What Weinstein’s lawyer actually means is, this is a great day for misogynists who believe women lie about rape, and a very dark day for survivors and the justice system. pic.twitter.com/E778ZURXrh

— Dr Charlotte Proudman (@DrProudman) April 25, 2024

See: Consent Theory on Steroids: Harvey Weinstein Sentenced to TWENTY-THREE YEARS IN PRISON

Well, we didn’t expect this.

Apparently, the Harvey Weinstein conviction, based exclusively on one of his girlfriends claiming that at some point in their relationship, they had sex when she didn’t really feel like it. (She had sex with him both before and after the alleged events, but one time, it wasn’t “consensual.”)

This is a massive win for all men.

No one likes Harvey Weinstein, but he didn’t “rape” anyone, and what this ruling did was make it so all forms of normal heterosexual sex could be relabeled “rape,” and men could face decades in prison based on a completely fake crime for which there was no evidence.

Reuters:

Harvey Weinstein’s 2020 conviction for sexual assault and rape was overturned by New York’s highest court, reopening the landmark case that fueled the #MeToo movement and highlighting the challenges of holding powerful men accountable.

Many accusers of the former Hollywood movie mogul condemned Thursday’s decision, with the actress Ashley Judd telling reporters it was “an act of institutional betrayal.”

You’re plastic surgery is an act of institutional betrayal, Ashley.

You had sex with Harvey to promote your career, because you are a prostitute. Harvey fulfilled his end of the bargain, and made you a star. Adults make decisions and they live with them.

Shut your deformed whore mouth.

The office of Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg signaled it planned to retry Weinstein.

In a bitterly divided 4-3 ruling, the state Court of Appeals said the trial judge made a critical mistake by letting women testify that Weinstein assaulted them, even though their accusations were not part of the charges he faced.

The appeals court said the trial judge compounded the error by ruling that if Weinstein took the witness stand, prosecutors could question him on a wide range of “loathsome” conduct, including bullying and fits of anger toward associates.

It said the ruling had an impact on Weinstein’s decision not to testify in his own defense, undermining a fact-finding process that turned on the parties’ credibility.

“The remedy for these egregious errors is a new trial,” Judge Jenny Rivera wrote for the majority.

Are you even allowed to do that?

Weinstein, 72, has been serving a 23-year sentence in a prison in upstate Rome, New York.

Jurors in Manhattan convicted him in February 2020 of sexually assaulting former production assistant Miriam Haley in 2006, and raping aspiring actress Jessica Mann in 2013.

Miriam Haley

Jessica Mann

The conviction included charges of first-degree sexual assault and third-degree rape. Weinstein was acquitted on other charges.

At a press conference, Weinstein’s lawyer Arthur Aidala called the decision “a great day for America.”

True.

Aidala said Weinstein expressed relief when they spoke about the decision, which Weinstein learned about when someone at the prison handed him a piece of paper announcing the outcome.

“He just said thank you more times than I can count,” Aidala said. “He’s in a horrible place, a horrible situation, but the human spirit is strong and he’s done the best he can.”

Weinstein is not expected to be freed immediately, as he faces a separate 16-year prison term imposed last year in California after he was convicted for the 2013 rape of an actress at a Los Angeles hotel. That conviction still stands.

Yeah, that was also fake.

Just let him out.

Then put him on trial for making “Good Will Hunting” and polluting the soul of America.

NOW: Harvey Weinstein’s legal team holds a press conference after his 2020 rape conviction was overturned by the New York Court of Appeals earlier today

An anti-Trump protester, after learning the press conference was about Weinstein, held up a sign reading “is a pig” pic.twitter.com/rOh8OdrFom

— katie smith (@probablyreadit) April 25, 2024

This is the same story with Harvey Weinstein. He had love letters from that bitch. She also admitted she had “consensual” sex with him both before and after the “unconsensual” sex she accused him of.

All of this “oh yeah, I just remembered that guy raped me decades ago” stuff is obviously bullshit. It’s actually cartoonish.

What sort of person takes this seriously?

Further: if this whore was shit on, who says that in public? Like, I assume her father is still alive. He’s reading the news, like, eye-bulging, “my daughter says the WWF guy shit on her…?! And she’s telling everyone this…?!”

New York Post:

A woman who alleges she was sexually abused for years by Vince McMahon wrote a gushing love letter to the former WWE CEO in which she declared the duo was “in love with a capital L” — and she now claims that McMahon coerced her to do it, The Post has learned.

Janel Grant — whose bombshell lawsuit landed a day before the wrestling icon abruptly stepped down as executive chairman of WWE-parent TKO Group Holdings — penned a lengthy email to McMahon dated Dec. 24, 2021 in which she called him “my best friend, my love and my everything.”

Huh.

“After almost 3 years together, it’ like my life isn’t even real to me unless you’re there and in it and I’m sharing it all with you,” Grant, 43, wrote in the Christmas Eve letter to 78-year-old McMahon obtained by The Post.

The lovestruck letter stands in contrast to the allegations in her explosive lawsuit filed in Connecticut federal court in January, which claimed that McMahon allegedly defecated on Grant’s head during a threesome in May 2020 — some 18 months before she wrote the alleged love letter.

Which is worse:

• She’s lying about being shit on?
• Or she wrote that gushing love letter to a man who shit on her?

Both are very possible.

But Grant’s attorney, Ann Callis, told The Post that McMahon actually instructed Grant to write the note.

This is the proof of that:

But she really wants him to have a nice letter, even in that proof.

Women are so disgusting.

They just have to be removed from society. There is no other option.

We cannot have this.

Taiwan’s government has proposed tougher punishments for sexual harassment offences.

It follows a wave of accusations that’s been dubbed Taiwan’s #MeToo movement. pic.twitter.com/nW2EHTQX19

— TaiwanPlus (@taiwanplusnews) July 13, 2023

Taiwan’s sexual harassment reporting laws “confusing for victims.”

The gov’t is amending its gender equality and sexual harassment laws in the wake of a #MeToo wave. TaiwanPlus reporter Louise Watt spoke to Darice D. Chang, ambassador for Women’s March Taiwan, to find out more. pic.twitter.com/lIAnpMrPQR

— TaiwanPlus (@taiwanplusnews) July 13, 2023

Are there any men in the theatre tonight? Put them up against the wall!

And that one looks flirtatious and that one sniffs poon!

Who let all of this riff-raff into the room?

There’s one winking his eye and another pointing at his cock!

If I had my way, I’d have all of you shot!

Reuters:

Taiwan’s cabinet on Thursday proposed stricter laws against sexual harassment as a recent surge in allegations brought the #MeToo movement to the island nearly six years after it gained global prominence.

The proposed reforms of Taiwan’s three gender equality laws introduce harsher penalties for perpetrators, lengthen the statute of limitations for filing complaints, and increase resources to support victims.

The #MeToo movement – ignited in 2017 by accusations of sexual misconduct against Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein – saw women around the world take to social media to disclose their experiences with sexual harassment, spawning investigations and toppling high-profile men from positions of power.

Addressing workplace harassment that takes advantage of power imbalances is a priority for Taiwan’s reforms, Lo Ping-cheng, minister without portfolio who led the cabinet’s efforts, told a news conference after a meeting during which the cabinet proposed the legal amendments.

Under the revised laws, an employer found guilty of sexual harassment could be fined up to T$1 million ($32,306) and jailed for up to three years.

Taiwan is a vaginal government ruling over a group of men who pride themselves on their dignity.

It’s really unsustainable.

Why would the men of this Chinese island allow themselves to be subjected to this humiliation from stupid, irate whores?

The US government is demanding they start a Ukraine-style war against China – explicitly in defense of so-called “anal marriage” and all of this vaginal gibberish.

If I were the US, directing this Cuntocracy, I would chill out.

Poll numbers for the KMT – the pro-reunification party – continue to rise like a teased cock, as they force this stuff down the throats of the people.

When the rubber hits the road, and the US makes their big push to get Taiwan into war, you’re going to see that for the majority of men in Taiwan, their patriotism is not to the American-backed Cuntocracy, but to their race and nation.

Related: If a Woman Says You Raped Her, You’re Going to Jail Despite Lack of Evidence

Previously: Harvey Rape-Hoaxed Again by Courts! 18 More Years!

This is your life now – if a woman says you did a crime and the jury believes here, that’s all the evidence required.

You go to prison.

AP:

Most of the jurors at Harvey Weinstein’s Los Angeles trial were ready to convict him of crimes related to three of the four women he was charged with raping or sexually assaulting.

Yet after weeks of deliberation the eight men and four women voted unanimously to convict him of crimes against only one: a Russian-born model and actor known as Jane Doe 1. She lived in Rome and was visiting California for a film festival at age 34 in 2013, when she said the now-disgraced film mogul appeared uninvited at her Los Angeles hotel room door in the middle of the night.

The jurors were released from service and allowed to talk publicly after more than two months Tuesday, when they could not reach a unanimous decision on two aggravating factors that might have made for a higher sentence. Their deliberations took nine days spanning more than two weeks, but those who spoke to reporters said the talks were never contentious.

Weinstein was found guilty of one count of rape and two counts of sexual assault against Jane Doe 1. He now faces up to 18 years in prison in California to go with a 23-year sentence for a rape and sexual assault conviction in New York.

Jurors said that Jane Doe 1′s composure, and the fact that she did not contact Weinstein after he raped her, allowed the divided group to reach consensus on her accusations.

“I thought Jane Doe 1 was very convincing in her story,” said one juror, a 62-year-old man who works in banking and only provided his first name, Michael, because he sought to maintain privacy amid the publicity surrounding the case.

The physical and technical evidence surrounding Jane Doe 1 was some of the thinnest at the trial, but jurors were told that under the law, if they found an accuser’s story credible, that alone could be enough to convict.

We mock the Nuremberg Trials, and indeed, all legal scholars mock them because people were convicted based on nothing but eyewitness accounts.

That is the only precedent for what they are doing now with the Weinstein Standard.

Everyone on earth is repulsed by Weinstein. I get that. Right-wingers will talk about how he’s Jewish. I get that too. But the fact is, they knew how hated he was and that’s why they used him to set this new standard.

Heterosexual sex is now illegal in America.

BREAKING: Jurors have found Harvey Weinstein guilty of of rape at a Los Angeles trial in the latest moment of #MeToo reckoning.

