Dude shaming his landlord on social media for illegally accessing his stimulus check records was actually going after his own grandma

[Dan Druff]

Joshua Browder, who is a self-styled consumer advocate with a medium-sized (25k) Twitter following, tweeted out this "horrifying" text conversation of some guy and his landlord. Note that this was NOT Browder's conversation, but instead he had obtained it from somewhere:



Browder also fanned the flames by tweeting, "This landlord's going to jail (and getting sued)", the jail part being completely untrue.

This went semi-viral on Twitter, and made Oregon mainstream news.

This one looked tailor made for Sensitive Leftist Twitter, and I smelled a rat immediately.

Embedded Tweet

https://twitter.com/ToddWitteles/status/1252027308090642432


Surprisingly, the previously anonymous owner of the landlord/tenant text exchange quickly came forward and addressed this with me. It was a guy named Austin Goodrich, who tweeted as @CascadianRebel.

However, I still wasn't getting much clarity. Goodrich admitted that he didn't actually have the landlord in his phone as "Landlord". He said that he changed this in order to prevent his landlord from being "doxxed and harassed".

Huh? So you're going public about your landlord using your SSN to illegally access your IRS records, and then you're protecting his identity? Why would such a person deserve such protection?

Furthermore, to "prove" it was real, Goodrich then posted a redacted shot of a e-mail he had with the landlord, which gave the landlord's initials and the exact small town in Oregon where he lived. Shouldn't it be easy for any internet sleuths to dox that landlord at that point anyway?

He could never explain to me why he was keeping the landlord's name private, other than claiming this was more shaming of the IRS' poor security procedures, rather than the landlord himself, which was very hard to swallow.



Well, of course there was more to the story.

First off, a quick googling of Austin Goodrich revealed that he was a member of a radical left Portland-based Facebook group with the stated purpose of encouraging everyone to pay zero rent. So that's some coincidence. A guy who feels it's his "right" to pay no rent (not just delay payment, but pay nothing) just happened to be victimized by his landlord in an obnoxious, greedy, and intrusive fashion. I mean, yes, it's possible, but it was all waaaaaaaaaay too convenient, and had Jussie Smollett written all over it.

It turned out that there was a good reason he changed the landlord's name to "Landlord" for the posting of the text exchange. It was his own grandmother! And now he's suing her for "violating tenants' rights"!



Oh... and here's his explanation, which he only put forth after the grandmother thing was discovered. Note that he refers to grandma as "my relative" so he doesn't look like as much of a dick:




You see, he's only suing his grandmother because he actually has "no relationship" with her. But somehow he's living in a building she manages, despite that total lack of relationship.

Is this hilarious, or what? This freeloading Antifa douchenozzle was sponging off grandma and denying he had the money to pay rent, so she finally got fed up and looked up his stimulus check online. He then tried to shame her as a "greedy, intrusive landlord", assuming nobody would figure out the real story. He was gloating like an asshole all over that Facebook group about how much attention he's been getting over this.

Oh, and she was also his tax preparer. But he had totally no relationship with her. None. Zilch. Totally normal landlord/tenant dispute here.

Austin was previously seen at an Antifa rally shutting down a College Republicans event at Portland State, in 2019.

https://pamplinmedia.com/pt/9-news/4...check-tracking

Now he protected his tweets in shame, but not before blocking me first.

LOL at the entitled bratty left

[Dan Druff]

Also, despite making more several tweets about the situation when it appeared to be a hot anti-landlord story, Josh Browder is refusing to retract it or clarify the truth.

The fake news outrage left is so amusing.

[Dan Druff]

In the meantime in Oregon, a beautiful 34-year-old woman named Amber Pearl Saintly has been charged with felony strangulation and "menacing".






That's Amber. A 34-year-old "woman". Five o'clock shadow and everything.

We gotta respect her pronouns!

It's the right who is anti-science, though.

[Dan Druff]

From Austin's Facebook:




Family comes first. Except grandma, apparently. You sue grandma.

[Walter Sobchak]

Yeah, this has a lot to do with politics and "the left."

[Dan Druff]

Yeah, this has a lot to do with politics and "the left."

Actually, it does.

How many people on the left do you think were asking tough questions about this whole thing? Just about zero. Go through the Josh Browder twitter post and read the replies. When you find a skeptical reply, click through to the profile, and you'll see it's someone with right-leaning politics. Why do you think that is?

And why did the blue-check-mark "journalist" who brought this story viral hide from publishing these very relevant and important updates? Why wouldn't he then report that this "evil landlord" narrative was a hoax, and was actually just a bratty loser broke Antifa dude trying to sponge free rent off granny?

Does it not bother you that there's a completely lack of curiosity from your side when an "evil greedy business owner screws the little guy" narrative is presented?

There's a reason people on the right are so distrusting of the news these days. The update to this story about the grandma made the whole thing actually waaaaaaaaaaay more interesting, but the journalists who brought the story to light didn't want to touch it.

