Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
the_steve
Nov 9, 2005

We're always hiring!

Timeless Appeal posted:

To be fair, I don't think that they've given legal aid to cases against Republican politicians although I could be wrong, focusing more on the private sector. But yeah, their justification was that if they were seen as partisan then they might lose their tax exempt status, but from what I've read that's probably not true. And the connections and what has been at best fence sitting with Cuomo makes it hard to take seriously.

What's really weird is that they WERE working with Reade at some point, and to be fair did publicly encourage her to move forward when they declined to offer her direct support. But the public narrative of what is out there is that they found out it was about Biden at one point which is weird because Reade was already out publicly with her initial claims about Biden. So, even if she was not forthcoming--which seems weird--you think they would have a good guess what this was about?

Possibly some sort of smokescreen. I mean, "We won't take your case, but we encourage you to pursue it elsewhere" can pretty quickly and easily be boiled down to "The 'official' group for this refused to take her case. Really makes you think... :thunk:"

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

the_steve
Nov 9, 2005

We're always hiring!

GreyjoyBastard posted:

While I don't really agree with the "metoo is doomed / dead" position, this is probably the best argument I've heard for it actually having taken a significant hit as a movement. It also doesn't really require a conspiracy, which is more troubling than if it did. Extended discussion of rape culture is upsetting, takes more effort, and gets fewer clicks.

That said, I certainly feel anecdotally like there is more discussion of the wider metoo issues than there was before. Both in media and the general population.

Unfortunately it seems like it primarily goes one of two ways:
- It happened to someone who knew someone who knew someone else. So many layers of separation that it becomes some abstract concept.

- It happened to a famous person, in which case the actual issue is overshadowed by the famous person themselves or it's treated like some isolated incident the same way as when a cop decides to shoot a black kid. "Oh, well obviously it's bad that this guy did that. We'll deal with him, but I'll be damned if we're going to pull the lens back any to examine the system that lets this keep happening over and over and over."

the_steve
Nov 9, 2005

We're always hiring!

https://twitter.com/TheAVClub/status/1424902207472734208?s=19

In news that will surprise literally nobody...

Though I am...not sure of the right word, amused feels wrong...about them using the "We can't be pedos because we always joked about and marketed ourselves as pedos!" defense.

the_steve
Nov 9, 2005

We're always hiring!

Yinlock posted:

The idea that Epstein wasn't collecting a big ol blackmail folder from visitations to Pedo Island is patently absurd.

It's the most basic rule of ruling-class horrific sex crime rings: make sure enough powerful people are "initiated" so that everyone goes down if someone starts having morals all of a sudden. A lot of powerful people have a very, very vested interest in this issue stopping immediately at Epstein himself and going no further.

I doubt he'd have been murdered if he didn't have a Big Book of Blackmail that the "right" people didn't want seeing the light of day

the_steve
Nov 9, 2005

We're always hiring!

Maybe pump the brakes on trying to use people's rap sheets against them to try to win your argument.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

the_steve
Nov 9, 2005

We're always hiring!

Kalit posted:

I mean.. they're a private company. Couldn't they pretty much just say "we don't want you anymore"?

I'm assuming there would be a contract involved, so it's possible they just needed to make sure they met whatever conditions were in it that would allow them to fire him without being sued for unlawful termination or something.

Personally, I figure they were willing to try to let it slide under the rug and then found out something that would make it un-ruggable and cut their losses while they were ahead/before it became public, but, who knows? Well, besides the bigwigs at CNN.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply