The “we reported the Jussie Smollett case responsibly” contention has been blasted to smithereens. Twitter accounts and headlines in the Washington Post, the New York Times, and the Los Angeles Times reported as fact Jussie Smollett’s wildly implausible allegations, and many other journalists did so as well, not to mention the innumerable activists and celebrities who piled on. So, a question for all of the above. Why did you believe Jussie Smollett? Let’s try to catalogue the red flags.
- Had you ever heard of Jussie Smollett before the alleged January 29 attack?
- Do you think it likely that fans of President Trump had?
- Smollett has said that his public anti-Trump statements were the likely reason for the attack. Is it really true that he was an especially prominent anti-Trump voice?
- Did you think it strange that Smollett or his representatives were, from the beginning, telling TMZ a different story than they told the police? He or his representatives told TMZ the attackers yelled, “This is MAGA country.” This was news to the police.
- Related to (4), don’t you think that if Smollett’s supposed attackers had yelled, “This is MAGA country,” he would have told the police in his initial interview with them, right after the alleged assault?
- How did Trump-loving racist homophobes know that Smollett would be at a Subway sandwich shop at 2 a.m.? Smollett has said going to the Subway was a spur-of-the-moment decision.
- It was extremely cold in Chicago the night of January 29. Assuming Trump-loving racist homophobes wanted to track down and attack Smollett, and maybe knew where he lived, as the shop was close to his apartment, wouldn’t they have waited for more agreeable weather?
- How likely do you think it is that attackers would shout, “This is MAGA country” in Chicago, a place that no one thinks is MAGA country?
- If Smollett’s supposed attackers did not know he was going to be at that exact spot at that exact moment and would have been willing to attack any random gay and/or black man in Chicago, how difficult would it have been for them to find a gay and/or black man to assault without going to the trouble of a 2 a.m. attack on a frigid night? Couldn’t they have just waited outside a gay bar on a summer night?
- Don’t you think for the attackers to have yelled a racist slur as well as a homophobic slur as well as having a bottle of bleach as well as having a noose sounds a bit overdetermined, like bad television writing?
- Smollett supposedly received a viciously nasty letter threatening him with lynching a week before the alleged assault. Is it likely that either two separate racist parties wanted to attack him at essentially the same time or else the January 29 attackers would telegraph their intentions with a letter?
- Don’t you think it strange that Smollett had a phone with him, yet didn’t call the police on that phone to inform them what had happened and which way his attackers had fled?
- Don’t you think it strange that his attackers fled without much harming Smollett or robbing him?
- Related to (13), did it not occur to you that the whole alleged attack looked a bit like the criminal equivalent of a press release, meant to send a message rather than accomplish anything?
- If you were beaten up, would you somehow remember to pick up your Subway purchase afterward?
- If you were subjected to a vicious, racist, homophobic, life-altering attack that included a hint of lynching, would you really leave the rope draped around your neck and calmly walk, not run, home?
- Would you then walk past the security desk at your apartment building without telling anyone what had happened?
- Would you wait 40 minutes before informing the police what had happened?
Lt. Columbo wasn’t needed to break this one. He would never have gotten the chance to ever say, “Just one more thing…”
But liberals, WANTING to believe Smollett and STARVING for a story like this never gave all the inconsistencies a second thought. Or even a first one. They just wanted to get their hate on.
I have to ask: What “liberals” are you talking about?
First of all, both Smollett and his ALLEGED attackers are innocent until proven guilty. The news media I witnessed never said otherwise. It was always “alleged” this and “alleged” that. The media reported who the cops interviewed, and what both the details of and the logical inconsistencies in Smollett’s story were. I heard only what sounded to me like unbiased reporting, and every politician who bothered to comment on it THAT I WITNESSED said they’d wait until the facts of the case were known. This from television AND paper media. Well, now the facts have been leaked, and it’s fairly obvious that it WAS a hoax. The talk show hosts who interviewed Smollett pandered to him to make a commercial product, and now they probably feel had, but not everything that is broadcast is news (Movies, soap operas, game shows) and in the commercial business, ratings justify trash.
So, what “Liberal” news do you follow to learn the truth that got this story so dead wrong that you are shocked and outraged, and why do you waste your time on such unreliable sources? Or is your outrage just another Smollett hoax?
You want their names? There were mobs of liberals that pounced on Smollett’s little theater, just as the did with the Covington kids, and fertilized it with their own imagination until it exploded.
So you never saw the media reports promoting this “hate crime” as indicative of the mood and character of the right today, thanks to Trump? You didn’t see Smollett’s heart-rending interview on CBS? Well, I guess that explains it…
Yes, liberals are ALWAYS innocent until proven guilty, and often beyond. That’s a nice perk of being a liberal.
