User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 12:52:38 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By klinc: I've tended to double down on "fuck you" if being put in a corner with bullshit even when it hurts me... I've survived so far. Some people aren't like though. That's a good attitude to have IMO. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 12:58:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Ajek]
[#2]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ag04blast: Can we get a summary? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ag04blast: Originally Posted By Everrest: Crowder's team reply: Here’s what you don’t know…  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IGIoeaLLNYCan we get a summary? Dubius accusations with loaded language and appeals to emotion. "All he had to do was abide by the agreement" "They discussed the case in private" (as if that means it was a sinister action, and not how everybody handles business) "Look at these other great things we're doing that we won't be able to do if they win" |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 12:59:52 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: Exposing the DW fining their people based on YouTube censorship was a good thing. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: Originally Posted By 11boomboom: Part of his schtick is infiltrating leftist gatherings, so I can see the use for an NDA to protect his methods, but the alleged issues with how he protects it, the shenanigans with the Daily Wire, the ugly divorce while preaching about his amazing marriage and that all of his prior co-workers and employees hating him speaks a lot to the type of person he is. Exposing the DW fining their people based on YouTube censorship was a good thing. That's his (Crowder's) language. Reducing a talking head's pay when their reach is reduced (which lowers the company's income) isn't fining people. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:03:27 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 11boomboom: True, but the whole thing was just gross to watch unfold. I wish these "conservative" media people could be better. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 11boomboom: Originally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: Exposing the DW fining their people based on YouTube censorship was a good thing. True, but the whole thing was just gross to watch unfold. I wish these "conservative" media people could be better. It is a gross business exposing other people’s secrets. I have low expectations for all journalists/media types. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:04:52 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ajek: That's his (Crowder's) language. Reducing a talking head's pay when their reach is reduced (which lowers the company's income) isn't fining people. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ajek: Originally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: Originally Posted By 11boomboom: Part of his schtick is infiltrating leftist gatherings, so I can see the use for an NDA to protect his methods, but the alleged issues with how he protects it, the shenanigans with the Daily Wire, the ugly divorce while preaching about his amazing marriage and that all of his prior co-workers and employees hating him speaks a lot to the type of person he is. Exposing the DW fining their people based on YouTube censorship was a good thing. That's his (Crowder's) language. Reducing a talking head's pay when their reach is reduced (which lowers the company's income) isn't fining people. I don’t recall the exact details but the cut in pay was in excess of the cut from YouTube. It was definitely a fine. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:07:11 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By 11boomboom: Part of his schtick is infiltrating leftist gatherings, so I can see the use for an NDA to protect his methods, but the alleged issues with how he protects it, the shenanigans with the Daily Wire, the ugly divorce while preaching about his amazing marriage and that all of his prior co-workers and employees hating him speaks a lot to the type of person he is. You mean the daily wire deal where he was getting the shittiest deal ever? Crowder was going to bring MILLIONS over with mug club and was consistently increasing the membership base. I wouldn’t have taken the deal either and told them to fuck off pay me more. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:09:13 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ajek: That's his (Crowder's) language. Reducing a talking head's pay when their reach is reduced (which lowers the company's income) isn't fining people. The compensation to begin with was a fucking joke. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:09:55 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ajek: That's his (Crowder's) language. Reducing a talking head's pay when their reach is reduced (which lowers the company's income) isn't fining people. Defending that DW deal makes you a joke. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:11:14 PM EDT
[Last Edit: ras_al_ghul]
