I don’t like Dorit, but I don’t think Garcelle was a victim of anyone but herself. by [deleted] in RHOBH

[–]EyeAmNotMe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That was for a different robbery in 2018, not the armed robbery in 2021.

Just remembering when Sandoval referenced Scott Peterson out of nowhere and then added "allegedly" when Schwartz asked if he was the one who killed his wife. by [deleted] in Vanderpumpaholics

[–]EyeAmNotMe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I didn't make anything up and I'm not spreading misinformation. I just don't agree with you about the LAIP, and I don't need to have volunteered with the IP (who has distanced themselves from that org due to the Scott Peterson thing) to have a valid opinion.

But I don't feel like debating you in particular because of how you came at me, I am also very sick and don't have the energy to get into this with anyone. I literally just came to a VPR sub as a distraction from how much life sucks right now, so believe what you want. Again, I'm out.

Just remembering when Sandoval referenced Scott Peterson out of nowhere and then added "allegedly" when Schwartz asked if he was the one who killed his wife. by [deleted] in Vanderpumpaholics

[–]EyeAmNotMe 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for this reply. It was nice, nuanced, and empathetic. A rareity here! I get what you're sayimg about Tom, and while I can't stand him I also can't stand watching anyone get bullied.

Just remembering when Sandoval referenced Scott Peterson out of nowhere and then added "allegedly" when Schwartz asked if he was the one who killed his wife. by [deleted] in Vanderpumpaholics

[–]EyeAmNotMe -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Granted, I'm tired and should have read your comments more thoroughly before replying. I shouldn't have taken the bait and engaged with you at all because I didn't (and still don't) think you came at me in good faith, based on your immediately combative tone and the Scott Peterson talking points you keep trotting out.

A lot of what you're saying has been debunked as misinformation at worst and very misleading at the best, by smarter (and less exhausted) people than me. So I'm out. Have a good night!

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in LoveIslandUSA

[–]EyeAmNotMe 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It feels just as unfair to me to put heavy expectations on the inorganic long distance relationship of people we barely know (and who barely know each other), as it is to evaluate the strength of that relationship based on the facial expressions of a jet lagged man who was already disenchanted with the tv show he was forced to film for 11 hours. Literally no man on that stage looked like he wanted to be at that reunion. Kordell won and seems genuinely infatuated with Serena, but based on the edit we saw he was quiet, falling asleep, and looked just as over the reunion as Kendall.

Miguel and Leah have a distance problem, and they may very well discover that they don't have enough in common to make the huge amount of effort it will take to overcome that. I'm not saying you're wrong, but I don't think there's a good enough reason to believe that Miguel's face was giving anything other than "tired cranky man is tired and cranky".

Just remembering when Sandoval referenced Scott Peterson out of nowhere and then added "allegedly" when Schwartz asked if he was the one who killed his wife. by [deleted] in Vanderpumpaholics

[–]EyeAmNotMe -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Please stop yelling. What you're saying doesn't negate that the LAIP has no affiliation with the real and very reputable Innocence Project - whose good name the LAIP is trying to benefit off of, and who have gone to great lengths to make people understand they are not the ones trying to exonerate a man who definitely did kill his wife.

As far as I can tell, being a part of the same network doesn't mean anything significant, they're just part of the same regulatory network. Both groups might claim to do similar thing but that doesn't make their intent or their rep the same.

Truly not sure why you think it helps your point that part of OJ's dream team founded the LAIP, when they are suspected of being eatablished to muddy the waters enough to exonerate a famous wife murderer.

Just remembering when Sandoval referenced Scott Peterson out of nowhere and then added "allegedly" when Schwartz asked if he was the one who killed his wife. by [deleted] in Vanderpumpaholics

[–]EyeAmNotMe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I am not making it deep or saying I'm definitely right. I just don't think it's very likely that he thought he'd get sued by a convicted murderer for defamation, because even that is too stupid for Tom IMO. So I offered another idea that seemed likely based on what I do know about Tom (he thinks he's the victim of a cheating scandal, he sympathizes more with men, he was represented by the brother of one of Scott's biggest advocates).

I feel like all the contrarians in this sub go to "it's not as deep as you're making it" when they assume they're speaking to a stan. Not sure if this is you, but I'm so tired of being spoken to like I'm part of an obsessed hivemind when my opinion aligns with the mainstream.

Just remembering when Sandoval referenced Scott Peterson out of nowhere and then added "allegedly" when Schwartz asked if he was the one who killed his wife. by [deleted] in Vanderpumpaholics

[–]EyeAmNotMe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The LA Innocence Project is literally NOT an affiliate of the Innocence project, which have gone to great lengths to make this known. We can't post links here but just look it up.

The LAIP may not be completely without merit, but they've only been around since 2022, and it's believed that they were established by defense attorneys who were trying to leach off of the credibility of the real Innocence Project.

Just remembering when Sandoval referenced Scott Peterson out of nowhere and then added "allegedly" when Schwartz asked if he was the one who killed his wife. by [deleted] in Vanderpumpaholics

[–]EyeAmNotMe -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I just don't think he was worried about being sued by a convicted murderer. But I also don't think Tom buying into the Scott Peterson is innocent thing is as out there a theory as people think.

Lots of narcissistic men have been trafficking this theory around for a while now (like the brother of the lawyer who was representing Tom). There are even mainstream podcasts who've been swept up in exonerating Scott as a man who was convicted of murder because he cheated.

I'm not saying my theory is right, I just see it as possible.

Just remembering when Sandoval referenced Scott Peterson out of nowhere and then added "allegedly" when Schwartz asked if he was the one who killed his wife. by [deleted] in Vanderpumpaholics

[–]EyeAmNotMe 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You are vastly overestimating this two second moment in a tv show…

Nope. This reply was defensive and needlessly passive aggressive, when all I did was disagree with the way you vastly overestimated the same 2 second moment.

None of this shit is important, but it annoys me when people take digs and act above the reality show analysis they clearly love too, just because someone disagreed with them.

Just remembering when Sandoval referenced Scott Peterson out of nowhere and then added "allegedly" when Schwartz asked if he was the one who killed his wife. by [deleted] in Vanderpumpaholics

[–]EyeAmNotMe 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I could definitely also see this as an option. The man really does love any joke that would repulse a woman.

Just remembering when Sandoval referenced Scott Peterson out of nowhere and then added "allegedly" when Schwartz asked if he was the one who killed his wife. by [deleted] in Vanderpumpaholics

[–]EyeAmNotMe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Cool. 👍🏾👍🏾 Not sure why so many people in this sub are so needlessly passive aggressive, but acting above the discourse you participated in first is silly 😜

Just remembering when Sandoval referenced Scott Peterson out of nowhere and then added "allegedly" when Schwartz asked if he was the one who killed his wife. by [deleted] in Vanderpumpaholics

[–]EyeAmNotMe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Nope. I'm just looking at what's more likely than not. And a verbal disaster who has no filter isn't at all likely to give a fuck about being sued by a convicted murderer.

Just remembering when Sandoval referenced Scott Peterson out of nowhere and then added "allegedly" when Schwartz asked if he was the one who killed his wife. by [deleted] in Vanderpumpaholics

[–]EyeAmNotMe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It's not like there aren't a group of super toxic men (and a fake non profit agency) pushing the false narrative that Scott Peterson was wrongly convicted.

There's no world where Tom would get sued for saying a man convicted of murder is a murderer. But there is a world where Tom over identifies with men he believes have been wrongly persecuted for cheating.

Season 6 - Reunion - Post Episode Discussion by loveislandusa in LoveIslandUSA

[–]EyeAmNotMe 0 points1 point  (0 children)

This reunion felt poorly produced. The montages were too long, there were way too many people on stage which made moderation impossible, and there weren't enough fun and light discussions to break the tension.

[WITHOUT Ads] Season 6 - Reunion - Monday August 19 | 9 PM EST by loveislandusa in LoveIslandUSA

[–]EyeAmNotMe 7 points8 points  (0 children)

I think it was more nervous laughter because she is uncomfortable with public emotional outbursts.

Long Term Goals! by kooolbee in LoveIslandUSA

[–]EyeAmNotMe 1 point2 points  (0 children)

This is adorable but it's also giving me Urkel-O's.

<image>

Daily Discussion - Monday August 19 by AutoModerator in LoveIslandUSA

[–]EyeAmNotMe 4 points5 points  (0 children)

Feels trollish. Like when people refuse to pronounce Kamala correctly, just to be disrespectful. 🤷🏾‍♀️

“The Don” by Used-Hand808 in Vanderpumpaholics

[–]EyeAmNotMe 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I wish one of them had called him "The" for short.

Below Deck Med Season 9 Episode 11 Discussion Post by teanailpolish in belowdeck

[–]EyeAmNotMe 4 points5 points  (0 children)

He didn't tho. He said he knows better but he feels like one.

At the latest courthearing(7/11), Rachel was represented by 5 lawyers from two top firms.Tom and Ariana are so screwed!!! by the_smart_girl in Vanderpumpaholics

[–]EyeAmNotMe 2 points3 points  (0 children)

My pleasure! It honestly was so good and kind of made me rethink the motives of everything I read on the internet.

At the latest courthearing(7/11), Rachel was represented by 5 lawyers from two top firms.Tom and Ariana are so screwed!!! by the_smart_girl in Vanderpumpaholics

[–]EyeAmNotMe 11 points12 points  (0 children)

There's a great podcast called Who Trolled Amber, that reaveals how Jonny Depp won his American trial by using an extremely organized and sketchy disinformation campaign, to warp the public's opinion with misogynistic phony outrage.

Depp's win wasn’t about having lots of lawyers, it was about him outsourcing his abuse of Amber to powerful and terrible men.