Hollywood Actor Jussie Smollett Facing Prison Time

conorhal

Penn wrote: »

Agreed. Ultimately, despite his accusations of the type of people he said attacked him and the conflict that could cause, nobody (luckily) ended up being hurt apart from himself. I'd say it just wasn't worth their time and effort to investigate, go to trial etc. A plea deal, sealed (likely agreed to on account of him being a celebrity) closes it out and everyone moves on. His reputation will likely never recover from it anyway.

His reputation won't recover?

Fox have already released a statement saying that he has always maintained his innocence and they are 'gratified' on his behalf that all charges have been dismissed. Which is just code for, we dropped him from 2 episodes but he'll be back on the series next season.

And there was no plea deal, the charges were dismissed at an 'emergency hearing' after which the case was sealed. That smacks of some political chicanery.
The left were embarrassed and now they're going to drop this episode down the memory hole and pretend like it never happened.

Billy86

conorhal wrote: »

And there was no plea deal, the charges were dismissed at an 'emergency hearing' after which the case was sealed. That smacks of some political chicanery.
The left were embarrassed and now they're going to drop this episode down the memory hole and pretend like it never happened.

My god this is just like Pizzagate, I hope Qanon is hot on the case! :eek:

conorhal

Billy86 wrote: »

My god this is just like Pizzagate, I hope Qanon is hot on the case! :eek:

Don't you have some Russian bots to bother?

So the Mayor of Chicago and it's black police chief are conspiracy theorists when they directly say that Smollet has received special treatment and the case has "literally been wite-washed", to quote Rahm Emanuel?

The cops referred to it affront to justice and a 'kick in the gut' to find out the case had been dropped and they weren't even notified.

Billy86

conorhal wrote: »

Don't you have some Russian bots to bother?

Where would I do that? You certainly don't find any of them on boards, which I have said repeatedly. Bu yeah many high level politicians definitely risked major, potentially career damaging scandal, so they could get this random gobsh*te who has a backing role in a TV show off a sentence that would have otherwise has no impact on their lives because... well because reasons. Because the same reasons De Demmycrats are raping children in the basement of a pizza place (which your theory is about as credible as, so it's a safe bet it's currently doing the rounds on your alt-right websites that were spreading that one too).

And for the record, as I said earlier in the thread, I absolutely think he should have got time for this. But he got off for being rich and famous in America, not for some grand political conspiracy to.... get a C-list celebrity off a sentence because reasons.

conorhal

Billy86 wrote: »

Where would I do that? You certainly don't find any of them on boards, which I have said repeatedly. Bu yeah many high level politicians definitely risked major, potentially career damaging scandal, so they could get this random gobsh*te who has a backing role in a TV show off a sentence that would have otherwise has no impact on their lives because... well because reasons. Because the same reasons De Demmycrats are raping children in the basement of a pizza place (which your theory is about as credible as, so it's a safe bet it's currenty doing the rounds on your alt-right websites that were spreading that one too).

When or where have I ever had anything to say about mad conspiracy theories like Pizzgate? That's some weak sauce attempt at strawmanning. You wanna throw in some faked moon landings in to muddy the waters also?


It's not like he rocked up in front of a judge for his hearing and the case got dismissed.
A private emergency hearing was convened, nobody, especially not the cops, were told and the case was closed without reason being given and the files sealed.
That's only done on orders. A few friendly calls were undoubtedly made to lean on (politically appointed) prosecutors.

Tell me this, do you reckon he faked it all or are you going to tell me you believe his BS?

EDIT:

It would seem that the Chicago Sun Times is also peddling conspiracy theories.....
https://chicago.suntimes.com/news/fop-federal-investigation-kim-foxx-interference-jussie-smollett-police-johnson-rahm-emanuel-react/

"In renewing the call for a federal investigation into what he called Foxx’s political “interference” on behalf of the Smollett family, Preib argued that the state’s attorney’s office’s decision to drop the charges “only gives more foundation to our claims.”
Foxx’s (The prosecutor that had to recuse herself) initial request that Johnson transfer the case to the FBI came after an influential supporter of the “Empire” actor reached out to Foxx personally: Tina Tchen, a Chicago attorney and former chief of staff for former first lady Michelle Obama, according to emails and text messages provided by Foxx to the Sun-Times in response to a public records request."