Weinstein will now have a California prison sentence added to the more than 20 years he has left to serve in New York. https://t.co/Q3QBTXx9FA

— The Associated Press (@AP) December 19, 2022

Previously: 

• BREAKING: Harvey Weinstein Convicted of RAPE, And with Him, So are All Men in America
• Consent Theory on Trial: Weinstein Jury Appears to be Hung on Two Counts

Harvey Weinstein has been convicted of rape, yet again, exclusively on the claims of prostitutes who were parasiting off of him.

Reuters:

Former movie producer Harvey Weinstein was found guilty of rape and two other sexual assault counts by a Los Angeles jury on Monday, marking the second conviction of the onetime Hollywood kingmaker who became the face of #MeToo sexual abuse allegations five years ago.

The jury found Weinstein guilty of rape, forcible oral copulation and sexual penetration by a foreign object involving one woman, but acquitted him of charges relating to a second alleged victim, the Los Angeles Superior Court announced.

The jury could not reach a verdict on two allegations, including rape, by Jennifer Siebel Newsom, the wife of California’s Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom, who previously disclosed she was Jane Doe 4 in the trial. The jury did not reach a verdict on charges relating to one other woman.

Imagine being Gavin Newsom and laying down in bed with your wife every night and knowing she had sex with Harvey Weinstein.

You’d have to tell yourself it was rape.

But all men know it wasn’t rape. And apparently, her lies weren’t even enough to convict a jury of angry kooks.

Weinstein, 70, is already serving a 23-year prison sentence after being convicted of sexual misconduct in New York.

The former model and actress that Weinstein was convicted of raping at a Los Angeles hotel in 2013, and known in court as Jane Doe 1, issued a statement shortly after the verdict.

“Harvey Weinstein forever destroyed a part of me that night in 2013 and I will never get that back. The criminal trial was brutal and Weinstein’s lawyers put me through hell on the witness stand, but I knew I had to see this through to the end, and I did. I hope Weinstein never sees the outside of a prison cell during his lifetime.”

Weinstein faces up to 18 years in prison on the counts for which he was convicted, but aggravating factors could increase that to 24 years. Lawyers return to court on Tuesday to deliver arguments about aggravating factors.

This is insane.

Elizabeth Fegan, Siebel Newsom’s attorney, said in a statement: “While we are heartened that the jury found Weinstein guilty on some of the counts, we are disappointed that the jury could not reach a unanimous verdict on Jane Doe 4,” Fegan said.

“She will continue to fight for all women and all survivors of abuse against a system that permits the victim to be shamed and re-traumatized in the name of justice.”

In Los Angeles, Weinstein faced seven counts of rape and sexual assault from four women during encounters between 2004 and 2013.

Yes – I’m sure there was a lot of really clear evidence of stuff from 10-20 years ago!

Who is buying this bullshit???

The only way they got away with it is this: Weinstein is repulsive, and people just simply do not like him.

However, now that they’ve set this precedent, it applies to all men in America.

Heterosexual sex is now illegal.

Superior Court Judge Lisa Lench declared a mistrial on the counts where the jury could not reach a verdict, including the allegations made by Siebel Newsom.

The women had alleged during often graphic testimony that the powerful producer of “Pulp Fiction” and “Shakespeare in Love” masturbated in front of them and groped or raped them.

He should have been on trial for making Shakespeare in Love.

That would be an easy conviction – we have evidence he did that!

Siebel Newsom and three other women offered testimony that provided the basis for the two counts of rape and five counts of sexual assault that Weinstein faced.

Four additional women offered similar stories to buttress the prosecution’s arguments that Weinstein routinely abused his position as a Hollywood power player to prey on women.

No one argues that point. He never argued that point.

The point of contention is “is it rape?” and the obvious answer is no.

It wasn’t rape in the cases of dozens of other women, who all admitted to having sex with him in exchange for roles in films. Those women came out and whined that he should have given them the roles for free. However, that wasn’t what he was doing. What he was doing was trading roles in films for sex. There are a lot of women in the world, and if these women didn’t want to have sex with him for a role in a film, he would have found other women.

They made the deal. Now they say they regret it. I doubt they regret getting the opportunities he gave them though, and the cost of those opportunities was sex.

They said he promised help with securing an audition or a book deal, then arranged meetings where staff disappeared and left them alone with him.

Weinstein said all of his sexual encounters were consensual and pleaded not guilty.

Defense attorneys argued that the women willingly had sex with Weinstein because they believed he would help their careers, part of what they said was a widespread “casting couch” culture in the film industry. In two of the cases, they said the sexual contact was fabricated.

They also highlighted that some of the accusers, including Siebel Newsom, kept in contact with Weinstein, which they argued did not make sense if he had attacked them.

I’m going to go through and pull all the details of this latest crucifixion. I didn’t follow this case like I followed the first one, because I already knew he’d be convicted. The precedent was set for him and every other man in America with the New York trial.

