Andrew Anglin is a Biological Failure – Part 4, The Weinstein Saga Continues

In my last post on the Manlet Cult Leader, which you can read here, I pointed out that there is a bizarre contradictory belief that the Manlet Cultists must believe in.

1. Anyone who makes a point that the terminally online incel crowd could theoretically interpret as being a “feminist talking point,” is a feminist and the opinion is immediately invalid. This includes 99.99% of humanity, but whatever.
2. There is nothing wrong with Harvey Weinstein and his entire legal team being feminists. It’s not relevant enough to bring up, and they deserve our support.

This is far from the only outright contradictory belief that the Manlet Cult enforces. We saw a particularly hilarious example when some little cucklet left the below comment on our site. I had to personally approve the comment, since the little retard put so many hyperlinks in it, but it’s a super duper scary threat from Leet Haxxor Weev’s personal attack schizo.

In order to remain inside the cult you must simultaneously believe:

1. TRS and the Daily Rake are federal agents.
2. It’s super intelligent to openly threaten us with computer crimes.

I think collecting the most ridiculous contradictions they have is great stuff. And trust me goyim, we’re going to see a ton of them when I get to Weev. Guess that’s just what happens when you have a midget antifa “anti-semite hunter” jew with a swastika tattoo and delusions of grandeur running your tech infrastructure.

But today we’re still focused on Anglin’s defense of Harvey Weinstein. Throughout most of this piece the bold is mine, but in this case he did it himself.

ManletMonthly:

In a world of thirst, where masculinity has been crushed under the brutal high heel of matriarchy, where psychologically destroyed men actually believe they can get laid by promoting a feminist agenda, there are two very distinct types of white knights:

1. There are white knights
2. And then there are white knights who are willing to defend the honor of whores who literally had sex with Harvey Weinstein

Because surely, there is a class of white knight that bows down and worships women, who exists only to follow their every command, and though this strategy has never yielded sex for him, perseveres onward – but who would draw the line at defending the honor of a woman who would literally have sex with Harvey Weinstein.

Then there is the Super Saiyan mode of white knights: the white knight who will actually, literally defend the honor of a whore so vile, so greasy, so completely debased by a blind and cruel drive for power, that she would actually, literally have sex with Harvey Weinstein.

Shockingly – or perhaps not – neo-Nazi white knights are of the latter category, and have mounted their mighty steeds and rode out onto the internet in droves to defend the honor and alabaster skin of women who actually had sexual intercourse with Harvey Weinstein.

In a world of shilling, where the goyim have been crushed under the brutal dreidel of Schlomo, where psychologically destroyed goyim actually believe they can get money by promoting a kike agenda, there are two very distinct types of jew shills:

1. There are jew shills
2. And then there are jew shill who are willing to defend the honor of revolting jew rapist Harvey Weinstein

Because surely, there is a class of kike shills that bows down and worships God’s Chosen, who exists only to follow their every command, and, though this strategy has never yielded money for him, perseveres onward – but who would draw the line at defending the honor of a disgusting kike who spent his entire adult life pushing filth through Hollywood and systematically raping White Women.

Then there is the Super Saiyan mode of kike shills: the kike shill who will actually, literally defend the honor of a jew so vile, so greasy, so completely debased by a blind and cruel drive for power, that he would actually, literally put retired mossad agents on his White victims and say “they should be killed.”

Shockingly – or perhaps not – 5’4 kike shills are of the latter category, and have mounted their mighty steeds and rode out onto the internet in droves to defend the honor and liver spotted hands of jews who actually are responsible for systematic rapes of White Women and also Western Civilization.

I can’t do this for the entire screed, because it’s just so long. How long you ask? Well I threw his article into an online word counter and got the following.

In case you are wondering, this is merely one of four articles he writes. To put that in perspective, 7,500 words is considered short story length. 17,500 is a novelette, 40,000 is a novella, and over 40,000 is a novel. Andrew Anglin almost wrote an entire fucking novel defending jew rapist Harvey Weinstein, and at no point does he point out that he is a feminist despite “these neo-nazis are secret feminists” being his only argument.

