• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."
  • Community Question: What makes a good motherboard?

The Jussie Smollett Affair

Page 67 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,069
18,810
136
Find me cases and I'll do just that if the facts warrant it. This is a standout story for more reasons than just falsely reporting crimes. It's the same exact dynamic as the Covington HS controversy: Party A, to which the broader culture and media is sympathetic, makes accusation that confirms the worst biases about Party B. Media falls for it like eggs from a tall chicken. Meanwhile, facts start to emerge that contradict and even reverse the desired story, and the victim turns out to be the perpetrator.

It's a cautionary tale about nemesis and the destructive power of lies, especially when the lie is very popular. Not every falsely-reported crime tells a story this good.

EDIT: Admittedly, the media didn't seem to fall for this story quite as hard as it did for the Covington HS controversy. There was some skepticism, or at least a reaction short of full-throated support, shortly after the allegation was made, even among left-wing outlets.
You could tell the EXACT same story about one of a hundred cases with the police. The exact. Same. Story.

As for stories I already linked one, the widespread problem of police perjuring themselves to incriminate people. This doesn’t just happen in NYC, it happens everywhere. Do you agree we need to be sending lots more cops to prison, nationwide?
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,069
18,810
136
You realize that their cognitive dissonance protecting a mentality that doesn't question authority is just going to have them keep assuming you're calling them racists, right? Because that's easier than internally questioning their motives wrt Smollett and this new idea you've placed before them.
It is kind of funny how not a single one of them has been able to articulate why they care so much about some C list actor in Chicago lying about a crime and yet so little about the thousands of cases where people charged with protecting us who wield literal life and death powers apparently routinely lie under oath in order to send the citizens they swore to protect to prison.

The small government conservatives are all worked up about an actor and couldn’t care less about the government imprisoning people based on false pretenses.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
47,632
7,693
126
It is kind of funny how not a single one of them has been able to articulate why they care so much about some C list actor in Chicago lying about a crime and yet so little about the thousands of cases where people charged with protecting us who wield literal life and death powers apparently routinely lie under oath in order to send the citizens they swore to protect to prison.

The small government conservatives are all worked up about an actor and couldn’t care less about the government imprisoning people based on false pretenses.
They see his staged crime as political speech that threatened them and therefore must be silenced and punished.
While the issue of police corruption I believe I already addressed. Law enforcement is selective by necessity, and so they're willing to look the other way as long they get votes and don't get 'selected.' There's also the issue of those who fancy themselves freedom-loving patriots, but want every freedom they don't enjoy themselves to be outlawed, and give LEO unrestricted license to carry that out, and then can't understand why people don't appreciate their professed love of freedom.

And then there's the conservative media fanning these flames in ironically the much same way they accused the 'liberal' media doing wrt MAGA hat kid. Somehow that's different, of course.
 
Last edited:

Atreus21

Lifer
Aug 21, 2007
12,017
571
126
You could tell the EXACT same story about one of a hundred cases with the police. The exact. Same. Story.

As for stories I already linked one, the widespread problem of police perjuring themselves to incriminate people. This doesn’t just happen in NYC, it happens everywhere. Do you agree we need to be sending lots more cops to prison, nationwide?
Certainly, if the crimes merit it.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,426
1,805
126
Lol, pathetic.

The exact thing conservatives are pretending to be concerned about here happens every day, all over America, and you never hear a peep. It ruins lives, destroys families, and corrupts our legal system and you say nothing. As soon as a minority lies about a crime though you’re all over it.

Why do you think that is?
The simple answer is that this thread is about Jussie Smollett. I popped in just to see what raging fire of whataboutism sent it rocketing back to the front page of the forum.

To answer your broader question, conservatives place faith in institutions. While I am sure every one of us has had a run in with an @sshole cop, most conservatives also see police as volunteers in their communities, selfless servants and the people who went rushing towards the flames of 9/11...and yes, this also includes those sitting in their cars next to road construction earning time and a half to sleep. Ironically enough, many of the abuses and excesses attributed to police are due to the power of their unions, something conservatives oppose. So there is no simple answer.

Specific to this thread, it is a shrine to tribalism. Some were very quick to believe Jussie. The OP is not a conservative. It took a mod to correct the thread title.

Which crimes do you think it should be okay for cops to commit?
None
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,069
18,810
136
The simple answer is that this thread is about Jussie Smollett. I popped in just to see what raging fire of whataboutism sent it rocketing back to the front page of the forum.

