Jussie Smollett staged attack with help of others

[Collegeguy]

In this case they would be accessories to filing a false police report, at the very least.

They likely cut a deal for full cooperation and confession since the PD was hush hush about it and released them.

[Xandrigity]

The only hang up for the brothers may be the letter. If they made and mailed the letter, even on Jussie’s behalf that is still a federal offense of mail fraud, atleast.

[Chinese Bootlickers]

I guess one can become so desperate to face up with the boogeyman that when he never shows up you have to create one.

"It takes a strong man to deny what's right in front of him. And if the truth is undeniable, you create your own."

[Jorlen]

I doubt Smollett was faking it to help anyone but himself. I think they sent the letter to get some brownie points and the news didn't cover it, so they escalated. Maybe he tangentially wanted to aid the anti-lynching bill or raise awareness of gay black male issues, but mostly he seemed to want HIMSELF to be the face of resistance. Otherwise I'm sure he could have found an existing cause to help.

Tangentially? It wouldn't shock me if the sole purpose of the noose was to tie this event to the anti-lynching legislation, possibly to push for LGBTQ to be added(?). No one in the real world carries around a noose, BUT everyone thinks noose when you think lynching. What if this whole thing was to promote the anti-lynching bill, how far down the rabbit hole does this go? We know that Dems love to coordinate their media responses in advance. Is it possible that some bigger people might have been involved in planning? Enquiring minds want to know.

[Najnaj]

"If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth." its his truth. and he's got a lawyer to defend his truth, which he just fired and replaced.

Did he? Or, is it that the rumor mill pinned him with one "high powered attorney" that turned out to be false (and this I do believe really happened) but he actually hired a local lawyer. I honestly do not know but if all you see is that the name has changed this might be why.

[Svifnymr]

Tangentially? It wouldn't shock me if the sole purpose of the noose was to tie this event to the anti-lynching legislation, possibly to push for LGBTQ to be added(?). No one in the real world carries around a noose, BUT everyone thinks noose when you think lynching. What if this whole thing was to promote the anti-lynching bill, how far down the rabbit hole does this go? We know that Dems love to coordinate their media responses in advance. Is it possible that some bigger people might have been involved in planning? Enquiring minds want to know.

I just think it was a convenient thing to get Smollett the press of center stage, the anti-lynch bill being a tool for him to use for his ends, rather than his attack being to back the bill. Who knows though, I doubt it'll even affect the presentation of the bill or the dem's that push it.

[Collegeguy]

I just think it was a convenient thing to get Smollett the press of center stage, the anti-lynch bill being a tool for him to use for his ends, rather than his attack being to back the bill. Who knows though, I doubt it'll even affect the presentation of the bill or the dem's that push it.

I don't think anyone really cares. It's not like it's a bad bill. My only question would be when was the last lynching?

[Kraenen]

Serious answer. We turned being a victim into celebrity status.

It's the other side of the US culture. This is the kind of glory that's to be sought in a life of privilege and wealth. Other cultures have honor culture or some kind of family culture. Whatever this culture is called, it has a system that motivates people to do and say stupid things based on archaic narratives about privilege and demographic power.

I'm reminded of a scene from My Dinner with Andre, where Wally essentially says "is it just because people are bored, spoiled children lying in the bathtub all day, now thinking, well, what can I do?"

[Svifnymr]

I don't think anyone really cares. It's not like it's a bad bill. My only question would be when was the last lynching?

It's just one of those bills that seems to have no purpose to me. If someone is murdered, does it matter if it was via rope or axe? Maybe there was some use for this bill back in Ye Ancient Days of Yore, but now? Can't see it meaning anything.

[Malaky]

I don't think anyone really cares. It's not like it's a bad bill. My only question would be when was the last lynching?

It's just one of those bills that seems to have no purpose to me. If someone is murdered, does it matter if it was via rope or axe? Maybe there was some use for this bill back in Ye Ancient Days of Yore, but now? Can't see it meaning anything.

