HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Remember when Jussie Smol...

Sun Feb 10, 2019, 12:50 PM

Remember when Jussie Smollett reported being attacked in a horrific anti-gay, anti-black hate crime

and people here questioned his story because he didn't want to give his phone to the police so they could confirm his statement that he was on the phone with his manager at the time of the attack?

And remember when we said that maybe he didn't want to turn over his phone because it had lots of unrelated personal information on it and the police could get the information they wanted through other means, and, besides, he had good reason not to trust the Chicago police, we were told that if he were really telling the truth and had actually been attacked, he should have no problem cooperating with the police - and so his refusal to cooperate with the police on this one particular thing, even if he thought what they were asking was an invasion of his privacy, was proof that he was likely lying about the incident?

Yeah. Me, too.

135 replies, 9604 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 135 replies Author Time Post
Reply Remember when Jussie Smollett reported being attacked in a horrific anti-gay, anti-black hate crime (Original post)
EffieBlack Feb 10 OP
Empowerer Feb 10 #1
Beakybird Feb 10 #2
EffieBlack Feb 10 #3
jberryhill Feb 13 #13
Empowerer Feb 13 #17
jberryhill Feb 13 #20
EffieBlack Feb 13 #21
sheshe2 Thursday #27
jberryhill Thursday #48
jberryhill Thursday #34
KentuckyWoman Saturday #93
Name removed Feb 10 #4
nolabear Feb 10 #5
Clash City Rocker Friday #76
JHB Feb 10 #6
irisblue Feb 10 #7
Aristus Feb 13 #14
irisblue Feb 13 #15
Aristus Feb 13 #16
irisblue Feb 13 #18
Caliman73 Saturday #82
sheshe2 Thursday #28
LisaL Thursday #29
TeeYiYi Monday #133
WeekiWater Feb 10 #8
TeeYiYi Feb 10 #9
Empowerer Feb 10 #10
Ms. Toad Feb 10 #12
Empowerer Feb 10 #11
Empowerer Feb 13 #19
cwydro Thursday #22
jberryhill Thursday #31
cwydro Thursday #33
jberryhill Thursday #35
cwydro Thursday #37
jberryhill Thursday #38
cwydro Friday #50
jberryhill Friday #58
EffieBlack Friday #61
sheshe2 Friday #64
jberryhill Friday #67
EffieBlack Friday #68
Post removed Friday #69
EffieBlack Friday #70
jberryhill Friday #72
jberryhill Friday #71
Empowerer Friday #74
George II Friday #75
Post removed Friday #73
EffieBlack Friday #78
cwydro Saturday #81
Swagman Sunday #108
USALiberal Thursday #23
Ace Rothstein Thursday #24
cwydro Thursday #25
lunasun Thursday #44
madville Thursday #26
grossproffit Thursday #41
xmas74 Saturday #79
LisaL Thursday #30
madville Thursday #32
cwydro Thursday #36
DemocratSinceBirth Thursday #39
cwydro Thursday #40
sheshe2 Friday #65
cwydro Saturday #83
happybird Sunday #104
PTWB Thursday #42
madville Thursday #46
USALiberal Saturday #97
Dr. Strange Saturday #100
Swagman Sunday #109
superpatriotman Thursday #43
Demonaut Thursday #45
madville Thursday #47
Hassin Bin Sober Friday #49
912gdm Friday #52
QC Saturday #96
Mosby Monday #125
Tipperary Monday #134
PoindexterOglethorpe Friday #51
cwydro Friday #59
GusBob Friday #53
cwydro Friday #55
MountCleaners Friday #62
xmas74 Saturday #80
MountCleaners Saturday #86
DeminPennswoods Friday #54
Raine Friday #56
cwydro Friday #57
Demovictory9 Saturday #85
jberryhill Friday #60
cwydro Friday #63
George II Friday #66
dalton99a Friday #77
Dr. Strange Saturday #87
madville Saturday #88
madville Saturday #84
cwydro Saturday #89
madville Saturday #90
cwydro Saturday #91
cwydro Saturday #92
madville Saturday #94
madville Saturday #95
melman Saturday #98
melman Saturday #99
Beartracks Saturday #101
catbyte Saturday #102
greyl Saturday #103
Tipperary Tuesday #135
SaschaHM Sunday #105
EffieBlack Sunday #106
cwydro Sunday #107
EffieBlack Sunday #115
cwydro Sunday #116
EffieBlack Sunday #119
Post removed Sunday #120
EffieBlack Monday #124
LisaL Sunday #110
cwydro Sunday #111
LisaL Sunday #112
cwydro Sunday #114
EffieBlack Sunday #117
cwydro Monday #123
EffieBlack Sunday #118
Inkfreak Sunday #113
Demovictory9 Sunday #121
cwydro Monday #122
MrGrieves Monday #126
EffieBlack Monday #127
Tipperary Monday #131
Vinnie From Indy Monday #128
MrGrieves Monday #129
Sneederbunk Monday #130
Power 2 the People Monday #132

Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2019, 01:10 PM

1. I remember it well

Seems like a lifetime ago, doesn't it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2019, 01:33 PM

2. Is there proof besides his word that he was attacked?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beakybird (Reply #2)

Sun Feb 10, 2019, 01:57 PM

3. There's physical evidence that he was assaulted

Why do you ask?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beakybird (Reply #2)

Wed Feb 13, 2019, 05:39 PM

13. Just so you know

"Evidence" and "proof" are different things, and every lawyer knows that. Confusing the concepts of "evidence" and "proof" is a rookie law student mistake, which is why every lawyer is sensitive to the difference between those two words. I doubt there is a lawyer alive who did not get the "evidence is not proof" lecture at one point or another.

So when you ask "is there proof?" and a lawyer says "there is evidence", you will know that your question was dodged.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #13)

Wed Feb 13, 2019, 06:27 PM

17. I'm an attorney and frequently use the terms interchangeably in normal conversation

FYI, Effie is hardly a "rookie" - she's a respected lawyer and law professor, among other things. And I think it's likely that she has just as much expertise as as you (and probably more), notwithstanding your propensity for bragging about your experience as if you're a modern day Oliver Wendell Holmes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Empowerer (Reply #17)

Wed Feb 13, 2019, 06:58 PM

20. Bragging about my experience?

I can't recall mentioning much about anything I've done other than once referring to a run-in with the Trump Organization when someone accused me of being a troll.

It simply struck me as odd that a request for "proof" was met by a non-specific statement about "evidence", since just about anything is "evidence". The implication was not that anyone was a "rookie". Far from it.

I really haven't followed this particular story, and am curious to know what it's about, other than some vague awareness that people dispute Smollet's claim. But why that matters, I don't know.

I further assumed from the thread that there had been some new development proving or disproving something or other. But I gather this is one of those rhetorical exercises bearing no tangible relation to the story being used as a vehicle to cast aspersions on the motives of others at DU.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #20)

Wed Feb 13, 2019, 11:01 PM

21. Interesting

Two posts from you in this thread, neither of which actually responded to the OP but did manage to incorporate at least two insults and a Restatement (First) on the Appropriate Use of Legal Terminology on an Online Discussion Board.

Nicely done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #21)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 08:02 PM

27. Snicker.

Bingo.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #27)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 10:20 PM

48. Thank goodness one can find the funny side of a bias attack

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #21)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 08:35 PM

34. Because I was not responding to the OP

Last edited Thu Feb 14, 2019, 10:16 PM - Edit history (1)

I was responding to the person who had a question about proof and who received a nonresponsive answer.

Knowing little about this incident, I was likewise curious.

But now I understand that the point of the OP was to make some sort of insinuation about unidentified others on DU against whom you have some kind of grudge, or something to that effect.

Whatever is meant by the OP, it is obviously not a good faith effort to advance any sort of discussion.

If I had to guess, since I do not follow everything you post on DU, then I would guess that your post has something to do about jumping to conclusions based on accusations, as there appear to be developing questions over whatever happened to Mr. Smollet.

But this is one of those species of OP more intended as a “so there!” by the author directed toward some class of persons who are believed to keep notes on what anyone here has said about any of dozens of topics.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Beakybird (Reply #2)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 03:37 PM

93. Since when do we put the onus of proof on the victim?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)


Response to Name removed (Reply #4)

Sun Feb 10, 2019, 02:28 PM

5. Enjoy your short stay.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to nolabear (Reply #5)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 11:10 PM

76. Oh, now I'm going to wonder what this fool said

I’m sure it wasn’t all that interesting, but I’m oddly curious anyhow.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Name removed (Reply #4)

Sun Feb 10, 2019, 02:31 PM

6. Better question...

Why was it so all-fired important for you to join DU just to comment on this?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Name removed (Reply #4)

Sun Feb 10, 2019, 02:41 PM

7. What do you like on pizza NOYB?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irisblue (Reply #7)

Wed Feb 13, 2019, 05:45 PM

14. We'll never know...

n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aristus (Reply #14)

Wed Feb 13, 2019, 05:47 PM

15. 🍕 delievered. 😂

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irisblue (Reply #15)

Wed Feb 13, 2019, 06:15 PM

16. Yes.

I wish we still had the "He Disrupted Poorly" headstone...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Aristus (Reply #16)

Wed Feb 13, 2019, 06:41 PM

18. After going in to tbe basement of the interwebz, I found a copy, but can only get it to imgur

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irisblue (Reply #18)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 02:06 AM

82. I miss those. They should bring it back.

NT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to irisblue (Reply #15)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 08:04 PM

28. Signed sealed delivered.

Thank MIRT.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #28)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 08:07 PM

29. Poster got tombstoned over questioning whether the story adds up.

Does the story add up?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #29)

Mon Feb 18, 2019, 06:48 PM

133. The problem...

...wasn't with the poster questioning the validity of the story.

The poster was tombstoned for being a racist, homophobic MAGAt with an ax to grind, and a litany of hateful, right wing talking points to spew; replete with a hate speech website address, for all to follow...

The poster continued to rudely attack the OP, (a Black woman and respected DUer,) while defending white racists and Trump supporters against the "lies and accusations" made by "multiple cases of Muslim women," "gay guys," and "black people."

The post was offensive on every level imaginable... Take this quote, for example... "He still had the rope around his neck 45 minutes later when the normal human reaction is to remove such a thing immediately" ... Now, how in the fuck would that poster have even the slightest idea of what it feels like to have a noose around their neck?... much less, be in a position to exclaim what "normal" people do when faced with such an everyday, pesky conundrum?...

The only "liberal wet-dream" turned out to be the delivery of a richly deserved pizza.

TYY

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Name removed (Reply #4)

Sun Feb 10, 2019, 02:47 PM

8. Not everyone is as sheltered as you.

Sheltered in moms basement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Name removed (Reply #4)

Sun Feb 10, 2019, 02:49 PM

9. You're still here...



TYY

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2019, 03:16 PM

10. Nothing but crickets so far, I see

Is it that no one remembers back that far (because two weeks was really long ago) or that they remember it just as well as you do, but can't figure out how to reconcile their arguments back then with their current position on a different case?

Inquiring minds, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Empowerer (Reply #10)

Sun Feb 10, 2019, 06:58 PM

12. Some of us have not changed our positions.

Neither rape survivors nor Jussie Smollet are obligated to prosecute merely because they are victims of a crime, in order to survive allegations of being a right wing troll, or of making stuff up.

The crickets you see may well be becasue this post by the OP seems to contradict the very vocal advocacy she has been engaged in for Fairfax's survivors should press charges or shut up/forfeit any presumption of believability.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Sun Feb 10, 2019, 05:55 PM

11. Kick

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Wed Feb 13, 2019, 06:43 PM

19. Crickets, still

Hmmm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Empowerer (Reply #19)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 02:56 AM

22. I'm not sure how the OP expects people to respond.

The OP is framed as a rehetorical question.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #22)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 08:28 PM

31. It seems to be an accusation of some kind


But whom is being accused of what is unclear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #31)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 08:32 PM

33. Yes, it does seem a wee bit accusatory.

Meanwhile, that Smollett story seems to be taking on a life of its own.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #33)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 08:38 PM

35. It's one that wasn't on my radar


So I’m still mystified about what I’m being invited to “remember”, not having read or commented on it at the time, and now being curious.

Is this one of those “Haha! I was right and you were all wrong!” posts? Can we at least recap what prize was being offered to the winner of this contest?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #35)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 08:41 PM

37. Yes, I missed most of the original story myself because I'm currently traveling.

I think this particular story may turn out to be a poor example to have been selected for whatever point the OP was trying to make.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #37)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 08:44 PM

38. I can't tell

The OP invites us to “remember” some prior discussion of the topic, but I don’t have my scorecard of “who thought what about what” in the “let’s react to the news of the moment” sweepstakes.

So was the OP skeptical of the story, not skeptical, or was there some other point we are supposed to “remember” in the notes we are supposed to have kept?

I didn’t know there was going to be a quiz.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #38)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 02:06 AM

50. Lol.

It’s all very confusing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #50)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 11:23 AM

58. When is someone going to do something about all these crickets?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #33)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 05:58 PM

61. Nope.

Not an accusation at all. Reread the OP.

It was simply a reminder that many people here were very quick to question Smollett's story because they heard he wasn't cooperating fully with the police (which the police later said wasn't the case). Based solely on his reported refusal to turn over his cellphone, they began to publicly suspect that he was lying about being attacked. On the other hand, in later discussions about the Fairfax case, when anyone questioned why Vanessa Tyson had not filed a police report after she went public with her rape accusation, we were shot down immediately, accused of calling her a liar and attacking Dr. Tyson, in particular, and rape victims, in general, etc., even though we did nothing of the kind.

It's not unusual for people not to readily assume that whoever makes an accusation is telling the truth, solely based on the accusation. Nor is it uncommon to take into account other factors surrounding the accusation - such as how a victim cooperates with the police once the crime is reported or made public - when weighing credibility and doing so doesn't mean that the victim is being attacked, called a liar, mistreated, etc.

I don't know whether Smollett was attacked or not. I'm waiting for more facts. I also don't know whether or not Justin Fairfax raped Vanessa Tyson - and am waiting for more facts. But I do know that there's nothing wrong with not assuming that an accusation is true without more information, whether it's an accusation or rape or a hate crime.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #61)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 08:00 PM

64. Yes.

I don't know whether Smollett was attacked or not. I'm waiting for more facts. I also don't know whether or not Justin Fairfax raped Vanessa Tyson - and am waiting for more facts. But I do know that there's nothing wrong with not assuming that an accusation is true without more information, whether it's an accusation or rape or a hate crime.


