Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Frank Underwood" data-source="post: 446133" data-attributes="member: 35">Three years in the making, it seems.&nbsp; There was a contentious discussion about the Russell Brand allegations back in 2023:[URL unfurl=&quot;true&quot;]https://tellytalk.net/threads/that-70s-show-star-danny-masterson-sentenced-to-30-years-to-life-for-two-rapes.13794/[/URL]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.&nbsp; Instead, journalists sought out anybody connected to Brand and interviewed them.&nbsp; In doing so, they found four women who claimed Brand had raped or sexually assaulted them.&nbsp; The timing of the investigation was suspect to me because it was during Brand&#039;s newfound career as an anti-establishment podcast host.&nbsp; Gone were the days when he was a Hollywood darling married to pop star Katy Perry.&nbsp; It&#039;s blatantly obvious that Brand was a sleazebag (even he says as much), but Hollywood didn&#039;t care when he was still &quot;one of them.&quot;&nbsp; Just like they protected Cosby and Weinstein (until they couldn&#039;t anymore.)&nbsp; Brand had been getting attacked for his &quot;dangerous&quot; anti-establishment views before these allegations surfaced.&nbsp; From what I understand, the women that Brand was criminally charged for raping and sexually assaulting came forward after watching that documentary.&nbsp; The media has been having a field day with Brand&#039;s conviction.&nbsp; They&#039;re saying he&#039;s been a sleaze for decades, yet the groundwork for his conviction was only set after he spoke out against their politics.It&#039;s well established that Brand was a sleaze, but is he a rapist?&nbsp; I won&#039;t presume to say.&nbsp; However, the way they &quot;found out&quot; seems unconventional, to say the least.&nbsp; I sense that the &quot;journalists&quot; who broke the story were on a fishing expedition.&nbsp; To paraphrase JR Ewing, they weren&#039;t looking for merit badges, they were looking for dirt.&nbsp; And also thanks to JR, we know if dirt can&#039;t be found, it can be manufactured.&nbsp; To be clear, I&#039;m not saying it was manufactured or that the women who came forward are lying.&nbsp; All I know is that the establishment wanted Brand to go away, and now they got their wish.&nbsp; Before his conviction, they used the accusations to throttle his ability to monetize his videos on YouTube.&nbsp; Bringing down Brand has always been personal to them.Although Brand&#039;s made a lot of political points I agree with, I still aim to be objective.&nbsp; If he&#039;s guilty, he deserves to be locked up.&nbsp; However, the unusual way these allegations came to light leaves room for skepticism IMO.&nbsp; Writing that skepticism off as a misogynistic conspiracy theory doesn&#039;t make sense to me, considering people have been targeted by false allegations in the past.&nbsp; I try to choose my words carefully because I feel it&#039;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&#039;t followed Brand as much lately since his conversion to Christianity.&nbsp; 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 &quot;free Palestine&quot; chants as well.)&nbsp; Not that that has anything to do with his conviction, of course, but I thought I would add that in case anybody thinks I&#039;m just some blind, rabid Russell Brand fan.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Frank Underwood, post: 446133, member: 35"] Three years in the making, it seems. There was a contentious discussion about the Russell Brand allegations back in 2023: [URL unfurl="true"]https://tellytalk.net/threads/that-70s-show-star-danny-masterson-sentenced-to-30-years-to-life-for-two-rapes.13794/[/URL] 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 [I]sought out[/I] 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 [I]was[/I] manufactured or that the women who came forward [I]are[/I] 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 [I]have[/I] 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. [/QUOTE]

Verification

Who played Sue Ellen in Dallas?