I may be wrong in this but didn't they say that "lynching" also applied to stuff like pulling someone's hijab off?

If that is the case there you have it: it's not about lynching as any sane person sees it but "lynching" as a radical leftist would, redefining the term to make it into a weapon, even if that means losing its original meaning.

[Daara]

I don't think anyone really cares. It's not like it's a bad bill. My only question would be when was the last lynching?

I think someone posted something about the last one being in the 70's.

[rogueMatthias]

It's just one of those bills that seems to have no purpose to me. If someone is murdered, does it matter if it was via rope or axe? Maybe there was some use for this bill back in Ye Ancient Days of Yore, but now? Can't see it meaning anything.

It's just more political propaganda.

The whole issue and discussion is only there for the media to perpetuate this left-wing fantasy that black and gay people are in danger of getting lynched at any moment in the US.

It again comes back to this myth that Trump has caused this massive rise in neo-nazis, KKK and other racist groups, when in reality they've still continued to drop and even Black Separatist hate groups outnumber neo-nazi hate groups in the US these days.

The last killings in US that you could even vaguely describe as a lynching were at least 20-30 years ago. There's no reason outside of this propaganda to make such a huge thing about lynchings being made a hate crime when they're not even happening. (well.. unless you pay some Nigerians to pretend to lynch you of course..)

[Xandrigity]

I don't think anyone really cares. It's not like it's a bad bill. My only question would be when was the last lynching?

Something like 1981

[Collegeguy]

Something like 1981

Then it's worthless to support and worthless to oppose. I wouldn't care unless they have a point of redefining something.

[Kraenen]

It's just one of those bills that seems to have no purpose to me. If someone is murdered, does it matter if it was via rope or axe? Maybe there was some use for this bill back in Ye Ancient Days of Yore, but now? Can't see it meaning anything.

It's usually to behaviorally punish certain disproportionate crimes. Although then we'd have to admit that policies have behavioral and motivational effects on people which seems to make people uneasy.

[Jehct]

If we cut military spending drastically yes I do. There are 330 million Americans figure 75% fall inside the range of 18 to 64 which is probably high. 1000 a month is 250 billion a year we spend approximately 700 billion on military each year. Slash military budget and actually implement taxes without loopholes on every dollar made over a million and yeah very feasible.

Sure. I just think UBI incentivizes laziness. I think that once most jobs are fully automated that people can benefit from a UBI since there arent really any jobs out there and the jobs that are out there will pay much more than the UBI. But yea UBI sounds like " I dont feel like working anymore, give me money im a lazy cunt". Help me understand that it isnt about being lazy.

[Svifnymr]

I may be wrong in this but didn't they say that "lynching" also applied to stuff like pulling someone's hijab off?

If that is the case there you have it: it's not about lynching as any sane person sees it but "lynching" as a radical leftist would, redefining the term to make it into a weapon, even if that means losing its original meaning.

The actual bill: https://www.harris.senate.gov/imo/me...c/ALB18773.pdf

Lots of history politics stuff, including: " At least 4,742 people, predominantly Afri-7can Americans, were reported lynched in the United 8States between 1882 and 1968"

But, the actual law is just:
"‘Whoever willfully, acting as part of any collection of people, assembled for the purpose and with the intention of engaging in conduct described in paragraph (1) or (2)(A) of section 249(a) against any person, causes death to any person, shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life, fined under this title, or both."

So, if a group of people murders someone, they can also be found guilty of lynching and get any number of years in Fed Prison.

[ohiostate124]

Did anyone see that clip of Kamala being asked about this situation after all the updates. She seemed pretty rattled. Wouldn’t suprise me at all if she was in on it.

[Theodarzna]

Did anyone see that clip of Kamala being asked about this situation after all the updates. She seemed pretty rattled. Wouldn’t suprise me at all if she was in on it.

I doubt she was in on it. If she was though that would send my sides into orbit.

[SinR]

Republicans will paint that picture and put it on display at The Louvre