Andrew Tate has been indicted on charges of rape, human trafficking, and forming an organised crime group to sexually exploit women. He is by his own admission a violent misogynist and, in his own words, "probably 40% of the reason" he moved to Romania was the perceived ease of evading rape charges there: "I'm not a rapist, but I like the idea of just being able to do what I want. I like being free." That's the same Romania which is known as one of the sex trafficking capitals of the world.
Given that there are many many more individuals with similar credentials (i.e. - none) doing the "just asking questions" schtick about vaccines, Ukraine, big pharma, etc. who have not been accused of rape or criminally indicted, why do you think that two people -- who constantly and openly discuss their predatory behaviour -- and have multiple accusers with independent witnesses, and documentary evidence, are being "silenced" for not conforming to the status quo?
It's self-evidently more likely that these are two predators who happen to truck in conspiracy theories, and they've been caught. Plenty of morons abound on Rumble and elsewhere, and frankly Tate and Brand's audience is nowhere near large enough (or, honestly, intelligent enough) that any government or organisation would orchestrate a fabricated "take down" to silence them.
I can tell that you're a conspiracy theorist, so let me state it plainly: very few people care about what you think as much as you do, and nobody holds your idols in the sort of esteem which would necessitate them being deliberately silenced for their opinions about "war/ukraine" or "pfizer/moderna".
> Also, consider that the ones that are silenced we are not hearing about and from.
I agree, and find this heartbreaking. I remember reading the accusations against Bill Clinton which, like those against Brand, were independent of one another, made by credible victims who did not know each other, supported by witnesses, and -- like Brand -- included similar patterns of behaviour from attack to attack (Clinton, if I recall, had a predilection for biting the faces and lips of the women he assaulted).
And then those women watch as Hillary Clinton uses her platform to discredit them in the cruellest possible terms.[^1] I wish those weeping and tearing their clothes for Brand as he is "silenced" would consider what it must be like to truly be silenced. Not just "my $1m a year YouTube income stream is gone"-silenced, but silenced by the fear of people like OP reflexively treating them with disdain and pretending they're part of some establishment plot.
It's on the same continuum as going into a pizza restaurant with a gun because it's a Democrat pedophile hub. Lunatics.
[^1] Although on Clinton it's worth noting that when his VP Al Gore was asked at a press conference whether he (Gore) thought the accusations were credible, he gave a wishy-washy answer. The journalist replied "You could just have said you don't believe them," to which Gore – astonishingly – replied: "I didn't say that," before going on to enumerate how any crimes Clinton may have committed were balanced out by his record of public service?!
> The journalist replied "You could just have said you don't believe them," to which Gore – astonishingly – replied: "I didn't say that," before going on to enumerate how any crimes Clinton may have committed were balanced out by his record of public service?!
Is there anywhere I can read about this? I tried feeding this into Google with quotes and got no results.
Here you go. The transcript is of a town hall meeting Gore held in Derry, New Hampshire, on 14th December 1999.
KATHERINE PRUDHOMME: When Juanita Broaddrick made the claim, which I found to be quite credible, that she was raped by Bill Clinton, did that change your opinion about him being one of the best presidents in history? And do you believe Juanita Broaddrick's claim? And what did you tell your son about this?
AL GORE: [Nervous laughter] Well, I don't know what to make of her claim, because I don't know how to evaluate her story, I really don't.
[…]
GORE: I didn't see it. There have been so many personal allegations and such a non-stop series of attacks, I guess I'm like a lot of people in that I think enough is enough. I do not know how to evaluate each one of these individual stories. I just don't know. I would never violate the privacy of my communication with one of my children, a member of my family, as for that part of your question--
PRUDHOMME [I slightly misremembered this part - apologies - but it doesn't change the substance]: So you didn't believe Juanita Broaddrick's claim?
GORE: No, I didn't say that. I said I don't know how to evaluate it, and I didn't see the interview. But I must say something else to you about this. Why don't you just stand back up, I'd like to look you in the eye. I think whatever mistakes Clinton made in his personal life are in in the minds of most Americans balanced against what he has done in his public life as president.
--
He then goes on to talk about his religious faith helping him to understand that "all of us are heirs to the mistakes that–are prone to the mistakes that flesh is heir to".
It's one of the most unsettling moments in American political history IMO.
Given that there are many many more individuals with similar credentials (i.e. - none) doing the "just asking questions" schtick about vaccines, Ukraine, big pharma, etc. who have not been accused of rape or criminally indicted, why do you think that two people -- who constantly and openly discuss their predatory behaviour -- and have multiple accusers with independent witnesses, and documentary evidence, are being "silenced" for not conforming to the status quo?
It's self-evidently more likely that these are two predators who happen to truck in conspiracy theories, and they've been caught. Plenty of morons abound on Rumble and elsewhere, and frankly Tate and Brand's audience is nowhere near large enough (or, honestly, intelligent enough) that any government or organisation would orchestrate a fabricated "take down" to silence them.
I can tell that you're a conspiracy theorist, so let me state it plainly: very few people care about what you think as much as you do, and nobody holds your idols in the sort of esteem which would necessitate them being deliberately silenced for their opinions about "war/ukraine" or "pfizer/moderna".