Monday, October 31, 2022

Heard and her stans keep dropping cluster bombs--that fall on themselves mostly

 

Well, OK, another Monday update on the Depp/Heard soap opera, which from Team Heard is a real life version of The Carole Burnett Show sketch “As the Stomach Turns.”  If you are looking for positive stories about Johnny Depp that the mainstream media avoids like the plague, there are plenty of sources happy to supply them. Depp is finishing up the U.S. leg of his tour with Jeff Beck—The Chicago Sun-Times even broke ranks with other mainstream media outlets and gave their visit a positive review. 

Depp also took the time for a photo op with hometown locals, and put on his Captain Jack outfit for a meet-and-greet with fans. When was the last time Heard went back to her own hometown? Maybe she imagines the locals staring at her, silently accusing her after she skipped skipped town right after the death of a kid named Logan.

Except for the tabloid The New York Post, the mainstream media doesn’t report any Depp news unless they can spin it as how “powerful men” are allowed to “profit” despite their “crimes.” Nobody in the mainstream media mentions the power women like Amber Heard have to destroy people's lives with their lies, probably because the MSM enjoys the power it has to destroy people without waiting for the facts to come in. 

Thus you have people like Kat—“Women-Can’t-Be-Abusers—Tenbarge informing us that she is going to keep backing a liar until hell freezes over:

 


We already know who those "many" people are: Tenbarge, Eve Barlow, Taylor Lorenz and Michele Dauber, who telegraph their bias from the next galaxy and have immense difficulty in accepting a reality at odds with their one-dimensional universe (and by the way, Britney Spears is not Amber Heard). It is their own fault that they are themselves “news” because they just won’t shut-up with their increasingly conspiratorial nonsense. By this time they are mostly good for an eye-roll, but there are plenty of others ready to jump in to add their half-bit.


For example, someone writing in Glamour is complaining about how people were allegedly poking fun at domestic violence victims like Heard with their Halloween outfits (supposedly there is an "Amber Turd" costume). Yeah, this from a publication that feeds off the vanity of women (like, say someone like Heard), yet has to on occasion take a “socially relevant” political stance.

And then on the website Slashfilm, some guy named Matt Rainis posted a story about how Wes Craven jump-started Johnny Depp’s movie career by taking the advice of his smitten daughters and cast him in the original A Nightmare on Elm Street. This led to Depp’s “storied career.” But don’t be fooled; he then says “So, it actually may have been a huge mistake after all”—with “huge mistake” linking to the UK trial verdict (ignoring the subsequent U.S. trial of course), which most people believe was not just wrongfully adjudicated by a biased judge, but unlike the reaction to it by the mainstream media and the major studios, did the opposite in regard to public reception.

Believe me, the world is a lot better off with Depp’s filmography than Heard’s forgettable output. If Heard’s name wasn’t linked to Depp’s, she would just be remembered in the film history books as a name who you have to look in the index to find the films you don’t remember or that she was in them. Why should Depp’s output be “cancelled” just because he made the mistake of becoming entangled with a narcissistic, bisexual woman who was only interested in him because it elevated her own egotism, and all this mess occurred because he told her he had enough of her and was leaving her—so she had to make him out to be the “villain.”

Of course there is new “news” about Heard out there that isn’t very flattering that the mainstream media can’t find on its own—mainly because it doesn’t want to find it. On Frank Valchiria’s channel https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RT0kgp4sogs we discover that a Spanish-language media outlet revealed that Heard once had a relationship with a Mexican film star named Valentino Lanus:

 


From a translation provided by a commenter, we learn from this report that

With tears in his eyes, Valentino Lanus explained: "She exercises psychological and fiscal pressure over men, and yes, there were numerous reasons for which I suffered humiliation from Amber. This went on for months, but at the end I set myself free, though it is something that traumatized me for life, to the point that I am still in therapy even today. It's something I want to completely forget." At the end of his interview, Valentino sends a message directed to Johnny Depp, showing him all of his support and solidarity. Valentino said that even though he cannot testify, he stands by his side even from far away.

Once more, we have to rely on online sleuths to find information that the mainstream media won't report unless it fits their "narrative."