I will probably do some Twitter threads on this.

https://twitter.com/WorldWarWang/status/1605286916785479680

There are so many problems, it’s hard to even come up with a full list, but here are the basics:

• There is no way to prove a rape that happened a decade ago, so the only thing the court has to go on is “believe all women.” In a frightening and bizarre transformation of the American legal system, prosecutors can now put women in front of a jury to cry and see if the jury believes her. It cannot be stated how drastically this veers from the entire history of the Western legal system and in fact, every legal system on earth.
• He has proof that these women voluntarily had sex with him. In the New York case, one of the women claimed she had been having sex with him already, then he raped her, then she dated him for a year after that. What these feminist Jew lawyers did was get her to go through her entire sexual history with this man and dial in to one sex meeting – over the course of 4+ years of sex meetings – that seemed especially uncomfortable. With all the women, Harvey has all this evidence that they kept in contact and said nice things about him and sent him nice messages after they claim they were raped.
• Even if they could prove it, what they describe is not “rape,” because he did not use any force. They don’t even claim he used force. In the New York case, it was “third degree rape,” which is rape with no force. No one even knows what that is.

I know people don’t like Harvey Weinstein. I don’t like him either. But that is exactly the point. They needed someone that everyone hates to be able to push through a totally new precedent on sex in America.

Since Harvey’s first trial, the sex prosecutions have gotten completely out of control. Men all over America are being hit with fake rape charges. They have no defense. Under this precedent, it is literally impossible to prove you didn’t rape a woman, because the court does not require any evidence.

Related: A Woman is Finally Raped for Real!

I haven’t reported much on the Johnny Depp trial. I probably should have because it is relevant to my interests that this drug-addled life-failure guy completely destroyed a stupid bitch who tried to wreck him.

But it was just kind of boring to me, and I didn’t have time to sit around watching these court room scenes, so it felt best to just let it go. There was so much coverage of it everywhere, it’s not like people couldn’t find other coverage of it.

But yeah – he won.

This basically destroys the entire metoo movement, as it is now known as a legal fact that women will just lie outrageously for their own material benefit.

RT:

A Virginia jury ruled in favor of actor Johnny Depp in a libel suit against his ex-wife, Amber Heard, finding that she defamed him with accusations of domestic abuse.

Depp was awarded $15 million in damages, though that may be reduced by law. Heard’s counter-suit was largely dismissed, with the jury finding Depp defamed her in only one instance, awarding $2 million in damages.

Depp sued Heard for $50 million, accusing her of libel in a 2018 Washington Post op-ed insinuating that he was a domestic abuser. Heard counter-sued for $100 million, saying Depp’s lawyer defamed her by calling the accusation a hoax. The trial opened on April 11 and went to the jury last Friday. It took three working days for the seven-person civil jury in Fairfax, Virginia to return the unanimous verdict.

Two out of three of Heard’s counts were dismissed, with the ‘Aquaman’ star getting awarded $2 million in damages for one instance the jury considered defamation – a statement made by Adam Waldman, the attorney who represented Depp in the divorce proceedings. Depp was awarded $10 million in compensatory and $5 million in punitive damages, though the latter may be capped by law to around $350,000.

The two actors started dating in 2011 and got married in February 2015. Heard filed for divorce just 15 months later, accusing Depp of having physically abused her and securing a temporary restraining order against the Oscar-nominated actor.

Depp denied the abuse and said Heard made the allegation “to secure a premature financial resolution” in the divorce proceedings, which were finalized in 2017.

In their respective defamation lawsuits, each had accused the other of destroying their career. Depp was dropped from a major role in the ‘Fantastic Beasts’ series of Harry Potter prequels.

Heard kept her role in the ‘Aquaman’ sequel, but her screen time has reportedly been drastically cut and a fan petition to have her cut entirely has attracted millions of signatures.

During the trial, Depp revealed that Disney had removed him from the ‘Pirates of the Caribbean’ franchise over Heard’s allegations, while continuing to use his likeness for rides and merchandise.

“They just didn’t want there to be something trailing behind me that they’d find,” he said.

“That is true,” Depp added when Heard’s lawyer said “nothing on this earth” would get him to work with Disney again on another ‘Pirates’ film, even “$300 million and a million alpacas.”

I’m not sure he won’t do another Pirates film. He is definitely going to go back to make more terrible films. But that isn’t the point here. Neither is the point that he lost at least ten times what Heard was ordered to pay him as a result of her slander.

The point is: this trial was basically a Jussie Smollett moment for women. Just as there will never be another hate crime accusation where people don’t ask if it was fake, there will never be another abuse allegation where people don’t ask if the woman is lying. That’s a pretty big deal, because women are virtually always lying – at least by male definitions of the word “lying” – and the primary way they’ve been able to get away with these sex and abuse scams is that people feel bad for women.

Men have a natural drive to protect women, because women are needed for the procreation process. Without women, there are no children, and without children, you die. So women have, all throughout history, been given completely unwarranted special treatment. That is what it is – it’s just a biological reality of humans, so you can’t really criticize it in a meaningful way.

However, this all changed when women started to be given the same rights as men. It used to be the case in Western civilization (and still is the case in most nonwhite nations), that while women were the benefactors of a special status in society, receiving special physical protections and largely not held responsible for any of their actions, they were also not taken seriously, and if they made some outrageous claim, men would say “well, that’s just a woman talking.” However, when feminism came in, suddenly women were given equal status to men, and their statements were meant to be taken seriously, but they maintained all of the privileges of being women. So, given that women were allowed to be involved in public discourse, you could no longer just say “well, that’s just a woman talking” and were instead obligated to take their statements seriously.

