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

GGizmo · 19 Feb 2019 at 15:50

chroniclard said:
Obvious link from your post due to Trump being possibly the highest profile liar on earth at the moment. Assume you are vilifying him in the same way.

The thread is nothing about Trump. Accusing everyone of being a Trump supporter when we're typing about a different subject is borderline mental illness.

Here is the latest from CNN, and maybe a headline to some of the ones trying to derail the thread;

Why our politics can't handle Jussie Smollett
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/02/18/politics/jussie-smollett-politics/index.html

chroniclard · 19 Feb 2019 at 15:56

BowdonUK said:
The thread is nothing about Trump. Accusing everyone of being a Trump supporter when we're typing about a different subject is borderline mental illness.

Here is the latest from CNN, and maybe a headline to some of the ones trying to derail the thread;

Why our politics can't handle Jussie Smollett
https://edition.cnn.com/2019/02/18/politics/jussie-smollett-politics/index.html

Looking forward to you slating Trump in the SC thread.

Mason- · 19 Feb 2019 at 16:04

chroniclard said:
Looking forward to you slating Trump in the SC thread.

You know there's a third position right? It's not: "you must be absolutely 100% against him, go full Raymond Lin, and he is guilty of everything and literally the worst man of all time" or you are a supporter.

edit: that is a good article.

We live in a political world -- and in a broader society, because, let's be honest, everything is political now -- that puts a premium on instant reactions. As soon as something happens, politicians scramble to beat each other off the draw to comment. Reporters ask them for their statements, and analysts -- yours truly often included -- start writing about what happened, what politicians said about what happened and what it all means.

This bit resonated quite a bit. When will it end though? Websites get revenue from adverts, so they don't care about what they post they just care about clicks. And being the first. It's the same with twitter. Will there be a huge backlash against social media and what it does to society?

I thought about this quite a lot recently. Before social media etc. if you lived in a town, or village of say 20,000. And you had 'rare' political views, communist, fascist, whatever. You'd be in a massive minority. Chances are you'd be ashamed to talk about them too. With the internet connecting people, all of those 1-in-20,000 can come together. And the old adage "there's power in numbers" applies. This applies not just to political views but other very minority views too. The internet brings people together, but it also amplifies minority views. And gives them much more power.

chroniclard · 19 Feb 2019 at 16:09

Mason- said:
You know there's a third position right? It's not: "you must be absolutely 100% against him, go full Raymond Lin, and he is guilty of everything and literally the worst man of all time" or you are a supporter.

edit: that is a good article.

There are many positions however BowdenUK is a firm believer that people in high profile positions who lie should be made examples of.

GGizmo · 19 Feb 2019 at 16:45

@Mason-

People can hold many positions on different topics. That is the reasonable thing to do. But sadly some people on the forum have a mental weakness for Trump, and I think have other issues that stop them from properly communicating on the forum.

I'm going to be blocking them from now on as they are a waste of space. I'm surprised the Mods haven't stepped in before now. Derailing threads used to result in some kind of warning.

Mason- · 19 Feb 2019 at 16:57

Well most of the people who hate Trump are pretty reasoned in their arguments so they're fair enough, he rightly deserves a lot of criticism. But some people are just rabid in their hatred, not immediately condemning him as guilty means you get bombarded with assumptions, it stinks of "if you're not one of us, you're one of them" false dichotomy, rubbish. I pointed out Raymond being hypocritical and he just goes off on one. Insane.

RaohNS · 19 Feb 2019 at 22:32

chroniclard said:
Lost due to a corrupt political system and a russian funded conspiracy.

Certainly is corrupt. You missed theory off the end tin foil hatter.

Raymond Lin said:
I would find you the youtube video where he admitted there was some collusion on air last month in an interview but it is clear that even words out of their own mouths can't get through your brains for acceptance as it has resistance to the truth.

You can say things that aren't true. Again, what is Clintons role in collusion. She 100% has as she funnelled money to Russia to pay for the dossier and also received millions in donations...

you imagine if Obama ask live on air for the Russsian to hack Trump's tax returns? You would be screaming for treason!

I refer you back to the previous post... The word... HACK... That is your assertion. I've not found he said that.

Here is the video (its with your wording too):
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YL7NkFa_F7w

Again... Unless you find a video to show he said hack you are either I) lying and II) deliberately inventing him saying something to fit your narrative.

Thus far.. You are lying. The word you specify is hack.

Raymond Lin · 19 Feb 2019 at 22:47

RaohNS said:
Certainly is corrupt. You missed theory off the end tin foil hatter.

You can say things that aren't true. Again, what is Clintons role in collusion. She 100% has as she funnelled money to Russia to pay for the dossier and also received millions in donations...

I refer you back to the previous post... The word... HACK... That is your assertion. I've not found he said that.

Here is the video (its with your wording too):
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=YL7NkFa_F7w

Again... Unless you find a video to show he said hack you are either I) lying and II) deliberately inventing him saying something to fit your narrative.

Thus far.. You are lying. The word you specify is hack.

You are resorting to literary gymnastics to a single word HACK and call me lying lol After all the LIES about Trump you have sprouted? remember 8000 and counting, it would be higher had he not gone to play golf after calling a National Emergency….some emergency.

Talk about deflection and standing on thin ice, you must try harder.

Yes HACK. You evidently have a problem with that word, what's the other way? ask the DNC to hand them over? Pretty please with sugar on top?

tang0 · 19 Feb 2019 at 23:16

Russia doesn't need to "hack" Hillarys emails, since the contents of the missing emails most likely contain direct communications with Russians.

Hence why Trump said "find" rather than "hack"

One of the many reasons why "stonetear" on Reddit (Hillarys IT guy) was desperate to know how to remove all the headers from her emails

RaohNS · 20 Feb 2019 at 09:18

Raymond Lin said:
You are resorting to literary gymnastics to a single word HACK and call me lying lol After all the LIES about Trump you have sprouted? remember 8000 and counting, it would be higher had he not gone to play golf after calling a National Emergency….some emergency.

Talk about deflection and standing on thin ice, you must try harder.

Yes HACK. You evidently have a problem with that word, what's the other way? ask the DNC to hand them over? Pretty please with sugar on top?

I've just posted the video above.... Show me Raymond where he uses the word HACK.

English really isn't your strong point.

Hack:
Gain unauthorized entry to a computer system or data

The word hack is a very very specific allegation. You have not given the evidence to substantiate and in some failed face planting mental gymnastics have made up a definition.

I name you a perfidious tartuffe.

Raymond Lin · 20 Feb 2019 at 09:21

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!

Trump loves to sue, not this one, in fact his campaign at the time had to walk back some of those talk afterwards instead of going after the papers.

chroniclard · 20 Feb 2019 at 09:42

and down the rabbit hole we go

RaohNS · 20 Feb 2019 at 09:46

Raymond Lin said:
You need help.

Raymond... You made the [false] allegation that Trump used the word hack. You then did some dodgy twisting and then stated it's implied. You've taken a specific word and made it into something to suit what you needed it to. Imagine going into a Court room and making that allegation. You would be laughed all the way to the bank.

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?

Were that the case, show me him using the word hack. I would then have to accept (not retract) he used that particular word.

Trump never used the word hack. Again, you are attempting to juxtapose - quite spuriously - a mere statement to request or compel and illicit/illegal act. Odd how you say earlier you would like to debate me and yet your centre piece allegation is not based on fact.

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

Name calling? Unlike your allegation, that description fits you perfectly. You are deceitful and you do preach to others from a moral point, whilst being a hypocrite. Again, this is verifiably true. Thus the I name you is axiomatic of this little back and forth.

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

So.... Trump couldn't sue due to the first amendment. If you listen to talk radio more you would know that the 1A permits all manner of things short of an outright lie that is costly or by printing it exposes a person to harm or loss. Covered ad infinitum in talk radio. You instead rely on the smallest headline.

You said the word hack... Trump never said: Russia if you are listening I WANT you to HACK... That would be the call to engage in an illegal activity.

Trump loves to sue, not this one, in fact his campaign at the time had to walk back some of those talk afterwards instead of going after the papers.

Big deal. Solicitors like to sue.

So far this debate is like watching a worm wriggle whilst getting pecked to death by a raven. Plenty of allegories there for you to pick apart (6 at my count)

Raymond Lin · 20 Feb 2019 at 09:56

Go get some help, pretty please.

[FnG]magnolia · 20 Feb 2019 at 09:59

chroniclard said:
and down the rabbit hole we go

Curiouser and curiouser.

doodah · 20 Feb 2019 at 10:02

I will just leave this here seeing as RaohNS is the figurehead for honesty, informed decision making and evidence.....

RaohNS said:
You have not given the evidence to substantiate and in some failed face planting mental gymnastics have made up a definition.

RaohNS said:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=_aevtHHULag

Not that anyone in here will watch or understand this or have the ability to admit they were wrong because they are so full if tarantulas.

Dan has been following the Russia conspiracy theory since day 1.

Equally posters who think the "any matters arising out of the investigation" clause ignore its obvious connection to catch anyone and scare anyone in Trumps orbit.

Hillary was where the real collusion was. Sadly, but not unexpectedly, the British and Australians were working against Trump and his team too.

If you can accept even 10% of what he says in this short video, you would have to admit the case for the FISA(s) which led to the most corrupt and biggest scandal was in fact entirely politically motivated against the interests of the US public (right and left all).

