My comment would have been similar if it was someone of no public importance - I don't give two shits about Johnny Manziel. The original claim was that they trashed the place to the tune of $32k. In light of that claim, those are certainly odd pictures to choose for public release because they don't show damages anywhere near that realm of magnitude.
This is purposely obtuse. You quoted my post and said:
That's what I was responding to. I meant that his celebrity status has no influence on me when I say that their pictures are rubbish.
No, you're completely missing my point. I'm not seeing the damage that they claim. Therefore, it's suspicious, and yes, attention grabbing does come to mind as a possible motive for embellishment. I've spent way too much time on this. If you see $32,000 worth of damage in those photos or think that they inexplicably held back the real pictures, then there's nothing for us to discuss.
I've been wondering the same thing. I've also been wondering what "left over" cocaine is.
It's there for the morning. Not like it goes bad or anything. And if you think it has, just smell it and see.
"broke an expensive glass table and a bathroom door, and left wine stains and cigarette burns on carpets"
You might want to read my post again because that's a neat straw man. Here, let me help you:
If this board was full of people repeating the same opinion over and over, it would be fucking boring. I'm not defending Manziel in the main. I'm saying there may be more to this one particular aspect of his saga than meets the eye, as I originally assumed the story to be 100% true given his track record. It's possible for more than one party to be operating in the grey. Yes, Johnny has made a long string of extremely poor choices and has hurt a lot of people in his wake. I don't think there's really any debate about that. Rather than being another voice that parrots this same opinion over and over, I decided to shed light on something different. I'm not sure why you're so offended by that.
A lot of topics require serious thought and nuance. And there are many cases where the contrarian opinion is thoughtful and interesting and furthers discussion. But you're defending the indefensible, which makes your entire post unhelpful.
From the beginning, I've been very consistent in merely questioning the validity of the severity of the homeowner's claim. That doesn't negate Johnny acing like a piece of shit for the better part of this past year and these past couple weeks in LA. In fact, there's almost no doubt he left the Airbnb a mess. Whatever, it doesn't matter.
Wearing bandanas at festivals is part fashion / part function. At festivals like Coachells, where there are copious amounts of fine sand and dry heat, those who don't wear a bandana over their mouths end up with black lung for 2 weeks.
Well, yes, you are, and no, you didn't.
Fair enough. If johnmd20 was specifically referring to the severity of the damage, then yes, I was offering a contrarian position. And if you want to call that defending Johnny, even though I was passing judgement on the owner instead of him, then fine. I do not apologize for it because the evidence is lacking and actually suggests otherwise.
People pay to go to places where they can get black lung if they dont wear breathing protection?
I'm only going to believe that people get black lung if I see some x-rays and maybe some lab results. Otherwise, GTFO.
What function? Can you hide oj in them or rob a train to buy more Molly.
Yeah, I was thinking of Zoolander. It's a slight exaggeration, but people will seriously cough up disgusting phlegm for a couple weeks if they don't protect themselves. Apparently there's fungus the lives in the desert sands, so people can also get sick from it.
Interesting. I guess some people aren't affected, but I'm surprised you aren't bothered by the long walks through the dusty paths in and out of the grounds each day. Eeryone I go with either brings protection or wishes they did later.
I think it supposedly enhances the roll, which I guess is understandable - if the purpose of rolling is to get high, then you can't blame them for wanting to feel higher. But yeah, in general I find the things that some people do when on it strange. At least the 90's baby pacifier trend is over - the drug has gone too mainstream for shit like that to persist.
So you either a) believe that the hosts are lying about the damage for...what reason or b) feel that the article should have presented evidence like a court proceeding?
Totally on point, not exaggerated in the least, I think, scary and sad. What his dad said a few months ago keeps popping into my head, and there is a really good chance that's where he ends up.
I can't believe this is still going on. The answers to your questions are in there. It's simple really. They claim that there was tens of thousands of dollars in damage. Then when they give pics to the media, it's only a few empty bottles on a counter and some traces of leftover drugs...that's it?? If I were making these claims and decided media attention was the way to go, I'd probably put my best foot forward, wouldn't you?
You have to think in terms of the level of housing he was staying at. One cigarette burn or wine stain in a rug in that house like that might mean 1500 square feet of rug at $200 a square foot has to be replaced. A broken chair means a whole set has to be replaced. Scratched paint means the entire room needs to be redone. $32K may seem unfathomable to an average homeowner, but this wasn't just an AirBNB he was renting. If it has to be repaired or replaced, it's going to be top shelf all the way.
I know someone who paid $20K for tile for the backsplash of their kitchen stove, and that didn't include installation. We're talking like maybe 10-12 sq feet total. You're spot on.
I understand this. However, the owners listed actual damages, but the pictures show nothing. It's okay if you don't find that suspicious in the least. I do.
We're like lost brothers. I adapted Frost to a urinal post and now you merge him with a Cruise flick.
