What are we asking? Are we asking for it by presenting all the sensuality and all the sexuality?

'And what are we throwing out to our children today about how to dance and how to perform and what to wear? How much should they show?'

How curious that she doesn't answer her own questions...

[Smitty-48]

That Canadian radio host comes to mind where the women were all caught collaborating and making up lies in a private SMS group.

Yeah, exactly, I can't stand that little Moxy Fruvous douche, I've always despised him, but I still cheered when he got off, and of course when it was Mary Henein who got him off, all the little cultural maoists called her a "traitor", but she wore it as a badge of honour, just like she should.