I don’t think I can really explain to you just how absurdly long this article is in text form, so I made a little video about this.

See here’s the thing. Literally everybody in the entire world thinks Harvey Weinstein is a digusting jew rapist. And that everybody includes other jews. And not just randos, politically active jews.

I don’t really feel like the manlet cult is entitled to an explanation for why everybody in the entire world thinks any particular thing. Perhaps right after I explain why Harvey Weinstein is a disgusting jew rapist who got far less than he deserved I can explain that water is wet, that gravity is real, or that tiny little men with faces that look like weird aliens are often extremely bitter towards women because of sexual rejection and not because of facts and logic.

We’re not going to be able to make it through all this tonight, and there’s three more of them. All we can do is try. Don’t bother growing old by reading everything he writes, only the bolded parts.

And now back to the LittleMan Quarterly:

This has become a massive project on neo-Nazi Twitter – defending these women. The reason that this has become a project is that people like me, Nick Fuentes and Scott Greer are pointing out that regardless of how vile Weinstein might be, these women voluntarily had sex with him and then accused him of rape, and now there is a new precedent of what qualifies as “rape” in America. The neo-Nazis are inexplicably claiming that anyone who doesn’t defend the women who had sex with Weinstein is “defending a Jew,” despite the fact that the entire Jewish system is using Weinstein to create a new law of consent in America.

Boy You’d sort of think that these jews would try to get precedent set by doing this to… some random guy. Bit weird for them to sacrifice a card carrying ADL member for absolutely no reason in order to get this “new law of consent.”

Since the manlets won’t tell you what Weinstein was actually found guilty of, let me do that for you.

Fox News:

He was found guilty of a criminal sex act for assaulting production assistant Mimi Haleyi at his apartment in 2006 and third-degree rape of a woman in 2013. The jury found him not guilty on the most serious charge, predatory sexual assault, which could have resulted in a life sentence. He was ordered to jail by the judge immediately after the conviction.

The verdict followed weeks of often harrowing and excruciatingly graphic testimony from a string of accusers who told of rapes, forced oral sex, groping, masturbation, lewd propositions and that’s-(((Hollywood))) excuses from Weinstein about how the casting couch works.

A running theme of the manlet cult is that there was this Brave New Feminist Marxist definition of rape and blah blah. Like, no. Harvey Weinstein is a disgusting rapist, who has raped woman in a myriad of ways. He was found guilty of a flat out sexual assault, and another third degree rape. Third degree rape is not this brand new legal theory, despite what these little losers would have you believe.

If you want an explanation. He brought Miriam Haley up to a hotel room and then locked the door, physically preventing her from leaving until she let him pretend to be sexy by eating her out. It’s third degree because he didn’t beat her up first, or hold a knife to her throat. That’s it.

Imagine you’ve got some faggot boss in Hollywood, and you break your leg one day so he brings you to his apartment to “console you.” Then he locks the door and demands that you let him suck your dick or he won’t let you out. Hours go by before finally you give in. That’s third degree rape.

It’s third degree because no explicit violence was enacted, which is what the dishonest little guy who penned this piece is using to pretend that this is some weird new legal theory. It’s just not. It flat out isn’t. There is literally no new precedent set, and almost two years later there have been none of the hundreds if not thousands of new fraudulent rape convictions that were supposed to follow this verdict.

And he’s doing all this in service of this guy.

The argument of these neo-Nazis is that everything the media is saying is precisely true, with regards to consent theory, believing all women no matter what, etc.

I’m going to go through and respond to these claims being spread by these people. I’m not going to post people’s @s, because I don’t have any reason to call them out, and because I think a “clash of personalities” is at least partially responsible for these people promoting this ultra-destructive stuff. This is too important to make it an issue of personalities. Anyway, it is primarily just randos on Twitter (though they are being supported by a few big names in the neo-Nazi white knight movement).

One such neo-Nazi (who claims to be male, but obviously we don’t have any way of confirming that) actually took the time to write up the entire Weinstein prosecution platform, based on a brand of consent theory developed by feminist Jew sex-hoax lawyer Gloria Allred, who is the lawyer of all of these women accusing Weinstein.

