lol True. I'm just uncertain how much (if any) is from actual fire and how much is from lawyers' smoke machines.
Fair points. I too am ambivalent about these accusations, although it's also worth remembering is that the accusations were reported "shortly after the alleged assaults", not immediately afterward. This is important because immediately afterward, the charges can be proven but also can be disproven. Weeks afterward there is no way to conclude whether or not the incident, consensual or not, ever took place. That means the accused has no way to truly clear his name, and if he's short-sighted or has a major deal in the works a celebrity might well see making a modest settlement to not take the bad press.
Which is somehow completely different from all the superior leftists who supported Roman Polanski even though he drugged, raped and sodomized a thirteen year old child, pled guilty, and then fled the continent to avoid punishment. 'Cause that's not 'rape' rape. That's not "legitimate" rape.
Yet Cosby has done stand-up for fifty years and this "common knowledge" seems to have existed for fourteen, since the first police report (which was at the time of the incident, but inappropriate touching rather than rape) became public. If Cosby is really a serial rapist for at least four decades, shouldn't this be much more broadly known? Believing people guilty of something doesn't necessarily make it so.
How many of the women actually claiming rape do you think are not going to attach themselves to the Allred lawsuit? I'm guessing exactly zero.
Fair enough, but she'll certainly know she had sex. That coupled with lack of consciousness is enough to claim rape even when the woman self-intoxicated, for men receive no such intoxication release from responsibility.
But are we now accepting lack of evidence as evidence of occurrence?
And you see nothing implausible about a man regularly committing crimes that could put him away for life AND incorporating that into his stand-up act?
Actually I read somebody (forget who) who pointed out that virtually all Polanski's support is from the Hollywood outsiders, those people involved in film/television/advertising who commonly make movies away from Hollywood. But you are correct, most mainstream non-film industry libs usually steer clear of voicing support.
Even sex offenders will change their methods. The thieves I catch switch up their tactics while targeting the same merchandise when we catch them or almost catch them. One group we even caught sending in their kids once they knew we were wise to them! There are compulsive thieves too, you know, and I prey on their compulsions to catch them. I form charts and plots and try not to let on how much we know so that they don't change up their tactics before we can adapt and catch them on their next attempt.
Personally I'm not saying it's not possible. I'm just saying I'm not convinced it's true.
Claim to have been molested by Jimmy Saville? That's good enough for us. Come get your chunk of his estate, and while you're at it, have a double helping of taxpayer money too. Just remember to tip your lawyers on the way out. They're the ones atop that biiig pile of cash.
We'll see. It's easy to claim no financial interest; it's quite another to actually avoid the financial gain and the attendant free publicity.
Why at this point would we choose to believe something so heinous? Consider - the women who actually claim to have been drugged and raped had the absolute power to prove it at that time. Every single one decided not to do so. Should I simply ignore that? If a woman tells me she's been drugged and raped, and she has the physical signs and a rape drug in her blood, then absent some powerful conflicting element I'll believe that. If she tells me she was raped decades ago and NOW she wants vengeance, I'm going to be somewhat skeptical. If she tells me she was raped decades ago and NOW she wants vengeance, not money, when coincidentally there is a shit pot full of money to be had, then I'm going to be very skeptical. It's akin to telling me you discovered the cure for cancer but you left it in your other pants and it was lost in the laundry.
Facebook
Twitter