About an hour and a half ago, I wrote about the extraordinary article in The Hill disclosing that prominent attorney Lisa Bloom had gotten together with some Democrat PAC's who supported Hillary Clinton to arrange for big bucks payments to women who would agree to come forward in 2016 and charge Donald Trump with sexual misconduct. It's a blockbuster story, but it had a major flaw in my mind. I could not understand why The Hill, which is ardently pro-left, would publish such a story, no matter how good of a scoop it is. Now, however, I understand.
Just a few hours ago, the Daily Mail published an article disclosing that the same Lisa Bloom allegedly offered actress Rose McGowan six million dollars to come forward and say that Harvey Weinstein had "changed" and ought not to be blamed for his prior behavior. In common terms, Lisa Bloom is now "toast". Being accused of trying to pay off Weinstein's victims to protect Weinstein officially makes Bloom lower than low in the current climate. Bloom and her mother Gloria Allred may become persona non grata among the Hollywood elites and the others in the Democrat pantheon of opinion leaders. As a result, for The Hill to publish this other story which makes Bloom look like a real sleaze, is no longer something that would affront the people whose opinions The Hill values.
Just a few hours ago, the Daily Mail published an article disclosing that the same Lisa Bloom allegedly offered actress Rose McGowan six million dollars to come forward and say that Harvey Weinstein had "changed" and ought not to be blamed for his prior behavior. In common terms, Lisa Bloom is now "toast". Being accused of trying to pay off Weinstein's victims to protect Weinstein officially makes Bloom lower than low in the current climate. Bloom and her mother Gloria Allred may become persona non grata among the Hollywood elites and the others in the Democrat pantheon of opinion leaders. As a result, for The Hill to publish this other story which makes Bloom look like a real sleaze, is no longer something that would affront the people whose opinions The Hill values.
No comments:
Post a Comment