Ed. Note: Harvey Weinstein, the 67-old former Hollywood movie producer, was found guilty today of two of the five criminal counts he was facing in New York Supreme Court. He was found guilty of criminal sexual assault in the first degree for performing oral sex on Miriam “Mimi” Haleyi, a former Production Assistant on “Project Runway” – and one count of rape in the third degree for the rape of hairstylist Jessica Mann.
While few feel any sympathy for Harvey, who seems to have abused many women along the way, one can still be troubled about the due process involved in modern trials. Although Bangkok’s language [below] is a little salty and demeaning, I think the points he raises should be discussed.
By Bangkok
This is in response to Harvey Weinstein Convicted on Two Counts: Has Justice Been Served or Did Prosecutors Bend the Rules Again? by K.R. Claviger.
For those who don’t know what Claviger is REALLY saying:
1) Claviger thinks these women were all opportunistic sluts who continued fornicating with Harvey even after the alleged ‘rape’ due to the expectation of career benefits. Thus, how can we trust these women when they claim they were raped?
I happen to agree with him.
2) Claviger thinks that some of these women are not only sluts who wanted it, but also outright liars —— since at least one of them referenced having ‘the best orgasm ever’ from Harvey. Therefore, if the jury buys her ‘rape’ testimony (due to society’s pressure to never disbelieve a female), then the US court system may eventually turn into a Kangaroo court.
I agree with him again. Since ‘up’ cannot mean ‘down’. Black cannot mean white. Water cannot mean sand. Having the best orgasm EVER cannot mean he’s a rapist.
3) Claviger is troubled that too many disgruntled/scorned women were allowed to tell their stories in court simply because they had once fucked Harvey in the past, even though they weren’t a part of the indictments. Thus, he’s troubled that his future clients may not fare very well if judges allow every gal who’s ever fucked a guy to testify against him in court.
I happen to agree with Claviger. Disgruntled/scorned women have an incentive to lie about things in the distant past. Thus, only actual victims of the crimes being charged should be allowed to testify.
4) As a defense attorney, Claviger considers trials to be a ‘game’. Thus, this game should have rules set up to favor the defendant just as our founding fathers agreed. In Claviger’s mind, it’s better to acquit 10 guilty rapists than it is to convict a single innocent man.
I happen to agree with him.
Truth is, Claviger is correct on all counts.
Most of these gals fucked Harvey as a ‘transaction’ to better their careers.
After all, why didn’t these same women get fucked by the local fatboy serving sandwiches at their local deli? I’m sure those losers made more attempts to pick them up than Harvey ever did.
Is that just a coincidence?
They obviously wanted to be with Harvey and injected themselves into his life.
Harvey is a fat old bastard with tons of money, thus a single ‘scream’ or ‘no’ would have gotten him to stop immediately (but would also have negatively impacted their careers).
In other words, these women secretly didn’t want to have sex with Harvey but failed to have the courage to tell him —- but since he can’t read their minds, it’s hardly considered rape. Communication is important.
Thus, these women now ‘regret’ having made bad career decisions (i.e., the decision to fuck a fatman for career advancement). But that’s not necessarily what rape laws were designed to punish.
Claviger is therefore REDEEMED in recognizing these facts.
I support Claivger’s interpretation here. I’m okay with Harvey being convicted cuz he’s an asshole and deserves jail IMO.
But the ‘process’ here is very concerning —– because it will eventually lead to a Kangaroo court system.
Who will stand with me and give accolades to Claviger?
Frank Parlato 
Janine Morrison 
J.J. O'Hara 
Richard Luthmann 
Marie White 
Paul Serran
Please leave a comment: Your opinion is important to us!
As I stated in the previous story, “I’m not going to give either one of you accolades, both of you have written so many stupid anonymous things that you’re bound to get a story right eventually. LOL
Here’s the real deal: Weinstein is just a man behind the times. The casting couch has been a Hollyweird staple for several decades. Plus, if he wasn’t so ugly the women may not have ever complained, or at least not enough to cause the uproar that occurred. That’s Raniere’s NXIVM perverse thinking, and only because Raniere is perverse and a similar perverse part of society is acting similar to Raniere’s ideas, you’re right! LOL
Both men had long-term power over women, although that power was not anywhere near the same. A major similarity is Weinstein and Raniere were ell-known their “communities” (NXIVM and high-level DEMOCRAT politicians and the movie scene) for their actions, but nobody did much of anything for decades, which allowed them to abuse more people. All of those early victims can blame themselves for the subsequent Raniere and Weinstein rape victims.”
Well, it’s an industry known for the open secret of the casting couch. People who go into it know what it takes. Does it excuse rape? No. But what is allowed and what is not becomes blurred in an industry that is rather loose when it comes to sexual mores and often displays these values on screen. It happens to both sexes, though the exploitation is not as common for men as it is for women. Even Brad Pitt was a pool boy for a gay man while he was working his way up in Hollywood. I’m not saying he was involved in anything sexual, but living the “pool boy” trope didn’t do him any favors in the rumor mill.