[#9]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: I don’t recall the exact details but the cut in pay was in excess of the cut from YouTube. It was definitely a fine. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: Originally Posted By Ajek: Originally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: Originally Posted By 11boomboom: Part of his schtick is infiltrating leftist gatherings, so I can see the use for an NDA to protect his methods, but the alleged issues with how he protects it, the shenanigans with the Daily Wire, the ugly divorce while preaching about his amazing marriage and that all of his prior co-workers and employees hating him speaks a lot to the type of person he is. Exposing the DW fining their people based on YouTube censorship was a good thing. That's his (Crowder's) language. Reducing a talking head's pay when their reach is reduced (which lowers the company's income) isn't fining people. I don’t recall the exact details but the cut in pay was in excess of the cut from YouTube. It was definitely a fine. Nom of this addresses the bigger point he made, that how do you expect to "take on big tech" if you are beholden to them? Seriously, this has never been answered. I don't get how the DW paying fbook an average of 120k a month is helping conservatives. This excludes even the corporate dinners with Zuckerberg. They didn't have presence on alt platforms until Crowder called them out. Not a huge Crowder fan, but he does legit move the ball occasionally. Promotes alt tech, Nashville shooter manifesto, etc. DW seems to be more concerned with Israel than what happens here at the moment. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:12:06 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: I don’t recall the exact details but the cut in pay was in excess of the cut from YouTube. It was definitely a fine. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: Originally Posted By Ajek: Originally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: Originally Posted By 11boomboom: Part of his schtick is infiltrating leftist gatherings, so I can see the use for an NDA to protect his methods, but the alleged issues with how he protects it, the shenanigans with the Daily Wire, the ugly divorce while preaching about his amazing marriage and that all of his prior co-workers and employees hating him speaks a lot to the type of person he is. Exposing the DW fining their people based on YouTube censorship was a good thing. That's his (Crowder's) language. Reducing a talking head's pay when their reach is reduced (which lowers the company's income) isn't fining people. I don’t recall the exact details but the cut in pay was in excess of the cut from YouTube. It was definitely a fine. Start at 26:40, or 29:50 if you want to skip some context:  Our Offer to Steven Crowder |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:15:05 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By StillGonnaSendIt: The compensation to begin with was a fucking joke. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By StillGonnaSendIt: Originally Posted By Ajek: That's his (Crowder's) language. Reducing a talking head's pay when their reach is reduced (which lowers the company's income) isn't fining people. The compensation to begin with was a fucking joke. What about it was a joke? Daily Wire admitted they couldn't offer Crowder the top end of what he was worth; they didn't have the budget for it. Remember that Crowder solicited an offer, then got pissy when it "wasn't good enough." Our Offer to Steven Crowder |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:15:26 PM EDT
[#12]
Who needs depositions when both parties make their testimony via public video?
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:15:53 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By callmestick: Defending that DW deal makes you a joke. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By callmestick: Originally Posted By Ajek: That's his (Crowder's) language. Reducing a talking head's pay when their reach is reduced (which lowers the company's income) isn't fining people. Defending that DW deal makes you a joke. Taking Crowder's side says everything about you that needs to be said. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:17:32 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ajek: What about it was a joke? Daily Wire admitted they couldn't offer Crowder the top end of what he was worth; they didn't have the budget for it. Remember that Crowder solicited an offer, then got pissy when it "wasn't good enough." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyCc5o1KDHU“Didn’t have the budget”. They had the budget they were trying to play the ‘we’re a small conservative outlet’ angle when the daily wire was started by a dude worth hundreds of millions already and the daily wire itself was worth shit loads. The budget was there. The daily wire has never been a ‘small’ or ‘little guy’. They’re another mega media conglomerate. They tried to play the victim and back pedaled real quick when they got called on their shit. It was a joke of a deal. |
|
|
|
AK, USA