He condescendingly says “I guess I have to explain rape by intimidation…” before laying out the entirety of Allred’s case (while calling Greg Johnson an incel who will never get a woman) and then proceeding to claim that anyone who doesn’t agree with the Allred analysis is a bad person who will never get laid.

Uhm… Greg Johnson is literally a homo. So he’s… not going to be having sex with any women anytime soon.

Does everyone see what I mean when I say bafflingly unhinged? I think Grindr Greg would probably agree with us that he will never get a woman, being a little fudgepacker.

As always just sort of let the manlet rage wash over you. Weinstein is a feminist as is his entire legal team. Beyond that, there is no actual novel theory of rape being discusses. Beyond that, literally everybody except for an admitted homosexual in Grindr Greg, a closeted homosexual in Nicky Fuentes, and a bunch of presumably straight dudes below the height of 5’7 are happy that Weinstein got put away. So the idea that there is this tiny little group of neo-nazis on twatter celebrating the Marxist-Feminist Weinstein verdict that has horrified the nation is too bizarre to take seriously enough to debunk.

Amazingly Anglin actually reproduces an “unnamed neo-nazi feminist,” who I initially believed to be Moike on his last twatter account. Now I’m not so sure, but whomever it is they give the actual lucid take here.

It’s a weird bit of gaslighting that Anglin puts this up there, and then just plows forwards with the rest of his article. This take is so obviously correct, and seems to hit all the right notes. But for anybody who isn’t clear, let me spell this out for you extremely clearly.

Harvey Weinstein is a jew. He and other jews control Hollywood. In addition to pushing their racial agenda as jews through the films they make and do not make, they also put young White Women in positions where they can say “have sex with me or your career is over.” Afterwards they get literal Mossad agents, sorry “retired” Mossad agents, to go spy on these women and intimidate them into shutting up. This borders on an act of war against White People, so of course Andrew Anglin is absolutely assmad that someone would be opposed to this.

Just scroll past everything I quote of him from now on out. I’m only including this so you can see the sheer verbiage dedicated to defending this cunt. I haven’t bolded anything in this next section, because nothing is worth reading. Just look at it.

I think this poster did the best job of expressing what other neo-Nazi white knights are trying to communicate, so it is only fair to post all of that before I respond to it.

These are the key points, as I understand them:

1. Harvey Weinstein is a serial rapist.
2. The Weinstein verdict does not set any precedent because it is the same as any other rape case.
3. People who say that this set a new precedent don’t explain what it is.
4. American women in their 20s who live in Hollywood and are attempting to get into the film industry are fragile and innocent, and don’t know that men want to have sex with them.
5. An innocent woman in her 20s who lives in Hollywood and is an aspiring actress doesn’t know that when she’s invited up to Harvey Weinstein’s hotel room and he answers the door in a bathrobe that he might try to do something sexual. They are too innocent to imagine that.
6. Women are victims of “power dynamics.” A woman who is in a hotel room with Harvey Weinstein and is shocked to find that Harvey Weinstein, after inviting her to his hotel room and answering the door in a bathrobe, has become sexually aggressive with her, can’t scream out because she is too shocked and terrified. Plus she’s worried about her career.
7. Fuck you.
8. People who do not believe in consent theory and power dynamics, and various other modern feminist concepts regarding men and sex, are ugly, and they don’t want Harvey Weinstein to go to jail because he is also ugly like them.
9. It is stupid to believe that legal cases set legal precedent. The justice system is already corrupt so it doesn’t matter. People shouldn’t worry about the precedent because the justice system favors people like Weinstein.
10. Women who had sex with Harvey Weinstein in exchange for career advancement are not whores.
11. Women who have sex for money in pornography are not whores.
12. Men who call women who have sex for money whores are bad people.
13. Men who do not support feminist theories of gender dynamics have low self-esteem because they are pathetic.
14. Women should be involved in careers.
15. If you don’t believe white women are competent and should be in the workplace, then you are against white people, because half of white people are women, and if you’re against women in the workplace you’re against women.
16. If you are against women in the workplace, you are a loser.

I’m going to respond to all of this, because again, I think it’s important to be clear about what exactly is being said.

I will categorize the different ideas being expressed as best I can in order to ensure that everything is covered in a clear fashion.

People Who Don’t Support the Weinstein Verdict are Supporting the Jew Harvey Weinstein

The basic idea being presented by neo-Nazi white knights to attack anyone who points out how insane this rape conviction is is that they are defending the fat Jew Harvey Weinstein if they do not defend the women who had sex with the fat Jew Harvey Weinstein. To call that “tedious logic” would be far too charitable, but apparently it appeals to people on a visceral level. (I am able to understand on some level just hating Harvey Weinstein and wanting to see him thrown in prison.)

However, who is defending Jews? The neo-Nazi white knights are presenting all of the arguments regarding Marxist theories of “gender power dynamics,” consent theory, female victimization, fundamental female sexual innocence, the threat of the patriarchy, “believe all women,” and every other Jewish feminist ideology in their defense of these women who had sex with Harvey Weinstein.

It gets pretty hilarious for this next bit though.

However, who is defending Jews?

Is it maybe the guy who is literally defending the jew?

The neo-Nazi white knights are presenting all of the arguments regarding Marxist theories of “gender power dynamics,” consent theory, female victimization, fundamental female sexual innocence, the threat of the patriarchy, “believe all women,” and every other Jewish feminist ideology in their defense of these women who had sex with Harvey Weinstein.

I dunno. I mean I could have sworn it was the guy who is literally defending the jew rapist. I would have also taken his all jew all feminist legal team as a close second. And we can’t forget the entire jew run system in Hollywood that set this systemic rape up and covered for him for years. 

As stated, the entire theory of how the “rapes” took place was formulated by the Jew lawyer Gloria Allred. She was the representative of all of these women, and the prosecution based their case on her theories.

(I guess maybe these people hate all Jews, but view female Jews as better than male Jews because all women are fundamentally morally superior to all men?)

Wow, that’s a great point Anglin. Oh wait it’s not because Weinstein’s legal defense team is all jew feminists. Whoopsie!

Weinstein’s sexual crimes against the goyim were covered up by jews for years, many of whom were avowed feminists, including Weinstein himself. However, now that a bunch of goy women got so uppity that critical mass hit, and they can’t cover this up any longer, a single jew feminist in Gloria Allred is desperately trying to get out in front of this, in the same way that jews get out in front of everything.

We’ve reached yet another point in the Manlet Cult where adherents must believe two entirely contradictory premises.

1. A single jew feminist pretending to support something makes it irredeemably bad.
2. Weinstein’s entire legal defense being jew feminists is totally fine and you should uncritically repeat their arguments about how the White Women were whores.

But wait, this is the very next line.

You cannot argue in favor of the Weinstein verdict without explicitly arguing in favor of the destruction of all traditional European sex norms in favor of revolutionary Jewish norms.

Nothing says Traditional European Sex Norms quite like destroying women’s careers if they refuse to have sex with you and sending the Mossad after them when they complain. Oh and also jerking off into Ficus plants and forcing women to watch.

The fact that if they are pressed on their white knight agenda, these people will revert to claiming they simply hate Jews, as they are handing over the entire mechanism of the judicial system to a Jewish feminist witch-hunt machine, is beyond my ability to grasp.

Jews: What would it take for you to support us in a complete takeover of the legal system where we have total power to throw any man in prison on fake sex charges?

Neo-Nazis: Just put one fat Jew in prison.

Jews: You sir have got yourself a deal.

Staggering.

Anglin got this assblasted because people were celebrating on twatter.

Apparently we hit the crucial “celebrate too hard on twatter,” index and now the entire judicial system is in the hands of jews. Great going guys. We’re all ruled over by jews now because you celebrated on twitter. Fucking amateurs. If only you had all done the Angry Manlet Raindance Ritual in unison the specific people who run the judicial bureaucracies would have spontaneously turned into Hitler-Enjoyers.

But you didn’t do that. You just had to celebrate over there you filthy tallcels.

Honestly, I’m not really sure that all of the people promoting this even believe it. Some of this seems malicious, as if they are targeting really stupid people in order to try to turn them against non-feminists in the nationalist movement.

Fucking height nazis at it again. Trying to turn people too stupid to not support a Mossad operated rape ring pushed by ADL member Harvey Weinstein.

The neo-Nazis appear to be making the argument that Harvey Weinstein was prosecuted on charges of being a Jew who defiled Aryan women. In fact, he was prosecuted for being a man who had “non-consensual sex” with his girlfriend between sessions of consensual sex.

Fuck. A guy running a site called the Daily Stormer, who previously ran a site called Total Fascism is calling us neo-nazis. How will average sized men ever recover?

If this was actually a case of outlawing Jew-on-non-Jew sex, I would of course endorse it 100%, as I endorse all anti-miscegenation laws. But that simply isn’t what it is, and anyone making that argument is either impossibly stupid, or they are lying to you on purpose. The precedent set by this affects all men, not simply Hollywood Jews.

Fuck. Neo-nazis owned again. Oh wait, I’m not running a rape ring backed up by Mossad agents so I think I’m fine.

Anyway, this next part is excruciatingly long. I’ll sum it up at the end.

I’ve written extensively on the precedent that is being set by this case, which is like nothing that has ever been seen before in the entire history of the Western legal system. The one possible comparison, where an “eyewitness account” was considered enough to convict a person of a crime is the Nuremberg war tribunal, where Germans were put on trial and sent to prison or executed based solely on the very outrageous claims of the Jews. However, that situation was already outside of the traditional legal system, as the allies were prosecuting an entire nation for losing a war (which is already a concept as crazy as prosecuting a man for having sex with his girlfriend in a hotel room).

Here is some of the material I’ve written explaining the societal cost of this verdict:

1. Consent Theory on Trial: Weinstein Jury Appears to be Hung on Two Counts
2. The Weinstein Verdict Effectively Makes Heterosexual Sex Illegal in America
3. “A New Day”: Following Weinstein Lynching, Jew Lawyers Hail Coming Mass Rape Hoax Movement
4. Consent Theory on Steroids: Harvey Weinstein Sentenced to TWENTY-THREE YEARS IN PRISON
5. Top Sex Hoax Lawyer Says Weinstein Sentence Hails “A New Era” of Men Getting Sent to Prison

In #3 and #5, you can read quotes from extremely powerful feminist and Jewish lawyers saying that they are going to use this case as a precedent to start mass prosecuting men for rape “without evidence.” And obviously, after this ruling prosecutors are going to be much more open to taking up cases based entirely on the word of a woman.

This is the summation of what happened at the Weinstein trial:

• Two women who engaged in sexual affairs with Harvey Weinstein in exchange for career advancement said that at points during the sexual affairs, they had sex which was not “consensual.”
• Jessica Mann (the main witness and accuser) claimed that while Harvey Weinstein was her boyfriend, he raped her in a hotel room in 2013. She remained his girlfriend until 2018. There was an entire history of sweet and flattering emails she sent him presented at the trial. She received all of the benefits of being the girlfriend of a high-powered Hollywood mogul, and would regularly email him asking for favors, all of which he fulfilled. She only broke off the relationship when the metoo scandal began (after which point he was obviously no longer able to provide her with professional favors).
• Mimi Haleyi (a secondary accuser whose claims were also dealt with at the trial) claimed that Harvey Weinstein forcibly performed cunnilingus on her after she went to his New York apartment “some time in 2006.” The visit came after he had gotten her a job on a TV show. She then admits to traveling to his hotel room to have consensual sex with him two weeks later. She continued to send him flatting emails and work with him and spoke well of him for years after the alleged “oral rape.”
• Due to the fact that the alleged things happened 7 and 14 years ago, respectively, there was no evidence of the crime. (Of course, there couldn’t be evidence for “I was telling him ‘no’ and I didn’t like it,” since neither of the women claims to have physically resisted.)
• Neither of the women ever reported the alleged things to the police, and did not discuss them publicly until Harvey Weinstein was being pilloried by the media.
• Harvey Weinstein was convicted for rape for both of these cases and sentenced to 23 years in prison.

Things that were new about this:

• There was no evidence presented beyond the claims of the women. There were no other witnesses. The only thing that Weinstein was convicted on was their word alone, about events that took place years before, and which they had never mentioned until this scandal broke in the media.
• The women admitted to having “consensual” sex with him after the alleged rape, with the main accuser literally dating him for five years.

What it means:

• The word of a woman is now absolute proof of a crime (again, this has never happened before in all of recorded history, not simply in the West, but in the entire world)
• Any woman can accuse you of rape, because she regrets having sex with you, she’s angry at you over something else, or for any other reason at all, and there is no possible way to defend yourself. The fact that she was your girlfriend doesn’t matter, the fact that you have proof of a five-year-long friendly sexual relationship where you did an entire list of good things for her doesn’t matter. She admits all of that. What matters is that one time, during your otherwise happy relationship, she felt unhappy, and for that you have to go to prison.
• The bottom line: any woman you’ve ever had sex with can now call the cops and say that it was rape. It doesn’t matter if it happened 7 or 14 years ago. It doesn’t matter if she was your girlfriend at the time. Nothing matters other than the fact that she is saying you did something bad.

We now have an entirely new definition of sexual relationships, where if you have sex with a woman, she has complete and total power to call the cops and have you sent to prison for decades, and you are left without any possible form of defense whatsoever. This now applies retroactively to any woman you’ve ever had sex with.

The little guy has this bizarre writing style where he spews and spews and spews and doesn’t bother to put in a citation anywhere or even bother having remotely reality based statements. According to Anglin there was no evidence other than “he raped me.” Really Andrew? That’s not what I remember.

And he keeps bringing up that one of the women continued to have a relationship with Weinstein after he raped her. It’s like the manlet equivalent of the Wow, Just Wow, where he doesn’t actually make an argument, but then just… thinks that he did.

If a woman’s husband holds a knife to her throat, rips her clothes off and rapes her, it is not magically not rape if she forgives him and continues the relationship. It is possible to rape your significant other. That this needs to be said is a bit weird.

I feel a little stupid even having to say this, but the Daily Manlet is not a legal entity. Andrew Anglin is not a lawyer, and no, he does not have a valid legal opinion nor should he be listened to on any legal matter.

Later in this series we cover Andrew Anglin’s shameful display in the Tanya Gersh case. The TLDR is that he stole $150,000 from his supporters for his “legal defense,” and then didn’t bother showing up. His excuse was something something legal system corrupt, but really he’s just a grifting faggot pussy who isn’t going to ever fight on anything.

Manlet Cult Contradictory Belief Update:

1. The US legal system was so hopelessly corrupt in 2017-2019 that Andrew Anglin couldn’t be expected to show up to court and fight even though he had already grifted the money explicitly to do so.
2. The US legal system is a pristine, corruption free entity that crucially needed to get legal precedent by putting innocent and oppressed jew rapist Harvey Weinstein through a sham trial. Our precious and legitimate legal institutions are under attack!

This next bit is more the same. The little gaffer keeps pretending like he’s a lawyer and doesn’t have batshit insane legal arguments. Just skim of course. Nothing is even worth bolding.

The Importance of Weinstein’s Fame and How High Profile This Case Is

This case was ridiculously important to the Jews. They were going absolutely nuts cheerleading it in all of the media. The New York Jew prosecutors engaged in extraordinary measures to secure a jury that they felt confident would convict.

That is because this case is intended not only to set legal precedent so this can be done to anyone, but also to inspire women to start doing this to men. They needed someone super-high profile to get everyone in the country looking at it, and have all women realize this new power that they have. If they had set this precedent on a random goy, it wouldn’t have held the same impact. Now every woman who wants to make an accusation knows about and can point to this case, the lawyers all know the case, the prosecutors all know the case.

I simply cannot stress enough that they are saying openly that they are going to begin using this to mass prosecute cases without evidence.

Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance Jr. said:

This is a new day. Rape is rape whether the survivor reports within an hour, within a year or perhaps never. It’s rape despite the complicated dynamics of power and consent after an assault. It’s rape even if there is no physical evidence.

