I think he’s saying that you used Google as cover for reporting incorrect info.
Smollett: “Right. Nobody believes it. I don’t even believe it, and I’m the one who made up the story!”
I believe I stated quite clearly that you failed to use Google correctly as evidenced by your own post. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you misspelled smollett. Not sure how that qualifies as a personal insult, but by all means, report away. Mods here aren’t generally impressed by ‘He hurt my feelings’ complaints.
How is saying that someone “fail(ed) at Google” a personal insult, for heaven’s sake?
Moderating:
Everyone please drop this squabble about who can Google and how insulting it is. This is a thread about Smollett. It’s not in the pit. It’s not an invitation to get personal with each other, especially in negative ways.
So, you threw a little personal dig in at me and my ‘sources’, so you went out to find a ‘credible’ source… which said the same thing. Congratulations on your ‘gotcha’.
By the way, the Toronto Sun is a major Canadian newspaper. It was also the first hit in my search because, you know, I’m Canadian.
You also might want to check into the credibility of Newsweek. It’s the same as the old one in name only.
Well, this is embarrassing. 
Turns out I am not too stupid to use a search engine, but I am too stupid to notice when I am using a computer whose default browser is DuckDuckGo rather than Google. That probably explains the discrepancy in the search results. I just ran that search there again and a few mainstream outlets are now on the front page, but three of the four top hits are still the NY Post, Washington Times and The Sun. Breitbart is #6.
Never heard of the Toronto Sun, and it may be a “major” newspaper in the sense that the NY Post is “major”, in that it sells a lot of copies. But a cursory skim of the site was all it took to see it’s run by right-wing cranks.
Hadn’t heard of any changes at Newsweek.
But more to the point, what my “credible” source said was that a bunch of right-wing assholes are calling for Lemon to be fired, despite there being no clear evidence of any wrongdoing on his part. It didn’t really seem to me that that was the point you were trying to make.
Seems a bit political for Cafe Society but I’ll bite. I would think people would equally object to Lemon’s actions regardless of who they voted for.
Thanks for the update! And in a rejoinder of solidarity likely more suited to the pit, I absolutely hate when MS takes it upon itself to reset my default search engines in all browsers to Bing.
Now back to pointing and laughing at Smollett.
Anyone thinking he’ll get anything other than probation, fine/restitution, and community service?
I’ll say a bit of time. It’s pretty serious what he did and if a couple people who fit the description were found by the police who knows how far the charade would have continued. A message needs to be sent and a bit of jail/prison time will send that message.
It would also help if prominent politicians would STFU about ongoing cases and not rush to judgement. Harris and others ought to be rightfully embarrassed for jumping to conclusions.
If for some reason he’s incarcerated he’ll have time to flesh out a Broadway prison version.
To state my point more politely, AFAICT nobody other than extreme conservatives are currently calling for him to be fired or charged with crimes.
Thus far, we have only the word of a convicted liar that this even happened. If it did, we will NEVER have more than the word of said liar that this warning actually motivated his trying to hide the evidence; as bobot has pointed out, it’s hard to imagine that was a great revelation to Smollett.
At some point, Lemon will make a statement, and it’s hard to imagine that will make him look worse. Frankly, if Lemon just denied ever having such a conversation, I’d be inclined to believe him, speaking as someone who had never heard of Don Lemon until today. And they’re presumably the only two who really know, so it’s a case of “he said, convicted liar said”. There’s zero chance this results in criminal charges.
If he did pass on information which he obtained in his professional capacity, I can see where that might be considered a violation of journalistic ethics, but I am not a professional journalist and couldn’t say for certain. So if CNN chooses to fire him, I will not protest, but neither will I call for them to do so.
As far as strictly moral judgments, I would certainly want my friends to tell me if the cops suspected me of a crime! For Lemon to have done wrong here IMO, we would have to establish that (a) he didn’t sincerely believe Smollett to be innocent AND (b) that his motive for telling Smollett was to encourage him to destroy evidence rather than to encourage him to cut his losses and tell the truth. Neither of those can ever be established to a reasonable certainty.
I kind of hope he doesn’t get any jail time just because he will just use that experience to self-promote himself by claiming how “changed” prison made him. Instead we should all just constantly make fun of him for the rest of his life like we do to every other person who lied for attention.
If Juicy does do some time, I do wish that someone will put David Chappelle on heavy rotation on the TV…
IANAL so I am asking whether Smollett’s apparent perjury on the witness stand would be “sentence enhancer” to be weighed against sentence reducing factors (like this being his first offense).
The fact that the jury didn’t believe him doesn’t necessarily mean he committed perjury. In most cases, the jury hears two versions of what happened, and the side that’s not believed is never (almost never) charged with perjury. (For example, here, does anyone think the prosecution witnesses be looking at perjury charges if he was acquitted?)
Courts are reluctant to punish the exercise of a fundamental right (testifying on your own behalf). On the other hand, if it’s obvious bullshit, I have seen some judges come down harder on someone vs. just people who just are “testing” the government’s case.
Harris and Biden tweeted what basically amounts to “Hate crimes are bad”. I don’t get how that’s jumping to conclusions. If there’s a news story about someone getting attacked, are they supposed to go “Well I won’t say anything because the victim could actually be lying and staged the whole thing.”
Not really. This is VP Harris’s tweet
“ [@JussieSmollett is one of the kindest, most gentle human beings I know. I’m praying for his quick recovery. This was an attempted modern day lynching. No one should have to fear for their life because of their sexuality or color of their skin. We must confront this hate.”
And what’s bad about that tweet?
I didn’t say it was bad. It was, however, much more specific than a general message against hate crimes.