As more details about pervert Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein emerge, we see just how much favor money can buy in Tinseltown. The cover-up of Weinstein’s sexually perverse escapades in Hollywood runs deep, even among mainstream actors like Matt Damon and Russell Crowe.
In an extremely exposing story for The Wrap, former New York Times reporter Sharon Waxman said The New York Times refused to publish her story that exposed the sordid behavior of the movie mogul.
“In 2004, I was still a fairly new reporter at The New York Times when I got the green light to look into oft-repeated allegations of sexual misconduct by Weinstein,” she explained.
Waxman managed to track down the man who ran Miramax Italy — Fabrizio Lombardo. His real job, however, was something quite different than movie production. Weinstein, who founded Miramax, apparently paid Lombardo a hefty sum to hook him up with women for sexual favors.
“According to multiple accounts, he (Lombardo) had no film experience and his real job was to take care of Weinstein’s women needs, among other things,” Waxman wrote.
Waxman even found a women who was paid off by Weinstein after an unwanted sexual encounter.
This is where it really gets bad — Weinstein, along with Damon and Crowe pressured the New York Times not to run the story — and The Times folded.
Weinstein, a major advertiser in The Times, allegedly visited The Times’ newsroom in person and made his “displeasure” with the story known.
The original story was never published.
“After intense pressure from Weinstein, which included having Matt Damon and Russell Crowe call me directly to vouch for Lombardo and unknown discussions well above my head at the Times, the story was gutted,” Waxman wrote.
Instead, it was edited and any reference to sexual impropriety were removed. The story, which ended up being an “obscure story about Miramax firing an Italian executive” was buried in the newspaper’s Culture section.
Fast forward over 10 years — Weinstein was able to get away with his despicable behavior for decades thanks to Hollywood elites who covered for him — and because of an unprincipled news media who folded under pressure.
It’s simply disgusting to know that Hollywood leftists, the Democrat Party and The New York Times remained silent about this man’s filthy behavior because he was rich and powerful. So much for empowering women.