Sand

Billy86 wrote: »

Where would I do that? You certainly don't find any of them on boards, which I have said repeatedly. Bu yeah many high level politicians definitely risked major, potentially career damaging scandal, so they could get this random gobsh*te who has a backing role in a TV show off a sentence that would have otherwise has no impact on their lives because... well because reasons. Because the same reasons De Demmycrats are raping children in the basement of a pizza place (which your theory is about as credible as, so it's a safe bet it's currently doing the rounds on your alt-right websites that were spreading that one too).

And for the record, as I said earlier in the thread, I absolutely think he should have got time for this. But he got off for being rich and famous in America, not for some grand political conspiracy to.... get a C-list celebrity off a sentence because reasons.

I wouldn't dwell on the pizzagate conspiracy. You might think the comparison is beneficial to your argument, but pizzagate was dreamt up and enabled by cranks in hopelessly partizan echochambers on the internet.

The Smollet hoax, the Convington hoax, the Barnes hoax, the Yasmin Seweid hoax: all these were enabled by the mainstream media in the US. The comparison to partizan cranks on the right reflects very poorly on the media as a professional group. Lets remember, pizzagate is not even unique in that it led to violence. The media enabled the conspiracy spread by BLM that police death squads were actively murdering unarmed black men...because reasons. That directly led to the murder of 5 Dallas police-officers and the wounding of 9 more by a US army reservist in 2016, convinced by the BLM argument supported and sustained by the media.

These ought to have been major, potentially career ending blunders by high profile media and political figures who endorsed and backed hoaxes and conspiracy theories with real consequences for real people. None of them were. Your view that political figures would be unlikely to take a significant risk by intervening on behalf of Smollett rests on the dubious belief that there is any real risk.

RDM_83 again

Billy86 wrote: »

Where would I do that? You certainly don't find any of them on boards, which I have said repeatedly. Bu yeah many high level politicians definitely risked major, potentially career damaging scandal, so they could get this random gobsh*te who has a backing role in a TV show off a sentence that would have otherwise has no impact on their lives because... well because reasons.

Whats your reply to the fact that a senior Obama advisor did try and have an input to the case?

Also its not simply about the actor, its about who latched onto this case.
Example
https://binged.it/2HX93iP

Avoiding more embarrassment for a likely 2020 Democrat Presidential candidate is a pretty decent reason for intervention

Billy86

Sand wrote: »

I wouldn't dwell on the pizzagate conspiracy. You might think the comparison is beneficial to your argument, but pizzagate was dreamt up and enabled by cranks in hopelessly partizan echochambers on the internet.

The Smollet hoax, the Convington hoax, the Barnes hoax, the Yasmin Seweid hoax: all these were enabled by the mainstream media in the US. The comparison to partizan cranks on the right reflects very poorly on the media as a professional group. Lets remember, pizzagate is not even unique in that it led to violence. The media enabled the conspiracy spread by BLM that police death squads were actively murdering unarmed black men...because reasons. That directly led to the murder of 5 Dallas police-officers and the wounding of 9 more by a US army reservist in 2016, convinced by the BLM argument supported and sustained by the media.

These ought to have been major, potentially career ending blunders by high profile media and political figures who endorsed and backed hoaxes and conspiracy theories with real consequences for real people. None of them were. Your view that political figures would be unlikely to take a significant risk by intervening on behalf of Smollett rests on the dubious belief that there is any real risk.

Explain how the media enabled it to me could you?

They reported on it. And they reported on it when he was arrested for it. Then today they reported that he has been cleared.

That's what the media do. They report on things. They also reported on the Seth Rich and pizzagate conspiracies, among others. And both of those were false too. Hence why it is not surprising that nearly half of republicans believed it, a long long way from the "fringe conspiracy theory" you are trying to paint it as. And by no coincidence, far right terrorism has absolutely shot up in the US in re ent years as a result.

If you don't want the media to report on breaking stories, personally I can't get behind that.

Sweetemotion

Billy86 wrote: »

They reported on it. And they reported on it when he was arrested for it. Then today they reported that he has been cleared.

You left out the part where they reported it as an absolute fact that it happened.

Cleared is a good way of putting it. You know something else went on here but you've gone so far down the rabbit hole you can't admit it. I used to read your posts with interest but now it's just. :rolleyes:

Sand

Billy86 wrote: »

Explain how the media enabled it to me could you?

They reported on it. And they reported on it when he was arrested for it. Then today they reported that he has been cleared.

That's what the media do. They report on things.