This wasn’t some charismatic man who had women and men flocking to him because of his magnetic personality. It was a predator employing classic predatory tactics for selfish purposes.
Is it okay that Weinstein successfully ended the careers of women who refused to have sex with him? Yes or no, that fact supports that this uninteresting and homely (and by all accounts smelly) man abused his position and authority to get access to some of the world’s most beautiful women, forcibly assaulting and raping some.
A predator is a predator. Certainly, people are drawn to those that are charismatic, attractive and even highly successful and highly intelligent.
Though Weinstein may have a couple of these qualities with the possibility of being charismatic or personally entertaining at times, how attractive a person is shouldn’t be a factor.
Certainly, a good looking man, successful or highly intelligent one that can easily manipulate, have an increased ability to win or “take” pussy in dubious situations… including ones that have nothing to do with career opportunity.
Most women know business meetings don’t take place in hotel rooms with their boss or gatekeeper wearing a bathrobe and most women know when they are being pressured for sex or seduced and make a decision good, bad or indifferent. It’s called being held accountable for your own actions and sexual freedom.
Weinstein ‘s fuckability factor was high because he was a gatekeeper with power to make Hollywood darlings and nothing to do with his looks. This implies that if the guy is good looking or charming then she wanted it or the threat of non-compliance wasn’t so bad.
On the flip side, many of these women that took Weinstein’s bait (or should that be cock?), wound up better off by comparison to how an ex-husband or ex-boyfriend leaves them financially, as well as with opportunities to pursue their dreams (Oscar parties, social events, etc.) and support (believing in them, socializing with them, trading emails, listening & communicating with them as if they mattered by giving his time & attention, and giving them work positions — besides the sexual ones).
An unattractive man considered one of the most powerful men in Hollywood and political influencer, is using his power to get his cock serviced by women that are trying to get ahead. Take this outside of the entertainment industry, and this same model of behavior has been around since I started working.
It was up to me to sink my fingernails into the forearm and say NO with the very real threat that if I was too nasty I could lose my job.
Later, as a single mother of two, I got my first job promotion offer to discuss that got pushed to a dinner meeting on a Friday night that involved me going to the “Big Boss’s” weekend beach home.
Needless to say, I didn’t get that promotion because I believed in my other talents besides my ability to fuck well (a gift reserved for the man I love) and as a mother of two daughters, I believed in their capabilities being much more expansive than opening their legs and the example started with me.
Often have thought we need to reprogram thinking where it isn’t a sliding scale of responsibility, believability or accountability based on how someone looks, their bank account, social standing, power or fuckability factor.
I also believe we give away collective power to gatekeepers and don’t hold them to high standards of leadership and character (ie. just look at politicians making bank and giving themselves top-notch healthcare for life and raises, as they sell out the US, personal data and freedoms or look at the media glorification, conjecture and fake news).
Gatekeepers impact the trajectory of other people’s lives and most people will never get the chance to address the damage done to them in their career, their confidence, their financial situation, their opportunity to get ahead based on their own merits without sexual harassment and the gas lighting turning them into a difficult person to work with for their non-compliance and being let go or hitting the glass ceiling so hard they have to leave.
Listening to various podcasts, there does seem to be a backlash against women that do no want to readily have sex or exclusive relationship with a competition amongst men over how much pussy they can get or think they can get because of their looks, their bank account, their power, their ability to be protective, their otherwise perceived superiority over other men.
Online dating seems to promote a fast food culture of easy sex offered up with the better looking men and women seen as the ones that have easier access to sex partners. Certainly, all of this plays into the dynamic between a gatekeeper and subordinates.
Your statement sounds so angry that “an uninteresting and homely man abused his position and authority to get access to some of the world’s most beautiful women, forcibly assaulting and raping some.” It feeds into this fast food culture that attractive men (or men with a lot of money) can get the beautiful woman for sex and justifies this current anger men get when women (or a woman) repeatedly don’t want them even if they think they are superior to other men and deserve that woman… it is still disrespecting the word NO and blaming the woman accordingly for making what is perceived as a bad, stupid and regrettable decision for which she deserves punishment by being treated like shit by men and being told a range of comments from she should feel lucky that he views her as sexually desirable as her window of opportunity is closing, to she is classless, lacking good judgment and taste, to she is getting old and only has a few good years left in her and she should take up any sex offers she may get because it could be her last.
Though you didn’t do this and seem genuinely disgusted, your statement hits me as being part of the vein of thought and behavior that is prevalent in dating culture. My issue is don’t put a predator/gatekeeper on a sliding scale based on looks or rape itself based on how beautiful the woman! Thankfully, rapists go to prison, times are changing within the workplace… I suspect how women are treated in dating, relationships, and pursuit of sexual fulfillment will come next to be more openly discussed and addressed culturally… perhaps, we need more pussy and even some cock candles for the work place (or home) for ‘balance’ since we can’t leave hormones, pheromones, chemistry and desire as a contact on our password protected phone… And, thankfully, women are the gatekeepers to their own pussy.
