Snarky Oracle!
Telly Talk Supreme
Megyn Kelley is a bit strident for my taste, and my politics is often different (she's been a registered Democrat, Republican, and Independent) but this is kind of funny...
Russell Brand convicted of 7000 rapes (approximately)
- Thread starter Snarky Oracle!
- Start date
- Copy link Copy link
CeeCee72
Telly Talk Star
Didn't she actually say that she had a consensual threesome with Brand and that the second encounter started out as consensual until he abused her?
As for Megan Kelly, she doesn't appear to know more than anyone else - as usual.
The fact remains that Brand himself lied to the police, admitted it on the stand, and asked for the court's forgiveness. Sure that went a long way towards damaging his credibility with jury.
Willie Oleson
Telly Talk Schemer
And that means it's not happening?
Even in this thread with not too many participants there are three negative comments about his personality.
You can imagine what the rest of the internet looks like.
Shame and embarrassment? So now even the spectators are victims? Maybe they should sue him.
Well that certainly takes the nuance out of my previous post, which was more about the retroactive prophecy in the "disliked person" becoming "rapist".
Comments like, "he's always looked kinda rape-y to me".
I don't even know what a rape-y person looks like.
My comments are not about his guilt because obviously that's been decided by the court.
All I'm saying is that there's a lot of hypocrisy going on.
Let's not forget that it's not a crime to be weird or to look rape-y or to upload peculiar youtube videos (videos that we're not forced to watch).
Last edited:
Willie Oleson
Telly Talk Schemer
She's going aaaall the way! (saying much more than she should).
But is it true that the heaviest part of the verdict is based on that incident as described in the video?
Angela Channing
Telly Talk Veteran
There has been a certain amount of revisionism by people who are now saying they never liked him or thought there was something off about him. Some people like to be wise after the fact but that shouldn't distract from the fact that Brand is a vile rapist who is finally facing justice for his horrific crimes. That is what we should focus on, along with his victims, not on whether or not he is weird.
Just read the court transcripts, they show the overwhelming evidence against Brand, it made jury's decision inevitable.
Snarky Oracle!
Telly Talk Supreme
Apparently, it is.
But that's what you say in all your posts!
Frank Underwood
Telly Talk Champion
Three years in the making, it seems. There was a contentious discussion about the Russell Brand allegations back in 2023:
What struck me both then and now is that the four women who got the ball rolling never came forward or went to the police themselves. Instead, journalists sought out anybody connected to Brand and interviewed them. In doing so, they found four women who claimed Brand had raped or sexually assaulted them. The timing of the investigation was suspect to me because it was during Brand's newfound career as an anti-establishment podcast host.
Gone were the days when he was a Hollywood darling married to pop star Katy Perry. It's blatantly obvious that Brand was a sleazebag (even he says as much), but Hollywood didn't care when he was still "one of them." Just like they protected Cosby and Weinstein (until they couldn't anymore.) Brand had been getting attacked for his "dangerous" anti-establishment views before these allegations surfaced. From what I understand, the women that Brand was criminally charged for raping and sexually assaulting came forward after watching that documentary. The media has been having a field day with Brand's conviction. They're saying he's been a sleaze for decades, yet the groundwork for his conviction was only set after he spoke out against their politics.
It's well established that Brand was a sleaze, but is he a rapist? I won't presume to say. However, the way they "found out" seems unconventional, to say the least. I sense that the "journalists" who broke the story were on a fishing expedition. To paraphrase JR Ewing, they weren't looking for merit badges, they were looking for dirt. And also thanks to JR, we know if dirt can't be found, it can be manufactured. To be clear, I'm not saying it was manufactured or that the women who came forward are lying. All I know is that the establishment wanted Brand to go away, and now they got their wish. Before his conviction, they used the accusations to throttle his ability to monetize his videos on YouTube. Bringing down Brand has always been personal to them.
Although Brand's made a lot of political points I agree with, I still aim to be objective. If he's guilty, he deserves to be locked up. However, the unusual way these allegations came to light leaves room for skepticism IMO. Writing that skepticism off as a misogynistic conspiracy theory doesn't make sense to me, considering people have been targeted by false allegations in the past. I try to choose my words carefully because I feel it's impossible to know the truth in these cases 100%, but I certainly see nothing wrong in pointing out how this benefits the establishment or how they clearly targeted Brand.
I also haven't followed Brand as much lately since his conversion to Christianity. Not that I have a problem with that, but it did feel like his views started to shift towards the right somewhat around that time (I recall him defending Jerry Seinfeld over his mocking "free Palestine" chants as well.) Not that that has anything to do with his conviction, of course, but I thought I would add that in case anybody thinks I'm just some blind, rabid Russell Brand fan.
"That 70s Show" star Danny Masterson sentenced to 30 Years to Life for Two Rapes
The statute of limitations has been revoked. Danny Masterson Sentenced to 30 Years to Life for Raping Two Women – The Hollywood Reporter
tellytalk.net
What struck me both then and now is that the four women who got the ball rolling never came forward or went to the police themselves. Instead, journalists sought out anybody connected to Brand and interviewed them. In doing so, they found four women who claimed Brand had raped or sexually assaulted them. The timing of the investigation was suspect to me because it was during Brand's newfound career as an anti-establishment podcast host.
Gone were the days when he was a Hollywood darling married to pop star Katy Perry. It's blatantly obvious that Brand was a sleazebag (even he says as much), but Hollywood didn't care when he was still "one of them." Just like they protected Cosby and Weinstein (until they couldn't anymore.) Brand had been getting attacked for his "dangerous" anti-establishment views before these allegations surfaced. From what I understand, the women that Brand was criminally charged for raping and sexually assaulting came forward after watching that documentary. The media has been having a field day with Brand's conviction. They're saying he's been a sleaze for decades, yet the groundwork for his conviction was only set after he spoke out against their politics.
It's well established that Brand was a sleaze, but is he a rapist? I won't presume to say. However, the way they "found out" seems unconventional, to say the least. I sense that the "journalists" who broke the story were on a fishing expedition. To paraphrase JR Ewing, they weren't looking for merit badges, they were looking for dirt. And also thanks to JR, we know if dirt can't be found, it can be manufactured. To be clear, I'm not saying it was manufactured or that the women who came forward are lying. All I know is that the establishment wanted Brand to go away, and now they got their wish. Before his conviction, they used the accusations to throttle his ability to monetize his videos on YouTube. Bringing down Brand has always been personal to them.
Although Brand's made a lot of political points I agree with, I still aim to be objective. If he's guilty, he deserves to be locked up. However, the unusual way these allegations came to light leaves room for skepticism IMO. Writing that skepticism off as a misogynistic conspiracy theory doesn't make sense to me, considering people have been targeted by false allegations in the past. I try to choose my words carefully because I feel it's impossible to know the truth in these cases 100%, but I certainly see nothing wrong in pointing out how this benefits the establishment or how they clearly targeted Brand.
I also haven't followed Brand as much lately since his conversion to Christianity. Not that I have a problem with that, but it did feel like his views started to shift towards the right somewhat around that time (I recall him defending Jerry Seinfeld over his mocking "free Palestine" chants as well.) Not that that has anything to do with his conviction, of course, but I thought I would add that in case anybody thinks I'm just some blind, rabid Russell Brand fan.
Last edited: