The Senator Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 2 minutes ago, Doc said: If he did it, yes he won't escape that. And he's apparently planning on suing the city. If the case is sealed, does that mean the city can mount no real defense? Well the DA has already proven he’s corrupt, now he’s proven he’s a freaking stupid moron for failing to indemnify the city against such nuisance suits. Maybe Michele can intervene with the judges and have any lawsuit dismissed. Or maybe she’ll intervene the other way, and have her lying pal awarded $100M. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoSaint Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 (edited) 5 hours ago, apuszczalowski said: Actors may welcome him back, but the exec's (producers, studios, Etc.) Wont be so eager to bring him back to roles and risk people boycotting the show/movie because of him. He wasnt very big of an actor before this, he doesnt have the star power to help him come back like bigger stars..... The flipside is he just sky rocketed his appeal in a niche that may rabidly support him. Even if 90% of Netflix viewers boycott a movie, if he now takes almost the entirety of the remaining 10% it can be a successful release (I know the percentages are random and arbitrary and not accurate estimates even) Edited March 28, 2019 by NoSaint Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 12 hours ago, apuszczalowski said: Actors may welcome him back, but the exec's (producers, studios, Etc.) Wont be so eager to bring him back to roles and risk people boycotting the show/movie because of him. He wasnt very big of an actor before this, he doesnt have the star power to help him come back like bigger stars..... Actors may welcome back Exec's might welcome him back if they thought he could make money for them But the real question is, will the nobody's behind the camera welcome him back? Writers, show runners, camera operators, make-up specialists, etc? These are the people who make a successful show but are paid significantly less than the on screen actors. Are they going to hitch themselves to somebody whose off-screen behavior or on-line presence may cause a backlash that costs them their livelihood? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 2 hours ago, /dev/null said: Actors may welcome back Exec's might welcome him back if they thought he could make money for them But the real question is, will the nobody's behind the camera welcome him back? Writers, show runners, camera operators, make-up specialists, etc? These are the people who make a successful show but are paid significantly less than the on screen actors. Are they going to hitch themselves to somebody whose off-screen behavior or on-line presence may cause a backlash that costs them their livelihood? Maybe I'm not looking in the right places, but I can't remember the last time I've seen such a unified response from almost everyone on this. It seems like everyone short of family and friend is so against this guy. I can't see this working out too well for him and landing new roles. He's poison for at least a few months anyway. I don't know how long that lasts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaoulDuke79 Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 Anthony Anderson's take.....good to see the system worked for him. https://www.google.com/amp/s/variety.com/2019/scene/news/naacp-image-awards-host-anthony-anderson-hopes-jussie-smollett-wins-1203174190/amp/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Poojer Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 I'm afraid to read this because I really like Anthony Anderson and i don't want him to disappoint me 48 minutes ago, RaoulDuke79 said: Anthony Anderson's take.....good to see the system worked for him. https://www.google.com/amp/s/variety.com/2019/scene/news/naacp-image-awards-host-anthony-anderson-hopes-jussie-smollett-wins-1203174190/amp/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 when you are granted a buttkissing softball interview with a "news source" and you have to insist "it's all true!!!' 16 times during it..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 Jussie is an idiot. Is this really a case for the FBI though? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 10 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said: Jussie is an idiot. Is this really a case for the FBI though? not really, but might be a slow case-cycle at the moment maybe the FBI can locate one Chicago powerbroker that doesn't deserve a long stretch 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaoulDuke79 Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 (edited) 21 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said: Jussie is an idiot. Is this really a case for the FBI though? Absolutely if there's probable evidence of corruption. It's a symptom of a bigger problem. Edited March 28, 2019 by RaoulDuke79 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Teddy KGB Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 27 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said: Jussie is an idiot. Is this really a case for the FBI though? ??♂️??♂️??♂️??♂️ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 34 minutes ago, ShadyBillsFan said: Jussie is an idiot. Is this really a case for the FBI though? Well evidently Foxx lied and didn't actually recuse herself so that's something. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaoulDuke79 Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 These people keep poking the dog this is going to end up a lot worse than it already is. Fox News: Jussie Smollett's attorney demands apology from mayor, police chief: 'Jussie has paid enough'.https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/jussie-smollets-attorney-demands-apology-from-mayor-police-chief-jussie-has-paid-enough 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Poojer Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 When you have that kind of power in your corner, is it any shock that your bravado would be so high? allegedly 9 minutes ago, RaoulDuke79 said: These people keep poking the dog this is going to end up a lot worse than it already is. Fox News: Jussie Smollett's attorney demands apology from mayor, police chief: 'Jussie has paid enough'.https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/jussie-smollets-attorney-demands-apology-from-mayor-police-chief-jussie-has-paid-enough Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaoulDuke79 Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 Charles Barkley summed it up best what he said everybody involved in this loses. 