Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Mayberry Lounge' started by cedented, Dec 6, 2017 at 11:34 AM.
I found this awkward to watch. I actually feel bad for Dustin.
Oliver was the first late night comedian that had the balls to go after Weinstein.
Shouldn't be surprised he would go after Hoffman in such a setting.
Who booked him to be on the panel?
Notice none of his colleagues on the panel tried to intervene to help out Hoffman?
Sick of this douchebag John Oliver acting like the moral authority officer of the U.S. Actually claiming the onus is on Dustin Hoffman to prove he didn't sexually harass some chick 30+ years ago. Typical shitty just believe the woman attitude. Who needs any actual evidence or evidence of a history of these issues when you have the word of a woman, I mean it's not like they ever lie.
Robert DeNiro looks awfully skirmish. I can tell he doesn't want to be there.
I don't know what to think. Somebody tell me what I should think
John Oliver should have asked if he cathed this morning
Had no idea he was a comedian. I'm gonna have to go back and rewatch some youtube videos. It just doesn't seem right to put this label on him.
I haven't seen him wanting to be anywhere in years, lol
John Oliver is one of the most annoying brit celebs.
I'm not gonna move to a foreign country, apply for citizenship, then rip on it. Unless I've got the dude all wrong but that's certainly how he comes off.
John Oliver is a jackass, and even worse, he's not funny.
People that say John Oliver isn't funny just kind of lose credibility as being pissy about his prominence in political conversation. Dude is hilarious. And he's one of the more insightful and intellectually responsible figures in comedy.
However, I completely agree that his line about "providing evidence that it didn't" happen is kind of bull shit. That is a nearly impossible feat.
I know that face.
It's like when your mom is threatening to kill the person who ate the last cookie and you're still chewing it.
I'm not quite prepared to knock Hoffman off his pedestal based on such a silly thing, but I don't think Oliver crossed a line by pressing him on it.
I just think Oliver is pushing a dangerous line that seems to be gaining steam when he simply seems to say she seems trust worthy and he believes her and so...
Out entire system of jurisprudence is based on innocent to proven guilty and the key word there is PROVEN. And that is because we learned in the past the danger of witch hunts where suspicion and not proof was enough.
People want to align with 'victims' and in that attempt they seem to be ready to accept that status first and demand others prove them wrong. Often an impossibility. It is a very dangerous slippery slope and i hope one day John Oliver is not asked to prove he did not assault someone as that is impossible to prove if you have had multiple contacts with anyone where no witnesses were present.
I voted no because he can say what he wants, but keep in mind J.O. profits handsomely (millions if not tens) off of his shtick. He's no moral authority.
He'll probably catch one too. No one is safe.
nailed it. you...you!
You know John Oliver will never have to face these kind of accusations, because he's too big of a pussy to ever talk to a female.
Alec Baldwin goes after John Oliver and Stephen Colbert for acting like Grand Juries.
Oliver is such a weasel. He doesn't give a fuck about any women that supposedly got molested, he just wants to enhance his brand with the "progressives". As far as Hoffman goes, he's in a pretty tough spot. On one hand, you want to deny this allegation for obvious reasons. On the other, if it were me I would want to take credit for the "soft-boiled clitoris" line.