Another missing post. There were originally three videos. I found two. Rick Sanchez calls out Whoopi Goldberg for her ignorant words. He was right what he said the first time and right the second. For the full transcription of her ignorant words see above.
Aired September 30
There is a disturbing, yet growing defense of Roman Polanski in this country — or Roman Polanski. And it’s coming, somewhat understandably, I suppose, from Hollywood. Still, let’s consider the facts and look who’s talking here.
I told you Monday that he was arrested in Switzerland when he went out there to achieve a lifetime achievement award last weekend. Authorities have been wanting to nab this guy since the 1970s for raping a 13-year-old. Look at the list of high-profile people who are defending this superstar director, Martin Scorsese, Woody Allen, Debra Winger, Peter Fonda, Jonathan Demme. Look at the list. Also, there’s powerhouse executive producer Harvey Weinstein.
And listen to this. listen to this from Whoopi Goldberg on “The View.”
WHOOPI GOLDBERG:What I’m saying is he did not rape her because she was aware and the family apparently was aware. [LIE. LIE. LIE.]
SHERRI SHEPERD: Was it consensual? I mean, what is rape? What is the definition of rape?
GOLDBERG: Well, I don’t know if it was consensual.
jOY BEHAR: Wait a second.
SHERRI: When you have to give somebody drugs, I don’t know.
GOLDBERG: He was not charged — I guess I’m saying he was not charged with rape, is all I’m trying to say. [LIE.]
SANCHEZ: Oh, my goodness. I didn’t want to do this because we already did this earlier in the week. There you’re looking at the famous director.
This is tough to even talk about without feeling like you need to take a shower afterward.
But Whoopi, you are very smart and we love your show and we use clips from time to time. And we have spoken in the past. And you have called into my show. And, listen, you’re welcome to do it again, if you’re watching me right now, Whoopi. I know you want to get the legal language right. But some might suggest you sound like you’re defending this guy.
I mean, here are the facts of what you say was not a “rape rape.” She was 13. He was 43. He drove her over to take nude pictures of her. He had her naked in a hot tub. He gave her champagne and a quaalude. She said no. And he still went ahead and had unlawful sexual intercourse with her many different ways.
Now, whatever deal he worked out with a lawyer or a judge or whatever anybody wants to call it is their prerogative.
But should we be mitigating this as to whether it’s statutory or something else like “rape rape”?
I mean, evidence shows that he lied to a little girl. He drove to a little girl to a house. He got a little girl drunk. He gave a little girl drugs. He sodomized a little girl.
This is not about how the rest of the world sees this, as opposed to how we Americans see things, because we tend to be very puritanical or whatever is often said.
There is in fact only one way to see this story.
A 43-year-old man once raped a 13-year-old girl who repeatedly told him: No! No! No!
And he just needs to face justice.
Come back to me, will you? Here’s the irony. Polanski would be the first to tell you that the Nazis who killed his mother in a concentration once should pay, even if decades had passed since they did what they did to his mother.
How can the same justice using time as an excuse not now apply to him?
Mr Sanchez – you were on another planet with the birth certificate issue – but here you are right on. Thank you for speaking up and restoring sanity.
A small point. She was 13 – age of consent in California is 18.
It was rape no matter what she said or didn’t say.
Keep up the good fight…