Weinstein Takedown is Clinton’s Final Warning

I keep seeing the question asked, “Why now for Weinstein?”  The New York Times went after him and the Great Wall of Media is crumbling.  The allegations are not new, and there are some big, popular names behind some of them.  Crusading UN globe-trotter Angelina Jolie, for instance, could have made this “a thing” on her own if she had set to do it — years ago.  So why now?

I think it’s a shot across Hillary Clinton’s bulbous bow.  While Democrats are split about Clinton, one thing they all have in common is that they were all wounded when she did not win in 2016.  The New York Times certainly love them some HRC, but these things are relative.  The Times endorsed Clinton for President in the 2008 primary, and again in 2016, neither of which gained Hillary the job.  The Clintons themselves were not wounded by the loss, however.  The Clinton money machine works, but not as one might expect.  It doesn’t sell influence to gain position; rather it courts influence to make money.  While she wouldn’t mind winning an election, Hillary Clinton is perfectly happy to go on losing them and cackle all the way to an offshore bank.

When there is not an election to be won, the Clinton machine selects an issue, such as Haiti or Russians, to ride like a mule, collecting cash.  The Obama years, with Hillary first employed by the President, and then preparing for the inevitable run for the top post, were the only eight years since 1992 that a Clinton hasn’t menaced the Democratic Party.  The past year has already featured several disastrous and highly amusing attempts to roll out Hillary’s daughter Chelsea, widely believed among Democrats to be the daughter of Bill Clinton.  This is one more reason the Clinton’s won’t go away.  The Clinton machine has reproduced, and is vigorously defending the pupa while its shell hardens.

Weinstein is part of the Clinton money machine.  An old friend and a Hollywood king-maker, this is the guy you used to need to whip the lefty arts caucus into line, in the same sense that the House Whip is responsible for ensuring the proper turnout for a “whipped” vote.

Even though he’s good with Obama, Weinstein is famous as a Clinton protectee.  To Obama he’s just another guy from the ‘hood.  To the Clinton’s he’s a key part of the defense mechanism.  Why does Hollywood love Hillary Clinton?  Weinstein is must certainly be part of that, as there’s no “tingle up the leg” constituency outide the likes of Lena Dunham.  Obama sycophancy, which needs neither aiding nor abetting, does not need a man like Weinstein.  He’s just another corpulent ATM to the Obamas.

Weinstein lives within the well-fortified walls of Castle Clinton-On-Styx.  Historically, nobody touches Weinstein without paying the price.  The Democrat-Media complex would swing into action and destroy any threat to Harvey.  See what happened to the Clinton surrogates who tried to come out swinging against Bourdain?  That’s why this is such a big deal.  If you have wondered why some movie producer getting called out for nefarious Shenanigans warrants a week of coverage. it’s not because of who he is or who his accusers are — it’s because he lives within Fortress Clinton, and the media people know it.  This was an inside job, a knife between the ribs from not just a guard, no the Captain of the Guard, but from the Lord High Chancellor.  The New York Times was not suddenly forced into this by overwhelming evidence, which has been available for years.  They weren’t pushed into executing Weinstein– they jumped.  This is a demonstration of power by the progressive forces raised in part by the Clintons, but who were far more effectively used by Obama in showing raw power.  Bill Clinton was smooth, but pragmatic.  Hillary is awkward and stupid but driven to ideology like Stalin.

I do not think that Obama called the hit — The New York Times can do the math on their own, and perhaps with more data available than anybody else — ever.  The Clinton machine has become toxic for Democrats.

Democrats are not tired of everything Clinton brings to the table, but they are sick of seeing the money machine operate to the personal benefit of the Clinton family, which hasn’t actually won a national contest since before most living Democrats can remember.  The Clinton money machine still works, and it works too well for the likes of Democrats interested in winning elections and ruining this country.  The Clinton money machine serves the Clinton’s, and their political goals are finally being seen by the left as merely another Clinton Incorporated marketing ploy.

In Hillary Clinton’s view, winning elections is for suckers.  OH, and for offspring.  Chelsea will have to win at something before she can take over the family grifting business.  The husband-ette’s hedge fund might not torun a profit someday, but the Clinton money machine actually profits from misery.  Losing will not hurt Chelsea in the long run, but she will need some victories to keep the ruse going.  Democrats who are tired of losing have taken the largest shot to date at the Clintons.  “Why Now?” is the question the right is asking about Weinstein.  “Why won’t they Go Away?” is the question that an increasing number of Democrats have struggled with for the last year.  I believe that these two things are related.  The Weinsten takedown is a bit of palace thuggery.  Now no place is safe for the Clintons.  They are being invited off the world stage by the sort of people whose offers are not refused.


Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Weinstein Takedown is Clinton’s Final Warning

  1. 10 Cents10 Cents says:

    This supposes organization in the Dems which I don’t think there is.

    I think people just have woken up to the Emperor having no clothes (and wanting a massage). With the Internet the news has a way of getting out. We can access Hollywood now.

  2. 10 Cents10 Cents says:

    The poor Dems paid for a landslide and all they got was 232. They didn’t even get to do the fireworks.

  3. TKC1101TKC1101 says:

    This makes quite a bit of sense. So is it the Deep Money Global folks who are throwing the Clintons into the recycle bin?

    I can believe that the Clinton’s are no longer “useful” to the global cause.

    One thing still has me wondering…

    How come the Vegas shooter is referred to by his last name and Harvey is still called “Harvey” by the media?

    I do not wish to be on a first name basis with this guy.

  4. Larry KolerLarry Koler says:

    Very interesting, BDB. The Democratic Party is indeed in bigger trouble than the Republicans — and that’s saying something. The NYT cabal with the other big media scum has been identified by Rush as the hand in the Democratic Party glove and I’m starting to believe he’s right. I always thought it was the other way around but things recently have made me change my mind.

  5. Larry KolerLarry Koler says:

    How much trouble do the leftists in this country think they are in? They have never had to deal with someone like Trump before. Trump is a healthy response directly from the center of the country and he is attacking the leftists at their root. This is why there is such a vitriolic response from the media.
    The media thought that Obama was worth casting aside any pretense at objectivity because he’s like a leftist wet dream. Did they not even calculate that the country would respond when they overreached?

  6. ctlaw says:

    “The Times endorsed Clinton in the 2008 primary, and again in 2016, earning Republican presidents in both instances.”

    I am having a hard time remembering the McCain presidency.

Leave a Reply