For the one or two people still braving these manic and histrionic waters of Speakers Corner who aren't NPCs and want to have a far larger picture of what has gone on, you can as I have been doing listen to Dan Bonginos famous Episode 628 onwards (now on Ep 857), and vast majority is done to expose what had been done to Trump in the run up and after his election.

RaohNS said:
Partly correct, have you ever considered that there are people who are there to deliberately sabotage him? We've already seen a huge swathe of the FBI "Investigation" corrupted by politicized agents. Even Robert Mueller is not immune from this (despite his appointment). This is the same man who turned a blind eye to the Obama Fast and Furious scandal and Uranium One.

Obama is put on a pedestal when his Politics bred the politics of division that has merely been exploited by a media establishment that has had its knuckles rapped repeatedly. Strangely, people still trust all of the above media corporations despite them being in bed with the Democratic party.

RaohNS said:
Speaking of information to try and influence the election... The dossier involved Clinton herself using proxies to contact Russian agents to influence the election. There have been no such things for Trump. There is a meeting between his son and a Russian Lawyer who the DoJ (Clinton friendly) allowed in the country without a Visa (highly suspect in and of itself) and that turned out to be nothing as this report has found and concluded.

RaohNS said:
Evidence of racism please?
Evidence of lack of understanding?
Evidence of lack of leadership?

Economy highest ever. Jobs going up. Tax break success. Businesses pledging to return monies. Its your crowd that is undermining everything else.

RaohNS said:
RE - the fake video Trump retweeted of a Muslim boy beating up another kid on crutches....

1) videos are true and show huge instances of brutality murder
2) anybody could have also posted those videos (ignoring the source here)
3) lets ignore all this violence committed by evil people because its Trump and lets attack Trump for posting it.

Complete logic fail again. 1+1=56 again the lefties are missing the entire point.

Some people on here may agree with mass rapes (an awful lot judging by the reactions on here) and violence directed at Kafirs (again an awful lot on here from the usual crowd who attempt to justify and downplay the actions).

Meanwhile evidence of grooming gangs from 1975 is starting to surface on alternative media platforms. But its ok because these girls "had it coming". Rape time...

RaohNS said:
You are probably correct. Although he did waiver the $400k salary.

Still at least its only 1 term and then doofus mcdoofus can come in and soundly beat him.

I saw Bernie the other day and that man has gone down drastically in my estimations now. I think as well as selling out he's also sold his soul

I apologise for continuing the trend of going off topic but behaviour like this needs to be called out. You spout your nonsense drivel in the Trump thread and pretty much everything you touch on here.

As for Jussie Smollett - I still have no idea if he's a victim or planned it :confused:

.

RaohNS · 20 Feb 2019 at 10:35

doodah said:
mindless drivel.

As for Jussie Smollett - I still have no idea if he's a victim or planned it .

The deflection doesn't work. The word hack is the allegation. Its not been substantiated.

I've seen some of your posts in the Trump Derangement thread and they are hilarious. Must be great down there in the dark with the other spineless worms.

Jussie Smollet may have a grand jury waiting for him. See how much protection he gets from democrats.

Raymond Lin said:
Go get some help, pretty please.

You've lost the debate.

Next time maybe. Unable to substantiate you allegation. The word hack undid you. Unlucky.

doodah · 20 Feb 2019 at 10:39

RaohNS said:
The deflection doesn't work. The word hack is the allegation. Its not been substantiated.

I've seen some of your posts in the Trump Derangement thread and they are hilarious. Must be great down there in the dark with the other spineless worms.

Jussie Smollet may have a grand jury waiting for him. See how much protection he gets from democrats.

Deflection for calling you out on your hypocritical drivel? Hehehe.

Tell me more about Uranium 1? Or how Bernie sold himself out? Or that VIDEOS ARE TRUE

? Or a CT former secret service agent? Or how Trump isn't racist? What amounts to a tax break success?

There's a reason why you're likely on a lot of people's ignore list. You scour the cesspits of the internet, regurgitate it and then paint yourself as a facts and figures person.

You lost pretty much every debate in SC. When you can actually back one of your claims with some evidence that isn't from Breitbart, Fox or 4Chan - perhaps someone on this forum might take you seriously for a split second but I wouldn't put money on it.

Raymond Lin · 20 Feb 2019 at 10:45

RaohNS said:
You've lost the debate.

Next time maybe. Unable to substantiate you allegation. The word hack undid you. Unlucky.

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.

doodah · 20 Feb 2019 at 10:53

Hillary was where the real collusion was. Sadly, but not unexpectedly, the British and Australians were working against Trump and his team too.

Another nugget from RaohNS followed by "everything in [Dan Bongino's] video is substantiated".

If you can accept even 10% of what he says in this short video, you would have to admit the case for the FISA(s) which led to the most corrupt and biggest scandal was in fact entirely politically motivated against the interests of the US public (right and left all).

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

?

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