4 ms·

There are billboards on 101 directing people to Holmes’ MAGA-like post truth website that declares she is ‘proven innocent’

dakr 1y ago
I saw one of those billboards on Ventura Blvd. the other day and wondered what kind of PR scam it was. Who pays for those things? Billboards are pretty expensive around here.
- ipv6ipv4 1y ago
  I assume she is paying for the billboards.
EnPissant 1y ago
[flagged]
- almostgotcaught 1y ago
  Right before I refreshed this comment said > There is no need to denigrate a political faction. It's flamebait and off-topic. And like witnessing a shooting star, I've witnessed manipulation. What this person was upset about was the insinuation that MAGA is conspiratorially minded. That's bad - can't have people agreeing with that! So they first play at striving for fairness (to poor helpless political parties lol). But realizing it's so just beyond the pale at this point to try to treat MAGA as a good faith actor that it wouldn't fly, they pivot to citing tenuously implicated rules. If this weren't so poorly executed (and if I hadn't caught the edit) I wouldn't have even noticed but given that it is so poorly executed I gotta wonder whether this is just someone slacking at their botfarm job. Edit: just so no one can accuse me of making this up, here is the screenshot from my reader app which still has the original comment: https://imgur.com/a/njjy4Fd https://imgur.com/a/njjy4Fd Edit 2: in case this person edits again, the comment currently reads > Please don't instigate political arguments.
  - EnPissant 1y ago
    [flagged]
    - almostgotcaught 1y ago
      Lol just like merely calling a protest an insurrection doesn't make it so, merely calling my describing what you literally did "instigation" doesn't make it so (neither for op).
      - EnPissant 1y ago
        I quoted the part that is instigating a political argument.
        almostgotcaught 1y ago
        You quoted my hypothesis for why you edited your original comment. I did not imply anything about MAGA, I implied something about you because it is you who is the subject of my comment, not MAGA.
        EnPissant 1y ago
        Allow me to use my top-secret CSI computer to enhance: > beyond the pale at this point to try to treat MAGA as a good faith actor
        almostgotcaught 1y ago
        Reading compression is fundamental (although it's a pity we'll be the last generation to learn that): it's my hypothesis about your state of mind when you changed the comment. What's funny is that you could easily cut this gordian knot by simply setting the record straight and explaining why you changed the comment from the original exhortation to the current litigious one. But you haven't, across 3 more comments lol.
aaron695 1y ago
[dead]
arp242 1y ago
So the website seems to be https://justblood.com https://justblood.com (?) She got got convicted on federal charges, so I think they're targetting Trump for a pardon/commutation. The "MAGA-like" aspect isn't a coincidence, it's deliberately mimics Trump's style to woo him. This is not a "delusional person does delusional things" kind of situation, but a "manipulative person does manipulative things" kind of situation. Presumably her husband (or "partner", whether they're legally married is a question of some debate) is paying for it by the way, as Holmes probably doesn't have any funds and he's born to wealth.

dakr 1y ago

I saw one of those billboards on Ventura Blvd. the other day and wondered what kind of PR scam it was. Who pays for those things? Billboards are pretty expensive around here.

ipv6ipv4 1y ago
I assume she is paying for the billboards.

EnPissant 1y ago

[flagged]

almostgotcaught 1y ago
Right before I refreshed this comment said > There is no need to denigrate a political faction. It's flamebait and off-topic. And like witnessing a shooting star, I've witnessed manipulation. What this person was upset about was the insinuation that MAGA is conspiratorially minded. That's bad - can't have people agreeing with that! So they first play at striving for fairness (to poor helpless political parties lol). But realizing it's so just beyond the pale at this point to try to treat MAGA as a good faith actor that it wouldn't fly, they pivot to citing tenuously implicated rules. If this weren't so poorly executed (and if I hadn't caught the edit) I wouldn't have even noticed but given that it is so poorly executed I gotta wonder whether this is just someone slacking at their botfarm job. Edit: just so no one can accuse me of making this up, here is the screenshot from my reader app which still has the original comment: https://imgur.com/a/njjy4Fd https://imgur.com/a/njjy4Fd Edit 2: in case this person edits again, the comment currently reads > Please don't instigate political arguments.
- EnPissant 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - almostgotcaught 1y ago
    Lol just like merely calling a protest an insurrection doesn't make it so, merely calling my describing what you literally did "instigation" doesn't make it so (neither for op).
    - EnPissant 1y ago
      I quoted the part that is instigating a political argument.
      - almostgotcaught 1y ago
        You quoted my hypothesis for why you edited your original comment. I did not imply anything about MAGA, I implied something about you because it is you who is the subject of my comment, not MAGA.
        EnPissant 1y ago
        Allow me to use my top-secret CSI computer to enhance: > beyond the pale at this point to try to treat MAGA as a good faith actor
        almostgotcaught 1y ago
        Reading compression is fundamental (although it's a pity we'll be the last generation to learn that): it's my hypothesis about your state of mind when you changed the comment. What's funny is that you could easily cut this gordian knot by simply setting the record straight and explaining why you changed the comment from the original exhortation to the current litigious one. But you haven't, across 3 more comments lol.

aaron695 1y ago

[dead]

arp242 1y ago

So the website seems to be https://justblood.com https://justblood.com (?) She got got convicted on federal charges, so I think they're targetting Trump for a pardon/commutation. The "MAGA-like" aspect isn't a coincidence, it's deliberately mimics Trump's style to woo him. This is not a "delusional person does delusional things" kind of situation, but a "manipulative person does manipulative things" kind of situation. Presumably her husband (or "partner", whether they're legally married is a question of some debate) is paying for it by the way, as Holmes probably doesn't have any funds and he's born to wealth.