Harvey Clinton, I mean Bill Weinstein
Oct15 by Jon Rappoport
Harvey Clinton, I mean Bill Weinstein
by Jon Rappoport
October 15, 2017
Now that everyone in Hollywood is taking such a brave stance after 20 years and pointing an accusing finger at Harvey Weinstein (cue massive applause and bravos), perhaps we should review Hillary Clinton’s attitude toward women who claim they were abused, attacked, and raped.
Hillary, too, was “disgusted” to learn about Weinstein’s outrageous crimes. Of course, thinking she is still on the campaign trail, she took the opportunity to equate Weinstein and Donald Trump. She somehow forgot about her own hubby Bill. When reminded, she says all that is in the past and it’s “already been litigated.” Which is lawyer talk for “we got away with it.”
Let’s see. Here are a few choice bits culled from dailywire.com:
In 1992, Hillary describes one of Bill’s women, Gennifer Flowers, as “some failed cabaret singer who doesn’t even have much of a résumé to fall back on.” She says, if given the chance to cross-examine Flowers in court, “I mean, I would crucify her.”
Hillary on Monica Lewinsky: “narcissistic loony toon.”
Hillary, while practicing as a lawyer, defends a man accused of raping a 12-year-old girl. She wins the case. Then on tape, she’s caught saying, “He [her client] took a lie detector test. I had him take a polygraph, which he passed, which forever destroyed my faith in polygraphs.” Then she breaks up laughing.
Hillary talking about Weinstein has the moral high ground of a dump truck unloading toxic chemicals in a landfill.
Lest we forget, there is this, from Zero Hedge (1/25/17, via Disobedient Media): “…the shocking discovery that Hillary and Bill Clinton provided assistance to convicted child trafficker, Laura Silsby, resulting in a reduced sentence for child trafficking.”
“Silsby was arrested at the Haitian border attempting to smuggle 33 children out of Haiti without documentation. Her sentence and charges were reduced after an intervention by Bill Clinton.”
“Hillary and Bill Clinton took an extraordinary interest in Silsby’s case from the moment she was arrested and almost immediately stepped in on her behalf. The Harvard Human Rights Journal stated that one of Bill Clinton’s first acts as special envoy for the United Nations in Haiti ‘was to put out the fire of a child abduction scandal involving American citizens.’ On February 7th, 2010, The Sunday Times reported that Bill Clinton had intervened to strike a deal with the Haitian government, securing the release of all co-conspirators except for Silsby. Prosecutors ultimately sought a six-month sentence in Silsby’s case, reducing charges for conspiracy and child abduction to mere ‘arranging irregular travel.’ A shockingly light penalty given the circumstances of her arrest, which would likely not have been possible but for the intervention of the Clintons in Silsby’s case.”
Even assuming Hillary did not directly intervene in the case, what about her husband Bill? What does Hillary have to say about him?
I believe it would be: It’s all in the past, it’s already been litigated—we got away with it.
For the Clintons, the present has a magical way of dissolving into the past.
After all, Bill, when questioned about sexual relations with that woman, Monica Lewinsky, defended his “I did not do it” answer with, “It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is.”
“Is,” as in right now, as opposed to “was,” in the recent past.
I’m not committing a crime right now, so “What difference, at this point, does it make?” That’s what Hillary said when she was grilled about the Benghazi attack and how she lied about the cause.
The present magically vanishes into the past.
The Clinton way.
And when the past is brought up—that’s already been litigated.
The Clintons—pure as the driven snow.
Thanks to: https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com