Hoax: Hate crime attackers: "This is MAGA country."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Kamala Harris had some difficulty coming up with a comment when asked what response she has to her initial tweet regarding Smollett - that it was a "modern day lynching."
She appeared to look around for her staff (or the reporters on her beat that double as her staff).

https://twitter.com/DavidRutz/status/1097602955082113024

The loyal mainstream media will do their best to protect and defend her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is the top story on the hour on Fox News. Not a peep about this on CNN or MSNBC. A few weeks ago they couldn't get enough of this story. Let's see if they cover this when Jussie is arrested tomorrow or the day after.

Nope. They’ve dropped it like it was hot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He brought attention to an important issue and for that alone he should be commended! Smh at some of the nastiness in this thread.

Ever heard of The Boy Who Cried Wolf? Smollett has done far more harm than good, and for that alone he should be ashamed.

If he did it to highlight the neccesity of the Kamela Harris anti-lynching law than maybe it was worth doing? That said, the investigation has not been concluded and many of the "leaks" have been dubious.

You can’t possibly be that stupid.

NP here. Don't call people stupid. That is part of the problem. Make your point without insulting people.

DP. Do you give the same advice to liberals who call Trump voters all manner of insults? No, didn’t think so.

Evidently, stupid is not okay to use; deplorable and comparisons to Nazis are okay to use.

Don’t forget racist, fascist, white nationalist...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the top story on the hour on Fox News. Not a peep about this on CNN or MSNBC. A few weeks ago they couldn't get enough of this story. Let's see if they cover this when Jussie is arrested tomorrow or the day after.

Nope. They’ve dropped it like it was hot.

Yep. Much like the gov., lt gov, and attorney general in Richmond.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is the top story on the hour on Fox News. Not a peep about this on CNN or MSNBC. A few weeks ago they couldn't get enough of this story. Let's see if they cover this when Jussie is arrested tomorrow or the day after.

What are you talking about? I saw something online about a possible motive so I turned on CNN to see the latest. I had CNN on for a couple of hours and they had an update about this case. They said the case has turned and he is now considered a suspect and police want to talk to him again but as of now he's not gone in to be re-questioned. They also had two guests panelist giving their opinion. One was a black gay man who said he is lying and needs to come forward and apologize and the other guest was a black woman who seemed disturbed but said she's waiting for more news from the police before making a final judgement. Also, if you go on the CNN website and click on the entertainment section, the first thing you see is a Jussie Smollett headline.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the top story on the hour on Fox News. Not a peep about this on CNN or MSNBC. A few weeks ago they couldn't get enough of this story. Let's see if they cover this when Jussie is arrested tomorrow or the day after.

What are you talking about? I saw something online about a possible motive so I turned on CNN to see the latest. I had CNN on for a couple of hours and they had an update about this case. They said the case has turned and he is now considered a suspect and police want to talk to him again but as of now he's not gone in to be re-questioned. They also had two guests panelist giving their opinion. One was a black gay man who said he is lying and needs to come forward and apologize and the other guest was a black woman who seemed disturbed but said she's waiting for more news from the police before making a final judgement. Also, if you go on the CNN website and click on the entertainment section, the first thing you see is a Jussie Smollett headline.

CNN just covered it as the last story of the hour. And he definitely will be re questioned. Whether he comes in on his own is up to him.

[Anonymous]

The local Chicago reporters are doing the best reporting on this story.

“Empire” actor Jussie Smollett, upset after a racist letter sent to the show’s studio didn’t get a “bigger reaction,” is suspected of paying two men to attack him a week later, according to multiple sources with direct knowledge of the investigation.

“When the letter didn’t get enough attention, he concocted the staged attack,” a source told CBS 2 Investigator Brad Edwards. Other sources corroborated that information.
The blockbuster revelation into at least part of Smollett’s potential motive comes two days after CBS 2’s Charlie De Mar reported Smollett and two brothers — Ola and Abel Osundairo — staged the attack on Jan. 29 in Streeterville.

De Mar spoke on the phone exclusively with the Osundairo brothers Monday afternoon. In a joint statement, they said: “We are not racist. We are not homophobic and we are not anti-Trump. We were born and raised in Chicago and are American citizens.”