If you took the trouble to read Greg’s #20 on “Liberals and the Left Wing Media,” you’d have found links to what I got from CNN. Their reporting was NOT “fake,” DID report “alleged” and DID call Smollett’s story into doubt when it so became. Furthermore, the CBS interview you refer to was not news, it was entertainment, and there is a difference. Rush Limbaugh isn’t news either – he’s entertainment too. I can’t imagine why you would bother to watch or listen to the garbage you are referring to. I certainly don’t. And that’s why I don’t KNOW about the crap you’d have me exposed to. If instead you read Curt’s 18-point list at the top of this thread, you’d have the real truth, all of the absurd details of Smollett’s hoax that any thinking person could decipher.
@George Wells: When a “journalist” in conducting an interview of a “victim” and discussing a “news story”, they are not entertaining; they are producing news… information about the issue. In this case, the purpose was to reinforce Smollett’s story, not seek facts or truth.
” CNN’s Brooke Baldwin on CNN Newsroom, “and this is America in 2019.””
“CNN anchor Don Lemon said the following on a popular podcast: “One, he has to deal with discrimination as a black man,” said Lemon, “then, on top of that, he has to be gay — and then, fame — fame is not natural — When something happens to you and it’s controversial, everyone is coming for you, and so I knew everyone would be picking apart his story.””
Greg discounts the impact of Twitter accounts, but what does he think they have the accounts for in the first place? They, like Trump, have them to get their OPINIONS out to the public and when “news people” do this, it reflects their biases they express when they do the actual “news”.
Then CNN’s “coverage”.
Maybe instead of trying to convince me that there was no bias in the liberal media, you can try to convince me that you can use turn lead into gold.
Greg isn’t the only person to discount twitter chatter. The courts have looked at it and concluded that it is meaningless drivel that the issuer can’t be held accountable for. Somebody was trying to take Trump to task for lying on his PUBLIC twitter stream, and the courts said never mind, that what Trump “mused” on his twitter feed meant nothing. If Trump’s lying to himself and anyone who is stupid enough to listen in on his “inner thoughts” has no effect on his capacity to perform his duties as president, then neither do a news reporter’s inner thoughts effect his capacity to report the news fairly. You can’t have it both ways. If Trump’s “locker room” profanities, his constant lying and threatening tweets and his long history of abusing tax, contract and bankruptcy laws don’t disqualify him from “public” service, then neither does a reporter’s sympathetic interview disqualify him from reporting the news. It would be nice to have completely impartial reporters, but it would also be nice to have a president who doesn’t lie to them. We are ALL biased. The fact that we vote proves it. We prefer one person, one party or one idea over another. Live with it.
When were you made privy to Trump’s tax, contract and bankruptcy records? Want to share them with us?
You tolerated 8 years of lying (If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor; non-existent shovel ready jobs; ISIS is on the run; yada, yada, yada) and I’m sure you lapped it up.
And just in case you think my memory fails me, here are some catch words for you:
Someone needs to advise about the Wayback Machine
@George Wells: Twitter produces algorithims to better spread “grass roots” propaganda and misinformation. At the same time intentionally “shadow bans” and suspends those posting conservative content.
@George Wells: Nice sidestep, but you tripped and fell in the cesspool. I don’t refer to any legal weight a tweet carries; I refer to public opinion, which is what leftist “news” seeks to mold. Maybe you should comment on what I write rather than what you merely want to talk about. Beyond any possible doubt, the corrupt liberal media produces propaganda with the intent of forming public opinion, not report factual news as information to be used for citizens to form their own opinions with.
Oh, if Twitter is so inconsequential, why does the left use a liberal bias to protect liberal views while suppressing conservative views?
Speaking of lying, had he cheated on his taxes, the annual audits of his returns by the IRS would have probably turned something up, or in the spirit of the Obama administration, taken something that LOOKS suspicious, leaked it and convicted him in the court of public opinion. Apparently he takes special care to be on the up and up. The same goes with “contract and bankruptcy laws”. He is under a microscope on a constant basis and the FACT that no one can find ANYTHING (forget investigations or even suits; they mean NOTHING until something is proven) on him. N O T H I N G.
@Deplorable Me: They are very careful what they consider hate crimes and what they promote as hate crimes.
A group of rowdy (and presumably) liberal protesters raided a Border Patrol museum, shouting, “Say it loud, say it clear, Border Patrol kills!” They plastered pictures over the faces of Border Patrol agents who died in the line of duty. They defaced our fallen agent memorial
Pulling a .40 glock on a couple in Sams Club, just because they were wearing the”hat”.
These things actually happened perhaps if they were play acting they would be given much more attention.
The fact that Trump refuses to make his tax returns public, as presidents have done for decades, tells me he has plenty to hide, and his history of contract disputes and declarations of bankruptcy are matters of public record.
I was one of the first to sign up for Obamacare’s “Pre-existing Conditions Insurance Plan,” having paid every red cent for my own medical care for the preceding ten years (having been dropped by Anthem when I developed diabetes), and I both liked my doctor from pre-PCIP, I got to keep him. I also recall a lot of confusion over what “shovel-ready jobs” actually were, and unless I am mistaken, ISIS has been on the run for almost as long as it has existed. Your effort to paint every issue in hues of black and white is a failure.
I have no idea what you are “catching.”
@Deplorable Me #9:
Well, what in Sam Hill is Trump trying to mold with HIS tweets if it isn’t public opinion, and isn’t that the same thing that Fox News is trying to mold, or Rush Limbaugh?
The flip side of that question is when, exactly, does news become “fake” news? When a reporter askes Donald Trump if he paid a prostitute for her silence, and Trump’s answer is a lie that the reporter then reports, is THAT “fake” news? If the reporter DIDN’T know that Trump lied (or that Smollett lied) and he reports the lie as if it is the truth, what is that reporter guilty of? I can’t see that the reporter would be guilty of anything except not knowing the truth BEFORE he asks the question, and if he DOES know the truth and then calls the liar on the lie, that’s not “fake” news as Trump likes to call it, that’s good journalism – the Fourth Estate.
Well, there ya go! You DID catch on. So, what is Twitter for? To influence public opinion? So, what are these pundits tweeting that Smollett was the victim of an outrage, racism, hate crime and it is all Trump’s and Trump supporter’s fault? Finger exercises? They are spreading the glorious message of Trump hate and inciting violence.
When the corrupt liberal media decided to become a propaganda organ for the DNC. While there are ample examples of outright lies, fake news does not always take the form of a false report. Sometimes it is how the news is reported… or NOT. During the Bush administration, papers published lists of the war dead… at Christmas. Under Obama, though there were MORE war dead, the publication of those lists ceased. When Obama faced Hillary in the primaries, the media favored the first black gimmick, Obama. Fake news shifted into overdrive under Obama. There were many mediocre accomplishment to herald and many scandals and failures to bury.
Oh, but we’d seen NOTHING until they went after Trump. Every rumor is a headline and every headline a “bombshell”. The media has succeeded at making itself a joke and object of ridicule.
Guilty of not verifying the story. Guilty of WANTING the fake news to be fact so badly that they forget what their REAL job and responsibility is; to inform the public with facts, not propagandize for the DNC. Note that WaPo did not report the sexual assault accusation against Fairfax because they could not verify it… as if they tried. See the difference? Kinda? Just a little?
Yes, yes, yes……………..heard that story before except you left out the part where you were able to be added to your “husbands'” insurance when you were “married” because same sex “marriage” had then become legal in a state other than Virginia.
No confusion. It was all the construction jobs that were supposed to be ready with the Stimulus Bill.
ISIS was rolling across the Middle East as Obama assured the nation they were on “the run” and was nothing more than a JV team.
As is then your effort to lie.
No. A lie is a lie. I don’t recall ever hearing of a politician who didn’t lie, and Trump makes a habit of it. Neither do I recall coming across any partisan hacks who don’t make a habit of repeating the lies of their champion. The fact that I can admit that Democratic politicians lie at least as much as Republican politicians compellingly suggests that I’m not just a parrot for one party.
Trump stumbles over his own lies daily, yet I don’t ever hear you call out HIS lies like some Republicans who are increasingly in the national spotlight for their courage in doing just that.
How many Republicans does Trump have to nominate into his administration only to turn on them when they reveal to the World that they have discovered that their fearless leader is a moron?
I don’t ever recall an executive (Whitehouse) administration of either political party in which public servants and the clown who nominated them so frequently throw each other under the bus. Does Trump do a really bad job of picking his subordinates, or are THEY onto something?
“I was one of the first to sign up for Obamacare’s “Pre-existing Conditions Insurance Plan,” having paid every red cent for my own medical care for the preceding ten years (having been dropped by Anthem when I developed diabetes), and I both liked my doctor from pre-PCIP, I got to keep him.”
That was my answer to your comment about people not getting to keep their doctors under Obamacare. I can only report from my OWN experience, which was not as you had described.
I went back and looked at this again:
First, did I say that your memory was failing?
Second, as it seems more than a bit creepy that you actually bothered to commit to memory some details of my personal life that I had previously shared with FA readers – which is my habit since I witness rather than speculate blindly and find that my own experience informs me reliably – I have to assume that you never found any “discrepancies” in any of those personal details, as you would have shoved them in my face if you had.
When you Googled “Betty Wells artist,” did you enjoy her Supreme Court art? There is a book about it (by her) available on Amazon if you are interested…
Um… that wasn’t about politicians. That was about the media lying. That was about the difference between WANTING to get the story right and factual (journalism) and WANTING a story that makes Trump or conservatives look bad to be true SO BADLY that they ignore all journalistic standards and ethics and run with it either not knowing if it is true or not or actually knowing it is false. It is sort of pitiful you can’t see that difference.