Meanwhile, despite for the most part the unsealed documents don’t look favorably on Heard, the mainstream media always has time for documents that that are not “evidence” but just bizarre claims made by Team Heard just to see what “sticks.” For example there is the claim going around that Depp allegedly “altered” images of his injuries with “questionable” metadata, but it is actually kind of hard to fake a purplish swelling of blood under the skin. Of course we never saw the mainstream media questioning how Heard’s stories never seemed to align with her “evidence,” or the seeming randomness of the “evidence” she did provide, likely from skin blemishes, acne, herpes on the lip or use of Botox, as I pointed out in this recent post:  https://todarethegods.blogspot.com/2022/10/because-of-her-lies-even-casual-stroll.html

It seems obvious that Heard was advised that the more fantastical her stories were, the more “believable” they would be. But in fact the opposite happened.  Why? Because the more fantastical her stories became the further from the “evidence” they went, and we know from the audio evidence that Heard’s histrionic personality disorder found her using terms of physical violence to describe Depp’s attempts to disengage himself from her desire to continue illogical arguments.

So what has Heard been doing that makes people dislike her any less? Not too much, I’m afraid. After learning that hardly anyone was impressed by her staged photo op with a German celebrity media outfit in Spain (and a “speculation warning” about an alleged police raid in the villa she was renting), Heard seemed to lay low for a few days until she suddenly turned up in London with her asshole friend Eve:

 


Well, we know what kind of bigot Barlow is, because she is OK in Israel (she’s never tires of telling you she is Jewish), doesn’t like Spanish people so she went to back to the U.S., and now since she is Scottish she is OK to rejoin Heard in London. Here we see the person who allegedly doesn’t have a substance abuse issue in a wine store with the kid:


 

Just in case you didn't know, Incredibly Average supplied this coverage https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyv8erMNX9o  of Heard’s history of alcohol abuse, including episodes where we see a clearly inebriated Heard during interviews or speaking engagements. Here she is experimenting with a “fun” new way of getting drunk:

 


And then there is this story from someone named Phoebe something-or-other, who is supposed to be a “celebrity,” or something, whose opinion is supposed to mean something other than the drivel of a juvenile. Here Colonel Kurtz gives her amusing take on it:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aq-DT609sOM&t=638s

Phoebe is “disgusted” by the backlash against Heard, falsely claiming that Depp admitted to being “violent” in court, and of course believed every sound bite supplied by the mainstream media about Heard’s excruciating testimony.  Frankly, I have nothing but contempt for privileged, entitled fakers like this who try to justify themselves with “advocacy” that is self-serving and self-promoting (i.e. Angelina Jolie). It’s like the difference between a term like “brotherhood” which has a universal construct, and “sisterhood” which has a narrow, discriminatory connotation.

It is probably pointless to go over this again with people like Phoebe, but this is the fake Heard:

 


This is the real Heard:

 


This is the fake Heard:

 


This is the real Heard:

 


This is the fake Heard with the "bruised" zit:

 


This is the real Heard (with the Amica cream?) the next day looking like she just woke up from a hangover after an all-night party...

 

 

...you know, the Heard allegedly suffering from PTSD here:

 



Heard stans like this person remain blissfully unaware that calling her an “imperfect victim” doesn’t come close to describing who she is in reality. I observe that while on Depp’s Wiki page there is a lengthy discussion about his substance abuse issues, on Heard’s page there is nothing at all about not just her own substance abuse issues, but the fact that she takes a cocktail of medication to control her mental health issues and behavior—as her former personal assistant Kate James described in her testimony, and how Depp had advised her to take so she would “feel better” during the audio in which Heard used violent metaphors to describe Depp’s desperate efforts to get away from her. When off her "meds" we can surmise she could be violent, physically and certainly emotionally.

We also learn that Depp and Jeff Beck are suing a man who claimed they “stole” the lyrics from a poem or something he claims to have copyright over, which apparently is a false claim, which Beck would probably know about since he has been a professional musician for close to 60 years. Rolling Stone has been put on “blast” for supporting the claim of infringement as it has any other anti-Depp story. 

Naturally you can’t trust a publication that doesn’t learn from its own past mistakes. You would have thought that Rolling Stone would have learned something from the University of Virginia case, when its contributing editor, Sabrina Rubin Erdely, was found guilty of defamation with malice in 2016 after writing a fake story about a gang rape by members of a fraternity--which she "justified" by claiming that it was in the "interest" of getting the "issue" out in the public.

