Hillary Defends the Clintons' Longtime Association With Harvey Weinstein and It Does Not Go Well at All

Hillary and Bill Clinton

FILE – In this Nov. 8, 2016, file photo, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton, and her husband former President Bill Clinton, greet supporters after voting in Chappaqua, N.Y. (AP Photo/Seth Wenig, File)

Political observers and social media aficionados alike are all talking today about the revealing interview Hillary Clinton recently did with The Hollywood Reporter in which she talks about, among other things, an authorized four-part documentary series on her that will air on Hulu in March.

During the interview, the failed 2016 Democratic presidential nominee was asked about the Clintons’ longtime close association with sexual predator Harvey Weinstein, and if either of them had any regrets. In typical Clinton fashion, she dodged and weaved around the issue, and feigned ignorance:

THR: Speaking of Hollywood, with his trial in the news right now, do you have regrets about your lengthy association with Harvey Weinstein?

HRC: How could we have known? He raised money for me, for the Obamas, for Democrats in general. And that at the time was something that everybody thought made sense. And of course, if all of us had known what we know now, it would have affected our behavior.

There is so much wrong with this statement that it would be comical if not for the seriousness of the issue. As my Red State colleague Brandon Morse noted around the time the news of the wave of allegations against Weinstein broke in late 2017, the Clintons had been repeatedly warned by others about the Hollywood mogul’s notorious and well-known habitual sexual abuse of women in Hollywood, but those warnings were ignored because money and politics and all that jazz:

Hillary Clinton's asking "how could we have known"

But Lena Dunham says that she warned her about Weinstein, one of the most prolific fundraiser for the Clintons over 3 decades

As if Hillary needed to be warned about the biggest open secret in Hollywood pic.twitter.com/KvIXMO1zjk

— Thomas: Malarkey Watch 2020 🕰️ (@ThomasIsOnline) January 21, 2020

Because she's Hillary, she throws the Obamas into her defense of her association with Harvey Weinstein (Obamas didn't hang out at parties w/ Weinstein as the Clintons did) https://t.co/7t3WpdYfSo pic.twitter.com/zcFjmH84nE

— Chuck Ross (@ChuckRossDC) January 21, 2020

Plus, there was the whole “trying to shut down Ronan Farrow” thing:

https://twitter.com/HashtagGriswold/status/1219662179223379968

All that said, a few folks gave Clinton a break of sorts on her remarks about her supposed lack of knowledge about Weinstein’s horrific history:

To be fair, Hillary is very, very bad at identifying sexual predators https://t.co/sBPBTgAKHt

— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) January 21, 2020

all my friends are sex pests how was i supposed to know

— Just Another Egg (@feggnews) January 21, 2020

She had no way of knowing what was a commonly known thing in hollywood…just like she had no idea what her husband and her friends were doing on Epstein planes

— No War With Iran (@Keptopolarbear) January 21, 2020

She's married to a man who was a frequent flyer on Epstein's Lolita Express. She's very practiced in pretending not to know.

— hi Bernie (@veganlefty) January 21, 2020

how could we have known that thing that everyone in the industry was talking about and that multiple people had warned us of anyway????????

— elizabeth 🌹 (@elzbthlncstr) January 21, 2020

So, the writers of 30 Rock had access to knowledge that a former First Lady and presidential candidate didn’t? I would… just NEVER admit that.

— Lizzy Borden Slash Fiction (@TheOneWhoMocks) January 21, 2020

Perhaps this tweet more than the rest sums up how a lot of people reacted when they first read her quote: