What Was Smolletts's Agenda Here?

[ToraToraTora]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-48754989
He was clearly trying to falsely portray the preponderance of the isms concerned. To what end?

[ludwig]

Gawd knows. He had a pretty successful career going anyway, so why he'd feel the need to concoct such a ridiculous scheme for publicity (if that's what he was after) is beyond me.

[dannyk13]

I think that I read somewhere in an earlier report that he was trying to get a pay rise.

[Spicerack]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-46634184

[dannyk13]

SR, Have you posted on wrong thread?

[Spicerack]

If you don't understand, Danny, just ask. No need to be rude.

//“The vicious attack on actor Jussie Smollett was an attempted modern-day lynching,” Booker tweeted in January.” I’m glad he’s safe. To those in Congress who don’t feel the urgency to pass our Anti-Lynching bill designating lynching as a federal hate crime– I urge you to pay attention.”//

[dannyk13]

SR,Where was I being rude? I was just asking a simple question.

[ludwig]

I hadn't realised they'd only just made lynching illegal. That's incredible.

// More than 200 anti-lynching bills have been introduced to Congress since 1918, all of which have been voted down.//

Savages.

[Spicerack]

It was a mischief making bill that no-one was interested in. Why would you introduce a law against something that hasn't happened for decades?
After Smollett's 'escapade', the bill passed unopposed.

[ToraToraTora]

what a load of old pony, "lynching" was already illegal, covered under every law from assault to murder. The actual phrase "lynching" may not be specifically mentioned but that doesn't mean carrying one out would be legal.

[ProfessorMaisie]

Spicerack, perhaps you took too much for granted expecting people to know the background to the clip you posted (although I'm surprised anyone could be unaware of it - it's been very well publicised).
That said, I think you've provided the perfect answer. And it also explains how Smollett got away with it.

[ludwig]

//After Smollett's 'escapade', the bill passed unopposed. //

So it was a box ticking exercise that they could and should have done years ago, a bit like the death penalty being valid for treason in this country until recently.

Looks like the only mischief being made was by the people that kept voting it down and therefore allowing it to keep resurfacing.

Either way, Smollet looks like a lying rsole, and will forever be known as one.

[cassa333]

Oh the anti lynching law that wasn’t needed. A democrat ploy to appear in touch with the BAME population in the US.

As was pointed out, the AL law wasn’t needed because it is already against the law to kill someone and to lynch them is to kill them. If used as a tool of torture then that is also covered u dear present law. But the Democrats love to show boat.

Smollett is familiar with a lot of high ranking Democrats and it could conceivably be his idea of ‘helping’. The law did obviously pass not long after several US senators specifically used the term ‘modern day lynching’and the Smollett case.

What did he have to gain from it?

Publicity
Tenure as a champion of the oppressed and suppressed minority.
A pay rise
A future where no one could criticise him for fear of becoming called racist.

His problem was he was too stupid to pull it off.