To answer your broader question, conservatives place faith in institutions. While I am sure every one of us has had a run in with an @sshole cop, most conservatives also see police as volunteers in their communities, selfless servants and the people who went rushing towards the flames of 9/11...and yes, this also includes those sitting in their cars next to road construction earning time and a half to sleep. Ironically enough, many of the abuses and excesses attributed to police are due to the power of their unions, something conservatives oppose. So there is no simple answer.

Specific to this thread, it is a shrine to tribalism. Some were very quick to believe Jussie. The OP is not a conservative. It took a mod to correct the thread title.

None
Conservatives do not oppose police unions, are you crazy? They very explicitly carve out exceptions for them when attacking other public sector unions because the police support conservatives.

Also by the definition now being used in this thread literally any time someone points out hypocrisy is whataboutism. This is dumb and you all know it. My point is that conservatives do not actually care about falsely reported crimes on its own merits, they care about WHO is falsely reporting crimes.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Vic and KMFJD

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,069
18,810
136
As a quick reminder to everyone of ‘whataboutism’ is, it would be me trying to excuse Smollet’s behavior by saying other people do similar things. I am not trying to excuse his behavior at all, and I think he should be prosecuted.

What I am saying is that people who claim to be outraged by this behavior routinely ignore far more egregious examples by the police, people you pay to arrest people that do this, that happen every day.
 

Starbuck1975

Lifer
Jan 6, 2005
14,426
1,805
126
Conservatives do not oppose police unions, are you crazy? They very explicitly carve out exceptions for them when attacking other public sector unions because the police support conservatives.
That’s a fairly recent shift. I remember a time in the not so distant past where underfunded and bloated pensions were a target of conservative angst.

Also by the definition now being used in this thread literally any time someone points out hypocrisy is whataboutism. This is dumb and you all know it. My point is that conservatives do not actually care about falsely reported crimes on its own merits, they care about WHO is falsely reporting crimes.
Hypocrisy is a matter of perspective. Whataboutism is a logical fallacy. If you’re legitimately concerned about conservative hypocrisy, perhaps its best not to make that point in a thread that started due to confirmation bias cry wolf alarmism.
 

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,069
18,810
136
That’s a fairly recent shift. I remember a time in the not so distant past where underfunded and bloated pensions were a target of conservative angst.
I mean at this point the shift is several decades old. Regardless, where conservatives stand today they affirmatively support the police unions that enable criminal activity by law enforcement and they actively work to block accountability measures like say, not having the police discipline themselves.

Hypocrisy is a matter of perspective. Whataboutism is a logical fallacy. If you’re legitimately concerned about conservative hypocrisy, perhaps its best not to make that point in a thread that started due to confirmation bias cry wolf alarmism.
It doesn't matter if it's a logical fallacy or not because I wasn't engaging in it. In order to engage in it I would need to be attempting to discredit the argument against Smollett by pointing out hypocrisy.

A thread about people lying about other people committing crimes seems to be an entirely appropriate place to point out that lots of people complaining about it don't actually care about people lying about crimes. Hard to think of a better place, really.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
47,632
7,693
126
Conservatives do not oppose police unions, are you crazy? They very explicitly carve out exceptions for them when attacking other public sector unions because the police support conservatives.

Also by the definition now being used in this thread literally any time someone points out hypocrisy is whataboutism. This is dumb and you all know it. My point is that conservatives do not actually care about falsely reported crimes on its own merits, they care about WHO is falsely reporting crimes.
Disparate treatment in deference to their authority figures is literally THE guiding principle of conservatism, but keep fighting the good fight here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ShookKnight

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
23,945
729
126
It is kind of funny how not a single one of them has been able to articulate why they care so much about some C list actor in Chicago lying about a crime and yet so little about the thousands of cases where people charged with protecting us who wield literal life and death powers apparently routinely lie under oath in order to send the citizens they swore to protect to prison.

The small government conservatives are all worked up about an actor and couldn’t care less about the government imprisoning people based on false pretenses.
You know, when the hoax was first uncovered people were using it to say the exact same thing about the OP and others who cared a little too much about an alleged hate crime against some C-list actor in Chicago. This attempt to turn it back on itself falls flat in light of this.

I don't think anyone's concern about this reflects a lack of concern about police imprisoning people under false pretenses. False accusations also lead to false imprisonment. This tactic of misrepresenting others to deflect and dismiss the concern at hand smacks of desperation and an attempt to save face after a particularly embarrassing gaffe exposing just how gullible people who share your political persuasion can be. It's happening in the Covington thread too. I'd be ashamed to even try to make that reach.