Much like the journalists who brought the (much bigger) story to light about the "Trump supporters" drinking fish tank cleaner because "Trump said to take chloriquine" refused to cover the (again more interesting) after-story that the wife actually hated Trump, and had domestic violence arrests in the past. Because, you know, it's better to believe that Trump followers are all dumb sheep who will drink literal poison because they think Trump told them to do it.

I always laugh when I see how afraid the left-leaning media is to cover the truth about something which will destroy a narrative they once presented. They wipe the egg off their faces when nobody is looking, and press forward.

[Dan Druff]

Also who wants to bet me that if we find a left-leaning Facebook group chosen at random by a neutral third party, and posted the voting question of, "Should we treat Amber Pearl Saintly as female and allow her to be in women's jail/prison?" (see post #3 above), that 51% or more will vote YES? I'll take the 51%+ YES side, and you will take 49% or more will vote NO. Any takers?

Then we can do the same in a right-leaning Facebook group, and I'll make the same bet that 90% or more will vote NO.

So remind me... which party is anti-science?

[Sheesfaced]

[Walter Sobchak]

Yeah, this has a lot to do with politics and "the left."

Actually, it does.

How many people on the left do you think were asking tough questions about this whole thing? Just about zero. Go through the Josh Browder twitter post and read the replies. When you find a skeptical reply, click through to the profile, and you'll see it's someone with right-leaning politics. Why do you think that is?

And why did the blue-check-mark "journalist" who brought this story viral hide from publishing these very relevant and important updates? Why wouldn't he then report that this "evil landlord" narrative was a hoax, and was actually just a bratty loser broke Antifa dude trying to sponge free rent off granny?

Does it not bother you that there's a completely lack of curiosity from your side when an "evil greedy business owner screws the little guy" narrative is presented?

There's a reason people on the right are so distrusting of the news these days. The update to this story about the grandma made the whole thing actually waaaaaaaaaaay more interesting, but the journalists who brought the story to light didn't want to touch it.

Much like the journalists who brought the (much bigger) story to light about the "Trump supporters" drinking fish tank cleaner because "Trump said to take chloriquine" refused to cover the (again more interesting) after-story that the wife actually hated Trump, and had domestic violence arrests in the past. Because, you know, it's better to believe that Trump followers are all dumb sheep who will drink literal poison because they think Trump told them to do it.

I always laugh when I see how afraid the left-leaning media is to cover the truth about something which will destroy a narrative they once presented. They wipe the egg off their faces when nobody is looking, and press forward.

Sort of like all the fake videos about ACORN and Planned Parenthood presented by Fox and others as real news.

Moral of the story: there are dishonest people of all ideologies.

[Dan Druff]

Actually, it does.

How many people on the left do you think were asking tough questions about this whole thing? Just about zero. Go through the Josh Browder twitter post and read the replies. When you find a skeptical reply, click through to the profile, and you'll see it's someone with right-leaning politics. Why do you think that is?

And why did the blue-check-mark "journalist" who brought this story viral hide from publishing these very relevant and important updates? Why wouldn't he then report that this "evil landlord" narrative was a hoax, and was actually just a bratty loser broke Antifa dude trying to sponge free rent off granny?

Does it not bother you that there's a completely lack of curiosity from your side when an "evil greedy business owner screws the little guy" narrative is presented?

There's a reason people on the right are so distrusting of the news these days. The update to this story about the grandma made the whole thing actually waaaaaaaaaaay more interesting, but the journalists who brought the story to light didn't want to touch it.

Much like the journalists who brought the (much bigger) story to light about the "Trump supporters" drinking fish tank cleaner because "Trump said to take chloriquine" refused to cover the (again more interesting) after-story that the wife actually hated Trump, and had domestic violence arrests in the past. Because, you know, it's better to believe that Trump followers are all dumb sheep who will drink literal poison because they think Trump told them to do it.

I always laugh when I see how afraid the left-leaning media is to cover the truth about something which will destroy a narrative they once presented. They wipe the egg off their faces when nobody is looking, and press forward.

Sort of like all the fake videos about ACORN and Planned Parenthood presented by Fox and others as real news.

Moral of the story: there are dishonest people of all ideologies.

My issue isn't that there was one Antifa loser freeloader who pretended that a fight with his grandma was a case of an evil landlord trampling his rights.

Clearly you can find examples of phonies on both sides, and this guy was no one special or influential.

What bothers me is how the left (including the media) eats up these "victim" narratives, and nobody on that side asks a single question.

This wasn't even a political story. It was supposedly a story of a landlord violating a tenants' privacy and accessing records they shouldn't have.

How come many people on the right (including me) instantly saw the red flags in that story, and everyone on the left was cheering him on like a brave freedom fighter? Go look at the responses to that tweet if you don't believe me.

How come the "journalist" who reported this won't do an update to the story, despite the fact that he posted other updates before this came to light?