There is no greater proof of this combination of female traditional privilege and modern women’s rights than the metoo slogan of “believe all women.” There had been a general sentiment that you should protect all women, even when their actions didn’t warrant being protected, but then when they were given equal status with men, that privilege transferred to the realm of men, and you had people with all of the rights and zero of the responsibilities of men. You have effectively created monsters who can do basically anything they want to anyone without any consequences, and even be rewarded based on how unconscionable their behaviors are.

The Depp victory obviously doesn’t totally overturn the entire feminist order – but it’s a pretty good start. If instead of saying “believe all women” we ask “well, what if she’s lying?”, we have a situation where a huge number of women’s behaviors are going to be off-limits. Before the Depp trial, we were basically in a place where a woman could do virtually anything – short of murder, and even then, women’s sentences are absurdly lower than men’s.

You will notice that feminism is always two-pronged:

• It is about increasing women’s power, and
• It is about decreasing women’s responsibility

You have both things wrapped up in a package in the so-called “gender pay gap” narrative. The demand is that women should get paid more for working less – more power, less responsibility.

The thing about this is, possibly with notable exceptions, women would not be able to function in the world of men if they were held to the same standards as men. So feminism has to argue for a removal of responsibilities alongside demands for an increase in power.

The whole metoo movement, introducing fake rape/abuse allegations as a weapon and claiming it was impossible for women to lie was an extreme escalation of female privilege, giving them an absolute power to ruin men’s lives. And this is relatively new. It began with Brock Turner in 2015, when the college boy was sentenced for “abusing” a drunk girl he was on a date with after a make-out and finger-banging session was invaded by the Swedes. The girl, who later turned out to be an Asian-Jew, saw an opportunity to alleviate her embarrassment by going along with the narrative that the Swedes put forward that she was being “raped.” The court sided with the accuser, despite the fact that no evidence existed that the sexual act was “nonconsensual,” and she admitted she couldn’t even remember what happened.

From there you had this downward spiral, with Jewish feminist lawyers attacking basically all men in Hollywood with the metoo movement, which culminated in Harvey Weinstein being sentenced to prison on claims that he “raped” his girlfriend one time during a years long sexual relationship she had with him. No evidence was presented to support the claim, and the court decided that a woman’s words are effectively the word of God – it is impossible she is lying because she is a woman.

So, maybe the Depp win rolls us back to Brock Turner – to 2015 standards. It’s not going to affect women’s privileges in the workplace, their ability to weasel out of traffic tickets and shoplifting arrests, or the sentencing standards for serious crimes. It will just slightly dull the blade of the fake rape and abuse charges that women have been successfully lodging against men for the past several years.

But that’s not a small thing – gaining any ground at all against the left is a big victory in a society that has been on an uninterrupted slide into the abyss for decades. This isn’t as big as the Trump 2016 victory, but it’s in the same category as that – it is a gaining of ground by sanity against the insanity of Jewish leftism. I think “this is women’s Jussie Smollett” is a good description of what transpired this week.

The Laser-Eyes of American Justice

Here’s a hot take: just as no one else could have set the standard for rape-hoaxing that Harvey Weinstein set, given that he was literally the single most repulsive person on earth, no one other than Johnny Depp could have changed the game like this, given that he is so dearly beloved by women. Men were disgusted by Weinstein in the same way that women are enthralled by Depp. Justice can’t be perfectly blind, but this demonstrates that Justice in America has 20/20 vision and a pair of binoculars.

One case was criminal and one was civil, but they both went to a jury and you’re dealing with the exact same question: do you believe this lying slut? The fact that the slut accusing the handsome man was not believed and the slut accusing the odious Jew gargoyle was believed should be reason for inquiry into the functioning of the American justice system.

The same thing, as we know, is happening with race, where black people are treated completely differently than white people, and with politics, where abortion people are allowed to riot and attack government buildings but Trump-supporters are thrown in a special political prison in solitary confinement on questionable trespassing charges. That’s really a bigger issue, but the difference between Johnny and Harvey’s outcomes is probably easier for people to think about.

You cannot have a functional society without a functional justice system. No one is going to honor a social contract that is being constantly breached. We have a lot of problems in our society, but the corruption of the justice system is in some ways the single most dire problem, as without a functioning justice system there is no possible way anything can ever be fixed.

Kathryn Mayorga claims Cristiano Ronaldo offered to show her his Pokemon card collection as a ruse to get her into his room.

I recently heard a long whiny thing about how Conor McGregor rapes bitches left and right and gets away with it because he’s famous.

Now we hear that Ronaldo is doing this too.

Ronaldo is obviously a homosexual, and McGregor might not be gay, but I’d be more apt to believe he’d raped a man than a woman.

All of this rape talk in the media is just a demonization of male sexuality, and an endless promotion of female supremacy.

New York Post:

Police investigating Cristiano Ronaldo over an alleged rape believed they had enough evidence to arrest and charge the soccer star — but were scuppered by a senior official.

Cops in Las Vegas — where accuser Kathryn Mayorga claimed the Manchester United ace had raped her in a hotel room — had even signed a warrant for Ronaldo’s arrest.