Tina Tchen, former Michelle Obama Chief of Staff and current CEO of “Time’s Up,” a metoo legal group, said:

I think the Weinstein conviction and today’s sentencing really marks a new era of justice in our country, where survivors are going to be believed, prosecutors are going to see these as cases that they should take to trial and juries are going to believe survivors when they testify and they’re going to convict people…and now judges are going to sentence them for long prison terms. Up until now the reality has been, of every 1,000 perpetrators of sexual assault 995 go free, either because nobody reports them or nobody prosecutes them or juries don’t convict. I think that is finally going to change.

Again: Every time you have sex, the woman now has the option of sending you to prison for decades. There are all of these Jewish groups, heavily funded, that will take her case and see that it gets prosecuted. All she has to do is pick up the phone.

And again: they have made sure that every single woman in America knows that she has that option.

What’s more, to force through a conviction based on the insane concept of “raping your girlfriend in the middle of a relationship, you didn’t know it was rape and she never told you but it was rape and we know because she said so,” they had to have a grotesque figure who was having sex with attractive young women.

Harvey Weinstein was in every way the perfect candidate for this. I don’t know where they could have found another one even close to this perfect.

Yes, Precedent is a Thing, No Matter How Corrupt the Legal System Is

While a good portion of the neo-Nazi white knights are inexplicably claiming that this is no different than any other rape case (again, there is no way they don’t know that it is different, so they are simply lying), some of the neo-Nazis are admitting that it is fundamentally different but simply saying that this doesn’t matter.

They are saying “the system is already corrupt – look at James Fields.”

The difference is that the James Fields case was a miscarriage of justice, where the principles of the justice system were violated. It did not set a new normal where “if you get in a car crash and you have right wing political views, you have to go to prison for murder.”

Meanwhile the Weinstein case means that the rules, as they are written, are that if a woman says you raped her years or decades ago, her word is the law and you have to go to prison. It doesn’t require tricks or fraud, it doesn’t require banning the admission of evidence, it doesn’t require jury rigging. Moving forward, in any case where a woman accuses a man of rape, the outcome is going to be the same, regardless.

This was actually bolded by the Manlet General himself, not me. I know you probably thought it was me because it’s hilarious, but nope. Andrew was so proud of his legal analysis that literally every single rape case ever will now result in a conviction that he bolded it.

So, needless to say, that never happened.

These situations are not even remotely similar, and the fact that neo-Nazis are making this comparison shows that they are either themselves stupid, or they are purposefully exploiting stupid people by lying to them.

In fact, there is no argument in favor of the Weinstein conviction. You will not find a single one. All that exists is a bunch of men like the one quoted above spewing emotional diatribes and insults against anyone who doesn’t believe all women.

You’re quite right Andrew. There is nothing but pure emotional diatribing from probably female neo-nazis. Thank god we have cooler heads giving us the reality based analysis that literally every single rape case will result in a conviction. That this hasn’t happened yet is merely proof that this is just about to happen. Any second now, literally every single rape case will result in a conviction, as genius legal scholar Andrew Anglin claims above. We’re just seconds away.

BTW, in the alternate reality where that was true, that would actually be great, since we could just get random women to accuse whomever we wanted of rape and they’d have to go to jail. Well we would, not these manlets, since they don’t know any women. It’s one of those arguments that the manlets never really thought out, and if their counter is “no, this only works for the people in power,” then it seems a bit weird they’d be so assmad about people laughing at Weinstein on twatter. You’d think they’d be coming up with ways of of dealing with those people, but they’re too busy doing video game livestreams and getting mad at heterosexuals.

We’re not even a third of the way done this one article. It’ll pick up from here, because I’ll only cover the funniest retarded bits he does. I just wanted to end by making sure everyone knows that he literally said that any woman can at any time accuse any man of rape and he will be convicted every time. He literally said that. So if you ever hear any shit from the Manlet Cult about how we’re not taking his meth fueled retard ramblings seriously enough, just remember that he quite literally said that any woman can simply make up a rape claim about a man and that man will be automatically convicted.

And all this coming from a guy who stole money from his audience and then ran like a little bitch at his own trial, so it’s a bit rich for him to be giving legal advice now isn’t it?

Tune in next time as we deconstruct his bizarre explanations of male-female power dynamics.