The Great 2017 Sex Harassment Hysteria: Trial Lawyers In The Woodpile?
Print Friendly and PDF

If you're on the Right, by now you ought to be used to October Surprises orchestrated by the Democract/MSM Complex (remember Bruce Herschensohn?) But the unprecedented thing about the Roy Moore October Surprise (which, for the record, I think is absurd for reasons outlined by Joy Overbeck here): the unexpected blowback is suddenly consuming extraordinary numbers of Leftist/ MSM types (Political media engulfed by sexual harassment crisis, by Jonathan Easley, The Hill, November 22, 2017).

Why? And who changed the rules? For example, has been scathingly critical of the New York Times' immigration enthusiast reporter Glenn Thrush. But what Thrush is accused of is making passes (allegedly boorishly) at young women–not rape. Newsrooms, like political campaigns, are sexually-charged places. (And these passes can be well-received, even invited, but that's another story).  When did this become a crime?

My suggested answer: when America's notoriously rapacious (to coin a phrase) plaintiff bar spotted another honey pot. Remember, Bill O'Reilly reportedly settled  a sex harassment case for $32 million—somewhere between a third and a half of which would have gone to the accuser's lawyer.

I think this is the answer, not only because of the obviously shyster-like unscrupulous blurring of standards, but because of the clearly-orchestrated nature of the multiple-accuser news leaks i.e. EXCLUSIVE: Bill Clinton is facing NEW accusations of sexual assault by four women, by Ed Klein, Daily Mail, November 20, 2017. This use of public pressure is typical trial lawyer tactics, a reason the MSM-canonized Ralph Nader has been so useful to them.

In other words, we're not looking at sudden moral enlightenment, but financial muggings. It will not end soon, or well.

Print Friendly and PDF