Posted by Tina
There are many more men and women who belong on the “Silence Breakers” list than those you see featured in the photo at left. The list continues to grow. But something else is missing in this celebration of “bravery.”
It’s not that I object to Time Magazine’s choice, they can do as they please. It’s good that this rampant deplorable behavior has finally been exposed. But Time touts the importance of these women coming forward now when it could have been so much sooner:
Social media acted as a powerful accelerant; the hashtag #MeToo has now been used millions of times in at least 85 countries. “I woke up and there were 32,000 replies in 24 hours,” says actor Alyssa Milano, who, after the first Weinstein story broke, helped popularize the phrase coined years before by Tarana Burke. “And I thought, My God, what just happened? I think it’s opening the floodgates.” To imagine Rosa Parks with a Twitter account is to wonder how much faster civil rights might have progressed (emphasis mine).
How much “faster” might the “floodgates” have opened had many of these women come forward when Bill Clinton’s accusers came forward? How “Rosa Parks” would this story have been had the media bothered to believe Clinton’s accusers? How much damage was done during the years that followed because no one bothered to question the character of Bill Clinton in 1992?
Has there been an ounce of compassion from the left for the women Bill Clinton is accused of raping and molesting or is the confession parade now, at least in part, just a ruse? Is it step one in a radical feminist plan to cleans the Democrat Party of it’s indecent players, and hypocrisy, as a means of gaining greater power within the Democrat Party?
Is politics the main driver behind the outrage?
I believe most of the women are sincerely fed up with conditions they’ve endured and were finally emboldened to speak up but I also wouldn’t put it past some to be engaging in a much bigger political game in which they’ve chosen to break a few eggs to make a power omelet. The treatment of Bill’s accusers, both then and now, is an indication that radical feminists continue to be biased against Clinton’s accusers and continue to seek power at their expense to further the feminist agenda.
Will this brave moment alter behaviors or attitudes in future? Will the exploiters clean up their acts? Will the exploited come forward in the moment? I guess we’ll have to wait and see….for now, these women (and men) are #1 on Time’s list of significant people for 2017.
Related (caution, some material explicit):
CNN, “Democratic senators to Al Franken: Resign”
NBC, “John Conyers III arrested but not prosecuted in domestic abuse case”
Daily Mail, “Former NBC exec Jeff Zucker who had ‘never heard about of Matt Lauer’s sexual misconduct’ joked about him masturbating and ‘rolled with laughter’ about the ‘C**k of the Rock’s’ sexcapades at explicit 2008 roast”
Telegraph, “‘Terrifying and humiliating’: male models accuse fashion photographer Bruce Weber of sexual harassment”
Michael Simone posted this on Twitter today (Friday):
“Give Al Franken credit. He has had a remarkable career for a guy with no real talent. He was the one guy on SNL who was never actually funny, hosted the most boring radio show ever, and served 6 meaningless years in the Senate before resigning in disgrace.”
Best description of Frankenstein I’ve seen so far!
And today’s Sunday Funny . . .
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/12/10/hillary-clinton-portrait-alerts-security-dogs-causes-road-closures-in-miami.html
Be sure to read the comments at the end of the article. Priceless!
I think it’s going to alter our future in two ways.
Men and women will think twice before committing a unwanted sexual act upon someone else. It won’t stop all cases, but knowing that there is a very good chance of what they do being exposed, instead of kept in secret, it should greatly decrease the numbers instead of the behavior being accepted as the norm.
The glass ceiling also just shattered for women. Positions up the career ladder will open up to women stuck in mid-management positions. The men removed for their stupid behavior will open the door for more women, instead of men, to now get promoted, because they will have a better chance of not behaving badly hurting the company’s name and bottom line.
I imagine that the work place is going to become very formal and even unpleasant as a result of this. Men will be constantly on guard, especially those with deep pockets.
The law should never be adjudicated in the arena of public opinion. The accused have no defense and no recourse. Their lives, and their family, and their jobs can be destroyed. I don’t want to live in that world but as long as women won’t report incidents to the authorities and make their legal cases I predict after this politicized mess blows over things will return to the way they were except for the few bad actors that are now exposed.
I read an interesting point the other day, expressed by a man. He asked us women, “Whatever happened to the practice of slapping men?” It’s a good question. Women should exercise their power to make a big public fuss at least in some cases and embarrass the mugs. The more dangerous types should be reported immediately to the police. One of the problems for Bill Clinton’s Arkansas victims is that he was the governor. In that case she should seek the advice of a lawyer and take steps, recording the even in terms of time place description and evidence gathering to protect her interests.
Another item discussed of late acts as a warning. One of the attorneys involved in the Russia/infusion scandal was also involved in the Enron case. In 2005 the Supreme Court overturned a judgement he was responsible for in that case:
Respect for the law includes refraining from engaging in false charges. The damage resulting from such can be horrendous.
Tina, the attorney you referred to must be Andrew Weissmann. He destroyed the careers and lives of more then 85,000 employees and their families, prior to the Supreme Court ruling of 9-0 to overturn his case. Now that’s something to be proud of. NINE TO ZERO. Wow!
So, why did Mueller bring him on board? Justice or to get Trump, just like he did with Enron? The answer based on past practice is obvious.
“Think back to April 1, 1940, and a world awash in turmoil, hate and fear. Revered Attorney General Robert H. Jackson assembled the United States attorneys. In remarks enshrined in the hearts of all good prosecutors, he said, “The citizen’s safety lies in the prosecutor who tempers zeal with human kindness, who seeks truth and not victims, who serves the law and not factional purposes, and who approaches his task with humility.”
Yet Mueller tapped a different sort of prosecutor to lead his investigation — his long-time friend and former counsel, Andrew Weissmann. He is not just a “tough” prosecutor. Time after time, courts have reversed Weissmann’s most touted “victories” for his tactics. This is hardly the stuff of a hero in the law.
Weissmann, as deputy and later director of the Enron Task Force, destroyed the venerable accounting firm of Arthur Andersen LLP and its 85,000 jobs worldwide — only to be reversed several years later by a unanimous Supreme Court.
Next, Weissmann creatively criminalized a business transaction between Merrill Lynch and Enron. Four Merrill executives went to prison for as long as a year. Weissmann’s team made sure they did not even get bail pending their appeals, even though the charges Weissmann concocted, like those against Andersen, were literally unprecedented.
Weissmann’s prosecution devastated the lives and families of the Merrill executives, causing enormous defense costs, unimaginable stress and torturous prison time. The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the mass of the case.
Weissmann quietly resigned from the Enron Task Force just as the judge in the Enron Broadband prosecution began excoriating Weissmann’s team and the press began catching on to Weissmann’s modus operandi.
Mueller knows this history. Is this why he tapped Weissmann to target Paul Manafort?”
http://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/356253-judging-by-muellers-staffing-choices-he-may-not-be-very-interested-in
Who is Weissmann?
“Weissmann Served as the FBI’s General Counsel Under Robert Mueller.”
http://heavy.com/news/2017/10/andrew-weissman-weissman-mueller-investigation-lawyer-attorney/
FYI – The Martha MacCallum show today will interview at least one of the women missing from Time magazine’s front page, Juanita Broaddrick
Could she be the other missing woman from the picture? The one hidden by the media instead of the woman who chose to not come forth out of fear?