When he lies, he will be called out. The accusation that “he lies all the time” is, in fact, a lie itself.
So, you don’t remember the scandal-ridden Obama administration? No, they weren’t turning on each other because they were all co-conspirators. Speaking out there could get you killed.
Well, that’s a laugh! A lying president isn’t worth complaining about, but a biased media is? WHAT?!
OK, I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt on that call. Trump lies frequently. In any given increment of time that is consistent with the interval of time I have let pass since I last subjected myself to the steady stream of nonsense coming from the Whitehouse, Trump has lied about something. Insofar as “all of the time” could be taken to mean the continuous and instantaneous passage of time, no, Trump CAN’T lie at that rate, as the formation of verbal communication or ANY sort by any source can’t be accomplished continuously.
My reference was to the lies Obama told. NOT the specifics of Obamacare.
Creepy? You’re the one who was running his mouth, not me.
I don’t use Google.
Well, if one of your CHARGES was that Obama lied about how his Obamacare affected one’s choice of doctor (YOUR comment, not mine) then the specifics of how Obamacare functioned was an appropriate answer.
So you stalked by another route. Big deal By however you looked, you didn’t find the dirt you were looking for.
Well, if one of your CHARGES
If? Why are you trying to twist what I said? I spoke of lies, not benefits. You understand that and now want to deflect.
You’re such a jerk. You don’t even seem to know what “stalking” is.
Oh, it’s there, all right. The internet is FOREVER.
So you FOUND my Mom! She’s now 92 and still painting.
And you’re right that I don’t even know HOW to stalk. You could teach me, I’m sure, but I don’t need to know. Anyway, your “list” reminded me to look for an online photo of Mom’s portrait of Elvera Burger. I wanted to locate it so I could refer you to it, but if something isn’t floating at the surface of a Google search, I don’t find it. Pity. It was kind of cute for an older woman. She was wearing a coat that made her look like a fluffy rabbit… or a Rockette. It was a good likeness, too.
I bet you were disappointed to find Ellen Hill, too. Yep, I’ve never once lied about anything here. (I did forge my parents’ signature on a report card in elementary school, but that crime was discovered immediately – I botched the first attempt and used white-out to correct it!) My analysis of political issues might occasionally be flawed, but since I frequently agree with Republican positions on important issues, I can’t be mistaken all of the time.
And, no, I didn’t mean “charges” as in “payments,” I meant it as in “accusations.” You seemed to be accusing Obama of lying when he said people would be able to keep their same doctors. I did, although I can certainly imagine some circumstances in which a person could NOT keep his same doctor, like if he moved or died.
@George Wells: Other circumstances were there were limited health insurance providers and not all doctors accept every insurance company. Obama care was not universal access to every clinic hospital or doctor.
Nothing will EVER provide that, and everybody knows that. Everybody DID know that. Just like anyone with a lick of sense knew that Mexico was never going to pay for Trump’s wall. So if Obama lied, so did Trump, on the same scale, for the same reason. To pander to their respective bases. Period. To suggest otherwise is disingenuous.
I didn’t know she was lost.
That is NOT what I said. What is this innate desire of yours to twist what others say?
How about totally losing decades of negotiated health insurance because Obama cut dark of the night deals with major companies and unions? Guess you think all those people affected just had their doctors “move or die?”
Seems your anal activities have affected your cranial abilities,
That was good! Funny!
By “stalking,” I meant digital, not physical. Maybe it is called something else besides “stalking.” I wouldn’t know. But what I DO know is that for whatever reason, you’ve done something that nobody else here at FA has bothered to do, and that’s obsess on some of my personal details. I think that’s kind of sweet. That’s why I call you “My Sweetheart.”
As for Obama, he didn’t touch anything of mine. That’s what I know. Did you lose YOUR doctors?
I only repeated what you previously made public here. That is not obsessing. Maybe you should dump some of your braggadocio routine.
@ Retire 05:
What, like your claim of serving the welfare of AIDS victims? Your personal accomplishments are worthy topics of conversation but mine are not? LOL.
Again, not what I said.
Really? Putting up a barrier between the USA an a failed State that will negatively affect 1/6th of the US economy, you sir are wrong.
You said that you had attended to male aids victims. I took your word and thanked you for your charitable sacrifice. Are you now telling me that you did not deserve my thanks? If so, why did you accept it when it was given?
You also told me that when I planted spinach, it would die. It didn’t. Are you planning to tell me that was a dream, too?
Where is that famous Retire05 total recall that works so well compiling my personal data? Because it doesn’t seem to work with yours.
Not what I said. Close, but no cigar.
Nope. I don’t know anything about planting spinach.
Memory’s good. I compiled nothing. You ran your mouth telling more than you should.