If anyone is silent it's because the insulting insinuation doesn't even deserve a response. This isn't how you save face. This isn't how you change minds. This isn't how you win arguments. It isn't having the effect you want. Understand that you lose respect any time you try to play this card.
 
Last edited:

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
25,047
9,924
136
You know, when the hoax was first uncovered people were using it to say the exact same thing about the OP and others who cared a little too much about an alleged hate crime against some C-list actor in Chicago. This attempt to turn it back on itself falls flat in light of this.

I don't think anyone's concern about this reflects a lack of concern about police imprisoning people under false pretenses. False accusations also lead to false imprisonment. This tactic of misrepresenting others to deflext and dismiss the concern at hand smacks of desperation and an attempt to save face after a particularly embarrassing gaffe exposing just how gullible people who share your political persuasion can be. It's happening in the Covington thread too. I'd be ashamed to even try to make that reach.

If anyone is silent it's because the insulting insinuation doesn't even deserve a response. This isn't how you save face. This isn't how you change minds. This isn't how you win arguments. It isn't having the effect you want. Understand that you lose respect any time you try to play this card.
As the OP I'll answer that.

It wasn't about some c-list actor, it was the continued scourge of racism in this country, that makes people of color a target, encouraged by the POTUS.

When I started this thread I did not conclude JS was telling the truth although at first I believed him. Once enough evidence came out I freely admitted JS lied.
 

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
23,945
729
126
As the OP I'll answer that.

It wasn't about some c-list actor, it was the continued scourge of racism in this country, that makes people of color a target, encouraged by the POTUS.

When I started this thread I did not conclude JS was telling the truth although at first I believed him. Once enough evidence came out I freely admitted JS lied.
Ding ding ding ding ding!

The OP freely admits it was because it fits a narrative regarding "continued scourge of racism in this country." Racism exists, but so does the concerted effort to divide this country by behaving as if it's worse than it is.

...and there we have it, folks. Bare for all to see: We cared too much because it fit a narrative. This is exactly like the Covington Catholic situation and so many others and it's exactly the mentality JS was trying to take advantage of. Heck, it's also why Trayvon Martin got blown out of proportion and people still believe George Zimmerman was a murderous racist when he demonstrably was neither.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Paladin3

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,069
18,810
136
You know, when the hoax was first uncovered people were using it to say the exact same thing about the OP and others who cared a little too much about an alleged hate crime against some C-list actor in Chicago. This attempt to turn it back on itself falls flat in light of this.

I don't think anyone's concern about this reflects a lack of concern about police imprisoning people under false pretenses. False accusations also lead to false imprisonment. This tactic of misrepresenting others to deflext and dismiss the concern at hand smacks of desperation and an attempt to save face after a particularly embarrassing gaffe exposing just how gullible people who share your political persuasion can be. It's happening in the Covington thread too. I'd be ashamed to even try to make that reach.
If there is a concern about police imprisoning people under false pretenses among this board's conservatives perhaps you can point me to the threads discussing this. Since it's vastly more common than things like this I will assume there are numerous threads devoted to it. Let me know what you find.

If anyone is silent it's because the insulting insinuation doesn't even deserve a response. This isn't how you save face. This isn't how you change minds. This isn't how you win arguments. It isn't having the effect you want. Understand that you lose respect any time you try to play this card.
Can you explain to me your impression of what I would need to save face about or what argument I am trying to win?

I suspect this post gets chalked up to 'I responded before reading the thread', haha.
 

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
25,047
9,924
136
Ding ding ding ding ding!

The OP freely admits it was because it fits a narrative regarding "continued scourge of racism in this country." Racism exists, but so does the concerted effort to divide this country by behaving as if it's worse than it is.

...and there we have it, folks. Bare for all to see: We cared too much because it fit a narrative. This is exactly like the Covington Catholic situation and so many others and it's exactly the mentality JS was trying to take advantage of. Heck, it's also why Trayvon Martin got blown out of proportion and people still believe George Zimmerman was a murderous racist when he demonstrably was neither.
"Fits a narrative" suggests it doesn't exist and just bringing it up for yucks. Also BTW - tired of the old canard pointing out racism is the real problem. That is such bullshit.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
47,632
7,693
126
You know, when the hoax was first uncovered people were using it to say the exact same thing about the OP and others who cared a little too much about an alleged hate crime against some C-list actor in Chicago. This attempt to turn it back on itself falls flat in light of this.

