Even The Wolf likely can't clean up Harvey Weinstein's pending troubles

@YankeeFan on line one

 

Three dozen damn liars got together with the L.A. Times to ruin James Toback's good name.

38 women have come forward to accuse director James Toback of sexual harassment

During these meetings, many of the women said, Toback boasted of sexual conquests with the famous and then asked humiliating personal questions. How often do you masturbate? How much pubic hair do you have? He’d tell them, they said, that he couldn’t properly function unless he “jerked off” several times a day. And then he’d dry-hump them or masturbate in front of them, ejaculating into his pants or onto their bodies and then walk away. Meeting over.

The women’s accounts portray James Toback as a man who, for decades, sexually harassed women he hired, women looking for work and women he just saw on the street. The vast majority of these women — 31 of the 38 interviewed — spoke on the record. The Times also interviewed people that the women informed of the incidents when they occurred.

As is often the case, none of them contacted the police at the time. When contacted by The Times, Toback denied the allegations, saying that he had never met any of these women or, if he did, it “was for five minutes and have no recollection.” He also repeatedly claimed that for the last 22 years, it had been “biologically impossible” for him to engage in the behavior described by the women in this story, saying he had diabetes and a heart condition that required medication. Toback declined to offer further details.

 

Toback is filth, and one can only hope some of these cases will result in punishment or prosecution.

From what I saw the other day on Twitter, the reporters have lots and lots of additional anecdotal stuff they couldn't corroborate.

Gawker had him on this stuff a few years ago, but couldn't deliver the coup de grace, or get other outlets to take up the story.

 

As Azrael points out, he's been written about previously, by Gawker among others.

But, like in the case of Bill Cosby, no one picked up the ball.

And, since the LA Times article came out, more women have come forward:

 

National Review wants O'Reilly cast out.

www.nationalreview.com/corner/452986/its-time-conservatives-banish-bill-oreilly-progressives-are-banishing-harvey-weinstein

 

Alma is skeptical.

 

Who's sticking up for O'Reilly, other than Hannity?

Roman Polanski was celebrated by Hollywood long after he was shown to be a rapist.

Whoopi Goldberg objected to the term rape being applied to the Polanski case, because, I guess, she considered the sex between Polanski and a drugged 13-year-old girl to be consensual.

Bill Cosby and James Toback were known sexual predators, who had been exposed in the press. They continued to work, and faced no repercussions from the peers, or in their industry.

Bryan Singer hasn't been ostracized.

But, O'Reilly is finished. He's done. He'll never have a TV show again. He, like Keith Olbermann, will be reduced to producing his own commentaries from his spare bedroom.

 

But O'Reilly is still useful for those who don't want to say anything really mean about Weinstein. He's gold for rape apologists.

 

The author apparently wants him banished to the Phantom Zone, along with his Corgi.

 

Again, the comparison to Weinstein isn't O'Reilly, it's Ailes.

He held women's careers hostage while forcing himself on them.

 

O'Reilly's Corgi is not well liked by conservative Twitter. But he's just an innocent bystander.

 

And you didn't see dedicated whatabouting with Ailes like you do with Weinstein. He was fired and ostracized before his death. Maybe things would have been different, though, if he had lived and gone to sex rehab for a week.