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:19:37 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ajek: Start at 26:40, or 29:50 if you want to skip some context: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyCc5o1KDHUQuote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ajek: Originally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: Originally Posted By Ajek: Originally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: Originally Posted By 11boomboom: Part of his schtick is infiltrating leftist gatherings, so I can see the use for an NDA to protect his methods, but the alleged issues with how he protects it, the shenanigans with the Daily Wire, the ugly divorce while preaching about his amazing marriage and that all of his prior co-workers and employees hating him speaks a lot to the type of person he is. Exposing the DW fining their people based on YouTube censorship was a good thing. That's his (Crowder's) language. Reducing a talking head's pay when their reach is reduced (which lowers the company's income) isn't fining people. I don’t recall the exact details but the cut in pay was in excess of the cut from YouTube. It was definitely a fine. Start at 26:40, or 29:50 if you want to skip some context: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyCc5o1KDHUWhy are we rehashing this. Just about everyone involved that considers themselves neutral said that it was a bad deal. One group even said "if Crowder was friends with people at DW. That friendship ended when that offer was sent" Other than DW saying everyone gets this. Which should be more concerning. I just looked at it as them saying we don't really want you here. Which would be consistent with the weird interactions with the organizations before that. DW has always looked down on Crowder. |
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:24:16 PM EDT
[Last Edit: ras_al_ghul]
[#16]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By StillGonnaSendIt: “Didn’t have the budget”. They had the budget they were trying to play the ‘we’re a small conservative outlet’ angle when the daily wire was started by a dude worth hundreds of millions already and the daily wire itself was worth shit loads. The budget was there. The daily wire has never been a ‘small’ or ‘little guy’. They’re another mega media conglomerate. They tried to play the victim and back pedaled real quick when they got called on their shit. It was a joke of a deal. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By StillGonnaSendIt: Originally Posted By Ajek: What about it was a joke? Daily Wire admitted they couldn't offer Crowder the top end of what he was worth; they didn't have the budget for it. Remember that Crowder solicited an offer, then got pissy when it "wasn't good enough." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyCc5o1KDHU“Didn’t have the budget”. They had the budget they were trying to play the ‘we’re a small conservative outlet’ angle when the daily wire was started by a dude worth hundreds of millions already and the daily wire itself was worth shit loads. The budget was there. The daily wire has never been a ‘small’ or ‘little guy’. They’re another mega media conglomerate. They tried to play the victim and back pedaled real quick when they got called on their shit. It was a joke of a deal. The loud part is "we don't have the budget." The quiet part is " we would rather spend the money on advertising on fbook, and making independent movies." Which is honestly fine. I don't like the DW because the demonstrably lied about several relatively large issues IMO. Crowder exaggerates and is a diva, which is to be expected from anyone who WANTS to be on camera. Not necessarily sticking up for him. More like I have a smaller distaste for crowder than the DW. Another more recent example of DW is in Nov they claimed they would never fire anyone for disagreeing with Israel and that they are sooooo "free speech." Fast forward to last week and Candace Owens is fired. For the record, my distaste for Owens is even greater than the DW, but my point is: just draw a fucking line and be honest about it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:26:38 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ajek: Start at 26:40, or 29:50 if you want to skip some context: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyCc5o1KDHUQuote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ajek: Originally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: Originally Posted By Ajek: Originally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: Originally Posted By 11boomboom: Part of his schtick is infiltrating leftist gatherings, so I can see the use for an NDA to protect his methods, but the alleged issues with how he protects it, the shenanigans with the Daily Wire, the ugly divorce while preaching about his amazing marriage and that all of his prior co-workers and employees hating him speaks a lot to the type of person he is. Exposing the DW fining their people based on YouTube censorship was a good thing. That's his (Crowder's) language. Reducing a talking head's pay when their reach is reduced (which lowers the company's income) isn't fining people. I don’t recall the exact details but the cut in pay was in excess of the cut from YouTube. It was definitely a fine. Start at 26:40, or 29:50 if you want to skip some context: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyCc5o1KDHUSo I was correct. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:28:12 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Ajek]