My point is that you won't get the truth if you count on left-leaning media to give it to you. Sometimes I also don't get the truth from right-leaning media about other types of things, which is why I try to independently verify all stories which interest me. However, there's a BS narrative going around that you can trust the mainstream media for the most part, and that it's only Fox News and its ilk spreading partisan disinformation. News flash: That's not true.

[duped_samaritan]

I'm glad we have warriors like you that bring social justice.

[Crowe Diddly]

So remind me... which party is anti-science?

Sure thing. Its the one that elected the single most anti-science president and vice-president in modern history, gutted the EPA, denies c!imate change, pushed the retarded idea of "clean coal," and pretty much destroyed ever environmental policy they could. If you need dozens more examples, let me know, but the gist is the party that is the most anti-science is the one that puts the anti-science people in power over and over again. Which is the Republicans.

Judge parties by who they elect, not by idiot nobodies with no influence on anything.

[jsearles22]

So remind me... which party is anti-science?

Sure thing. Its the one that elected the single most anti-science president and vice-president in modern history, gutted the EPA, denies c!imate change, pushed the retarded idea of "clean coal," and pretty much destroyed ever environmental policy they could. If you need dozens more examples, let me know, but the gist is the party that is the most anti-science is the one that puts the anti-science people in power over and over again. Which is the Republicans.

Judge parties by who they elect, not by idiot nobodies with no influence on anything.

:headshot

I'll eagerly await Druff's 6 paragraph reply telling you why you are wrong.

[blake]

So remind me... which party is anti-science?

Sure thing. Its the one that elected the single most anti-science president and vice-president in modern history, gutted the EPA, denies c!imate change, pushed the retarded idea of "clean coal," and pretty much destroyed ever environmental policy they could. If you need dozens more examples, let me know, but the gist is the party that is the most anti-science is the one that puts the anti-science people in power over and over again. Which is the Republicans.

Judge parties by who they elect, not by idiot nobodies with no influence on anything.

you forgot wind causing cancer

[sonatine]

so it took [ checks notes] one page for druff to retreat from landlord porn to blaming antifa for his beatdown.


youre playing great pfa.

[dwai]

So remind me... which party is anti-science?

Sure thing. Its the one that elected the single most anti-science president and vice-president in modern history, gutted the EPA, denies c!imate change, pushed the retarded idea of "clean coal," and pretty much destroyed ever environmental policy they could. If you need dozens more examples, let me know, but the gist is the party that is the most anti-science is the one that puts the anti-science people in power over and over again. Which is the Republicans.

Judge parties by who they elect, not by idiot nobodies with no influence on anything.

[MrTickle]

this thread is embarassing. Druff gone off the deep end

[gut]

This kid might be a jerkoff, but he's got a slam-dunk lawsuit. Grandma done fucked up. I mean, she even had to click "ok" on this before looking up what appears to be multiple peoples info:




I'm sure if the kid had "Trump 2020" on his facebook Druff would be railing about privacy violations by the obviously leftist Oregon landlord. Sad!

[sah_24]

Bernie bros going to Bernie bro ... so funny PFA has so many ANTIFA fairies lol, no wonder they make so many great prediction threads LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

[Walter Sobchak]

...

What bothers me is how the left (including the media) eats up these "victim" narratives, and nobody on that side asks a single question.

...

How come many people on the right (including me) instantly saw the red flags in that story, and everyone on the left was cheering him on like a brave freedom fighter? Go look at the responses to that tweet if you don't believe me.

...

My point is that you won't get the truth if you count on left-leaning media to give it to you. Sometimes I also don't get the truth from right-leaning media about other types of things, which is why I try to independently verify all stories which interest me. However, there's a BS narrative going around that you can trust the mainstream media for the most part, and that it's only Fox News and its ilk spreading partisan disinformation. News flash: That's not true.

What bothers me is how the right (including the media) eats up their own "victim" narratives, and nobody on that side asks a single question. Whites, males, conservatives, rural residents, Americans born here vs immigrants, are all "victims" and their victimhood is encouraged, stirred up into a mob mentality and used cynically against their interest by ring-wing media, politicians, evangelical leaders, corporate leaders and other elites.

How come many people on the left can instantly see the red flags in right-wing "news," and sees how badly the Republicans especially Trump are screwing over the people that vote for them, serving only very narrow elite interests, and everyone on that side cheers them on like brave freedom fighters?

News flash: The mainstream media are not as monolithically left-leaning as you would like to believe. They're not infallible and they never will be. They try to present the facts as they are and varying points of view (the good quality sources do, anyway) but sometimes drop the ball. This is different from right-wing sources like Fox News and their brethren, who were founded specifically to drive a right-wing agenda, with an intentionally built-in willingness to disregard or even invent facts, with actual journalism a low priority. At least part of the "liberal bias" of the mainstream media is due to the fact that reality has a liberal bias.