Jeff Vinnick/Cindy Ord/Getty Images

Over the course of her political career, Hillary Clinton has repeatedly drawn attention to herself. In the process, she has also raised awareness about women's issues, such as the exploitation of females in the workplace.

While remaining firmly committed in her marriage to former President Bill Clinton, who has faced accusations of sexual misconduct for decades, she has lobbed withering attacks against former rival and current President Donald Trump for similar allegations that arose in the heat of the 2016 election campaign.

Nonetheless, it is quite conspicuous the former presidential candidate is so restrained about the most explosive sexual harassment story to hit Hollywood since numerous women came forth with accusations against once-beloved comedian Bill Cosby.

Pray tell, what is this opportunity for Mrs. Clinton to redeem herself for years of perceived hypocrisy over Bill Clinton's sexual assault accusers?

It is a story about a film producer's alleged abuse of power and the exploitation of women. It puts at the heart of the salacious tale a scurrilous mover-and-shaker who could make or break careers. The scandal threatens to pull back the ugly scab of Hollywood excess to reveal the hidden wounds that female actresses suffer as they ladder-climb their way to the top of the movie industry.

It is a script tailor-made for the Hillary Clinton narrative. Yet the vanquished aspiring president, brimming with wit and wisdom about the Trump presidency, currently on a self-promotional book tour over “What Happened,” has been remarkably mum.

Of course, it is entirely possible that Mrs. Clinton missed the subtle New York Times headline: “Harvey Weinstein Paid Off Sexual Harassment Accusers for Decades.”

Let us take in the Times's account of what happened:

An investigation by The New York Times found previously undisclosed allegations against Mr. Weinstein stretching over nearly three decades, documented through interviews with current and former employees and film industry workers, as well as legal records, emails and internal documents from the businesses he has run, Miramax and the Weinstein Company.

During that time, 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.

The Times exposé has been chalked up by Weinstein as a “right-wing conspiracy,” according to a Daily Mail report, in Clintonesque language torn from the pages of the corrupt 1990s.

It is no coincidence that Weinstein and Clinton would strike similar verbiage in response to a public relations crisis, either: Weinstein is more than a political supporter of Clinton's; he is also a “friend.”

Larry Busacca/Getty Images for TIME

While many deny Mrs. Clinton is morally obligated to speak out about the Weinstein matter, Keli Goff of the Daily Beast perhaps put it best:

Harvey Weinstein represents much more than the reviled coastal elites disdained by Trump voters (despite the fact that Donald Trump is one himself.) Weinstein's growing scandal represents yet another instance of liberal hypocrisy on issues liberals relentlessly criticize conservatives on. After all, conservatives were allegedly responsible for a War on Women, but yet again we have a liberal man accused of privately mounting his own War on Women, and hiding in part behind his public support of feminist causes and candidates to do so.

Goff also points out Weinstein was a prominent defender of Roman Polanski, another Hollywood creep who escaped industry castigation for keeping the devoted liberal faith. Indeed, only two days ago, a fourth woman came forth to accuse Polanski of rape when she was only 15 years old. Birds of a feather?

As the liberal media still reels from the results of what the New Yorker described as the “Sexual Assault Election” (a worthy read if only as an exhibit of premature gloating), the son of the presidential candidate who was subjected to such media scrutiny would like to know where Hillary Clinton, the self-imagined voice of feminism, is amid all the new revelations about her “friend.”

The revelations about Weinstein may wind up revealing more than the seedy nature of the Hollywood film industry and the lascivious left-wing louts who run it.

If silence is any indication of where one's true loyalties lie, it is yet further proof the feminist legacy of Hillary Clinton was nothing more than a media-fabricated facade that has now collapsed in upon itself.

Please note: This is a commentary piece. The views and opinions expressed within it are those of the author only and do not necessarily reflect the editorial opinion of IJR.

Be the first to comment!
sort by: latest