Comments by "" (@dirkardostevergreen4827) on "Notorious Conspiracy Theorist Faces 'Brand New' Claims | Russell Brand Case Analysis" video.

  1. Another allegation from an unnamed person so we don't know if this person actually exists or is just another story hatched up for clicks. He's been fairly open about his prior behavior and no doubt did some pretty ordinary stuff but that doesn't mean he's a r*pist. Are you sure what you call "simps" aren't just people pointing out that none of these accusations have been proven? Because I think that's the point. Whether you like him or not, he has a right to the assumption of innocence until proven guilty - like anyone should - before being slandered in the court of public opinion.
    3
  2. Mate, I'm a recent subscriber and I've been really enjoying your back catalogue but I think you missed the mark with this one. This seems more like an opinion piece - and clearly your opinion is that you don't think he has any talent! Now that's fair enough and I wouldn't say I'm a huge fan but if I can say a couple of things. Firstly, humour is subjective. Ponderland was a great show and I personally thought it was very funny and found Russel to be a very engaging and entertaining presenter. Secondly, the titles of his videos (which you seem to be basing your analysis on, rather than the actual content), are intentionally over the top and designed to be click bait. I don't necessarily agree with that approach but what he talks about in his videos seem to be at least based in real life events and then he offers his own opinions. I wouldn't call him a conspiracy theorist per se but no doubt he does attract them. Thirdly, I don't think you have represented his work in drug rehabilitation (which is considerable) very fairly at all. As for the allegations, you do rightly point out that there is no way to ascertain the truth behind them in the absence of any evidence. However, it's not unfathomable that it was a coordinated attempt to silence or at the very least discredit him. It seems rather odd to me that a member of UK parliament was writing to several platforms like Youtube, Rumble, etc. with a letter clearly aimed at persuading them to demonetize him. Over mere allegations? That's a bit weird don't you think? I've never heard of anything like that happening before. Whether he is guilty or not, I have no idea. But supposedly the TV channel behind that documentary interviewed over a thousand women and only a handful came forward ... anonymously. How hard do you think it would be to find four or five women, unrestrained by any accountability, who are willing to stretch the truth a bit if they felt used, simply didn't like him or just wanted to create drama for whatever reason? Only time will tell if charges are laid and a court case occurs. Until then, he should be assumed innocent until proven guilty.
    2
  3. Um ... no it wasn't
    2
  4.  @jabraun00  yes it will be interesting to see. That's if any charges actually get laid. At the moment it's just mainstream media pushing a story in an attempt to slander someone and really that's how it should be viewed, not as a foregone conclusion of guilt. Interesting though that a member of UK parliament would be contacting various platforms to get him demonetized over unproven allegations, isn't it? Smells awfully ratty to me.
    2
  5. Nice attempt but if you're going to troll, try to be a bit less obvious.
    1
  6.  @Urban-Spaceman  I don't believe Russel ever made that claim specifically. But given that he has spoken out against powerful institutions and has a considerable amount of influence, don't you think it's at least possible that he's pissed someone off and they want to shut him up?
    1