Who Will Hold Weinstein’s Lawyers To Account?

Harvey Weinstein tried to rape Rowena Chiu, a Miramax assistant, twenty one years ago after evaluating scripts with her in a Venice hotel. Chiu, who has a degree from Oxford in English Literature can write, so she tells a lucid and harrowing story that details how Weinstein, and others like him if we extrapolate, wreak havoc on their victims’ lives.

Props to you for getting this far in the post.

But will you take the 7-8 minutes required to read her story or is it too unpleasant a topic for a fall weekend? Are you giving in to a MeToo malaise? I hope not, women who have suffered sexual abuse deserve much better. And given the intense silencing of victims that Chiu details, we’re really just getting started understanding the breadth and depth of the problem.

Chiu reflects:

“I’ve had many years to ruminate on how I fell into Harvey’s trap, and the best way to understand it is through the four power dynamics of gender, race, seniority and wealth.”

Power over. Power over. Power over. Power over.

I shudder to think Weinstein may leverage his immense wealth to avoid spending the rest of his life in prison. In the U.S. we talk sporadically about growing inequality, but not nearly enough about how that growing inequality creates two distinct judicial systems.

Granted, our legal system depends upon everyone receiving a robust defense when charged with a crime, but what about before then, how is it okay for lawyers to enable monsters to continue committing crimes indiscriminately by strong arming victims into non-disclosure agreements? Why can’t we go after those attorneys and get them disbarred for moral turpitude? It’s not enough to ask “How do they sleep at night?”

The Kavanaugh Nomination Explained

Thank you Lili.

“The nominee looks good on paper—he’s Ivy-educated, Federalist Society–approved, and has the sorts of credentials serious thinkers like to solemnly enumerate. More importantly, though, Kavanaugh isn’t just a booster for presidential power, he’s someone who—having once laid out the grounds for impeaching President Bill Clinton—has since (in a move his advocates will no doubt cite as evidence of his broad-mindedness) changed his mind about how presidents should deal with being investigated. In brief, he doesn’t believe they should have to: ‘[T]he President should be excused from some of the burdens of ordinary citizenship while serving in office,’ Kavanaugh wrote. ‘We should not burden a sitting President with civil suits, criminal investigations, or criminal prosecutions,’ he added. The ‘indictment and trial of a sitting President’ would ‘cripple the federal government.’

Imagine Trump’s feelings when he heard that. Trump used the phrase equal justice twice in his speech, but what he really wants is exceptional justice. And Kavanaugh is willing to give it.

But installing a judge who will quietly immunize you from any legal consequences for wrongdoing requires finesse. It’s a challenge even for a showman of Trump’s caliber. A maneuver like this must look quite, quite normal in order to successfully mask his real rationale. It can be easy to forget, especially on the heels of a bile-filed rally in Montana, that Trump can ‘code switch’ when he has reason to, and he had reason to do so Monday, when what he needed was to make filling a Supreme Court seat look like the act of a statesman rather than a robber baron.

Kavanaugh went out of his way to play his part in catering to Trump’s ego.”

 

Highly plausible. I also LTM (laughed to myself) as Kavanaugh’s acceptance stretched from one minute to seven or so and Little St. Don couldn’t mask his complete and total annoyance at having lost the limelight. I’ve heard some people have been saying he’s a bit of a narcissist.

One Nation Under God, Indivisible, With Liberty and Justice For Those With Economic Means

How can anyone argue the U.S. is the indisputable best country in the world when our tax and health insurance systems are so flawed. On top of that, our legislature is broken. Yet, none of that has done much to quell our arrogance.

Reading David Grann’s story, Trial by Fire, from the New Yorker, reveals an even more fatal flaw. The more money one has, the better our judicial system works. Put differently, people are not equal under the law because not all people can afford competent, let alone expert representation. In the U.S. today, people’s ability to pay determines how much justice they receive.

If you don’t believe that, read Grann’s story about Todd Willingham. If you’re like me, when you finish it, you’ll be completely gutted. Gutted for the masses of working class people wrongly convicted. And gutted for what economic disparity has wrought.