@bro's banner p

bro


				

				

				
0 followers   follows 3 users  
joined 2022 September 05 20:25:55 UTC

				

User ID: 700

bro


				
				
				

				
0 followers   follows 3 users   joined 2022 September 05 20:25:55 UTC

					

No bio...


					

User ID: 700

Roseanne clarifies -- she claims that the Obamas directly pressured the studio to fire her:

QT @BarackObama:

Remember when you and your wife called Bob Iger to have me fired?

Further, she has claimed in the past that she was tweeting about Valerie Jarrett in the context of criticising the Obama admin's Iran deal which she knew Jarrett was associated with. She now seems to be making a harder claim that the Iran deal part was significant to her firing:

QT @JackPosobiec:

Because they aren’t the same. I wasn’t fired for lying I was fired for telling the truth about the Iran deal and slandered into oblivion. This will still be worse for our side than theirs. Kimmel will get an entire PR tour to clear his name with the backing of all media.

I don't personally find that very easy to believe, though I don't discount it 100%. The 1st claim I don't know, but it is not helped by the 2nd.

(it's also possible she's just extending the chain of causation back one step to reflect her subjective experience and does not really intend to be making a claim about the motive)

Some of the inner mechanisms are modelled, but on closer inspection of some videos not nearly as much of them as I'd thought. Fatal downgrade tbh, that was most of the notional appeal.

While I understand the inclination, the beliefs and motivation you've assigned to me here are not accurate. (do we even have a single Trump-deranged person on themotte? how would they not go crazy and burn out immediately?) I am neither a Trump obsessive nor an Epstein obsessive, and that "70%" is not a strongly held immovable belief.

My (again loosely-held and not deeply researched) model was that Trump knew or kinda knew about Epstein's proclivities during the 80s and 90s, he didn't really care (considered and treated it as within the jocular class of "cocaine and affairs"), he thought he should get credit for his later hostility to Epstein (hence his comfort attacking others for Epstein-connections, drawing massive attention to it, until like 2019 -- not the behavior of a man who fucked kids with Epstein), but did not fully appreciate that he would be held little less guilty even by his base for not immediately turning him in until more recent rounds.

I took another look at the card and found it would be more implicating if real than I'd remembered, which does not fit that model as well, so I withdraw my tossed-off small-questions-thread-grade take for further review.