Hillary stumbles badly handling Harvey Weinstein

With the same cluelessness that lost her the presidency, Hillary Clinton is setting herself up for trouble in the way she is handling the revelations about one of her key political backers, Harvey Weinstein.  First of all, she waited five whole days before responding at all, and when she first broke her silence, she did it indirectly.  Instead of speaking personally, or even writing a tweet, she had her spokesman, Nick Merrill, tweet out a prepared statement:

Statement from Secretary Clinton on Harvey Weinstein: pic.twitter.com/L1l2wl9l0I

— Nick Merrill (@NickMerrill) October 10, 2017

Kellyanne Conway easily mocked this handling of the matter:

It took Hillary abt 5 minutes to blame NRA for madman's rampage, but 5 days to sorta-kinda blame Harvey Weinstein 4 his sexually assaults.

— Kellyanne Conway (@KellyannePolls) October 10, 2017

...and a few minutes later retweeted this questioning of Hillary's silence coming from Erin Burnett, of Trump-hating CNN:

HRC spoke for 90 mins last nite, didn't mention Harvey Weinstein.She won't give women a "pass" for not voting for her, but she gave him one.

— Erin Burnett (@ErinBurnett) October 10, 2017

All of this must have prompted Hillary to actually appear on television and speak directly, choosing the normally friendly environs of Fareed Zakaria on CNN, but only dig a deeper hole:


(Can you see the shock and compassion?)

Rush transcript via Grabien:

Today one big beneficiary Hillary Clinton spoke to Fareed about this situation."
ZAKARIA: "What was your reaction when you heard the news of Weinstein?"
CLINTON: "I was sick. I was shocked, appalled. It was something intolerable in every way. Like so many people have come forward and spoken out, this was a different side of a person who I and many others had known in the past."
ZAKARIA: "Would you have called him a friend?"
CLINTON: "Yes, I probably would have. And so would so many others. People in democratic politics for a couple of decades appreciated his help and support. And, I think these stories coming to light now, and people who never spoke out before having the courage to speak out, just clearly demonstrates that this behavior he engaged him cannot be tolerated and cannot be overlooked. And I'm hoping that the —"
ZAKARIA: "Do you think it was tolerated because he was powerful —"
CLINTON: "I don't know."
ZAKARIA: "People say people knew."
CLINTON: "Well I certainly didn't and I don't know who did. I can speak for myself and many others who knew him primarily through politics. But the courage of these women coming forward now is really important because it can't just end with one person's disgraceful behavior and the consequences he is facing. This has to be a wake-up call and shine a spotlight on behavior like this any where at any time. We've had a revelation of plenty of companies in Silicon Valley sexual assault being so accepted. That's where a lot of young people have their first or most significant jobs. This can't be tolerated whether it's entertainment or anywhere."
ZAKARIA: "Senator blooming that will says people should give back the money he donated. He donated money to you directly or indirectly. Would you give it back?"
CLINTON: "Well there's nobody to give it back. What my colleagues are saying people are donating it to clarity. Of course I'd do that. I give 10% of my money to charity every year. There's no doubt about it."

Like Meryl Streep and Sergeant Schultz on Hogan's Heroes, Hillary knew nothing at all about the rumors so widely spread that an Oscars ceremony featured a joke about it, and TV insider humor-based sitcom 30 Rock did two separate jokes alluding to Harvey's well known sexual bullying.  So she is defining herself as extraordinarily stupid – or, much more likely, a hypocritical liar.

But it gets worse.

It is an absolute provable lie that "there's nobody to give it back."  (I assume that she means "give it back to."  She is the entity that would "give it back.")  Harvey Weinstein still exists, and there is a paper trail for every contribution he made to Hillary's campaigns, her PACs, and the DNC.  

In fact, if she gives it back to Harvey, then when he is sued by his victims, the money will be available to pay out in settlements.  Or to give to his wife, who is divorcing him.

But then comes the truly Clintonesque twist, the promise to donate it to "charity."

Hmm, can anyone think of a charity that Mrs. Clinton likes to donate to?  If you answered the Clinton Foundation, give yourself a gold star.

That's right, in order to respond to a scandal in which women were horribly abused – rather reminiscent of her own husband's many abuses – she is promising to take money out of her right pocket and put it in her purse, potentially.  If you think that's too cynical an interpretation, then you need to read up on her life in politics.