[#18]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Bacon_Grease: Why are we rehashing this. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Bacon_Grease: Why are we rehashing this. Just about everyone involved that considers themselves neutral said that it was a bad deal. Let's accept the premise that it was a "bad deal," and never mind that Crowder is the one who solicited it. There are several possible responses: 1) Make a counter-offer 2) Laugh and walk away 3) Get pissy and try to blow everything up (<-Crowder's choice) Interestingly (or not), Crowder used choice 3 to pump his own platform and attack his "friends." |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:29:45 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ras_al_ghul: The loud part is "we don't have the budget." The quiet part is " we would rather spend the money on advertising on fbook, and making independent movies." Which is honestly fine. I don't like the DW because the demonstrably lied about several relatively large issues IMO. Crowder exaggerates and is a diva, which is to be expected from anyone who WANTS to be on camera. Not necessarily sticking up for him. More like I have a smaller distaste for crowder than the DW. Another more recent example of DW is in Nov they claimed they would never fire anyone for disagreeing with Israel and that they are sooooo "free speech." Fast forward to last week and Candace Owens is fired. For the record, my distaste for Owens is even greater than the DW, but my point is: just draw a fucking line and be honest about it. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ras_al_ghul: Originally Posted By StillGonnaSendIt: Originally Posted By Ajek: What about it was a joke? Daily Wire admitted they couldn't offer Crowder the top end of what he was worth; they didn't have the budget for it. Remember that Crowder solicited an offer, then got pissy when it "wasn't good enough." https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyCc5o1KDHU“Didn’t have the budget”. They had the budget they were trying to play the ‘we’re a small conservative outlet’ angle when the daily wire was started by a dude worth hundreds of millions already and the daily wire itself was worth shit loads. The budget was there. The daily wire has never been a ‘small’ or ‘little guy’. They’re another mega media conglomerate. They tried to play the victim and back pedaled real quick when they got called on their shit. It was a joke of a deal. The loud part is "we don't have the budget." The quiet part is " we would rather spend the money on advertising on fbook, and making independent movies." Which is honestly fine. I don't like the DW because the demonstrably lied about several relatively large issues IMO. Crowder exaggerates and is a diva, which is to be expected from anyone who WANTS to be on camera. Not necessarily sticking up for him. More like I have a smaller distaste for crowder than the DW. Another more recent example of DW is in Nov they claimed they would never fire anyone for disagreeing with Israel and that they are sooooo "free speech." Fast forward to last week and Candace Owens is fired. For the record, my distaste for Owens is even greater than the DW, but my point is: just draw a fucking line and be honest about it. That's a pretty fair take, except for the last part. Officially, DW and Owens "ended their relationship." That could mean anything from "fired" to "we didn't sign a new contract." |
|
|
|
AK, USA
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:29:53 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By PeterPangenderPhD: If it were only her and only that one video, I'd be on his side. I was. Divorces are nasty, I've been through one, and I sure as hell would never believe any woman going through a divorce when she talks about her husband aspiring to be an ex husband. However.... Crowder has apparently shit all over everyone who left his employ, trying to enslave them and keep them in silence. If a man goes through a divorce, and his friends and employees side with his soon to be ex wife, something is up. There is zero reason to put Jared and Dave Landau and Svencomputer under these oppresive NDAs forever if you're not a giant piece of shit. If everyone you run into is an asshole who is out to get you, then you're actually the asshole. I believe you're right for the most part. But I think it's also important to note he wasn't really talking bad about these guys publicly either. (at least not that I've heard) We're hearing a lot about these NDA's but I'm starting to think they're pretty industry standard. The folks involved are just upset enough to want to break them. But if it's just keeping you from talking shit about Crowder I don't see why just moving on is a bad thing. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:29:56 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: So I was correct. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: Originally Posted By Ajek: Originally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: Originally Posted By Ajek: Originally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: Originally Posted By 11boomboom: Part of his schtick is infiltrating leftist gatherings, so I can see the use for an NDA to protect his methods, but the alleged issues with how he protects it, the shenanigans with the Daily Wire, the ugly divorce while preaching about his amazing marriage and that all of his prior co-workers and employees hating him speaks a lot to the type of person he is. Exposing the DW fining their people based on YouTube censorship was a good thing. That's his (Crowder's) language. Reducing a talking head's pay when their reach is reduced (which lowers the company's income) isn't fining people. I don’t recall the exact details but the cut in pay was in excess of the cut from YouTube. It was definitely a fine. Start at 26:40, or 29:50 if you want to skip some context: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyCc5o1KDHUSo I was correct. 