Heard and her supporters can't keep focus, so instead of using "precision weapons," they drop cluster bombs everywhere and they don't take care who gets hurt, even it turns out to be themselves mostly. I have to admit that I kind of wish we could move on from all of this, but there just seems no end to it because there are people who just can’t stand to lose even when the truth is standing there in front of them, trying to shake some sense into them.

Sunday, October 30, 2022

Loss to the Bills seems to suggest that the Packers' offensive "identity" still a war between coach and diva quarterback

 

Well, I suppose, as I intimated last Sunday, that the Packers were more likely than not to lose against the Bills today, and that was the opinion of most commentators, at least insofar as the Bills had an 84 percent likelihood of winning the game, according to ESPN. After the Bills blew-out to a 24-7 halftime lead, Matt LaFleur apparently decided what was there to lose, and returned to running the ball more—in fact at one point the Packers ran seven straight run plays in the third quarter for three first downs—but that was broken up by two pass plays that netted 3 yards and that drive failed to convert on a fourth-and-one.

Seventh round pick Samori Toure caught just his second pass of the year, a 37-yard TD toss to make it look like the Rodgers hadn’t given up the game entirely, given some of his bizarre commentary since last week’s loss. However, three of four passes late to Toure misfired, which suggested that he isn’t the answer either, and Mason Crosby attempted his first 50+ field goal attempt of the season, and naturally he missed it, and that was the end of that as the Packers fell to the Bills 27-17.

First off, the Packers from the last three years would have won this game. If the Packers had at least kept the game within a touchdown in the first half, they had a good chance to win, since the Bills fell off the board in the second half, as Josh Allen threw two interceptions on back-to-back possessions; but given that this is this year,  it is perhaps not coincidental that the Packers ran only one offensive play in between, a Rodgers interception after he threw the ball so low it hit the helmet of a lineman and bounced into the air:

 


So typical of the Packers season, and of Rodgers, who has made many such strange-looking throws this year. Frankly, the Packers don’t seem to have a consistent offensive scheme. When they were winning, the seemed to rely on their running game; in the previous three losses in a row, they ran the ball a grand total of 52 times, throwing the ball 120 or so times. 

Today’s game opened with a pass here, a run there, and not too much happened in the first half. In the second half somebody decided enough of this, we are going to play this game my way. As noted the run game was pushed after halftime, with most of the Packers' 208 yards on the ground on just 31 carries coming after the break, with Aaron Jones having his best game of the season with 143 yards.

Rodgers again didn’t seem to find himself until late in the game, but even then it just seemed like sheer luck that someone caught a long pass before a series of incompletions ground things to a halt. I just don’t know what is going on here. The Packers gained nearly 400 yards of offense, but two losses on downs, the interception and the missed field goal all potentially left points off the board. The Packers run blocking obviously is working, so why isn’t the pass blocking? Or is it that it just doesn’t "look" like its working on many occasions?

Of course you can’t allow the defense to get away without criticism. Josh Allen isn’t a HOF-caliber quarterback, but if you let him he can burn you for 53 and 41-yard completions, and even scramble for a 20-yard gain, which helped open up the big first half lead. Maybe the defense only looked better in the second half because the Bills were only playing well enough not to lose; but in any case the Packers defense played their worst half of football this season, and they were not playing a Lions team that would fold on both sides of the ball in the second half.

Are the Packers just missing a true number one receiver? Before anyone gets carried away, remember that entering this season the Packers were 7-0 without Davante Adams in the line-up, with one three game streak which was arguably Rodgers best; let’s also remember that in 2018, the Packers were 6-9-1 despite Adams catching 111 passes. And as we have seen during the playoffs, Rodgers tunnel-vision with Adams proved disastrous during critical times. And by the way, in the Raiders 24-0 loss to the Saints, Adams caught just one pass for 3 yards on five targets.

After three weeks against teams the Packers were supposed to beat, and against a Bills team that Packers were likely expected to beat before the season started (I mean, “Bills” just don’t sound like a team you have a lot of confidence in), and now after four straight losses and a 3-5 record, this just seems like a reversal to the 2018 season. Commentators are now saying that this is Lafleur’s time to prove he can coach; does that mean he will return to  the running game like the Packers did with a great deal of success in the second half of this game—or will this season be a tug-of-war with a diva quarterback who simply isn’t putting out?