Last year, Republicans were happy to point out that alleged serial sexual assaulter and social pariah Harvey Weinstein had strong ties to the Democrats — he was, after all, a big donor to their causes. One high-profile voice was Ronna McDaniel, the chair of the Republican Party, who gleefully used the Weinstein exposés to attack Dems and, in particular, Hillary Clinton.
Whose side is Hillary Clinton on: Harvey Weinstein's or his victims?
— Ronna McDaniel (@RonnaMcDaniel) October 7, 2017
So Michelle Obama speaks out against women in the @GOP, but won’t stand up for the women assaulted by Weinstein?https://t.co/OSmvi7p7nI
— Ronna McDaniel (@RonnaMcDaniel) October 10, 2017
Never thought I’d say this, but I agree with Maxine Waters: the DNC does need to give the Weinstein money back. pic.twitter.com/mHJX9xoPLO
— Ronna McDaniel (@RonnaMcDaniel) October 16, 2017
If the DNC truly stands up for women like they say they do, then returning Weinstein's dirty money should be a no-brainer.
— Ronna McDaniel (@RonnaMcDaniel) October 6, 2017
But her condemnation of “dirty money” appears to be softening, now that a top Republican is in similar crosshairs.
Steve Wynn, the casino mogul and finance chair of the Republican National Committee, is stepping down from his position, after a report revealed that numerous women have accused him of sexual assault. After staying silent on the issue for much of the weekend, McDaniel said Tuesday that the allegations against Wynn shouldn’t be believed because he didn’t admit to them.
"We took the allegations seriously enough to remove him as finance chair." What? I thought Wynn "resigned." Again, what is the standard? You fire him but keep his money? Fine. Just explain the logic, please. Here's @GOPChairwoman: https://t.co/ZvcloNniOL
— Jon Ralston (@RalstonReports) January 30, 2018
“Steve has denied these allegations — unlike Harvey Weinstein, Al Franken and others. Steve has denied them. There is an investigation that is going to take place. He should be allowed due process, and if he is found of any wrongdoing, we will absolutely return 100 percent of that money,” McDaniel said.
She added that she took the allegations “seriously enough” to remove him from his position — without due process. But his money? That needs to stay with the GOP for as long as it can.
Due process is a tricky phrase to use in this situation, as many have noted. It ensures fair legal treatment in the justice system. Due process has no basis in the court of public opinion, which found him guilty enough, apparently, for the RNC to no longer want him on the board.
"Due process" is a right when the deprivation of your liberty is at stake, not to decide whether or not to reject someone's money. The WSJ article was well sourced, and any reasonable person would realize Wynn is as guilty as Bill Clinton. So please, spare me the excuses. https://t.co/Rxpuwp2Sdr
— Tiana Lowe Doescher (@TianaTheFirst) January 30, 2018
The NRSC — the GOP’s Senate-specific financing arm — is also facing a problem when it comes to Wynn’s money, mostly because he’s given so much.
What will @NRSC do with Wynn-linked money? Chairman Cory Gardner tells me “appropriate action”- but no specifics what that action would be. Says no decision made yet.
— Hallie Jackson (@HallieJackson) January 30, 2018
Wynn and his company gave $3 million to the Republican Governors Association over the past 18 months, The Wall Street Journal reported. The association announced they were returning a fraction of the money.
But the big problem for Republicans is that they’ve painted themselves into a corner on sexual harassment and assault. They have to live with the standard set by their party leader — a president accused by more than a dozen women of sexual assault — that accusations don’t count if the accused denies them, and they count even less if a candidate wins an election after being accused.
Calls to the RNC weren’t returned.
Here’s another reason for concern for anyone looking for justice and consistency from the Republicans. McDaniel said if the investigation found wrongdoing, Wynn’s money would be returned. But if Wynn paid a $7.5 million settlement to a manicurist who claimed he pressured her into having sex with him, and if Weinstein’s similar settlements were understood as an admission of wrongdoing — not guilt in a legal sense, but in the court of public opinion — wouldn’t the case against keeping Wynn’s money already be closed?
