Tuesday, October 10, 2017

Hillary, Barack and the Harvey Weinstein scandal (Updated!)

Update: I guess Hillary read my blog post this morning! (Yeah, right) In any case (Eli Watkins, Hillary Clinton condemns longtime Democratic donor Harvey Weinstein CNN 10/10/2017):

"I was shocked and appalled by the revelations about Harvey Weinstein," Clinton said in a statement through her spokesman Nick Merrill. "The behavior described by women coming forward cannot be tolerated. Their courage and the support of others is critical in helping to stop this kind of behavior."

Weinstein is a longtime associate of the Clintons and a major Democratic Party donor who bundled funds for the party's political campaigns, including supporting both of Clinton's presidential bids.
Pretty straightforward. She condemned the kind of behavior "described by women coming forward" without claiming any special capacity to judge the particulars. Works for me.

****************************

There are some serious shortcomings to our US mainstream media. One of the worst, and most pathological, is their susceptibility to Clinton pseudoscandals.

Another is their willingness to follow the lead of the Republican Party and their media universe (FOX News, Wall Street Journal but also Breitbart News and Drudge) in their selection of reporting and punditry priorities.

So the media squawking about how Democrats and "Hollywood" are not condemning Harvey Weinstein widely and severely enough is largely a continuation of those same bad habits. "Hollywood" having been a rightwing codeword for "Jews" since at least the 1930s and also common Republican code for "decadent liberal elites."

With all those qualifications, I still consider it legitimate for the media and political activists to ask about Hillary Clinton's and Barack Obama's positions on the apparently well-founded accusations against Weinstein.

Chris Cillizza in The deafening silence of Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama on Harvey Weinstein CNN 10/10/2017 gripes, "Five days after the New York Times broke the news that Weinstein, the head of Miramax and a major Democratic donor, faced a series of allegations of inappropriate behavior toward women over a several-decade span, neither Bill or Hillary Clinton nor Barack Obama has said a single word about the incidents."

The Weinstein allegations aren't some frivolous pseudoscandal. The Times story reported:

During [the last 30 years], after being confronted with allegations including sexual harassment and unwanted physical contact, Mr. Weinstein has reached at least eight settlements with women, according to two company officials speaking on the condition of anonymity. Among the recipients, The Times found, were a young assistant in New York in 1990, an actress in 1997, an assistant in London in 1998, an Italian model in 2015 and Ms. O’Connor shortly after, according to records and those familiar with the agreements.

In a statement to The Times on Thursday afternoon, Mr. Weinstein said: “I appreciate the way I’ve behaved with colleagues in the past has caused a lot of pain, and I sincerely apologize for it. Though I’m trying to do better, I know I have a long way to go.”

He added that he was working with therapists and planning to take a leave of absence to “deal with this issue head on.” [my emphasis]
His company has also fired him from its board.

Ronan Farrow reports (From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Stories New Yorker 10/10/2017), "Beyond Hollywood, he has exercised his influence as a prolific fund-raiser for Democratic Party candidates, including Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton."

So it's legitimate for them to be asked to address the matter.

I can appreciate that for reasons of general prudence, and even for legal caution, that even a major public figure like Obama or the Clintons would be cautious about speaking with certainty about possible criminal acts of which they themselves don't have direct personal knowledge.

But they are politicians! They know how to mealy-mouth. Which means they know how to condemn the acts that are being publicly alleged and apparently at least in part acknowledged by Weinstein and his company without passing inappropriate judgments about accusations of which they previously didn't have direct knowledge. As long as the donations their campaigns received from him were legal and they didn't play any specific role in helping him duck personal or legal responsibility for his actions, there's no reason his support should tarnish their reputations.

Adam Schiff does it here:



Also, there's this:



And this, which is a bit of a sour commentary on Hillary Clinton's status as a feminist icon:



But the corporate Democrats are currently promoting themselves as the defenders of civil rights for women and minorities while trying to smear the New Deal wing of the Party as sexist "BernieBros" who denigrate women. So it's perfectly fair for people to wonder what their current leading feminist icon has to say about the Weinstein scandal. Corporate media pathologies nothwithstanding.

While I'm on the topic, I think Jessica Valenti is an excellent political writer and analyst of women's issues. But this vague comment, coming in the midst of a group of tweets about the Weinstein scandal, doesn't strike me as constructive:



Obviously, questionable assertions and outright lies are told regularly by both men and women about public officials and prominent business and political figures. And even the most serious accusations have to be proven in legal cases like lawsuits or sexual assault charges.

And in the Weinstein case, not only are actresses like Ashley Judd and Rose McGowan going on the record publicly, but there are a wide range of accusations and even some kind of recognition of their legitimacy on the part of Weinstein himself. This is not a case whether there is a single accusation that just has to be believed or rejected. It's not a matter of believing women in the abstract. It's a matter of substantial evidence being presented over a long period of time about some very serious kinds of misconduct.

No comments: