Fake hate crime: Jussie Smollett paid two Nigerian brothers to attack him

Raymond Lin said:
Tell yourself what you want to sleep better and go get some help.

Funny how you cling onto that single word and thought "victory". Anyone with 2 brain cells knows what he meant, hence all those papers published the story they did.

I suggest you put that conspiracy brain of yours to some use and look closer to home.
Click to expand...

Unlucky. You were unable to substantiate your position except to change the narrative.

doodah said:
Another nugget from RaohNS followed by "everything in [Dan Bongino's] video is substantiated".
Click to expand...

If its easy to disprove... Then tell him that and he can issue all the retractions from his best selling book. Be good for you to read that book too.

I would try dialectic argument based on fact with you but it wont work. Watch:
Did the Clinton campaign fund through third parties information that came from Russians?


Wait so the part about the FISA warrant is only contained in 10% of the video :p?

Didn't you think Trump has a high IQ as well? Jesus.
Click to expand...

I don't believe it was me that made the claim he had a high IQ, but he was certainly smart enough to beat the most qualified person to ever run for President :D

I suppose in that respect he had a higher IQ than Clinton. Also, remember Clinton was desperate to run against Trump as the Wikileaks emails proved. Not a smart move.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Bloody hell... if it's true that he staged this, that guy is mentally unhinged.

Yas786 said:
Interesting if true, the guy is an absolute idiot if he’s made all this up and rightly deserves to be called out for it.
Click to expand...
I think he deserves more than being 'called out' for it, if it's true.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yas786 said:
What exactly does he deserve more??


He’s been called out and I’m pretty damn sure that if the allegations are true, then he won’t have a career anymore. For me that’s more than enough unless you feel he deserves
Click to expand...
Prison time?

I don't know what the legalities are but what he was trying to do is terrible. Fake an attack, bad. Fake homophobic motives, worse. Fake racist motives, worse. Fake political motives, even worse. I've also heard that he potentially would have testified against 2 random white men who were innocent, worse still.

People shouldn't be able to get away with what he's attempted without jail time.
 
Mason- said:
Prison time?

I don't know what the legalities are but what he was trying to do is terrible. Fake an attack, bad. Fake homophobic motives, worse. Fake racist motives, worse. Fake political motives, even worse. I've also heard that he potentially would have testified against 2 random white men who were innocent, worse still.

People shouldn't be able to get away with what he's attempted without jail time.
Click to expand...
I agree, was just curious to know what else he deserved. If it does come to criminal charges being brought against him then for sure he should serve some jail time. Which would hopefully act as a deterrent to others who may try and do the same.
 
Yas786 said:
I agree, was just curious to know what else he deserved. If it does come to criminal charges being brought against him then for sure he should serve some jail time. Which would hopefully act as a deterrent to others who may try and do the same.
Click to expand...
I hope so too. What he's done is akin to inciting racial/homophobic/poltiical tensions/violence. Which I'm not sure is a crime in the US? Happy to be proven wrong.
 
Raymond Lin said:
You need help.

For someone like you who is such a massive conspiracy superfan but when everything is laid out in front of you, that's when you decide to look the other way. Really?

Sure, start the name calling, that's what Trump does, that's what little kids do.

Yes, the word hack is a very specific allegation but do you see Trump suing any of the papers for false reporting??? I don't!
Click to expand...

Is this utter derailment in an attempt to deligitimize criticism of a false flag still going on? Are you now arguing that if Trump doesn't sue papers for misreporting that he asked Russia to hack US computer systems? Your burden of proof is now that unless a lawsuit is initiated you believe it happened? Despite a complete lack of evidence for such? You were wrong. It's as simple as that. More specifically you were misread by a media that reported he said something he didn't and rather than accepting you were misled, you are trying to impose absurd burdens of proof. To quote Donald Trump: "sad".

Now as this relates to Jussie Smollet I think it's a really good example of what we're dealing with here. I'm already seeing a lot of people on the Left saying things like "the fact that we were so ready to believe this is an illustration of how racist our society is" and similar. Which is one Hell of a spin on a False Flag. But human nature is tribal and hates to be proven wrong by someone they view as a rival. If Raymond Lin, who is an intelligent person as proven in plenty of other discussions, so easily falls into this trap, then it's a great example of just how effective media lies can be. The principle is: If you can get in first with your version, people will defend your version simply because they don't want to be corrected. Hence we're seeing ground work being lain already in interviews with Jussie's new lawyer (same guy who defended Michael Jackson for a bit of thread cross-over) to set up favourable narratives.

Mason- said:
Well most of the people who hate Trump are pretty reasoned in their arguments so they're fair enough
Click to expand...

Ha, no. Most of ANY group are not pretty reasoned, they're just repeating what they've read from favoured sources. Democrat, Republican, Green... all majority comprised by people repeating learned opinions with a periphery of thoughtful people drawing their own conclusions. Generally the reasoning people in any group fall into one of two categories: core opinion leaders who are exploiting the rest / telling them what they want to hear. And peripheral, conditional supporters who are less partisan but broadly agree with some of the beliefs. The majority may or may not be right on any given issue, but that is determined by whether what they are repeating is right or not, not their own reasoning ability.

And that's not primarily because of intelligence or lack. It's due to (a) time they're willing to put to look into things and (b) willingness to prioritize accuracy above tribalism.

RaohNS said:
Jussie Smollet may have a grand jury waiting for him. See how much protection he gets from democrats.
Click to expand...

It may be a lot more than we expect. I've now come down on the side of believing this to be a false flag based on the continuing events. However, once politics and high-level connections become involved, actual outcomes become hard to predict. A couple of years ago, Eric Clanton, a professor in California, attempted to kill someone by smashing a steel bike lock into their head (this was facilitated by other masked protestors using Black Block tactics). On the same day he also attacked SEVEN other people with the weapon. Despite clear evidence it was him, he was given leniency by the Almeida jury (a very, very Left Wing, Progressive area of California) and let off with a three year probation. That's what American partisan politics can accomplish. With friends who are upcoming Democratic presidential candidates and this being very much something that could be turned into a partisan issue, there's a good chance he could get let off with a slap on the wrist.

To remind people why this is so serious, aside from the gross waste of police time and possibly a hoax terrorist act (the white powder in the mail if that proves to be him), this could have caused massive political fall-out and riots. If this had taken place in Summer when it wasn't -9C, we could be looking at a similar situation as took place in Ferguson or Baltimore a couple of years ago. What Smollet did could have been extremely harmful.

Raymond Lin said:
Funny how you cling onto that single word and thought "victory". Anyone with 2 brain cells knows what he meant, hence all those papers published the story they did.
Click to expand...

That word is pretty damn important given one is a crime and the other not. You're now damning him for what you assert was in his head and speaking in favour of wild misreporting. You should take a break, consider - genuinely - if you are arguing honestly. And stop damning someone else for defending the actual on record truth. Which is what you are currently doing. You were wrong. This isn't the end of the world. You can still hate Trump if you want without needing him to have said something he didn't.

Mason- said:
I hope so too. What he's done is akin to inciting racial/homophobic/poltiical tensions/violence. Which I'm not sure is a crime in the US? Happy to be proven wrong.
Click to expand...

I brought this up myself earlier. The USA has a lot stronger Freedom of Speech laws than most of Europe. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schenck_v._United_States is the landmark case on the limits of Free Speech. It's the classic "Falsely shouting fire in a crowded theatre" example. You CAN be prosecuted for actions or speech that incited racial violence, but it has to be imminent (the word used in the law) violent action. If a riot had been directly kicked off by the False Flag, a case might be possible. But I don't think there's a case that can be built on general raising racial tensions. I mean, I've seen people publicly calling for the extinction or expulsion of people based on race in the USA without reprisals, so this probably gets a pass.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Handbags away please guys, and keep it on topic, or this will be locked.

And don't overuse the Report button please, you know who you are ;)
 
It has begun. Smollet attempts to perpetrate a career boosting hoax, defame political opponents and risks kicking off race riots... But he's the victim here. Expect a lot more of this on behalf of the well-connected political darling.
Shared-Screenshot.jpg


(Seth Mandel: Washington Examiner editor, btw).
 
I wonder if his being connected will get him off the hook?

As posters have said, activist Judges to use their proper title, will probably let him off.

In my view what he attempted to do is a very perverse thing. The consequences could have been severe for many many people. It would be q guilty and prison verdict for me. A few years at least.
 
doodah said:
Didn't you think Trump has a high IQ as well? Jesus.
Click to expand...

If Trump was really smart he'd use a private email server for government work and delete a few thousand emails on purpose, then after the fake news media and left have spent months salivating about how it's 100% proof of Russia collusion he can release them all and then hopefully the sheep will reflect inwards on how Hillary was able to do it without anyone batting an eyelid. What's that quote the big brother apologists use all the time on here? "if you don't do anything wrong you have nothing to hide", it just doesn't apply to Hillary because she's so trustworthy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom