Is the Hollywood sex scandal how they will bring Trump down?

For nearly a year we've heard Russia, Russia, Russia...Conflict of Interest, Conflict of Interest, Conflict of Interest...and finally, Mentally Unstable, Mentally Unstable, Mentally Unstable.

For now, none of it seems like it's going to stick. Indeed, it's hard to imagine how any of those would be successful without substantial evidence, and absent any such evidence, how nearly half of the American public would accept Trump being driven out over any of those issues.

But then the entertainment media sex scandals began taking people out. First it was Roger Ailes, then Bill O'Reilly, Dean Cain, Scott Brown, and Eric Bolling. I'm probably missing a few. Then, Harvey Weinstein, which seems to be bleeding into Matt Damon, Russel Crow, Ben Afflek, Roy Price and Jeff Bezos. It seems the brush fire is accelerating into an inferno.

The public is outraged. More will likely follow.

An interesting characteristic of all of this is that in nearly all of the above cases, people were driven out by mere claims of sexual misconduct or the existence of previous settlements- not convictions- some of which go back decades.

And that got me to thinking about Trump and the Meuller investigation. You'd have to be living under a rock to not know Trump is perhaps most vulnerable on this issue, given his Access Hollywood and Miss America statements. Not to mention, other similar allegations made against him during the campaign.

Like Ken Star who was initially appointed to look into Whitewater, but eventually took down an American president over a sex scandal, you have to wonder how long before Meuller follows the same blueprint?

If there truly is a coordinated strategy to take out the President, this topic is their best shot. Not only because there might be some real there, there, but because its the one issue that at this moment really seems to cut across party lines.

So how many of these liberal icons are being taken out now to set the stage for re-litigating Trump's alleged sexual misconduct in a way that looks no longer partisan?

Last week, the NYT reported that Trump's legal team was warming up to the idea of cooperating more with Mueller's investigation. See: Hoping to Have Trump Cleared, Legal Team Eases Resistance to Inquiry

The Ken Star pattern seems in the process of being repeated.

What do you think?

a reply to: loam

Harvey Weinstein has donated over $1 million to Democrats since 2000 – here are some of the biggest names

Top Democrats including former President Barack Obama, 2016 Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton, and Sens. Elizabeth Warren, Al Franken, Cory Booker, and Kirsten Gillibrand have all received contributions from Weinstein, the Hollywood mega-executive who co-founded Miramax Films and The Weinstein Company.

On Thursday, The New York Times reported on Weinstein's decades of alleged sexual misconduct. The Times reported that Weinstein pressured younger women into giving him massages and asked them to watch him bathe, among other harassment. By Friday, Weinstein was suspended from his company, the Associated Press reported.

Almost immediately, Democrats began facing pressure to return their donations from Weinstein. So far, a number of prominent Democrats already have.

BuzzFeed reported that, as of Friday afternoon, 10 Democratic senators have donated campaign contributions from Weinstein to charity. They include Sens. Chuck Schumer, Martin Heinrich, Patrick Leahy, Richard Blumenthal, Kamala Harris, Booker, Warren, Gillibrand, and Franken. Many of the charities were either national or local nonprofits focused on combating sexual violence.

Also worth reading (even if I don't agree with the thesis of the author, he brings some interesting points) :

Did Bannon Just Take Down Harvey Weinstein?

Weinstein - and most of Hollywood - is part of the anti-Trump wagon, it don't see how this could be harmful for Trump if they get into trouble.

Last I remembered there were quite a few more states then California,the evidence is against the Democrats,so how do you figure?,liberal who thinks Trump should be impeached for actually doing the job the president should have been doing,what else is new,libs come up with lame excuses,look at their leadership

I thought we've already seen Trump involved in (almost) every possible type of sex scandal imaginable?
Let's see:
Ivana Trump - Rape.
Jill Harth - Sexual assault/molestation and sexual harassment.
Donald Trump and Billy Bush recording of supposed "locker room talk" describing acts of sexual assault.
Jessica Leeds - Sexual assault.
Kristin Anderson - Sexual assault.
Cathy Heller - Sexual assault.
Karena Virginia - Sexual assault.
Natasha Stoynoff - Sexual assault/harassment.
Jessica Drake - Sexual assault/harassment.
Summer Zervos - Sexual assault.
Allegations of pageant dressing room visits - including Miss Teen USA pageants.
Alleged rape of an unknown 13 y.o. girl (charge dropped)...
Allegations of showers in Russia...

(To name a few?)

Apparently Trump is impervious to sexual allegations - or people just don't care. But then again willful blindness seems to be quite common when it comes to Trump supporters.
Just my humble observation.

originally posted by: theultimatebelgianjoke
a reply to: loam

Weinstein - and most of Hollywood - is part of the anti-Trump wagon, it don't see how this could be harmful for Trump if they get into trouble.

I think the FOX executions were a coordinated effort to kill the perceived mouthpiece that got Trump elected. Those attacks were so successful largely because sexual misconduct is not a party line issue. If you take out some big liberal icon names for the same reason, you substantially remove from the table later (assuming Trump is ultimately driven out on similar grounds) that such an initiative against him on these grounds was purely partisan.

In my opinion, it's the one way to take Trump out without nearly half the nation screaming coup. The stage seems in the process of being set with the Weinstein scandal and the ones that follow.

Bannon had nothing to do with how the Weinstein story broke. Jodi Kantor of the NYT broke the story:

Link.

Isaac Chotiner: Tell me a little bit about how you got on this story. When did you start and what was the impetus?

Jodi Kantor: The Times has made a real commitment to sexual harassment reporting this year. My colleagues Emily Steel and Michael Schmidt did the Bill O’Reilly story and Katie Benner had done some really startling reporting on women in Silicon Valley. So basically we said as investigative journalists we can look at the whole pattern here, and not just focus on one individual woman’s experience. Let’s see if there is a pattern of allegations over time.

So the NYT is behind all of these public executions.

a reply to: Gemwolf

He was during the campaign when the benefit of the doubt went his direction and the allegations were viewed as purely partisan.

But the current climate seems to have changed. If Mueller pulls a Ken Star, the path and the public's appetite to reconsider those allegations might be there.

I now see it as Trump's greatest vulnerability.

Aye, folks don't get to be outraged about Weinstein, and still support Trump.

loll sodom ghomorra based hollywood accused trump for violating woman....
how far can you sink....

a reply to: Painterz

It's only a matter of time before all of Gemwolf's examples, and likely new ones, get revisited.

This time with more traction.

I see chess pieces closing in on Trump on this topic.

I doubt it, it is more beneficial to keep him in office being the loud mouth he is it keeps all eyes on him rather than watching the fox in the chicken coop that is congress.

It is not in the best interest of Republicans or Democrats to remove him,if they do they might actually have to do something or face a greater backlash at the next major election.

Interesting observation-connecting the dots. I think you might be on to something here.

Trump is a scumbag-no dispute there. If he doesn't toe the line for the Deep State who knows what they'll throw at him. For all we know they could be doing this as to hold it over his head. He doesn't seem to have many big Hollywood names to speak out but neither did Bill Clinton and Bill Clinton didn't go down-nope, Hollywood and Hillary just closed their eyes.

It's one dirty political world out there-Trump knows it and he knows where some of the bodies are buried or he wouldn't have been allowed to be elected. He's doing their bidding so far.

Great thinking-something to ponder.

a reply to: loam

I kind of doubt it. I think it would have come out in more force when he went up against Hillary. I wouldn't be at all surprised if some or all of the allegations are true, but if there was something that could have nailed him to the wall I really think it would have already happened and stuck.

Interesting theory. I think for now it's contained to Hollywood.

a reply to: loam

Maybe it's the reverse...

Maybe the right figured out a way to get at democrat donors by taking out a large figurehead that ends up being a hydra.

Just spitballing a theory.

No 'they' is going to bring Trump down. He's going to do that entirely on his own.

see ya all at the re-election.....

Antifa propaganda... All of it
Trump is a good president.
Majority of those against Trump do not even know why they are against him when it comes down to facts.
They live by evil rumors and make believe.

a reply to: GraffikPleasure

The NYT is not the right.

originally posted by: Spacespider
Antifa propaganda... All of it
Trump is a good president.
Majority of those against Trump do not even know why they are against him when it comes down to facts.
They live by evil rumors and make believe.

This is a good example of the "Lalalala I can't hear youuuuuuuu!" defense.

Trump supporters have mastered this.

i say just look at where the Cosby thing has gone. Nowhere.

a reply to: Gemwolf

Everything you just wrote and the FACT that he said

Just Grab them by the p()sy.

But locker room talk. And excuse #1 and excuse blah blah and locker room talk, so it doesn't matter what TRUMP says. He is awesome. Just ask him.