But Clark County District Attorney Steve Wolfson slapped down the detectives and declined to prosecute the case.

In a bombshell court transcript unearthed by The Sun, Mayorga’s lawyer Leslie Mark Stovall, revealed: “What happened is when that [arrest warrant] was submitted to the district attorney’s office, Mr. Wolfson declined to prosecute.

“He doesn’t say why he decided to decline and anything — any argument is just speculation. It was within the statute of limitations.

“The police believed that they had a case to prosecute for one count of sexual assault and the DA decided not to.”

Stovall made the claim in the US District Court in Las Vegas on September 21 last year, but the transcript has only now come to light.

DA Wolfson is the top prosecutor in Las Vegas, which comes under Clark County, Nevada.

In July, 2019 after reviewing the police investigation, Mr Wolfson said there wasn’t enough evidence to prove the allegations against Ronaldo beyond reasonable doubt, and no charges were filed.

The superstar striker has fiercely denied raping Mayorga at the Palms Hotel and Casino on June 12, 2009.

Ron, 37, settled with his accuser in a civil case where she accepted a $373,839.24 “hush” payment, but she is now seeking a further $75,835,200 in damages.

Maybe Ronaldo isn’t gay, and maybe he had sex with this woman.

But the story is that she went to his hotel room. I’m sure you can get the camera footage of her entering his hotel room.

That should be the end of it.

Anything that happens inside of a hotel room is he said, she said, and when what she said means she gets millions of dollars in free money, the situation becomes ridiculous.

Furthermore, if a woman voluntarily goes into a man’s hotel room, she has already agreed to sex, and therefore “rape” is impossible. Even if she tries to leave and he blocks the door – what goes on in a room between a man and a woman after she has agreed to go in the room with him is outside of the purview of the legal system. Or rather, it would be in any sane society.

Elon Musk needs to jump on this and accuse Bill Gates of creating too much carbon dioxide with his nude sex orgies.

All that huffing and puffing is making the air too hot, Bill!

Time to pay the price – collapse Microsoft stock to keep a cool breeze blowing through the willows!

LATEST: Microsoft’s directors started a probe into Bill Gates’s alleged involvement with a female employee that was deemed inappropriate and decided that the co-founder had to step down from the board last year, Dow Jones reports https://t.co/xi0jWrEOcw $MSFT

— Bloomberg (@business) May 16, 2021

Gates said he left his post on the Microsoft board in 2020 to focus on philanthropy. https://t.co/AWpb5e872X

— HuffPost Politics (@HuffPostPol) May 17, 2021

Exclusive: The breakup of Bill and Melinda Gates’s marriage is shedding new light on an open secret within Microsoft and his foundation: Gates has at times behaved badly in work-related settings.

A @nytimes investigation. @FlitterOnFraud @MattGoldstein26 https://t.co/Z66j5wB7NS

— David Enrich (@davidenrich) May 16, 2021

WSJ exclusive: Microsoft directors started an investigation in 2019 into allegations by a female staffer of a sexual relationship with Bill Gates. Gates decided to resign from the board before the probe was completed. Our deep dive into what happened: https://t.co/sUykmiLtY2

— Emily Glazer (@EmilyGlazer) May 16, 2021

Melinda French Gates was said to be aware of Bill Gates’ wandering eye. However, two things shook their marriage in recent years: his response to a sexual harassment claim against one of his employees and his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein. https://t.co/ZLyow3MNef

— The New York Times (@nytimes) May 16, 2021

EXCLUSIVE: Jeffrey Epstein gave Bill Gates advice on how to end his 'toxic' marriage https://t.co/pcaPWbHk3p

— Noah Shachtman (@NoahShachtman) May 16, 2021

Bill Gates known for 'womanizing,' naked pool parties, biographer says https://t.co/ERSq4jGwpv pic.twitter.com/K7A9lRR3Fa

— New York Post (@nypost) May 10, 2021

But seriously though – this is just divorce propaganda.

Melinda Gates is smearing the weirdo Bill Gates as a sex pervert, even though it is clear from his physical form that he has lower testosterone than she does.

Have you seen his vulturelike posture?

Have you seen the way his hand just flop around on his wrists like tetherballs?

Have you seen the fact that he is 65 but looks like he’s 87?

Someone with testosterone that low doesn’t really have any sexuality, unless he is a pedophile or a furry.

The woman is a liar.

All the men who claim that to keep a marriage together “you just have to be alpha” need to check what exactly is going on in their brains.

Divorces of the last couple years:

• Brad Pitt (world #1 sex symbol)
• Johnny Depp (world #2 sex symbol)
• Ben Affleck (world greatest actor of all time)
• Jeff Bezos (world #1 richest person)
• Bill Gates (world global overlord person)
• Derek Chauvin (world champion animal control manager)

Also, this rich super-sized Jew was divorced by a mutated geriatric cancer patient:

Furthermore: every man you know is either:

• Never married
• Divorced
• In the process of divorce
• Completely controlled by his wife

Don’t lie.

Everyone knows this is true.

Just because the media doesn’t talk about it doesn’t mean it isn’t obviously, self evidently true that virtually every marriage that took place after the year 2000 (and most of them that took place before that) is going to “fail” when a woman decides she’s bored.

Understand this: women do not care about you. They do not care about family. They do not care about their children. The single thing that a woman cares about is being entertained. Period. The end. Nothing else.

In the case of women, “entertained” means more broadly “doing something that makes them the focus of attention.”

Sex can entertain women, children can entertain women.

What’s more: destroying a marriage can entertain women.

Men think they can get married and it’s settled – well, sorry, this is no longer a Christian society, you can’t beat your wife or you’ll go to prison, and if you simply try to live normally, the woman will start harassing you and going ape. She will start pushing your buttons, trying to get you to snap, because the conflict excites her.

It excites her when her friends tell her what a victim she is, and how her husband is so mean, and how she doesn’t need him.

The adventure of the post-divorce excites her as much as the divorce itself.

You need to understand all of this.

Stop thinking you’re going to beat the house.

If you’re going to get married, you need to keep the woman in a constant state of fear, uncertainty and doubt.

Sadly, that is mostly impossible. Maybe the solution is to keep her constantly pregnant?

I don’t know.

What I do know is this: you need to keep your money HIDDEN. Do not let her know the money exists. Make her think you’re broke by faking a gambling addiction or something. Of course, she will leave you because she thinks you’re broke, but she was going to leave you anyway!

The only solution to America is JESUS CHRIST.

There is no other solution. You cannot make a society work without God. If you try, you end up with gay anal tranny children, replacement immigration, a massive destructive flu hoax, race riots, and a 100% divorce rate.

People have accused me of being more vocally religious over the last couple of years as a way to boost morale. If I was doing that, I don’t see how it would be bad. In part I am obviously doing that. But I’m also just telling you as a matter of scientific fact: society cannot work without religion.

Do you know the etymology of the word? “Religion” mean “to bind together again.”

Yes, you have to believe that Jesus walked on water and was born of a Virgin. But the purpose of believing that is to surrender yourself to the higher power of God. People claim that “science” overtook religion, but this is actually retarded. Firstly, everyone in ancient times knew walking on water or a virgin birth was physically impossible. You don’t have to understand atoms or genetics to know that this is impossible.

Think about it: There was no point at which sperm was discovered in a microscope and then someone said “Jesus couldn’t have been born of a virgin because there wouldn’t be any sperm!” Everyone already knew that pregnancy is a result of semen injection. Primitive cave people in Africa know this (although to be fair, some anthropologists have argued that at the time the white man arrived in Australia, the Abos had not yet made the connection between sex and pregnancy, and believed sex was just a fun thing and pregnancy was a random event).

Believing in the miracles of Christ is part of the surrender to God. That’s why Christ performed the miracles in the first place. He said it while He was doing it: “I do this so that you will believe.”

To relate this back to the marriage problem: believing in a higher power that can control reality itself is what binds people together. It is what binds a nation together and it is what binds a family together. If you do not believe in that higher power, you can do anything of your own will.

This is why I’ve told you: evangelicals like the greedy plastic surgery hag Joyce Meyer preaching the “Gospel of Divorce” are not actually Christians. People who put the material world first, who put their personal happiness first, do not actually believe God is in control. They have not surrendered their will to Him. They can make whatever claims they want, but “Evangelical Judeo-Christianity” is ultimate just a Jewish scam and a money racket.

You will know them by their divorce rate.

These churches literally preach divorce!

This is to say: Judeo-Christianity is a fake religion, which is why it failed so miserably to serve as the custodian of our civilization. It failed the basic task of family. No other task can be accomplished once you’ve failed at that.

Any smart person is free to try to explain how you build a society without families, but no person on earth can explain how you build families without religion.

Speaking of which…

What if Melinda was the power behind the throne and after the divorce Bill Gates turns good?

Freed from the claws of this satanic parasite, maybe he’ll turn against the illuminati and fight against the vaxx agenda?

No but seriously: with this bitch gone, he’s just going to have more time to devote to his diabolical agenda. Obviously, the divorce was the bitch’s fault. Every divorce is the bitch’s fault, just like every single time Adam ate of the fruit of the Tree of the Knowledge of Good and Evil it was the bitch’s fault.

But Bill Gates, like the Judeo-Christians and other servants of the Jews, has given himself over to the spirit of a woman.

The solution to his problem would have been to forgive his mother.

But it’s too late for that now.

They’re going to make it so in college if a woman accuses you of anything, you’re guilty.

That is the new standard. A woman’s word is equal to physical proof of a crime.

If you’re in college, just save your allowance and go to a hooker before going with one of the “free” ones on campus (they’re not actually free, you have to give them your time and possibly a lot more).

The reason Donald Trump changed the rules was because there were non-stop rape hoaxes, and guys like the victim of Mattress Girl were getting railroaded.

New York Times:

President Biden on Monday directed the Education Department to conduct an expansive review of all policies on sex and gender discrimination and violence in schools, effectively beginning his promised effort to dismantle Trump-era rules on sexual misconduct that afforded greater protections to students accused of assault.

With two executive orders — one ordering the new education secretary to review those policies, and the other establishing a gender-focused White House policy council — Mr. Biden, an author of the Violence Against Women Act, waded into an area that has been important to him but has been politically charged for more than a decade.