Keep digging, Hillary!

With the same cluelessness that lost her the presidency, Hillary Clinton is setting herself up for trouble in the way she is handling the revelations about one of her key political backers, Harvey Weinstein.  First of all, she waited five whole days before responding at all, and when she first broke her silence, she did it indirectly.  Instead of speaking personally, or even writing a tweet, she had her spokesman, Nick Merrill, tweet out a prepared statement:

Statement from Secretary Clinton on Harvey Weinstein: pic.twitter.com/L1l2wl9l0I

— Nick Merrill (@NickMerrill) October 10, 2017

Kellyanne Conway easily mocked this handling of the matter:

It took Hillary abt 5 minutes to blame NRA for madman's rampage, but 5 days to sorta-kinda blame Harvey Weinstein 4 his sexually assaults.

— Kellyanne Conway (@KellyannePolls) October 10, 2017

...and a few minutes later retweeted this questioning of Hillary's silence coming from Erin Burnett, of Trump-hating CNN:

HRC spoke for 90 mins last nite, didn't mention Harvey Weinstein.She won't give women a "pass" for not voting for her, but she gave him one.

— Erin Burnett (@ErinBurnett) October 10, 2017

All of this must have prompted Hillary to actually appear on television and speak directly, choosing the normally friendly environs of Fareed Zakaria on CNN, but only dig a deeper hole:


(Can you see the shock and compassion?)

Rush transcript via Grabien:

Today one big beneficiary Hillary Clinton spoke to Fareed about this situation."
ZAKARIA: "What was your reaction when you heard the news of Weinstein?"
CLINTON: "I was sick. I was shocked, appalled. It was something intolerable in every way. Like so many people have come forward and spoken out, this was a different side of a person who I and many others had known in the past."
ZAKARIA: "Would you have called him a friend?"
CLINTON: "Yes, I probably would have. And so would so many others. People in democratic politics for a couple of decades appreciated his help and support. And, I think these stories coming to light now, and people who never spoke out before having the courage to speak out, just clearly demonstrates that this behavior he engaged him cannot be tolerated and cannot be overlooked. And I'm hoping that the —"
ZAKARIA: "Do you think it was tolerated because he was powerful —"
CLINTON: "I don't know."
ZAKARIA: "People say people knew."
CLINTON: "Well I certainly didn't and I don't know who did. I can speak for myself and many others who knew him primarily through politics. But the courage of these women coming forward now is really important because it can't just end with one person's disgraceful behavior and the consequences he is facing. This has to be a wake-up call and shine a spotlight on behavior like this any where at any time. We've had a revelation of plenty of companies in Silicon Valley sexual assault being so accepted. That's where a lot of young people have their first or most significant jobs. This can't be tolerated whether it's entertainment or anywhere."
ZAKARIA: "Senator blooming that will says people should give back the money he donated. He donated money to you directly or indirectly. Would you give it back?"
CLINTON: "Well there's nobody to give it back. What my colleagues are saying people are donating it to clarity. Of course I'd do that. I give 10% of my money to charity every year. There's no doubt about it."

Like Meryl Streep and Sergeant Schultz on Hogan's Heroes, Hillary knew nothing at all about the rumors so widely spread that an Oscars ceremony featured a joke about it, and TV insider humor-based sitcom 30 Rock did two separate jokes alluding to Harvey's well known sexual bullying.  So she is defining herself as extraordinarily stupid – or, much more likely, a hypocritical liar.

But it gets worse.

It is an absolute provable lie that "there's nobody to give it back."  (I assume that she means "give it back to."  She is the entity that would "give it back.")  Harvey Weinstein still exists, and there is a paper trail for every contribution he made to Hillary's campaigns, her PACs, and the DNC.  

In fact, if she gives it back to Harvey, then when he is sued by his victims, the money will be available to pay out in settlements.  Or to give to his wife, who is divorcing him.

But then comes the truly Clintonesque twist, the promise to donate it to "charity."

Hmm, can anyone think of a charity that Mrs. Clinton likes to donate to?  If you answered the Clinton Foundation, give yourself a gold star.

That's right, in order to respond to a scandal in which women were horribly abused – rather reminiscent of her own husband's many abuses – she is promising to take money out of her right pocket and put it in her purse, potentially.  If you think that's too cynical an interpretation, then you need to read up on her life in politics.

Keep digging, Hillary!

RECENT VIDEOS