Tying Harvey Weinstein to the Las vegas Event

from Miles Matthis:

As usual, this is just my opinion, take it or leave it

Yep, you read that right. There is a link between the two events. They didn't come out almost simultaneously by accident.

This is going to be much shorter than my recent Las Vegas comments, but I do have something to say. Be patient, because I will make it worth your while. I'm sure Weinstein is a big creep, and I don't like seeming to defend him, but this whole things stinks of yet another project. It reminds us of the recent Bill Cosby story, which is also a lie and a conjob. Just ask yourself this: do you think it is possible to fire a man from his own company for sexual harassment accusations? This is a country of law— allegedly—not a country of hearsay. Legally, you cannot be fired for accusations. You can only be fired for convictions. That is true for little ole you, working at the Five&Dime, but it is also true for CEOs of major companies. The law is supposed to be blind to such distinctions. So even if a company's board of directors had the power to fire the majority owner and head of the company— which is doubtful—they still don't have the legal authority to do so based on accusations. Weinstein should be suing for wrongful termination, but mysteriously we don't see that. More logically, we should see him (and his family) firing his board of directors. So all this is fishy in the extreme.

As I said, Weinstein is no doubt a nasty person, but do you really think all these actresses accusing him of touching their tushies or whatever are any less nasty? Why believe them on a first reading? Shouldn't they be required to prove these allegations in a court of law? Do you think no woman has ever lied about sexual harassment? Think again. People in the modern world are liars, and the richer they are the better they are at lying. And that includes women as well as men.

To be honest, I don't really give a rat's behind whether Weinstein grabbed someone or not. All the planted feminists are shouting that Affleck and Damon and all the Hollywood males are complicit in this, but—given the story we are expected to believe—do you know who else was complicit? The actresses who were grabbed and said nothing for years. Yeah. Why don't you ask them why they are coming out now? Why not report it when it happened, if it was so awful? We know why: they wanted to get ahead and become famous and rich. Which they did. Which is why they are nasty. They were free to file charges, weren't they? They were free to work somewhere else, with someone else. But they didn't do that.  For that reason, I have trouble taking any of this seriously.

But it is even bigger than that, since I don't believe any of this happened at all. I suspect it is just one more big stageplay. That is what these people do. They lie all day about everything. These are actors, actresses, and other Hollywood people, so—like politicians and media people—they are professional liars. Some play the heroes in these productions and others play the heavies. Also, remember that all these people in Hollywood—male and female—are gay. No guys are grabbing any woman's naughty bits, since they are too busy grabbing eachothers'. Frankly, I don't think the top actresses are lying here for money, since many of them already have a lot of that. What it looks like to me is that we have signs of a war between major Jewish families here, with some in Hollywood taking one side and some taking the other. Best guess is some big investment group wants control of The Weinstein Company, and this is the form of the hostile takeover. I showed you that this is how it is done now in my paper on John Lennon. There, after proving Lennon is still alive, I showed you how Blackrock/Blackstone wormed its way into Sony/ATV via the Michael Jackson fake molestation charges and later faked death. We also saw it in my analysis of the Aurora/Batman shooting in the same paper, where I showed you these big investment groups used that hoax to apply pressure to billionaire Philip Anschutz, owner of Cinemark theaters—where the fake shooting took place. They wanted to take over his profitable companies (AEG), which they almost did. In a rare turn of events, Anschutz—after appearing whipped —suddenly gave himself a pep talk, drank a Gatorade, and leapt back into the ring swinging. He fired his Blackrock advisors and is now richer than he was then. But that is not how it usually happens.

In the modern world, hostile takeovers aren't just achieved with higher bids, shareholder pressure, or stock buyouts, they are achieved via black ops run against the opposing owners. Since some of the biggest billionaires control parts of the Intelligence apparatus, they can use a cadre of agents to run a project against the owner of a big company. I would say that is what is happening here with Weinstein. He is a lesser billionaire whose assets look tasty to the trillionaires.

Which means. . . the timing of this is no accident...

Read the entire PDF @ MilesMatthis.com