“How could we have known?” That was Hillary Clinton’s response in a recent interview when asked about her relationship with disgraced former Hollywood producer and Democrat megadonor Harvey Weinstein, who is currently facing trial on multiple charges of rape and sexual assault.
The problem with Clinton’s claim? Everyone knew. Weinstein’s behavior was an open secret for years. So the evidence is her own words. She lied.
Clinton has long exhibited a tendency to claim ignorance to avoid accountability for years — and she appears to have relied on that go-to response yet again.
The bulk of Clinton’s interview with The Hollywood Reporter was largely centered around a new documentary series about Clinton that will be aired by Hulu.
The interview touched on topics such as her failed presidential bid and her political career and connections, as well as some of her personal and professional relationships, particularly with her husband, former President Bill Clinton.
At one point, the conversation moved to Clinton’s increasing foray into the entertainment realm and how it compared to that of former president and first lady Barack and Michelle Obama, who’ve scored lucrative production deals with Netflix and Spotify, with the primary question being whether Clinton and her daughter Chelsea would also form their own production company.
Along those lines, Clinton was asked, “Speaking of Hollywood, with his trial in the news right now, do you have regrets about your lengthy association with Harvey Weinstein?”
Clinton got defensive, replying, “How could we have known? He raised money for me, for the Obamas, for Democrats in general. And that at the time was something that everybody thought made sense. And of course, if all of us had known what we know now, it would have affected our behavior.”
That’s a difficult pill to swallow, however, as it seems highly unlikely that Clinton, or for that matter the Obamas and hundreds of congressional Democrats over the years, didn’t know or at least suspect what Weinstein was doing or what kind of a person he actually was.
Weinstein’s behavior was an “open secret”
It has been made abundantly clear over the past year or two that Weinstein’s gross misconduct was an “open secret” in and around Hollywood, something everyone pretty much knew about but chose to look the other way and ignore, due to his powerful position as a top producer and financier.
Worse, actress Lena Dunham and journalist Tina Brown said they specifically alerted Clinton’s 2016 presidential campaign about Weinstein and warned them against accepting donations from him — yet did Clinton heed them? Apparently not, because she was seen dining with Weinstein just weeks after her Election Day loss.
It seems virtually impossible for the Clintons to have been completely unaware of Weinstein’s behavior over the years. It’s doubtful that anybody other than her most strident sycophants in the media will actually buy what she is selling.