|
|
|
|
AK, USA
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:37:24 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ajek: Good question. I didn't bring it up. Let's accept the premise that it was a "bad deal," and never mind that Crowder is the one who solicited it. There are several possible responses: 1) Make a counter-offer 2) Laugh and walk away 3) Get pissy and try to blow everything up (<-Crowder's choice) Interestingly (or not), Crowder used choice 3 to pump his own platform and attack his "friends." If you remember that situation then you know he didn't specifically name the DW. Just said this is a bad deal and if you as the weaker party get it don't take it. There was a counter offer given as well as a request to start over without the reduction terms. This was admitted to by both parties. (only the timeline was disagreed on but all this happened well before his video about it) I mean I get you don't like Crowder. That's a valid position to take in all this. I just don't see a reason needed to twist the facts. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:37:45 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ajek: Taking Crowder's side says everything about you that needs to be said. He's pulling as many viewers on Rumble than BS & MW combined, they gave him a shit offer and on top of that were going to penalize him if he got banned one social media something he constantly does. On top of that they would have owned all of his content, he would have been working for nothing. Nothing about that "offer" was acceptable. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:40:48 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Bacon_Grease: If you remember that situation then you know he didn't specifically name the DW. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Bacon_Grease: Originally Posted By Ajek: Good question. I didn't bring it up. Let's accept the premise that it was a "bad deal," and never mind that Crowder is the one who solicited it. There are several possible responses: 1) Make a counter-offer 2) Laugh and walk away 3) Get pissy and try to blow everything up (<-Crowder's choice) Interestingly (or not), Crowder used choice 3 to pump his own platform and attack his "friends." If you remember that situation then you know he didn't specifically name the DW. Everyone knew he was talking about the DW. But let's not twist facts. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:43:18 PM EDT
[#25]
Only ever watched a few minutes here and there don’t know anything about him
Just watched the ring camera footage of him telling his very pregnant wife he will fuck her up. Guy is a giant dick head. |
|
|
|
GA, USA
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:47:34 PM EDT
[#26]
The context of Gerald’s rebuttal is eye-opening. I haven’t read up on the docs they’ve put out but they’ve definitely unzipped their fly to be transparent.
I can certainly see a slash and burn attempt from the Ex and her family, that’s sounds like what the real thing is. Greed and hatred seems to be the motivation. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:49:14 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ajek: Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ajek: Originally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: Originally Posted By Ajek: Originally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: Originally Posted By Ajek: Originally Posted By ClayHollisterTT: Originally Posted By 11boomboom: Part of his schtick is infiltrating leftist gatherings, so I can see the use for an NDA to protect his methods, but the alleged issues with how he protects it, the shenanigans with the Daily Wire, the ugly divorce while preaching about his amazing marriage and that all of his prior co-workers and employees hating him speaks a lot to the type of person he is. Exposing the DW fining their people based on YouTube censorship was a good thing. That's his (Crowder's) language. Reducing a talking head's pay when their reach is reduced (which lowers the company's income) isn't fining people. I don’t recall the exact details but the cut in pay was in excess of the cut from YouTube. It was definitely a fine. Start at 26:40, or 29:50 if you want to skip some context: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NyCc5o1KDHUSo I was correct. If you don’t understand how that isn’t punitive, I want to negotiate my next contract against you. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:53:15 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ATLDiver: The context of Gerald’s rebuttal is eye-opening. I haven’t read up on the docs they’ve put out but they’ve definitely unzipped their fly to be transparent. I can certainly see a slash and burn attempt from the Ex and her family, that’s sounds like what the real thing is. Greed and hatred seems to be the motivation. Did Gerald's rebuttal freeze up? It stopped playing about halfway through for me. Seemed like he had his shit together though. |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:53:18 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Pesty: Only ever watched a few minutes here and there don’t know anything about him Just watched the ring camera footage of him telling his very pregnant wife he will fuck her up. Guy is a giant dick head. . A selectively edited clip taken from thousands and hours of footage (that was later destroyed against court orders allegedly), released by a journalist tied with a PR guy known for false allegations against famous men means nothing to me. |
|
|
MI, USA
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 1:56:43 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Pesty: Only ever watched a few minutes here and there don’t know anything about him Just watched the ring camera footage of him telling his very pregnant wife he will fuck her up. Guy is a giant dick head. If you had said you just watched the video they released this morning where they brought the proof that the ring video is edited and intentional PR to get the psycho ex a better deal, you would have a point. But you ignored all that, and “just” watched a 6 month? Year old? Video to pop in and sling mud? |
|
|
AK, USA
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:04:25 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ajek: Everyone knew he was talking about the DW. But let's not twist facts. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ajek: Originally Posted By Bacon_Grease: Originally Posted By Ajek: Good question. I didn't bring it up. Let's accept the premise that it was a "bad deal," and never mind that Crowder is the one who solicited it. There are several possible responses: 1) Make a counter-offer 2) Laugh and walk away 3) Get pissy and try to blow everything up (<-Crowder's choice) Interestingly (or not), Crowder used choice 3 to pump his own platform and attack his "friends." If you remember that situation then you know he didn't specifically name the DW. Everyone knew he was talking about the DW. But let's not twist facts. Exactly so be smart business people and play the game. Pretend you don't know he's talking about you. Say publicly we don't do deals like that but Crowder's the kind of wild card we actually might with. Tell your talent internally that despite his song and dance Crowder is making the same kinds of deals. Admitting it was you and getting into a pissing match about it was the wrong answer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:04:37 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ajek: Everyone knew he was talking about the DW. But let's not twist facts. He said he had multiple offers with similar penalties in them. He was complaining about the penalties in the height of social media silencing people for whatever the fuck they felt like. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:05:52 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By APPARITION: Did Gerald's rebuttal freeze up? It stopped playing about halfway through for me. Seemed like he had his shit together though. Yeah, I just went and watched in on Locals. It looked like it was messed up on Rumble too. |
|
|
|
CT, USA
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:07:28 PM EDT
[#34]
The "source documents" from the rebuttal video from Lowder with Crowder posted to their website in the form of twitter links:
https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/here-is-the-truth |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:10:17 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ras_al_ghul: A selectively edited clip taken from thousands and hours of footage (that was later destroyed against court orders allegedly), Never did I ever, during any of my wife's pregnancies, tell her that I would "fuck her up"  Doesn't matter how many thousands of hours of video you go through or how you "selectively edit" clips You would literally have to piece together sentences one word at a time to create anything resembling the way that douchebag talked to his wife Then he has the audacity to get online and tell all his followers what a wonderful husband he is and how he does everything the "right way" Too rich |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:10:40 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By LordEC911: Ummm... the response today points to all of this, including the wife video, being a PR attack against Crowder to essentially extort him during the divorce. So yes, that video was a set up that she had pre-planned to use against him. The video that exists, because he was being a fuckin asshole? |
|
|
|
USA
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:10:59 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By sbhaven: The "source documents" from the rebuttal video from Lowder with Crowder posted to their website in the form of twitter links: https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/here-is-the-truth The quartering also reviewed it for those that hate reading:  Steven Crowder SHOCKINGLY Reveals Extortion Plan Headed Up By His Ex Wife! They Went After His Dog |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:14:30 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By ATLDiver: The context of Gerald’s rebuttal is eye-opening. I haven’t read up on the docs they’ve put out but they’ve definitely unzipped their fly to be transparent. I can certainly see a slash and burn attempt from the Ex and her family, that’s sounds like what the real thing is. Greed and hatred seems to be the motivation. Whaaaaaat? You mean the "Dependent" spouse may have pulled out all the stops (including possibly lying, colluding, extorsion, and perjury) to get more money? Any of you who jump to conclusions in a divorce or business agreement based on morals, opinions, or feelings amuse me greatly (not you ATLDriver, here). Never seen it before...  *former divorce attorney. **There are no saints in a divorce. There ARE demons, though. We're going to have to see where it goes with discovery. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:22:39 PM EDT
[#39]
I listened to him for about three minutes before deciding I just didn't care about his whining and could tell it was probably going to end with him asking for money.
|
|
|
|
AK, USA
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:25:11 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By JeepersCreepers: Never did I ever, during any of my wife's pregnancies, tell her that I would "fuck her up" Doesn't matter how many thousands of hours of video you go through or how you "selectively edit" clips You would literally have to piece together sentences one word at a time to create anything resembling the way that douchebag talked to his wife Then he has the audacity to get online and tell all his followers what a wonderful husband he is and how he does everything the "right way" Too rich No doubt. But were those exact words ever spoken on camera. I heard there was a longer ring video but I don't think I saw that one. Just the one that says he said it (with the words he admitted that he said it) |
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:34:20 PM EDT
[Last Edit: Ajek]
[#41]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By callmestick: Yeah, I just went and watched in on Locals. It looked like it was messed up on Rumble too. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By callmestick: Originally Posted By APPARITION: Did Gerald's rebuttal freeze up? It stopped playing about halfway through for me. Seemed like he had his shit together though. Yeah, I just went and watched in on Locals. It looked like it was messed up on Rumble too. It seemed to work for me on Rumble. I skipped a little around 2/3rds through, but everything played fine. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:39:00 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By AJE: Only listening a few minutes in so far, absolutely nothing said so far is surprising to me. If Steven is that much of an asshole to his pregnant wife, I figured he was the same to everyone else. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:40:09 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Bogdan: Steve, you made a huge deal about fucked up legal terms amounting of slavery that you would not sign up for with "conservative media". Yet here you are doing exactly the very same thing. I hope your wife fucks you in the ass with no lube in the divorce court and that you never see your child since no kid deserves abuse that you dish out around everyone. You are a shit bag.  |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:41:30 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By callmestick: An attack on a conservative commentator right before an election. Where have I seen this play out before??? And for a bunch of people that don't like him you sure pay a lot of attention to him. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:44:45 PM EDT
[Last Edit: APPARITION]
[#45]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ajek: It seemed to work for me on Rumble. I skipped a little around 2/3rds through, but everything played fine. Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Ajek: Originally Posted By callmestick: Originally Posted By APPARITION: Did Gerald's rebuttal freeze up? It stopped playing about halfway through for me. Seemed like he had his shit together though. Yeah, I just went and watched in on Locals. It looked like it was messed up on Rumble too. It seemed to work for me on Rumble. I skipped a little around 2/3rds through, but everything played fine. Rumble worked fine. What is Gerald's background? |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:49:42 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By APPARITION: Rumble worked fine. What is Gerald's background? Runs a wine distributor type of thing and now runs the Media company IIRC. The amount of virtue signaling in here is impressive. The left could learn a thing or two from some of you. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:49:59 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By APPARITION: Rumble worked fine. What is Gerald's background? He was just a co-commentator but he's now the CEO of louder with crowder. Played a sport at Notre Dame, Basketball or Football. I think he bought a vineyard recently. |
|
|
|
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:51:45 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Everrest: Crowder's team reply: Here's what you don't know https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IGIoeaLLNYNow that they have put their cards on the table, I'd like the other side to do the same. Seems like there are enough people who want to damage the company that they should indemnify NGJ and anyone else who has receipts showing what Crowder has done. Or maybe folks are really low on critical thinking skills and just respond/emote on carefully crafted hit pieces? |
|
|
|
GA, USA
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:52:54 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By Bacon_Grease: I believe you're right for the most part. But I think it's also important to note he wasn't really talking bad about these guys publicly either. (at least not that I've heard) We're hearing a lot about these NDA's but I'm starting to think they're pretty industry standard. The folks involved are just upset enough to want to break them. But if it's just keeping you from talking shit about Crowder I don't see why just moving on is a bad thing. Yeah, Jared didn't *have* to sign it. As Owen said he didn't but it's possible (and probably) there's no "good guy" in this. Steven could still be a huge piece of shit but so could everyone else looking to get their piece of the pie. Sounds like Hillary and fam are going for everything so she never has to work or marry again. I do thing Gerald is a decent guy and a savvy businessman, I appreciate them being transparent on the court docs which is more than team Hillary has done. |
|
|
AK, USA
|
Posted: 3/27/2024 2:55:09 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By APPARITION: Rumble worked fine. What is Gerald's background? Quote HistoryOriginally Posted By APPARITION: Originally Posted By Ajek: Originally Posted By callmestick: Originally Posted By APPARITION: Did Gerald's rebuttal freeze up? It stopped playing about halfway through for me. Seemed like he had his shit together though. Yeah, I just went and watched in on Locals. It looked like it was messed up on Rumble too. It seemed to work for me on Rumble. I skipped a little around 2/3rds through, but everything played fine. Rumble worked fine. What is Gerald's background? Like his professional background before LWC? or his position with the company? I may be wrong but he was touted as a long term friend of Crowder and better with business decisions. So he is the CEO of LWC the company. I guess Crowder is still the official owner. But Gerald is supposedly calling the shots there in the way that Jeremy Boring was calling the shots at DW. Does seem kind of weird given how he is treated during the shows though. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
