26 February 2020
Be careful what you wish for
Harvey Weinstein is living testimony to the truth that physiognomy is real. The guy looks what he is. Not only is he hideous inside and out, a bully, coward, grasping, degenerate, crooked and disloyal, and he's hastened the weaponising of Hollywood against traditional Western culture and values. Now as he faces time in the Big House there won't be many sympathising with him, certainly not me.
But be careful what you wish for. Because his case dramatically ratchets up the subversion of our legal system in that the most fundamental Western judicial principle, that of innocent until proven guilty beyond reasonable doubt, has been demolished. Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. admitted as much: "This is a new day, Rape is rape whether the survivor reports within an hour, within a year or perhaps never. It's rape despite the complicated dynamics of power and consent after an assault. It's rape even if there is no physical evidence."
Conviction in a criminal case on the basis of uncorroborated verbal testimony has, or had, been anathema to our legal system. In fact traditionally no prosecutor would even bring a case on such a basis. But that was then, this is now. And as L.P. Hartley noted, the past is a foreign country. In this new country TPTB have acquired legal precedent to come after you based on uncorroborated testimony. Think about that. Think of the power that gives them. What if they want to take out - and of course they do - some rising figure on the political right like Nick Fuentes? Just magic up some whore who claims he raped her. Based on the Weinstein precedent Fuentes would be convicted. So he's out of the way. Now who will we take out next? You see how this can be used? Bad law is often introduced in response to a public outcry. Hence the prevalence of false flags by TPTB. Think 911 and the Patriot Act. The fact that Weinstein is a deeply unsympathetic figure blinds the public to the dangers inherent in his conviction.
You could argue that guilt by accusation has already been enshrined in case law. Happens all the time with the charge of racism for instance. But the Weinstein case means that an immensely powerful figure can and will be jailed because some woman says he should be.
I'm reminded of what (((Norbert Schlei))) said on the passing into law of the 1965 Immigration Act, the one that destroyed America and for which he was the chief drafter: 'And now let the floodgates open'.
Be afraid. Be very afraid.at 21:50
[Colour fonts and bolding added.].