The Obama administration issued guidance to schools, colleges and universities that critics in and out of academia said leaned too heavily toward accusers and offered scant protections or due process for students and faculty accused of sexual harassment, assault or other misconduct. The Trump administration swept those aside and delivered the first-ever regulations on sexual misconduct, which many saw as swinging too far the other way, offering the accused too much power through guaranteed courtlike tribunals and cross-examination of accusers.

Believe all women laws are all going to go back to Harvey Weinstein.

That was a situation where it was proved in court that one of the women was his girlfriend, that he’d had sex with her “consensually” before the alleged rape and for years after the alleged rape. But she said that a decade ago, in the middle of their boyfriend-girlfriend relationship, he raped her. He raped her without force. The only evidence was her word, and he was convicted.

I wrote a lot about this because people were arguing with me about it.

• Consent Theory on Steroids: Harvey Weinstein Sentenced to TWENTY-THREE YEARS IN PRISON
• Top Sex Hoax Lawyer Says Weinstein Sentence Hails “A New Era” of Men Getting Sent to Prison
• Neo-Nazi White Knights Go All in on Defending the Honor of Women Who had Sex with Harvey Weinstein
• Neo-Nazi Leader Intensifies Feminist Rape-Hoax Agenda, Says Anglin Loves Weinstein

That is the standard they are working to put in everywhere. They want men to be presumed guilty of anything they’re accused of.

According to this standard, Mattress Girl’s victim would have been convicted. He was cleared when he showed texts of her begging him for more sex and talking about how much she enjoyed it (the evidence was that she accused him of the rape because she was mad he wasn’t following up with her). Harvey Weinstein had that same thing, and it didn’t save him.

If you’re in a university, don’t only not have sex with them, don’t ever be alone with a woman. In my view, you shouldn’t even make eye contact with them, or respond to them when they speak to you.

Maybe it doesn’t matter, because we’re locked in coronavirus forever.

“Consent Theory” is effectively a religious dogma. It is an incoherent concept, which is totally incompatible with a species that reproduces sexually.

However, it is also now at the core of our legal system, following the verdict of the Harvey Weinstein trial. So, I guess it is important for young men to know that they can be sent to prison if they have sex with a woman and she decides at any point afterward that she wants him to go to prison.

If a woman tells the authorities that there was no “consent” involved with the sex, and in her mind she was feeling that she didn’t like it, even if she did not inform you of this, you are legally a rapist, and you have to go to prison.

I personally think teenage boys need to be made aware of this fact. They could teach “critical consent theory.” But the fact is, this is now our legal system, and it isn’t intuitive.

The Guardian:

Despite chronic struggles with sexual violence in Utah, lawmakers in the state have rejected legislation that would have changed the state’s health education curriculum to teach consent and prevent unwanted sexual behavior.

The legislation, called HB177, was defeated by Utah’s house education committee by a vote of 7-4.

The bill’s defeat was part of a larger conservative pushback across America. Some politicians argue, wrongly, that consent instruction teaches students it is OK to have sex, said Jennifer Driver, senior director of reproductive rights at the State Innovation Exchange.

It’s actually closer to the opposite of that, in fact.

If they’re trying to prevent boys from wanting to have sex, there is no greater motivator than teaching applied consent theory.

But “that is not what consent means,” Driver said, and informing young people about sex education and consent is necessary to protect them. “When you don’t teach sex education, when you’re not teaching about consent, you actually are putting young people at harm – in harm’s way,” she said.

I agree with that also.

Young men need to know that as soon as they have sex with a woman, they are turning over all power over their entire life to that woman, forever.

In Utah, parents must opt in for their child to participate in sex education classes. The bill would have also mandated instruction on coercion, sexual violence behavior deterrence, and sexual assault mitigation as part of sex education instruction for students in grades seven to 12.

State representative Carol Spackman Moss, a Democrat who sponsored the legislation, said the bill would have updated the state’s sex ed curriculum to include information about consent, which the bill defines as “freely given, informed, and knowledgeable agreement” either “to do something” or “for something to happen”.

It probably doesn’t include the fact that this “consent” can be withdrawn decades later. The Mormons could include that part.

It would have taught students how to understand and communicate other people’s boundaries without shaming victims. And it would have provided “sexual assault resource strategies” for survivors, who could use them “to address the physical and psychological effects of sexual assault”.

“This is to give kids tools, and it all has to do with giving them the language and knowing that you have rights,” Moss told the Guardian. “It’s so commonsense.”

Yes.

Women have a right to accuse men of rape, at any time, because they have defined a sexual encounter as rape – even if the woman did not indicate it was rape at the time, or herself think it was rape at the time.

She can discover later that it was rape, and you have to go to prison.

In recent years, the #MeToo movement has brought awareness to sexual misconduct in all corners of the United States and underscored much-needed conversations about consent. Yet it has simultaneously revealed how many people – including adults – misunderstand the concept, and the real-world implications of that ignorance.

No one on earth understands the concept, because it is incoherent, and also constantly shifting.

Boys should know.

This is the biggest argument for celibacy that would be a true game changer in the world of Christian values.

Mormons might be weird. In fact they are weird. But I’ve always found them to be honest people. And according to them, they believe in Jesus Christ.

They have a duty to their young men to explain to them the existential threat of consent theory.