Apparently, Weinstein (and others in Hollywood) opened the gates to womens’ pu$$ie$, or this never would have happened.
Nothing has fucking changed in the human condition. Only the trinkets have: bigger houses: faster cars; stock options; fancy electronics; the high corporate position, yada, yada. To men these are just the items used to get what they’ve always wanted: power and pussy.
It’s galling how selfish this fat bastard was. Married to the gorgeous Georgina Chapman, he still was out there testing his luck. People are just ungrateful.
The problem is Harvey was the gatekeeper, and he used that position for undue influence.
It’s reminiscent of the woman that goes to a job interview but has to sleep with her boss to feed her kids. Or sleep her way to the top.
Harvey needs to go away. He used his influence to rise to the level of a gatekeeper pimp. That “system” of implied corruption was dismantled yesterday and will open the door to equal opportunity for all.
Ps: rape victims can still have orgasms.
I would also like to add that Harvey Weinstein’s head looks like he was a drunk monk preparing for the Inquisition but the Vikings landed first, not that I would know anything about history (anonymaker)
Harvey Weinstein looks like a shit that grew limbs and climbed out of the toilet.
“but since he can’t read their minds, it’s hardly considered rape. Communication is important.”
Give me a fucking break. Most of you pricks think just because we look at your ass we want to fuck you. Yes, women crying fake rape is disgusting. Yes, these actresses were personally climbing the social dick ladder. Weinstein knew he was using his power to control these women. He wanted pussy but failed to realize true pussy power. Only wise men would know about that. He knows now of course. That sloppy pig looks so pathetic walking with his little walker. Another manipulative act. And guess what the poor misogynist pig was rushed to the hospital for chest pain. Poor baby.
BangBalz 🎀 have a nice day.
Bangkok,
You have really polished your whole act! Nobody can twist somebody’s words better than you…
“….the women were all opportunistic sluts who continued fornicating with Harvey even after the alleged ‘rape’ due to the expectation of career benefits.”-Bangkok
Are you not then an opportunistic slut as well? After all, you slept with your Boy Scout troop leader for a lousy 3 merit badges. You are such a little-cheap-whore you didn’t even holdout for Eagle Scout!
Have a nice night little 💩!
Harvey Who?
What I enjoy is all of the celebrities and politicians who sucked up to Harvey when he was King of Hollyweird.
And now they don’t know him.
Harvey Weinstein, Hillary Clinton and Gwyneth (This candle smells like my vagina) Paltrow.
Harvey Weinstein between Hillary Clinton and Huma Abedin
Harvey Weinstein and Bill Clinton trading tips on how to assault women.
Woody Allen and Harvey Weinstein
?width=300&quality=85&auto=format&fit=max&s=fe0da548cd5ac1be8953f73bb23e9d50
ShadowState,
Here are some more Washington politicians and insiders, who hung out with Harvey!
https://images.app.goo.gl/qiYFaMq9hLDWEvpS6
https://images.app.goo.gl/PRh2kd2DntL7jVky5
Nice Guy:
I hope you enjoy the Gulag camp that President Bernie Sanders sends you to.
I can’t stand Bernie Sanders!!!!
F*ck-OFF Commie Sympathizer!!!
Bangkok, you speaketh the unvarnished truth
— due to society’s pressure to never disbelieve a female
You’re such a misogynistic prick. You and Raniere deserve each other. Maybe he’ll agree to share Lauren with you.
The US Justice system has in place the condition that they cannot be tied down to only one specific offense, thus they are legally allowed to take a person’s crime and make it into 2 or 3 or 4 more crimes.
This is the problem with the HW conviction.
You don’t agree? Wait till you get arrested for something and find you have 3 charges associated with it and your pressured to plead guilty to the most lesser charge to avoid jail time and to avoid 1000’s in attorney fees.
PS… To above post….And you are innocent. Too many in the US Justice system plead guilty to a lesser charge to avoid jail time and attorney fees because they are over charged.
Why does Frank Report give visibility to a known racist?
Bangkok made comments in the Salinas article about how Mexicans had inferior brains than Americans. That is a highly racist comment without any facts.
The Frank Report loses power by empowering and enabling racists. Similar to how Lauren enabled Raniere. The Frank Report is empowering individuals filled with hate and racism. It hurts the Frank Report’s credibility .
Is the truth racist?
You, Anonymous, lose credibility when you show no proof of FR losing credibility. It is only your opinion because you don’t understand or agree with the particular writer.
Mexicans are not a race moron. When you virtue signal, please know what the hell you are talking about.
Completely agree with you. Frank allowing posts by right wing incels like this clown makes me question the validity of everything else in this site. If he thinks this garbage is worth publishing, then his judgement is screwed.
Are you suggesting that Frank allow only Lefty Wingnuts to post stories? LOL
Have you seen the shit the left wing incels like you, flowers and anonyfaker crap all over this blog???
Yay KC!!!!!
You contribute so much!!!!