Smollett received a letter containing a white powder Jan. 22. The letter was mailed to Chicago’s Cinespace Studios, where the show “Empire” is filmed. The letter prompted a HAZMAT response. CPD says the “white substance” was later determined to be aspirin.

https://chicago.cbslocal.com/2019/02/18/jussie-smollet-motive-staged-attack/

This was Smollett's attorneys' or PR person's response when asked for comment:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is the top story on the hour on Fox News. Not a peep about this on CNN or MSNBC. A few weeks ago they couldn't get enough of this story. Let's see if they cover this when Jussie is arrested tomorrow or the day after.

What are you talking about? I saw something online about a possible motive so I turned on CNN to see the latest. I had CNN on for a couple of hours and they had an update about this case. They said the case has turned and he is now considered a suspect and police want to talk to him again but as of now he's not gone in to be re-questioned. They also had two guests panelist giving their opinion. One was a black gay man who said he is lying and needs to come forward and apologize and the other guest was a black woman who seemed disturbed but said she's waiting for more news from the police before making a final judgement. Also, if you go on the CNN website and click on the entertainment section, the first thing you see is a Jussie Smollett headline.

CNN just covered it as the last story of the hour. And he definitely will be re-questioned. Whether he comes in on his own is up to him.

Okay, I'm just responding to the person who posted "not a peep about this on CNN". I'll admit, I believed this story at first but it's clear now that this was a hoax. I just don't get the need to spread lies. this is very much being covered on CNN.

[Anonymous]

He is toast.

I read a comment that basically asked this: What MAGA men watch Empire first of all - and are faithful viewers who could trail and pick out Smollett at 2 am on a subzero night?


I am intrigued by the anti-lynching law and Smollett's incident - https://www.booker.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=860

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:He is toast.

I read a comment that basically asked this: What MAGA men watch Empire first of all - and are faithful viewers who could trail and pick out Smollett at 2 am on a subzero night?


I am intrigued by the anti-lynching law and Smollett's incident - https://www.booker.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=860

Is lynching illegal to begin with? Do we need an anti-shooting law? An anti-drowning law? And anti-stabbing law? Do we need an anti-(fill in the blank) law for every possible way to kill someone?

[Anonymous]

I think this is hilarious. What an idiot he was. People want to hate Trump supporters so much, he thought this would be easy

[Anonymous]

I don’t understand all the criticism of the media here. They reported an alleged attack of a celebrity? What’s the big deal?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He is toast.

I read a comment that basically asked this: What MAGA men watch Empire first of all - and are faithful viewers who could trail and pick out Smollett at 2 am on a subzero night?


I am intrigued by the anti-lynching law and Smollett's incident - https://www.booker.senate.gov/?p=press_release&id=860

Is lynching illegal to begin with? Do we need an anti-shooting law? An anti-drowning law? And anti-stabbing law? Do we need an anti-(fill in the blank) law for every possible way to kill someone?

background on lynching
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-46634184

For much of US history, lynchings were rarely prosecuted at all.

More than 200 anti-lynching bills have been introduced to Congress since 1918, all of which have been voted down.

Lynching is murder by a mob with no due process or rule of law. In the US South in the 19th and 20th Centuries, thousands of African Americans were lynched by white mobs, often by hanging.

I questioned this, too. What makes lynching an different from murdering someone with a knife or a gun or even strangling someone? It's murder, oftentimes orchestrated by mobs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand all the criticism of the media here. They reported an alleged attack of a celebrity? What’s the big deal?

Well, the story angles were warped b/c they didn't wait for more details. So people were up in arms over a false incident. The story fed into a liberal agenda - empowering one side immediately . . . until more facts were shared which crushed the liberal agenda.

I know that the internet has changed reporting. Many of the stories are inaccurate and poorly written b/c reporters are competing over who gets the story first. Quality goes down, which increases the chances of posting inaccurate information.

THAT'S the deal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t understand all the criticism of the media here. They reported an alleged attack of a celebrity? What’s the big deal?

Well, the story angles were warped b/c they didn't wait for more details. So people were up in arms over a false incident. The story fed into a liberal agenda - empowering one side immediately . . . until more facts were shared which crushed the liberal agenda.

I know that the internet has changed reporting. Many of the stories are inaccurate and poorly written b/c reporters are competing over who gets the story first. Quality goes down, which increases the chances of posting inaccurate information.

THAT'S the deal.

I agree the story confirmed their priors and they were surely excited to report it. But what are they supposedly to do? Toss in a few more “allegedly”-s? I don’t think tossing in a few words like that really changes the character of a story— just as I didn’t think it was cool for the media to append “if true” to that debunked Michael Cohen story from a few weeks back and call it a day