Closing Remarks Given at Weinstein Rape Hoax Trial

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
February 15, 2020

We’re about to see where this goes…

AP:

Harvey Weinstein believed he was so powerful he could get away with denigrating aspiring actresses drawn into a world where he considered them “complete disposables,” a prosecutor said on Friday in closing arguments at his New York City rape trial.

“The universe is run by me and they don’t get to complain when they get stepped on, spit on, demoralized and, yes, raped and abused by me — the king,” Joan Illuzzi-Orbon said, mimicking Weinstein.

Using a TV monitor next to the jury box, the prosecutors displayed photos of “Sopranos” actress Annabella Sciorra and five other accusers who also testified. Illuzzi told jurors that aside from the more successful Sciorra, the others were “complete disposables. They were never going to be in his world.”

Illuzzi also showed a side-by-side comparison of Sciorra’s testimony about confronting Weinstein in the mid-1990s after he allegedly raped her and similar testimony by his rape accuser about how the mogul reacted when she told him she had a boyfriend in 2013.

“His eyes went black and I thought he was going to hit me right there,” Sciorra testified. With the click of a button, the rape accuser’s testimony popped up: “His eyes changed and he was not there. They were very black and he ripped me up.”

Illuzzi’s closing comes a day after the defense offered an epic, hourslong closing argument painting the prosecution’s case as a “sinister tale” and the allegations as “regret renamed as rape.”

…

The prosecution’s task has been complicated because the women he’s charged with assaulting didn’t abandon Weinstein after the alleged encounters.

In her closing argument Thursday, Weinstein lawyer Donna Rotunno accused prosecutors of creating an alternate universe that “strips adult women of common sense, autonomy, and responsibility.”

“In this script the powerful man is the villain and he’s so unattractive and large, that no woman would ever want to sleep with him voluntarily. Regret does not exist in this world, only regret renamed as rape.” Rotunno said in remarks that went on for more than 4½ hours.

Yes.

That’s pretty much what I would have said.

“Ladies and gentleman of the jury, my client is a fat, dirty, greasy, stinking slob. He is Jewish. His face looks like a monstrous bridge troll. And as you have seen, he has a penis that looks like a vagina and no testicles. No one in their right mind would want to have sex with him – except those wanting access to his power, which this woman admits that she sought, and continued to seek, even after she claims he raped her.”

This case is so clear cut, that it is damning to our society that it ever went to trial. If he actually gets convicted, then you might as well just all cut your dicks off now, because any man who has sex with a woman will be effectively guilty of rape, years later, under whatever circumstances.

Sure, Harvey would only be convicted because he is so disgusting, but his disgustingness is legally irrelevant. The legal relevance of this case is this:

• A woman was in a sexual relationship with a man; all parties agreed that the sex was consensual
• She continued to have sex with him over a period of years
• According to her, several years into that relationship, he raped her, though she has no evidence other than her word
• After the rape, according to all parties, she continued to have a close relationship with him, including continuing to have sex with him and sending him flattering emails

So yes: any woman you’ve ever had sex with can come and accuse you of secretly raping her years ago. And if Harvey gets convicted, then anyone can be convicted.

This effectively makes you the slave of any woman you are sexually involved with, as she can at any time issue the credible threat that she will get you thrown in prison for rape if you do not do what she wants you to do.

The saddest fact is: even if Harvey gets off, a case like this is bound to get a conviction at some time in the near future, because the new philosophy of our society is that men are simply evil and should be punished for existing. Then a few years after the first conviction, this will become standard.

We should have made our stand with Saint Brock the Martyr.

We have to ask: at which point is it no longer worth it?

At what point will we simply give up on women altogether, rather than continue to be subjected to this abuse?