1 minute ago, The Poojer said: When you have that kind of power in your corner, is it any shock that your bravado would be so high? allegedly It's a small wonder, but I'd be willing to bet there may be some cops or friends of cops that may not be on the up and up that wouldn't be opposed to seeing some type of harm come to Mr. Smollett. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SlimShady'sSpaceForce Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 Everyone wants an apology smh With all the snowflakes its a Blizzard I'm sorry Jussie was such an idiot to put this in the public spotlight Next up Little People of the ATL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Augie Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 Well, he wanted attention....and he got attention. Pee Wee Herman says not all attention is good attention. That’s the type of attention he got and about how he will be remembered for his 15 minutes of shame. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted March 28, 2019 Share Posted March 28, 2019 20 minutes ago, RaoulDuke79 said: Charles Barkley summed it up best what he said everybody involved in this loses. Could Trump be a winner in all this, since everybody is so pissed off. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaoulDuke79 Posted March 28, 2019 Author Share Posted March 28, 2019 2 minutes ago, bbb said: Could Trump be a winner in all this, since everybody is so pissed off. Nah....he's already so polarizing I think the people who like him will still like him and those who dislike him will still dislike him as well. I really dont think there's much he can do either way to change people's minds. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 6 hours ago, RaoulDuke79 said: These people keep poking the dog this is going to end up a lot worse than it already is. Fox News: Jussie Smollett's attorney demands apology from mayor, police chief: 'Jussie has paid enough'.https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/jussie-smollets-attorney-demands-apology-from-mayor-police-chief-jussie-has-paid-enough Exactly, what he really needed to do is just say sorry, thank people for their support and go away while not speaking of what happened again. He should be thanking whatever he can that he didn't end up with anything worse, and possibly see if that Subway is hiring. Sometimes you just need to realise you screwed up, got lucky things didn't end up worse, and just never speak of it again. Instead he took the route of trying to continue trying to get attention and push things further which usually makes things worse when those your continuing to piss off (the cops) are going to make things worse and get you on something else. Kind of reminds me of OJ, instead of realizing he literally got away with murder and getting out of the public spotlight to live the rest of his life free, he continued to try and get some spotlight and made things worse which lead him to jail on something stupid. The support he is getting reminds of of the support that was given to Michael Jackson, and even OJ at first where they believed he was innocent because of race. Had he been white, he would not have been given the support and they would be blaming him getting away with it on him being white and white privilege. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 7 hours ago, bbb said: Could Trump be a winner in all this, since everybody is so pissed off. You know this Jussie idiot will come up if Cammie starts working her way through the crowd next spring. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaoulDuke79 Posted March 29, 2019 Author Share Posted March 29, 2019 (edited) 20 hours ago, bbb said: Could Trump be a winner in all this, since everybody is so pissed off. According to Rahm this whole fiasco is Trumps fault anyway. https://www.thewrap.com/chicago-mayor-rahm-emanuel-blames-trump-toxic-environment-for-jussie-smollett-hoax-video/ Edited March 29, 2019 by RaoulDuke79 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LB3 Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 43 minutes ago, RaoulDuke79 said: According to Rahm this whole fiasco is Trumps fault anyway. https://www.thewrap.com/chicago-mayor-rahm-emanuel-blames-trump-toxic-environment-for-jussie-smollett-hoax-video/ Do you want to know what else is Trump's fault? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bdutton Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 I shared this in the PPP thread too... http://www.ilpba.org/announcements/7249825 Quote The Illinois Prosecutors Bar Association serves as the voice for nearly 1,000 front line prosecutors across the State who work tirelessly towards the pursuit of justice. The events of the past few days regarding the Cook County State’s Attorney’s handling of the Jussie Smollett case is not condoned by the IPBA, nor is it representative of the honest ethical work prosecutors provide to the citizens of the State of Illinois on a daily basis. The manner in which this case was dismissed was abnormal and unfamiliar to those who practice law in criminal courthouses across the State. Prosecutors, defense attorneys, and judges alike do not recognize the arrangement Mr. Smollett received. Even more problematic, the State’s Attorney and her representatives have fundamentally misled the public on the law and circumstances surrounding the dismissal. The public has the right to know the truth, and we set out to do that here. Much more in the link. SA got slammed. 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LB3 Posted March 29, 2019 Share Posted March 29, 2019 23 minutes ago, bdutton said: I shared this in the PPP thread too... 4 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 Chris Rock, despite being told not to talk about him, took Smollett to task as the NAACP awards Saturday night. Good for him. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JohnC Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 On 3/27/2019 at 10:01 AM, apuszczalowski said: Theres a town around here that's thinking of playing Manilow music in the downtown area to stop some of the issues they have been having with people causing trouble. Its said to work that playing classical or other forms of music keep the 'riff raff' away and less issues happen....... What did people expect in this case? Even if it went to court and tied up the court system, along with a media circus, he most likely would have walked away with some fines and community service anyway. The only reason people want more is because the media blew it up because it was a somewhat 'celebrity' who did it so the media continued to run with it. Had this been a nobody claiming this happened to them, you would have heard nothing about it after the first day outside of local news stations. Nobody would care if the person was ever charged or faced any punishment. Theres now a pretty good chance he wont get another Hollywood acting gig after this as no one will want to be associated with him, and in about another year we wont hear about it anymore. Your post is well stated and reasoned. However, I disagree with it. This was a hoax. No doubt about it. But let's put this incident in context. It was done at a time when police and community relations were at a tinder box level. It was done at a time where the inner city murder rate was escalating and seemed to be uncontrollable. Much of it due to retaliatory gang violence. The local police are struggling with a lack of the credibility from a large segment of the communitybut also national credibility. What Smallette did with his staged event is created an incident with a dangerous volatility that might not have been easily contained. There is a big difference between lighting a match in the playground and lighting a match near a gas line. I agree with your assessment that this case would have become a circus if it went to trial with the final outcome maybe resulting in a insignificant sentence. So what! Some cases are easy to bring to trial without much commotion and simple cases. On the other hand its not surprising that a high profile case can turn into a very rambunctious and loud event. Ask Martha Stewart how her trivial charge turned into a world event? Inconvenience in adjudicating shouldn't be the standard as to why someone is not tried. Although this case turned out to be a circus it should have gone to trial if the defendant wasn't willing to plead guilty and acknowledge the facts of this case. Whether the outcome would have been a conviction, non-conviction or hung jury at least the law would have been equally and rightfully applied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shrader Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 I just don't get why someone would call in a favor to save this guy, if that is in fact what happened. Why would you waste any capital to save such a small fish? It would be like me calling in a favor with one of the mods to save that kid who used to post reviews of the Smurf movies from a ban. A complete and utter waste of a favor. I think I know exactly where responses to this question will go, but it should be interesting to hear them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 12 minutes ago, shrader said: I just don't get why someone would call in a favor to save this guy, if that is in fact what happened. Why would you waste any capital to save such a small fish? It would be like me calling in a favor with one of the mods to save that kid who used to post reviews of the Smurf movies from a ban. A complete and utter waste of a favor. I think I know exactly where responses to this question will go, but it should be interesting to hear them. I wondered the same thing. There seems to be evidence that this was done, but why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 5 minutes ago, Buffalo_Gal said: I wondered the same thing. There seems to be evidence that this was done, but why? Compromising photos/info? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buffalo_Gal Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 Just now, Doc said: Compromising photos/info? That is as good a guess as any. I wonder if we will ever know? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Joe Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 5 hours ago, Buffalo_Gal said: I wondered the same thing. There seems to be evidence that this was done, but why? The alleged incident happened at the same time K. Harris and C.Booker were promoting their anti-lynching bill. Coincidence? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Doc Posted April 1, 2019 Share Posted April 1, 2019 1 hour ago, Uncle Joe said: The alleged incident happened at the same time K. Harris and C.Booker were promoting their anti-lynching bill. Coincidence? And not long after that MAGA hat-wearing kid went face-to-face with that native American dude. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeGOATski Posted April 2, 2019 Share Posted April 2, 2019 Too funny Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
row_33 Posted April 2, 2019 Share Posted April 2, 2019 20 hours ago, Uncle Joe said: The alleged incident happened at the same time K. Harris and C.Booker were promoting their anti-lynching bill. Coincidence? there is no law against lynching? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbb Posted April 2, 2019 Share Posted April 2, 2019 3 hours ago, row_33 said: there is no law against lynching? Nope. Perfectly legal. Good thing Booker and Harris are on the case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted April 3, 2019 Share Posted April 3, 2019 10 hours ago, row_33 said: there is no law against lynching? Yes when they were told that lynching falls under murder or attempted murder their response was "wait......what??" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted April 3, 2019 Share Posted April 3, 2019 (edited) 12 hours ago, row_33 said: there is no law against lynching? Yes. (Or was for a long time until just last year). "Subsequent bills followed but the United States Congress never outlawed lynching due to powerful opposition from Southern Senators. It was not until 2018 that the Senate would pass (unanimously) anti-lynching legislation, the Justice for Victims of Lynching Act." https://www.ajc.com/news/local/georgia-lynch-mobs-devised-flimsy-reasons-for-taking-lives/DPNqpcG72DpJFUV6FLQnlI/ "...The perception is that a lynching always involved a certain means of death — whether by hanging or shooting or burning. “It’s not the method in which a person is killed, it’s the context in which they are killed,” said Hill, a professor of African and African-American studies at the University of Oklahoma. “That context is when the person is summarily, lethally and brutally punished for an alleged crime and denied due process of law. That cocktail of things is what we call a lynching. It’s less about being hung, shot or dragged to death. ...” Edited April 3, 2019 by ExiledInIllinois Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uncle Joe Posted April 3, 2019 Share Posted April 3, 2019 9 hours ago, ExiledInIllinois said: <snip> That cocktail of things is what we call a lynching. It’s less about being hung, shot or dragged to death. ...” Makes me wonder now where Molotov fits in? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.