Thank you Effie. Not understanding the attacks on you here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #61)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 08:43 PM

67. "many people here were very quick to question Smollett's story"

So what?

Really. So what?

It’s an internet discussion forum which frequently has discussions of a range of current events.

People speculate and share their opinions of those events.

Sometimes those opinions and impressions differ.

Yes, some people thought it was odd that two people would be hanging out at 2am in arctic cold weather in the general vicinity away from someone’s residence for a targeted attack on the off chance they went out at that hour. These people had the temerity to express themselves ona discussion forum.

So effing what?

Some folks hailed Snowden and Assange as heroes, for example. Some didn’t. Maybe some still do. So what?

Some thought Avenatti was the greatest thing since sliced bread. Some didn’t. Maybe some still do. So what?

I’m sure there are people here who KNOW who killed Jon Benet Ramsey.

This isn’t a courtroom. No one here is going to be on a jury in the case nor will they influence a jury.

Who knows, maybe more facts will come to light and there will be another dramatic turn of events.

Stuff happens. People have opinions, speculations, questions, guesses, and so on. Often, they differ.

You should have been here for the Duke lacrosse thing. That was a real rollercoaster ride.

It’s a shame that people tend to use the infinite and bizarre variety of human events involving real people simply as fodder for one narrative or another, but people are going to do that too.

But insisting “thou shalt not discuss a news item, nor form an impression about it until all the facts are in” on an Internet discussion forum is pretty much pointless.

I still don’t understand the point of the OP in this thread since I was attending a conference when this story broke and don’t remember who said what. Nor do I care. If I ever get so hard up that I keep track of “who thought what about X on DU” then I will have truly run out of things which matter.

If someone’s opinions or way of expressing themselves keeps you up at night, there’s an ignore button. I have a very select list, which tends to rotate, since people on my ignore list tend to go bye-bye before long. But I often find discussingor arguing with people whose opinions differ from mine to be enlightening. What’s truly amazing is that there are people who disagree with me who somehow manage to STILL disagree with me, even after I’ve unequivocally set them straight. Hard to believe, really.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #67)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 08:54 PM

68. You've posted 10 times so far in this thread to snark or say you don't get my OP or you don't care

OK. You don't get it and you don't care.

Gotcha.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #68)


Response to Post removed (Reply #69)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 09:15 PM

70. "previous thread on the topic of this story-You will find a complete absence of any comment from me"

Yes, I'm sure that's the case.

Which makes your obsession with this particular thread on the topic all the more bizarre.

But, whatever floats your boat ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #70)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 09:22 PM

72. Like i said

I was away at a conference, and didn’t spend UCB time engaged with news or on DU for a couple of days.

My interest wa piqued by your use of the word “proof” in the OP, and your hedging in response to a question about “proof” in the responses to your OP. I’ve explained that in a longer post in this thread.

Do I have your perrmission to continue posting if I so desire?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #68)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 09:19 PM

71. And maybe i should be more specific

In your run-on rhetorical question #2, you accuse others of taking his non-cooperation as “proof” of something to hide.

When asked if there is “proof” of his being attacked, you say there is “evidence” of his being attacked.

It’s a conversational double standard which, surprise, only works one way.

Someone could consider his non-cooperation to be evidence of having something to hide.

Someone could consider his own testimony as evidence he was attacked.

Neither is “proof” of either proposition.

And that’s your basic hypocrisy here. As with anything, there is “evidence” either way.

Yeah, some people speculated that his lack of cooperation was a reason to doubt him. Just like you have proposed with Fairfax’s accuser not reporting a crime.

Is it “proof”? No. But you are not so forgiving in your OP when you accuse others of claiming that evidence was “proof”.

So then someone asks if there is “proof” of an attack, in the manner that you have accused others of claiming “proof” of evasion, and what did you? You hedge by saying there is “evidence” of one.

Well, golly, there was “evidence” that he was being evasive in the investigation into his claims too.

So, no, other than “I’m upset people dont think the way I do and don’t see things my way” I well and truly still do not understand the point of the OP.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #71)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 09:40 PM

74. Wow, dude. Just ask her to the prom already.

Sheesh!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Empowerer (Reply #74)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 11:03 PM

75. Bazinga!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #68)


Response to Post removed (Reply #73)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 11:39 PM

78. LOL!

But alas, he, too, has gone away. At least from this thread.

Was it something I said?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #61)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 02:00 AM

81. My suspicions about his story had nothing whatsoever to do with his phone.

I didn’t understand how two random MAGA supporters (in Chicago no less) recognized a not very well known actor in the middle of the night in record cold temps. No doubt he was bundled up.

Why would MAGA types watch Empire?

Why would they be lurking around in record cold?

If he was coming home from the airport, why not swing by in the warm taxi to pick up food? Is there no delivery in Chicago?

Despite multitudes of cameras in the area, there were 60 seconds (the attack) that somehow weren’t captured.

I know the fact that people doubted him for other reasons maybe fits the rhetorical point you’re trying to make, but it doesn’t negate the fact that many doubted his story from the get-go. I don’t see his story and the Fairfax story comparable in any way.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #61)

Sun Feb 17, 2019, 04:02 AM

108. I'm uneasy with the blanket acceptance

that he lied or it was a set-up.

I know 'show-biz' folk go to extraordinary lengths to garner publicity but this doesn't strike me as a clever way to.

One furphy made was that he was being dropped from the show but that seems to be untrue so in that case it would be a down right pathetic publicity stunt and fairly dangerous were it to backfire (or has).
It would have to be one of the most bizarre and riskiest of PR stunts with very little to gain if it worked.
Then again- people do strange things and celebs are no different to anyone else.

The phone business sounds perfectly reasonable under the circumstances.

Then again the alleged suspects seem to have been released without bail which is odd. But their claim they were paid by Smollett to do it isn't worth much at this stage. It's a bit like saying someone paid me to rob the bank.

Even if the police claim this was a set-up by Smollett he is as entitled to the presumption of innocence as would any alleged attackers be.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Empowerer (Reply #19)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 07:45 PM

23. ???

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 07:47 PM

24. Sounds like he's now being investigated for a possible hoax.

The whole thing sounded like liberal fan fiction from the beginning.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ace Rothstein (Reply #24)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 07:55 PM

25. It's getting weirder every day.

Stranger hoaxes have happened.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Ace Rothstein (Reply #24)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 09:28 PM

44. Yes it does and as a Chicagoan, I will be upset he chose Chicago for the location to play out this

hoax, if true.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 07:58 PM

26. Sources: Jussie Smollett staged attack with help of others, allegedly being written off 'Empire'

https://abc7chicago.com/sources-smollett-staged-attack-with-help-of-others-allegedly-being-written-off-empire/5138497/


CHICAGO -- Chicago police confirmed Thursday that detectives are talking to two persons of interest in connection with the alleged attack on "Empire" actor Jussie Smollett.

Multiple sources have told ABC7 Eyewitness News that police are investigating whether Smollett and the two men staged the attack allegedly because Smollett was being written off of "Empire."

A source familiar with the investigation told the ABC7 I-Team that Smollett failed to appear for an interview with detectives earlier Thursday.

A source briefed on the Smollett investigation confirmed to ABC News that Chicago police are questioning the two persons of interest -- one of whom has appeared on "Empire."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madville (Reply #26)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 08:52 PM

41. Chicago police are denying these reports. Empire has also denied his being written off the show.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madville (Reply #26)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 01:28 AM

79. I don't know about him being written off.

Rumor is that the show might not be renewed. Taraji P Hensen might be leaving to work on her film career while it's hot-and who could blame her? She's one of the biggest draws of the show and as of this time it's up in the air on whether the show will be renewed. Most believe it will, though ratings are down compared to past seasons.


I don't know if they will be writing anyone off right now, especially if they are waiting for a renewal.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 08:09 PM

30. Or maybe there was another reason altogether why he didn't turn over his phone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #30)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 08:31 PM

32. That's what I was thinking

He may have been in contact with the alleged attackers before it happened. That would be plausible. No way Chicago PD is not getting a warrant for his full records and access to his phone now. Maybe there is something there, maybe not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madville (Reply #32)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 08:39 PM

36. I've really reserved judgement on this for a while, but things aren't adding up.

MAGA supporters from Nigeria? He first said his attackers were white, now he is sure these two are the guys?

I watched the GMA interview, and I didn’t find him believable in the least. Almost like overacting, especially at the end. I’m in the UK, and it’s even made the news here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #36)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 08:45 PM

39. Does anybody know his motivation for lying?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #39)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 08:50 PM

40. The motivation suggested on the Chicago area stations is that he was being written off the show.

The Nigerian guys who supposedly attacked him were extras on the show.

The whole thing is bizarre.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #40)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 08:04 PM

65. Well.

Perhaps not.

Star Member grossproffit (5,393 posts)

41. Chicago police are denying these reports. Empire has also denied his being written off the show.

https://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/430125-smollett-allegedly-staged-attack-over-being-written-off-empire

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sheshe2 (Reply #65)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 02:06 AM

83. I think it was publicity.

His concert the following week benefited immensely from all the publicity.

Unfortunately, it may backfire on him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DemocratSinceBirth (Reply #39)

Sun Feb 17, 2019, 12:16 AM

104. Reminds me of those faked receipts

with no tip and a nasty note, supposedly left by customers.

Publicity, attention, and the grand drama of social media outrage followed by sympathy would be my guess for motivation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 08:59 PM

42. Why wouldn't the police just subpoena the phone records?

Last edited Fri Feb 15, 2019, 11:20 PM - Edit history (1)

If they wanted into his physical phone it’s for evidence of something else - not who he’s talking to. Hell, I often delete text and call history from my phone. The phone company records would be the only accurate source.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PTWB (Reply #42)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 10:03 PM

46. Probably already been done

They'll get a warrant for the phone company records, his manager's records and probably to examine their devices as well. I say "IF" there is suspicion of a conspiracy there is going to be a footprint somewhere and probably some money changing hands. These guys wouldn't have done something this weird unless it was coordinated by someone.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PTWB (Reply #42)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 08:54 PM

97. true

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PTWB (Reply #42)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 09:41 PM

100. Word on the street...

(and by street, I mean Twitter ) is that the police did subpoena the phone records, and in the meantime, Smollet handed over a redacted spreadsheet of his phone records. The detectives looked at the real records, and focused on the redacted calls, which lead them to the Nigerian brothers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PTWB (Reply #42)

Sun Feb 17, 2019, 04:08 AM

109. presumably they would if they think the story is bogus

but as an alleged victim he has certain rights. A bit odd if cops asked straight up for his phone if they haven't yet decided the abuse claim is not true.

There may be good legal reasons he refused to hand over a phone. After all it's now our main communication device and there is bound to be all sorts of confidential information on it.
Police can easily obtain phone records though and see what calls were made if not the content.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 09:53 PM

45. would he be ever justified with lying?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demonaut (Reply #45)

Thu Feb 14, 2019, 10:05 PM

47. Nope

Makes everyone doubt and be suspect of real claims. It's possible it was coordinated without his knowledge though, maybe by other people that could benefit from it, Smollett could still be the victim in all this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 12:12 AM

49. This hasn't aged well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hassin Bin Sober (Reply #49)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 02:23 AM

52. noooope.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hassin Bin Sober (Reply #49)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 07:55 PM

96. And looks worse by the day. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hassin Bin Sober (Reply #49)

Mon Feb 18, 2019, 09:01 AM

125. I wonder if she knows about self delete?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Mosby (Reply #125)

Mon Feb 18, 2019, 07:33 PM

134. Seems a fair question.

One wonders.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 02:18 AM

51. The last thing I paid attention to about this was that

the police were looking at video footage in that area, and had not yet come across anything that showed the attack.

Which seems a bit, I don't know, suspicious? Not turning over the phone doesn't particularly bother me, but local video not showing anything, hmmmm? Also, he was out in the early hours of the morning and some guys were out in the same area and recognized him and were all geared up to attack? Why exactly is my bullshit meter vibrating?

So people weren't questioning his story because he didn't want to give his phone to the police, but because there's simply no outside evidence the attack occurred. Such as, video footage. Which doesn't seem to show anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PoindexterOglethorpe (Reply #51)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 12:23 PM

59. He declared unequivocally yesterday on GMA that those were the guys too.

They are black.

He swore the attackers were white. Not good.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 02:33 AM

53. The one thing that struck me as odd

Chicago Illinois is not MAGA country

When he claimed the attackers said that, it bounced off me for some reason

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GusBob (Reply #53)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 03:47 AM

55. I thought it odd that two MAGA supporters would recognize an actor in the middle of the night.

No doubt he was bundled up that very cold night. How would they recognize someone from that show?

I don’t watch the show and sure as hell wouldn’t recognize him in the middle of the day. Doesn’t seem a likely show for MAGA watching.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GusBob (Reply #53)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 05:59 PM

62. Okay, but...

One thing I remember from my teenage years (and granted, this was in the late 80's) was that sometimes nazi skinhead types from downstate or elsewhere (Indiana or wherever - the south side is right across the skyway) would come to the south side strictly to intimidate and cause trouble, almost always at night. I'm not aware of them venturing into actual black neighborhoods, but they used to come to the far south side neighborhoods where there were a lot of Polish and harass the punk or new wave or gay kids and the Polish people and would paint swastikas all over the place.

It's been known to happen, and I could believe that some downstate or out-of-state crackas would stalk and harass a gay black celebrity. For real.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MountCleaners (Reply #62)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 01:32 AM

80. Yep.

A friend from high school was beaten up years ago outside a well known gay bar in Chicago. He swore they were skinheads who were trolling for a fight in the middle of the night. They never caught the guys and since this was the mid nineties no one really tried or cared at the time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to xmas74 (Reply #80)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 09:07 AM

86. Yeah, I used to live in Boys Town

I remember walking down the streets and sometimes skinheads would drive through the area and yell homophobic slurs at people. Sometimes they'd come through the neighborhood just to harass. Once in a while I'd see an actual skin just walking down the street going about their business. You could tell they were skins just from the clothes or pins they'd wear.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 03:38 AM

54. All very odd

What struck me was the lack of video evidence. Today there are security cameras everywhere, yet there has been nothing found but the video of the 2 people seen walking in the area around the time of the alleged incident. The latest story today said that Smollet and his agent turned over phone records, but they had redacted them. I'm not sure I'd trust the police with a cell phone either, but if the phone records are needed, they'll just supoena them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 03:51 AM

56. Sounding more and more the reason for not turning over the phone ... because it was a hoax

and he knew that the phone would give the whole stunt away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Raine (Reply #56)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 08:38 AM

57. The lawyer for the two accused say they are friends with Smollett.

They work out with him.

And he said to GMA yesterday he “knew” they were the ones.

Curiouser and curiouser.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #57)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 02:12 AM

85. rumor is that Smollett was going lose his TV role

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 05:06 PM

60. Remember when the two people arrested in the case were coworkers of his?


And his cell phone (along with other information from cell phones having been determined to be in the area) might have information about communications with the two suspects who were known to him?

One of the things that can be done in police investigations is to get a wealth of information about cell phones that were in a given area during a given time frame.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jberryhill (Reply #60)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 07:01 PM

63. Wait. Is that crickets I hear?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 08:39 PM

66. Two arrests this afternoon - both charged with battery. Chicago police don't arrest suspects...

...for no reason at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #66)

Fri Feb 15, 2019, 11:20 PM

77. Two men have been released without charging

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/two-men-arrested-jussie-smollett-case-are-released-due-new-n971866
Two men arrested in Jussie Smollett case are released 'due to new evidence,' police say
No charges were filed against the men, and "detectives have additional investigative work to complete," a police spokesman said.
Feb. 15, 2019, 9:43 PM CST
By Phil Helsel

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to dalton99a (Reply #77)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 12:11 PM

87. And Smollet just hired Michael Monico as his defense attorney.

(Michael Cohen's defense attorney, no less.)

Damn this case is full of weirdness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dr. Strange (Reply #87)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 01:14 PM

88. CPD now says they were released due to "new evidence"

Provided by the two and information obtained from their interrogations.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to George II (Reply #66)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 02:11 AM

84. My guess

They cut a deal and turned on whoever set this whole thing up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madville (Reply #84)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 01:16 PM

89. And now, it turns out Smollett has hired Michael Cohen's attorney.

The plot thickens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #89)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 01:20 PM

90. CPD says they have new evidence from the two brothers

That triggered their release and are investigating the new information.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madville (Reply #90)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 01:33 PM

91. Oh my.

Fascinating.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madville (Reply #90)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 03:13 PM

92. I'm thinking this isn't going to end well for someone.

Though I’m doubtful about repercussions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #92)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 04:22 PM

94. Latest news is Smollett has retained a defense attorney

Michael Cohen's defense attorney to be exact.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 06:15 PM

95. Chicago detectives are 'eager to speak to Jussie Smollett' after new information emerges

https://abcnews.go.com/US/information-jussie-smollett-investigation-change-story-police/story?id=61117628

Chicago police are "eager to speak to Jussie Smollett" after new information emerged following the interrogation of two persons of interest in the investigation into the alleged attack of the "Empire" star.

"We have been in touch with Smollett's attorneys," said Chicago Police spokesman Anthony Guglielmi told ABC News.

Early Saturday, after two men were released after being arrested and interrogated, police said they had new information that “could change the story entirely.”

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 08:55 PM

98. Police sources: New evidence suggests Jussie Smollett orchestrated attack

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to melman (Reply #99)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 09:57 PM

101. That answers the proof question. Apparently there are receipts!



========

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 10:10 PM

102. Perhaps there are crickets because this story keeps changing and I don't know what to think.

I had posted an article about Smollet's non-cooperation with Chicago Police Department and was clobbered for it. I never said anything like "if he didn't have anything to hide, then why not cooperate?" but just noted that something about his story seemed "off." I'm as sensitive to racial attacks as anybody on this board. Growing up Ojibwe in northern lower Michigan, we were THE minority group. I've heard so many people refer to me, my friends, and family as "those dirty Indians" and that's one of the milder ones. I'm also the daughter of a cop and something just seems a little off about the whole incident. I'm reserving judgement in any case, because if the attack was legitimate, then the attackers need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. If it turns out he staged this, then he needs help.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to catbyte (Reply #102)

Sat Feb 16, 2019, 11:10 PM

103. 'I showed the cops my call history, but didn't want to give them possession of my phone'

Last edited Sat Feb 16, 2019, 11:49 PM - Edit history (1)

is not a quote from this story. If this were a true story, that quote probably would have been part of the initial reporting. Its absence was evidence for people to doubt Smollett's honesty.

Only minimally mitigating saving grace for Smollett now is that he apparently wasn't trying to involve the police at first, thus didn't directly make a false report to authorities, initially. Too bad he compounded the problem and ended up making many false statements to authorities, friends, and fans. Sad story all around.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to catbyte (Reply #102)

Tue Feb 19, 2019, 12:26 PM

135. Now it looks as though he is going before a grand jury.

He may have scuppered his career. The whole thing is astonishing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Sun Feb 17, 2019, 12:25 AM

105. Regardless of how this turns out, civil liberties exist for a reason....

Always hire a lawyer. Always request to see a warrant. Always insist that everyone in the situation follows the law to the letter.

And in this case specifically, never forget the 2017 Obama DOJ report on the Chicago Police Department.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SaschaHM (Reply #105)

Sun Feb 17, 2019, 01:00 AM

106. You're absolutely right

However, that wasn't what I was getting at. I was questioning the double standards in how black men are treated when it comes to being accused of and reporting crimes.

In the Justin Fairfax case, I had in other threads questioned why his accuser had not filed a police report after she went public with her allegation - since the normal justifications for a rape victim not going to the police no longer applied once she publicly detailed the incident she alleged. I don't think it meant that she was lying and she could have a good reason not to involve the police, but it was certainly a factor I considered in trying to assess the credibility of her allegation. (I should note that, since I raised the question, I've seen some reports that she is willing to speak with the authorities in Massachusetts, so we'll see what happens).

In the wake of that, I was reminded of how quickly some people pointed to Jussie Smollett's reported "refusal to cooperate with the police" by virtue of his reluctance to hand over his cellphone as reason to call his credibility into question, but to immediately assume that he was lying about the attack. As you note, there are many reasons for a black man not to trust the police, especially in Chicago, but that didn't matter to many folk here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #106)

Sun Feb 17, 2019, 02:34 AM

107. Perhaps another example might have served your case better.

This Smollett thing is not ending well. Your point has been lost in the reek rising from this stinking pile of hooey he tried to pull off.

The MAGAts will love this whole thing. All he has done is give the right ammunition. I hope he will wise up to how badly these hoaxes hurt those who are genuinely victims of hate crimes.

If he made this all up for publicity, he’s a pathetic loser of a person.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #107)

Sun Feb 17, 2019, 08:34 AM

115. Actually, this example proves my argument perfectly

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #115)

Sun Feb 17, 2019, 08:37 AM

116. No. It doesn't.

But whatever works for you.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #116)

Sun Feb 17, 2019, 09:11 AM

119. You felt the need to devote considerable time and effort - and 20+ posts

trying to knock down an argument you claim proved your point, not mine.

A sure sign that my point was made and with stinging precision.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #119)


Response to Post removed (Reply #120)

Mon Feb 18, 2019, 08:43 AM

124. "It takes me about 30 seconds to write a post"

That explains a lot.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #106)

Sun Feb 17, 2019, 06:01 AM

110. So I guess you are still arguing his credibility shouldn't be questioned? Despite the recent reports

suggesting that he might have orchestrated his own attack. I am confused.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #110)

Sun Feb 17, 2019, 06:16 AM

111. It is confusing, isn't it.

I see the case of Jussie Smollett being used elsewhere on DU to prove some point or another.

He’s a very poor example.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #111)

Sun Feb 17, 2019, 06:31 AM

112. If it should be used as an example, I would think that we shouldn't automatically believe

without any doubts, when someone claims to be a victim.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #112)

Sun Feb 17, 2019, 06:40 AM

114. Yes, I think the Smollett example has proved exactly the opposite point desired by those OPs.

Funny how things work out some times.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cwydro (Reply #114)

Sun Feb 17, 2019, 08:38 AM

117. It's clear the point was completely lost on you

It happens.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #117)

Mon Feb 18, 2019, 07:56 AM

123. If someone doesn't agree with you, then they miss the point?

Oh ok.

How do you feel about Smollett now? That story of his is crumbling fast.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LisaL (Reply #110)

Sun Feb 17, 2019, 08:42 AM

118. I'm not arguing that at all - never have

I'm saying that he shouldn't be assumed to be lying because he didn't want to turn his phone over because there are also rational reasons not to turn over his phone to the Chicago Police.

There's a difference between a factor weighing against his credibility and determining he has no credibility based on that factor.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Sun Feb 17, 2019, 06:33 AM

113. he lied.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inkfreak (Reply #113)

Sun Feb 17, 2019, 04:01 PM

121. yep.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Demovictory9 (Reply #121)

Mon Feb 18, 2019, 01:01 AM

122. He's made himself look stupid, if nothing else.

Amazing some here still defending him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Mon Feb 18, 2019, 09:17 AM

126. So any thoughts on the damage this may do to credibility of future victims?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MrGrieves (Reply #126)

Mon Feb 18, 2019, 09:26 AM

127. Yes

Anyone who assumes a victim in the future is any less credible because a completely unrelated person may previously have made a false allegation in an altogether unrelated case probably wouldn't take that victim seriously under any circumstances and is just looking for an excuse to do what they were going to do anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Reply #127)

Mon Feb 18, 2019, 11:03 AM

131. Huh?

Dayum, I would hate to have to diagram that sentence.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EffieBlack (Original post)

Mon Feb 18, 2019, 10:10 AM

128. This incident should be learning opportunity for everyone.

Stampeding in any direction based on accusations is always a fool's errand. I wish more Democrats would stop making pronouncements about issues like this without at least waiting for a few days to get a clearer picture of the situation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinnie From Indy (Reply #128)

Mon Feb 18, 2019, 10:12 AM

129. Agreed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Vinnie From Indy (Reply #128)

Mon Feb 18, 2019, 10:45 AM

130. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Reply to this thread