I don't think anyone's concern about this reflects a lack of concern about police imprisoning people under false pretenses. False accusations also lead to false imprisonment. This tactic of misrepresenting others to deflext and dismiss the concern at hand smacks of desperation and an attempt to save face after a particularly embarrassing gaffe exposing just how gullible people who share your political persuasion can be. It's happening in the Covington thread too. I'd be ashamed to even try to make that reach.

If anyone is silent it's because the insulting insinuation doesn't even deserve a response. This isn't how you save face. This isn't how you change minds. This isn't how you win arguments. It isn't having the effect you want. Understand that you lose respect any time you try to play this card.
To be really really honest, what's insulting here is the conservative ego, continuously demanding that everyone else adhere to their self-serving narratives, and bend over backwards to try to change their resolutely unchangeable minds.

And I don't know if this applies to you personally, but I have to say that no one, and I mean no one, who actually listens to and somehow believes the unending stream of absurdly sensationalistic emotion-based bullshit and outright lies that is 'conservative media' should ever call anyone gullible, or accuse other media of sensationalism, etc. Just sayin'.
 

Vic

Elite Member
Jun 12, 2001
47,632
7,693
126
Ding ding ding ding ding!

The OP freely admits it was because it fits a narrative regarding "continued scourge of racism in this country." Racism exists, but so does the concerted effort to divide this country by behaving as if it's worse than it is.

...and there we have it, folks. Bare for all to see: We cared too much because it fit a narrative. This is exactly like the Covington Catholic situation and so many others and it's exactly the mentality JS was trying to take advantage of. Heck, it's also why Trayvon Martin got blown out of proportion and people still believe George Zimmerman was a murderous racist when he demonstrably was neither.
I've got a thought experiment for you. Reverse the racial or political identities of the characters in any of those narratives, then tell us that your positions on them remain the same.
Make Smollett a conservative white guy who staged a hate crime, put the MAGA hat on the Native American guy, and make Zimmerman an armed black man who followed the white kid home. Give it a shot, and you might understand why so many people have such a hard time believing you.
 

CZroe

Lifer
Jun 24, 2001
23,945
729
126
I've got a thought experiment for you. Reverse the racial or political identities of the characters in any of those narratives, then tell us that your positions on them remain the same.
Make Smollett a white guy who staged a hate crime, put the MAGA hat on the Native American guy, and make Zimmerman an armed black man who followed the white kid home. Give it a shot, and you might understand why so many people have such a hard time believing you.
My positions absolutely would remain the same, and that is the fatal conceit of your argument. You deluded yourself into thinking otherwise and are so confident in your belief that you'd actually use this thought experiment that proves a truth you've already rejected instead of what you imply it would.

Zimmerman was not a bloodthirsty racist murderer.
The Covington Catholic kids were not racists harassing a Native American.
Jussie Smollet was not a hate crime victim.
...and, most of all, the people who disagree with you politically do not automatically change their positions on whether or not people care when you reverse the races. On the other hand, those perpetuating this narrative are the ones who care DECIDEDLY less when the roles are reverse. It's demonstrable. You are inadvertently proving it by implying that this should be cared about less now than before the hoax was revealed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Paladin3

HomerJS

Lifer
Feb 6, 2002
25,047
9,924
136
My positions absolutely would remain the same, and that is the fatal conceit of your argument. You deluded yourself into thinking otherwise and are so confident in your belief that you'd actually use this thought experiment that proves the opposite of what you imply it would instead of a truth you've already rejected.

Zimmerman was not a bloodthirsty racist murderer.
The Covington Catholic kids were not racists harassing a Native American.
Jussie Smollet was not a hate crime victim.
The only one we know for sure is #3. GZ had numerous violent run-ins with a gun since the trial. We don't know if the Covington Kids are racist. BTW - I thought kids should be seen and not heard...couch...cough...Greta...cough.

I have just as big a problem with antisemitism as I do with racism. Not just a one trick narrative, Skippy.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: s0me0nesmind1

fskimospy

Elite Member
Mar 10, 2006
70,069
18,810
136
The only one we know for sure is #3. GZ had numerous violent run-ins with a gun since the trial. We don't know if the Covington Kids are racist. BTW - I thought kids should be seen and not heard...couch...cough...Greta...cough.

I have just as big a problem with antisemitism as I do with racism. Not just a one trick narrative, Skippy.
I mean all you have to do to see what a horrible and potentially violent person George Zimmerman was/is is to look at, well, basically everything he's done since that incident. He's pretty obviously a racist with serious anger management problems and a sadistic streak.

I challenge anyone to read this and come away with the impression that our good friend George is anything other than a disturbed individual.

 

ASK THE COMMUNITY