Hillary Clinton and others are facing a new lawsuit for covering up Harvey Weinstein’s alleged sexual assaults.
But she refused to speak up for the women because he was raising money for her campaign.
Millennial liberal actress Lena Dunham warned Hillary Clinton about Harvey Weinstein’s assaults.
But Hillary continued to take his money anyway.
The disgraced liberal fundraiser and movie producer is now facing a new lawsuit from six women who were denied work for refusing to become victims of Harvey Weinstein’s sexual abuse.
The suit details how Hillary Clinton, Bob Weinstein, the Walt Disney Company, and elite talent agency CAA were all complicit in facilitating or enabling Harvey Weinstein’s sexual abuse over a period of several decades.
The cesspool of the liberal political and Hollywood elite is getting exposed.
“Actress Lena Dunham and media mogul and veteran journalist Tina Brown have claimed they warned Hillary Clinton’s senior campaign staffers about Harvey Weinstein’s sexual misconduct, yet they proceeded to work with the now-disgraced movie producer anyway.
Weinstein was a major Democratic party support and donor to Clinton’s unsuccessful 2016 presidential campaign, and held two star-studded fundraisers in 2015 and 2016 to support both her primary and presidential campaign.
“I just want you to let you know that Harvey’s a rapist and this is going to come out at some point,” Dunham claims to have told Kristina Schake, the campaign’s deputy communications director, The New York Times reports.
“I think it’s a really bad idea for him to host fund-raisers and be involved because it’s an open secret in Hollywood that he has a problem with sexual assault.”
Meanwhile, former Vogue and Newsweek editor Tina Brown claims she warned a member of Clinton’s inner circle that Weinstein’s sleaziness had “escalated.”
“I was hearing that Harvey’s sleaziness with women had escalated since I left Talk in 2002 and she was unwise to be so closely associated with him,” she told the Times in an email.
Clinton’s campaign claimed they were “shocked” by the allegations and that the campaign’s staff “wouldn’t forget” such a warning.
Of course, Hillary has overlooked the alleged sexual predatory behavior of her own husband, so this is not surprising.
“We were shocked when we learned what he’d done,” Nick Merrill, Clinton’s communications director, told the Times. “It’s despicable behavior, and the women that have come forward have shown enormous courage.
As to claims about a warning, that’s something staff wouldn’t forget.” “Only she can answer why she would tell them instead of those who could stop him,” he added on the subject of Dunham’s claim.
The Times also notes that about a month before the first Weinstein exposé broke, Clinton’s attorney Robert Barnet was negotiating a Weinstein-backed documentary series about Clinton’s presidential campaign.
“Talks were ongoing until the allegations surfaced, at which point all discussions ceased—completely and permanently,” Barnet told the Times.
The accusations against Weinstein first surfaced in a bombshell New York Times report in October, and over 50 women have since alleged that they were victims of his sexual abuse, with allegations ranging from inappropriate behavior to rape.
Following the initial report, it took Hillary Clinton five days to break her silence on the allegations against Weinstein, in which she claimed to be “shocked and appalled” by his behavior.
Now Weinstein is facing more criminal investigations, and the net is expanding to include those who covered up his activities.
Weinstein now remains under investigation by a Los Angeles Police Department’s special taskforce into sexual abuse across Hollywood, while the Manhattan District Attorney said their office was preparing an indictment against Weinstein on charges of rape.
Six women filed a lawsuit Wednesday against Harvey Weinstein and current and former executives at both The Weinstein Company and Miramax accusing the disgraced movie producer of sexual misconduct, and a coverup by his associates.
Filed in New York’s U.S. District Court, the suit says the women encountered “credible and objective threat of being blacklisted by Weinstein and major film producers such as Miramax and TWC if they refused Weinstein’s unwanted sexual advances or complained about his behavior.”
The civil suit says the women were subjected to “flashing, groping, fondling, harassing, battering, false imprisonment, sexual assault, attempted rape and/or completed rape.”
“The proverbial ‘casting couch’ was Harvey Weinstein’s office of choice, a choice facilitated and condoned by TWC and Miramax,” the suit reads.
Weinstein, his associates, “complicit producers,” attorneys, reporters, and other operatives of constructing what the suit calls “The Weinstein Sexual Enterprise” which helped “facilitate and conceal his pattern of unwanted sexual conduct.”
The cover-up of this activity by people who wanted access to Weinstein’s money is what this lawsuit is highlighting.
“Each participant in the Weinstein Sexual Enterprise had a systematic linkage to each other participant through corporate ties, contractual relationships, financial ties, and the continuing coordination of their activities,” the lawsuit says, claiming that the so-called enterprise violated the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act.
In a statement, the six women said: “Harvey Weinstein is a predator. Bob knew it. The board knew it. The lawyers knew it. The private investigators knew it. Hollywood knew it. We knew it. Now the world knows it.”
The suit comes a day after the New York Times published a 7,800-word exposé detailing how Hillary Clinton, Bob Weinstein, the Walt Disney Company, and elite talent agency CAA were all complicit in facilitating or enabling Harvey Weinstein’s sexual abuse over a period of several decades.