To clarify, I was betrayed by a fake friend and that’s what I meant with ‘they’ not anything more.
~Jamie Foxx/Instagram/August 5, 2023
The above quote is an excerpt from Foxx’s online apology for an earlier Instagram post which could be interpreted as anti-Semitic based on its historical use to blame Jews for the crucifixion.
They killed this dude name Jesus … what do you think they’ll do to you???! #fakefriends #fakelove.
~Jamie Foxx/Instagram/August 4, 2023
As seems to be the case these days, celebrities, regardless of occupation, seem incapable of simply saying, “I know I screwed up. I’m sorry. And I know I need to work at being a better person.” Instead, Foxx’s explanation only made the matter worst. Why? Because his explanation makes sense only if one of the following must be true.
- His #fakefriend is non-binary and refers to himself as “they.”
- By simple deductive reasoning, if “they” refers to Foxx’s #fakefriend, Foxx accused this individual of killing Jesus. Should we, therefore, expect a new comedy album in which Mel Brooks, in a role reversal, is the straight man to Foxx’s #fakefriend, the new 2,000-year-old man?
- Foxx refers to every individual as “they,” as in “Joe, how are they doing this afternoon?”
Of course, Foxx is not alone, Donald Trump and his campaign played “can you top this” over the weekend. It began with Trump’s now infamous post on “Truth Social.”
If you go after me, I’m coming after you.
~Donald Trump/Truth Social/August 4, 2023
Jack Smith correctly pointed out in a filing to Judge Tanya Chutkan it took Trump less than 24 hours to violate a federal magistrate’s warning not to intimidate or threaten anyone associated with his obstruction and conspiracy indictment.
It is a crime to try to influence a juror or to threaten or attempt to bribe a witness or any other person who may have information about your case, or to retaliate against anyone for providing information about your case to the prosecution, or to otherwise obstruct the administration of justice.
Her concern was not unfounded. This unusual admonition was likely tied to findings by the House Select Committee to Investigate the Attack on the United States Capitol’s finding Trump had contact one of their witnesses prior to that individual’s interview with committee staff. And once Trump’s legal team realized their client might be in jeopardy of having his bond vacated, they backtracked quicker than Vin Diesel in the latest Fast and Furious movie.
The Truth post cited is the definition of political speech, and was in response to the RINO, China-loving, dishonest special interest groups and Super PACs, like the ones funded by the Koch brothers and the Club for No Growth.
~Unsigned Statement from Trump Spokesperson/August 5, 2023
If that is who Trump meant, why did he not mention them specifically? I thought maybe he might have referred to the one security officer at his hush money arraignment in New York who did not cry when he was led into the courtroom. The irony is Trump’s lawyers did not appreciate that the very statements and ads sponsored by the Koch Brothers and others, which so upset their client, are the “definition of political speech,” without the “fire in a crowded theater” threat to avenge a perceived wrong.
Despite the MAGA-verse “war on woke,” the real problem is not whether an infinitesimal percentage of Americans who could be described as gender fluid choose to attach a non-traditional pronoun to their persona. The real problem is the use of pronouns such as “they” and “you” which are bandied about as a façade for moral fluidity.
For what it’s worth.