They uncritically accept, repeat and amplify obvious conspiracy theories with an obvious political slant. Is a peaceful, if boisterous, confrontation between a native american activist and some schoolboys national news? Was that the lead story of the day in any real or objective sense?

The US media is not innocently and objectively reporting events. This is not the first draft of history by people aware of their responsibility to the truth. This is a partisan media trawling through minor events and twitter posts deliberately seeking out and amplifying minor stories into national and international news because it confirms their own political bias.

The key point though is they face absolutely no consequence when caught out. Some mild embarrassment or anger at being caught, but quickly rationalised and excused. You are now claiming Smollett was cleared. In 12 months, to the extent that anyone recalls the Smollett case it will only be that he was innocent, the victim again.

They also reported on the Seth Rich and pizzagate conspiracies, among others. And both of those were false too.

Really? Did the entire US media uncritically report that senior Democratic figures were engaged in the systematic sexual abuse of children in a dungeon built under a Washington DC pizza restaurant? Did they lead with that claim 24/7 with talking heads on to endorse and advance the claims?

Be serious. Pizzagate was spread by social media and banned sites like InfoWars. To the extent the mainstream media reported on pizzagate it was in the context of debunking an obvious conspiracy theory. The idea that the media should just uncritically report wild claims is only used selectively. If you cant see the bias in the media you consume, its because you agree with the bias.

And by no coincidence, far right terrorism has absolutely shot up in the US in re ent years as a result.

Fairly sure that is a hoax too. An Israel-American man was recently jailed for 10 years after making 2,000 bomb threats against Jewish institutions and community centres across the US through 2016 and 2017. The level of antisemetic crime is so low that this one man campaign (by a Jewish person) fuelled a belief that Trump's election had unleashed an antisemitic wave of hatred.

If you don't want the media to report on breaking stories, personally I can't get behind that.

I think its entirely fair for the media to report on newsworthy events, but aware that claims and allegations are just that. Some sense of responsibility and restraint has to be exercised. Can you honestly say that Smolletts claim that he was randomly accosted late at night by two white guys in MAGA hats shouting that Chicago was MAGA country sounds in any way credible? Who says that? In Chicago?

Anyone who uncritically accepted, repeated and amplified such an unlikely scenario is either hopelessly naive or hopelessly biased. I don't accept Trump supporters as being genuine media sources, and we increasingly cannot accept the US media as being genuine media sources where ever racial or progressive narratives are in play.

markodaly

Billy86 wrote: »

today they reported that he has been cleared.
.

Cleared?

"I have been truthful and consistent on every single level since day one," he said. "I would not be my mother's son if I was capable of one drop of what I've been accused of."

So what about the two black guys he wrote cheques for?

The guy is still lying and claiming he was the victim.
Whatever about justice, his moral credibility is in tatters.

VicMackey1

Jussie Smollett's lawyer suggests his attackers may have been in whiteface!

6m20s into the video (the whole video is pretty comical though)

Mrsmum

I don't understand how those brothers could possibly be ok with his version now that they attacked him out of the blue. And seeing as that is his story, surely he should be screaming for them to be locked up.

Hector Savage

It's an absolute disgrace, this guy has gotten away with inciting hatred.
The irony here is how f*cking RACIST and hate filled would you have to be to do something like this ?

Zorya

Mrsmum wrote: »

I don't understand how those brothers could possibly be ok with his version now that they attacked him out of the blue. And seeing as that is his story, surely he should be screaming for them to be locked up.

It's very odd. So now the brothers who he was employing to train him, and who worked with him on the show, bought all the gear, plus white pan stick and ski masks, used homophobic and racist language against him, left him wearing an emblematic noose but still holding his sandwich, came out and said he organised it....very weird

Zorya

Zorya wrote: »

It's very odd. So now the brothers who he was employing to train him, and who worked with him on the show, bought all the gear, plus white pan stick and ski masks, used homophobic and racist language against him, left him wearing an emblematic noose but still holding his sandwich, came out and said he organised it....very weird

It's an absolute disgrace. I can only imagine the mental gymnastics going on in his supporters heads at the moment.

If anyone condones or accepts his version of the story, they are immediately discredited in my eyes.

This is absolutely shocking and should not be allowed to be swept under the carpet.

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

It's an absolute disgrace. I can only imagine the mental gymnastics going on in his supporters heads at the moment.

If anyone condones or accepts his version of the story, they are immediately discredited in my eyes.

This is absolutely shocking and should not be allowed be swept under the carpet.

Easy there tiger, he is an absolute Díckhead, but no one was killed. Fraud for profit is hardly a new phenomenon.

I think you may need to breath into a paper bag for a bit.

Zorya

Deleted User wrote: »

It's an absolute disgrace. I can only imagine the mental gymnastics going on in his supporters heads at the moment.

If anyone condones or accepts his version of the story, they are immediately discredited in my eyes.

This is absolutely shocking and should not be allowed be swept under the carpet.

It's so very odd that now I have to leave room in my head for the vague possibility that the brothers may have conspired against him. :eek: I know there was a cheque but maybe that was for the training. What is the evidence exactly that Smollett engaged them to do this? Just so I can get it right in my head.

Boggles

Boggles wrote: »

Easy there tiger, he is an absolute Díckhead, but no one was killed. Fraud for profit is hardly a new phenomenon.

I think you may need to breath into a paper bag for a bit.

Oh of course. I'm over-reacting. :rolleyes:

Boggles

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh of course. I'm over-reacting. :rolleyes:

Well, your nearly right.

Ricosruffneck

The State Attorney said had it went to trial he would be found guilty - Kim Foxx

First Assistant State's Attorney Joe Magats said he was guilty and not exonerated. - Guy doing the press interviews post case dismissal.

The Police Department say he's guilty based on evidence.

The Grand Jury decided to proceed to trial on a sliver of the evidence presented.


Jussie is misleading people by saying he's innocent, he is still misinterpreting the facts. The fact he can come out with statements saying ' i wouldn't be my mothers son if I did this' is just crazy.

The case is being redacted and closed. There's the FBI element of the threatening letter, the fact he's now throwing his conspirators under the bus, accusations of whiteface etc etc.

Accusations of colusion from former white house officials, PAC donations, Election Campaigns, Justice for Victims of Lynching Act Bill etc etc.

It's all so weird how this is playing out.

I hope Tarrantino/Adam McKay makes a movie about this.

Zorya

Zorya wrote: »

It's so very odd that now I have to leave room in my head for the vague possibility that the brothers may have conspired against him. :eek: I know there was a cheque but maybe that was for the training. What is the evidence exactly that Smollett engaged them to do this? Just so I can get it right in my head.

It is bizarre. But that's the world we live in now. This ridiculous situation has done so much damage to the credibility of people who actually suffer racial abuse. And for it to go unpunished is beyond parody.

Zorya

Deleted User wrote: »

Oh of course. I'm over-reacting. :rolleyes:

Attacking the poster not the post. Best ignored.

Hector Savage

Boggles wrote: »

Easy there tiger, he is an absolute Díckhead, but no one was killed. Fraud for profit is hardly a new phenomenon.

I think you may need to breath into a paper bag for a bit.

What he did is more than that, he has incited hatred in an already f*cked up divided nation.

Even the Obama's were involved in getting his case dropped.
It all f*cking stinks.

Boggles

Hector Savage wrote: »

What he did is more than that, he has incited hatred in an already f*cked up divided nation.

They elected a man who indulges in that daily.

98q76e12hrflnk

Boggles wrote: »

They elected a man who indulges in that daily.

He was voted in by the majority, remember that.

Oh yes tell us more BS

98q76e12hrflnk

Boggles wrote: »

Easy there tiger, he is an absolute Díckhead, but no one was killed. Fraud for profit is hardly a new phenomenon.

I think you may need to breath into a paper bag for a bit.

Ah yes once its a liberal doing these acts its grand but if a conservative does your all up in arms.

Boggles

declan2693 wrote: »

He was voted in by the majority, remember that.

He wasn't actually.

But I never suggested he wasn't voted in, so I don't really understand what point you are trying to make.

Boggles

declan2693 wrote: »

Ah yes once its a liberal doing these acts its grand but if a conservative does your all up in arms.

Must be utterly bizarre and quite a chore to view everything as "liberal" or "conservative".

How about you just view things like they are and make up your own mind.

take everything

This is why people can't stand the left. Making light of or ignoring this. They're just hoping this embarrassment will go away.

Instead of calling it as it is. This guy is more than just a dickhead. He's dangerous and could well have sparked something more serious. Not to mention setting a precedent for this kind of stunt.

But instead it's all "calm down, tiger" like reasonably-minded people are overreacting.