A prominent member of the #MeToo movement who was one of 13 women to originally accuse Hollywood producer Harvey Weinstein of sexual assault and harassment settled a civil lawsuit made by a male accuser against her for the same behavior.
“[I]n the months that followed her revelations about Mr. Weinstein last October, Ms. Argento quietly arranged to pay $380,000 to her own accuser: Jimmy Bennett, a young actor and rock musician who said she had sexually assaulted him in a California hotel room years earlier, when he was only two months past his 17th birthday. She was 37,” according to The New York Times.
Asia Argento is a prominent Hollywood actress and director, and former girlfriend of the late cooking show superstar Anthony Bourdain. She has been one of the loudest critics of the culture of sexual abuse in show business. Her “activism” has been an elaborate ruse.
The New York Times received documents that chronicled the settlement agreement via encrypted email from an “unidentified party.”
“The documents, which were sent to The New York Times through encrypted email by an unidentified party, include a selfie dated May 9, 2013, of the two lying in bed,” the paper wrote. “As part of the agreement, Mr. Bennett, who is now 22, gave the photograph and its copyright to Ms. Argento, now 42. Three people familiar with the case said the documents were authentic.”
Neither Argento nor her attorney, Carrie Goldberg, have responded to any requests for comment.
“We hope nothing like this ever happens to you again,” Goldberg wrote in letter to Bennett detailing the final settlement agreement. “You are a powerful and inspiring creator and it is a miserable condition of life that you live among shitty individuals who’ve preyed on both your strengths and your weaknesses.”
Argento’s is another story that proves that nothing is beyond the pale for the sexual deviants in Hollywierd.
Does the Arizona Constitution Provide Means for Lawmakers to Crack Down on Big Tech Censorship?
Does the Arizona Constitution provide protections from Big Tech?
The Arizona Constitution provides stronger protections for freedom of speech than the First Amendment does, potentially providing legislative solutions to Big Tech censorship in the state at a moment where political censorship is more pervasive than ever.
Article 2 Section 6, Arizona Constitution states that “Every person may freely speak, write, and publish on all subjects, being responsible for the abuse of that right. “
This differs greatly from the federal constitution in that it doesn’t limit the powers of a legislature to restrict freedom of speech. The US Constitution identifies “Congress” as the body it’s restricting from making a law abridging the freedom of speech.
The speech rights established by the Arizona Constitution are thus expressed positively; recognizing a right belonging to the people, as opposed to negating an infringement of said right.
Quite obviously, the Arizona Constitution was written in an 1910, an era in which the internet would’ve been just as inconceivable as it was in 1789.
In a 2019 Arizona Supreme Court case, the state’s highest court recognized in a 4-3 judgement that the Arizona Constitution provided greater protections than the federal constitution. The case recognized that violations of the First Amendment would represent de facto violations of the
It’s not outside the realm of possibility that the Arizona Attorney General, or state legislature, could hold Big Tech oligarchs to account for violating the Article 2 Section 6 rights of Arizona citizens- especially in a context the major platforms are collectively adjudicated to be acting as a trust in order to suppress competition and silence lawful speech.
Three Arizona legislators called upon Attorney General Mark Brnovich to begin an antitrust investigation into Big Tech oligarchs following the coordinated deplatforming operation against Parler, in which both Amazon and Apple colluded to restrict the free speech platform from the internet.
In an era where the overwhelming majority of free speech is communicated online, the censorious actions of Big Tech very plausibly represent an assault of the right of free expression guaranteed in the Arizona Constitution. Both chambers of Arizona’s legislature remain Republican, even as the state has become purple, and action against Big Tech censorship on the state level could become a real possibility in the coming years.
Politics3 days ago
GOP Establishment Threatens President Trump with Impeachment Unless He Denies Election Fraud
Big League National Security3 days ago
DNI Ratcliffe: China Interfered in 2020 Election, CIA Suppressed Info
States22 hours ago
Grassroots Leaders Send Final Warning to GOP Establishment: Rejecting Trump Means Death of Republican Party
White House7 hours ago
President Trump Contemplates Ditching the GOP, Starting New ‘Patriot Party’ to Put America First
Tech1 day ago
Free Speech Platform Gab Receives 3 Million New Users in 12 Days
Politics2 days ago
Constituents Already Beginning to Turn on Peter Meijer, Who Admits That Voting to Impeach Trump May Have Ruined His Political Career
Free Speech2 days ago
Tennessee High School Principal Suspended for Speaking Against Big Tech Censorship
Big League National Security3 days ago
Left-Wing Extremist Charged in Alleged Florida Capitol Attack Identified Soros as “Sponsor”