Comments on: Destroying Russell Brand

By: Cappy

Cappy — Wed, 27 Sep 2023 14:23:34 +0000

The repressed memories from years ago really surface when does badthink out loud.

By: Jordan Rivers

Jordan Rivers — Mon, 25 Sep 2023 23:26:31 +0000

A crazy idea, but…

I wonder if countersuits could be launched by men, claiming that these women had seduced and enticed them into sexual relations against their will, 10-40 years ago; in other words sexually (mentally?) “assaulted” them. If these suits were not allowed, it would be sex discrimination!

Maybe some preemptive anti-lawfare test cases?

Sauce for the gander…

By: Bauxite

Bauxite — Mon, 25 Sep 2023 10:41:03 +0000

This is a control mechanism that, as a bonus, puts the right in a ridiculous situation. The left debased the culture. Once Russell Brand participated in the debased culture, they owned him. He sealed his fate when he strayed from the leftist orthodoxy.

With Brand in particular, though, there is a second benefit for the left. The way that the left has done Russell Brand stinks to high heaven. But the world doesn’t do nuance anymore. Defending Brand is going to be perceived as defending a sexual predator. Technically, it is at least defending a serial cad. So the right has to fight the left’s degradation of society and then also fight their abusively selective #metoo moves like this, but somehow do so without appearing to defend the left’s degradations.

Good luck to us. We need it.

By: Richard Olson

Richard Olson — Mon, 25 Sep 2023 02:55:07 +0000

I believe the situation with Russel Brand and others fits the old aphorism coined by Sir Acton perfectly, that is “Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.”
That is the power to assassinate a character is an absolute power, with no consequence for lying. (In court, such would be perjury.)
How many corpses with reputations destroyed by falsehoods need to lie about, stinking, before such BS is ever called out for what it is, a false allegation?
Yes, I do have personal experience with similar allegations, on a much smaller scale of course. In a university setting. With anonymity promised. Nothing ever in writing, verbal complaints that can be denied or reworded if challenged. And test the accusers are all female, and me, a male. I guess I need to wear a bodycam whenever interacting with women on campus.

By: Jordan Rivers

Jordan Rivers — Mon, 25 Sep 2023 00:56:42 +0000

I decry this Meee Tooo BS & see it as partially a byproduct of the suck-up-to-women-and-minorities zeitgeist.

I’m not into “celebrities” & never heard of this guy. I don’t care for men with greasy long hair who wear what look like women’s shirts.

By: Abraxas

Abraxas — Sun, 24 Sep 2023 20:06:12 +0000

Whatever happened may have happened in a druggy haze for both parties. That and time and politics can make memories uncertain and the truth even harder to discover.

#MeToo has another meaning. Once someone comes up with plausible or half-way plausible accusations, other accusers appear saying “Me too, me too,” whether anything happened or not.

By: Owen

Owen — Sun, 24 Sep 2023 19:44:38 +0000

Neo: I hadn’t followed the Brand story so, apologies, I did not know that the accusers are (as yet) unnamed. So this really is the sleaziest version of an ambush. Hard to sue those who hide in the shadows. Maybe one could go after the media peddling such garbage, but then we have the NYT v. Sullivan defense (“I can’t tell you who told me, but I honestly think she’s telling the truth, and Brand is a public figure (because I dragged him into the public eye by putting out the story); so no defamation, right?”).

Disgusting business. As you and other commenters say, this practice comes at a cost. Not just to the target, not just to the publishers, but to all future victims whose stories are now subject to a stronger presumption that they, too, are just making it up. And the social capital account dwindles: all of us must live in an uglier, less-trustworthy world.

By: neo

neo — Sun, 24 Sep 2023 18:55:38 +0000

Owen:

I believe that’s what Dershowitz did to his accuser. Thing is, Dershowitz could prove he never even was anywhere near where his accuser said he was. With Brand, he apparently had sex with these women (and plenty of others), and so I doubt he could prove he was never around them. It just becomes she said he said about something that happened 15 years ago. That’s more difficult.

At the moment, Brand’s accusers are also anonymous, at least to the public. I’m going to assume he knows who they are, but perhaps he doesn’t – at least, yet.

By: Owen

Owen — Sun, 24 Sep 2023 18:06:16 +0000

Why doesn’t he sue his accusers for defamation? If he wants to play rougher, he can also sue those who republish the defamation. If Miss A says I did a bad thing to her, I sue her for defamation. And if B spreads A’s story, I warn B to stop spreading lies. If B doesn’t stop, I sue B as well.

These suits may be costly and ultimately unsuccessful, but what have I got to lose? Make them pay. Build a reputation as somebody jealous of his honor and expensive to cross.

By: SHIREHOME

SHIREHOME — Sun, 24 Sep 2023 15:02:23 +0000

Just got back from England. The TV news is all over Brand, 24/7. He is toast. I do not know if it all happened, but doesn’t matter. And by the way he is obnoxious.