Brazilianpeanutwar posted:

emo-ignorance posted:

Echoing this. I'm generally more surprised by child stars who aren't hosed up, but especially if they worked under a tyrannical pedophile like Dan Schneider.

Snowman_McK posted:

We did have a weird person in this thread defending Dan Schneider and wishing him well in future projects. That was an incredibly weird hill to die on.

Snowman_McK posted:

We did have a weird person in this thread defending Dan Schneider and wishing him well in future projects. That was an incredibly weird hill to die on.

Alan Smithee posted:

I feel like I would remember a post that flagrant

21 Muns posted:

I don't really trust the Dan Schneider stuff because his alleged status as a sexual predator is a meme in alt-right spaces like /pol/, it has been since before there was any good reason to think Weinstein-style sexual abuse is so rampant in the entertainment industry, and it's explicitly driven by antisemitism. There may be something legitimate to the allegations against Schneider, but there are so many disingenuous parties targeting him that I'm inclined to dismiss them as conspiracy theories in the absence of really solid evidence. Just for comparison's sake - this isn't like the Ansari case, where the allegations are detailed, recent, and first-person. I don't think this is going anywhere and I'm officially afraid for the future of this movement if it does. If Dan Schneider gets ousted over vague, malicious rumors and Roman Polanski is still off in France making movies, please let me get off of this train.

21 Muns posted:

Okay, I'm going to be real with y'all, this is a gimmick account and my heart really isn't in it anymore. I'm a fringey conspiracy-inclined Republican who believes in Pizzagate, and several years ago, back at the height of that whole drama, I got mad at the dismissive way Something Awful discussed it, and decided that the best way to counter that would be to pretend to be an extremely unappealing and dense skeptic (because openly stating my position would presumably just get me mocked and banned). In retrospect, this was a piss-poor plan, and even if it had been good, I put very little effort into implementing it and all I've really accomplished is making GBS threads up the forum and wasting everyone's time, including my own. I am sorry for having done this. I have often been wracked with guilt over it, as I despise lying and am simply a hypocrite here.

You have no reason to trust me or listen to me in any way, because I have been a stupid and disingenuous internet troll, but I would encourage everyone here to take a serious deep dive into the Pizzagate evidence. I see a lot of cognitive dissonance here about Epstein and Pizzagate: as it becomes more and more obvious that Epstein's existence implies an enormous child sex trafficking institution among the elite, people are struggling to reconcile this with their earlier knee-jerk view of Pizzagate. Some of the justifications are sad and desperate grasping - for example, trying to maintain that elite child sex abuse remains absurd in a stereotypically "normal" place like a pizzeria (even one at the center of many powerful people in DC), and that elites would only do such things in their gaudiest mansions, islands, private planes and so on. Others, though, are completely predicated on a failure to understand what evidence existed to support Pizzagate in the first place, or of what Pizzagate was claiming (which is reasonably forgivable, seeing as media sources at the time were, to say the very least, extremely loath to report honestly on it). It was "debunked" in the same sense that the interested parties could have "debunked" the allegations about Epstein if they so desired - claims that it was debunked all eventually trace back to the MPDC (the DC police department), who openly admit that they performed no investigation and simply rejected the premise out of hand. Frankly, the shooting at the pizzeria stunk as much as Epstein's death.

Most Pizzagate believers idiotically went on to become Q believers, despite Q's being, best I can tell, genuinely evidence-free. I was scratching my head wondering why so many people were going along with an obvious psyop like Q a long time before it actually became notable enough to get media attention. In retrospect, it's obvious why - it was designed to appeal to their hero worship of Trump and the hopes they had for his presidency. I was riding the partisan Trumper rush myself back in 2016, so I drank the Kool-Aid and tried not to think about it, but it's still very clear: Trump is himself among the elite, there is very little chance that he doesn't rape children, lots of them, probably including his daughter, and it's really obvious, because the dude's a loving creep. I am not smarter than you - the same partisan blinders in the brain that made you go along with the dominant narrative on Pizzagate also made me believe that Trump must have had good reasons for associating with Epstein.

It will not surprise me if I am perma'd for this post, and if I am it will be well-deserved, as I am a very bad poster whose presence on this forum amounts to an ill-conceived attempt to false-flag my political opposition. It's me, I'm the conspiracy, the conspiracy to make Something Awful a worse place. No more.

(USER WAS BANNED FOR THIS POST)

Alan Smithee posted:

pizzagate purist

John Wick of Dogs posted:

I think I may have asked at some point if Schneider actually has any accusers, but it became pretty clear shortly after he retired that there were a lot of accusers in his orbit who were saying something bad had happened and just not directly using his name that it was safe to take a guess who they were talking about

quote:

shows Schneider directing Amanda to perform what looks like an inappropriate act on a science project, something that the tween actress wouldn't have understood to be inappropriate.

Skwirl posted:

It's almost entirely rumors, but it's a lot of loving rumors. And remember how long it took anyone to go on record about Weinstein.

This has a good breakdown of what we actually know. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thethings.com/forgotten-facts-about-the-dan-schneider-scandal/amp/

The BTS video of a then under age Amanda Bynes in a hot tub with him and then another BTS video that
Seems pretty damning to me though.

RevKrule posted:

I always forget that Schneider was the creepy momma's boy that Monique stays with in Better Off Dead. It adds a whole new layer to the role.

Skwirl posted:

It's almost entirely rumors, but it's a lot of loving rumors. And remember how long it took anyone to go on record about Weinstein.

This has a good breakdown of what we actually know. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.thethings.com/forgotten-facts-about-the-dan-schneider-scandal/amp/

Bust Rodd posted:

There’s also the rumor that he’s the father of Jamie Lynn Spears kid and they basically offered a kid from her high school a poo poo ton of money to pretend to be the dad, and it’s weird because in googling around just now you literally cannot find a US source talking about the paternity, but UK and EU fan sites from the 2000’s are all talking about how the timelines literally do not make sense unless this kid was flying out from Louisiana during the final season of the show, which he absolutely was not doing.

We know for a fact that the Spears parents will let you do whatever you want to their kids for a rusty nickel

Ghost Leviathan posted:

Wasn't it under Schneider that Nick moved away from the animated shows to a heavy push of neonate sitcoms?

Ghost Leviathan posted:

Wasn't it under Schneider that Nick moved away from the animated shows to a heavy push of tween sitcoms?

Skwirl posted:

But Nick has always had tween sitcoms? Salute your Shorts, Adventures of Pete and Pete, Clarissa Explains it All.

quote:

The charges are related to an alleged interaction between him and a 15-year-old child at a Cleveland nightclub in Dec. 2017. The case was filed against the actor in 2018 in Canada, and was later brought to the Cleveland Division of Police. Following an investigation, it was discovered by authorities that Bell had an established relationship with the child for “several years” prior to the alleged interaction, which was supposedly at times sexual in nature.

Bust Rodd posted:

… why is there a 15 year old in a Cleveland Nightclub?

Bust Rodd posted:

No my main takeaway is that Drake is a pedofile and I hope he goes to jail, my follow up is “I wonder who is running this nightclub and letting celebrities BYOB children”

HopperUK posted:

That's your main takeaway? Kids go to nightclubs when they're too young. Surely even in Cleveland this happens.

Skwirl posted:

It looks like a venue, not a night club, I have no idea what the liquor laws are in Cleveland, so who knows if it's abnormal for 15 year olds to be there.

Bust Rodd posted:

Ok, well then either someone working at the club helped Drake smuggle a child in OR Drake went to an all ages show and bumped into a kid that he’d been hooking up with for years? Jesus this sucks