NewStats: 3,263,913 , 8,181,861 topics. Date: Sunday, 08 June 2025 at 06:18 PM g5319

I was under the impression that President Tinubu had already appointed Reno Omokri to a position. If that is the case, why does he still behave so pettily—or has he not officially assumed office yet?

Time and again, Reno has shown that he is less interested in engaging with meaningful ideas or presenting constructive arguments that could contribute to Nigeria’s progress. His discourse is consistently focused on attacking individuals like Peter Obi and Natasha Akpoti, rather than addressing national development, policy proposals, or governance reforms.

Moreover, his political loyalty appears transactional at best. If, by any chance, Atiku Abubakar were to win tomorrow, does anyone doubt that Reno would promptly shift his allegiance in that direction? How can anyone take such a political chameleon seriously?

Let’s not forget: this is the same individual who uses AI tools to generate doctored images of himself alongside prominent figures—an attempt to artificially inflate his relevance. If he’s willing to fabricate photos, what else is he not willing to fabricate?

It’s time we start evaluating voices in the political space not by how loudly they shout, but by the principles they uphold, the consistency of their values, and the sincerity of their contributions to the national conversation.

It’s deeply troubling that a defamation case against Senator Natasha Akpoti-Uduaghan is being ed by individuals facing serious credibility issues.

Justice cannot be served through compromised witnesses or politically motivated prosecutions.

Nigeria’s legal system must uphold fairness, not fuel vendettas.

This is a serious and valid concern. When state institutions begin to take sides in personal disputes between legislators, democracy is at risk.

Justice must be impartial—not used to shield one senator while targeting another. The questions raised demand honest answers.

Selective prosecution isn’t governance; it’s abuse of power.

Britishpea:


If you have a working brain you would see that i only talked about those who endorsed him and not about economy or other things...Only talked about the reasons tey endorsed him..ALso stated that people who rant, cry, act to know more but know nothing and complanants general like you dont go out to vote....

However, you lots will keep crying as if you are the only ones feeling the heat of whatever any govt brings about...I had never complained during Buhari and Goodluck tenures, should i now start to complain about Tinubus regime?

If thety check the profiles of all the town criers on this forums and other forums, we will find out that those sets of people have always been criers and complaints general in every emerging govt...


They are lazy people who are looking for everything to remain soft..
People can complain but not that you should turn it intio a job. On every posts either it is related to the govt or tinubu or not they will always find a way to rant

If you had a working brain, you'd realize that your entire rant is built on a foundation of assumptions, hypocrisy, and false superiority. You claim you "only talked about endorsements," yet somehow veered into a full-blown tirade labeling anyone who criticizes the government as lazy, ignorant, and unserious. That’s not discussion — that’s projection and intellectual laziness.

You say you "never complained" under Buhari or Goodluck — well, congratulations. Silence in the face of dysfunction isn’t wisdom; it’s apathy at best, complicity at worst. People like you love pretending that endurance equals intelligence, but in reality, it just reveals your low standards and misplaced pride in suffering.

The fact that you generalize critics as "lazy people who want everything soft" is exactly why this country continues to spiral — because people like you weaponize silence and demonize dissent. Democracy doesn’t thrive on people shutting up; it thrives on ability. And if you think holding leaders able is “turning it into a job,” then maybe governance and civic responsibility are concepts far above your comprehension.

You can pretend all you want that criticism equals "crying," but the truth is — the real crying comes from people who can’t stand their blind loyalty being questioned. That’s exactly what you’re doing: reacting emotionally while accusing others of doing the same. Irony must be lost on you.

So before you label people as town criers or complaints generals, ask yourself: what exactly are you contributing besides empty condescension and flawed logic? Because from here, it looks like you’re just another noise-maker pretending to be above the noise.

😛

Britishpea:
Endorsing him means they want him to continue. Tinubu has increased the allocations of the governors to about 300% and National Assembly each earns nothing less than 1B for constituency project. They earn way more than they have ever been since 1999

So who else should endorse the president for a second term if not them!

Are they not the coordinators of the votes during elections? 90% of those complainants don’t go out to vote!

So because Tinubu padded the pockets of governors and lawmakers with a 300% increase in allocations and stuffed National Assembly with at least 1 billion naira each under the laughable excuse of “constituency projects,” you think that justifies their endorsement? Are you hearing yourself? Is this your idea of governance or a well-oiled criminal enterprise?

Let’s call this what it is: state-sanctioned bribery. You’re celebrating the fact that our so-called leaders are endorsing a president not because of vision, not because of progress, not because of results—but because he paid them off with public funds. Do you realize how deranged and dangerous that logic is?

You say “who else should endorse him?” Try this: the citizens. The people getting crushed daily under economic hardship. The ones who can no longer afford food, fuel, or basic healthcare. The ones whose lives are falling apart while the ruling class gorges themselves on obscene wealth stolen in broad daylight.

Let’s talk about these “constituency projects” you mentioned. Where are they? Name them. Point them out. Go to the average Nigerian’s community and ask them what 1 billion naira has done for them. Most will laugh at the absurdity. Because what you're defending isn't service to the people—it's high-level corruption dressed up as development.

You then have the audacity to blame voter apathy, as if it’s some personal failure of the masses. Maybe people don’t vote because they already know the outcome is bought and paid for behind closed doors by the same politicians you say are the “coordinators of votes.” How convenient for you. And how insulting to millions of Nigerians.

So let me ask you straight:
Is this what you think a president should be doing—weaponizing national wealth to buy endorsements from corrupt elites while the country sinks further into poverty, insecurity, and hopelessness? Is this your standard for leadership? Because if it is, then you’re endorsing a system of decay, and you have no moral ground to speak on progress or democracy.

bixton:






You seem to write intelligently but it's also obvious that you did not read to understand my comments but only rushed to respond for the defense of Sen. Natasha.
Nevertheless, we shall all see the outcome of this drama irrespective of how long it will take.
The road to 2027 is going to be full of all kinds of treats.

I appreciate your response, but let’s be clear—I read your comment thoroughly and responded based on its content, not out of blind loyalty to Senator Natasha or anyone else. Disagreeing with a narrative isn’t the same as defending a person; it’s called applying critical reasoning.

You’re right that the full outcome will eventually unfold, but until then, it’s essential that we resist jumping to conclusions based on bias or innuendo. Public discourse, especially around politics, demands more than speculation—it requires facts, fairness, and ability on all sides.

Yes, the road to 2027 will be turbulent, but let’s not allow sensationalism to replace sound judgment.

bixton:



All these alternate monikers that were just opened yesterday.

Judicial process and judicial delays like your lawyer who filed a case did not know that he will serve a summon to the one he is accusing for his client.....


Well, let Sen. Natasha keep gathering her evidence. Only she knows where it was dumped. The case is opened till election campaign starts come 2027 and beyond.

I never enter court before.
What do I even know about telling lies.

Your attempt to trivialize the matter with insinuations about “alternate monikers” and sarcasm regarding the judicial process only serves to reveal your lack of understanding—or deliberate misrepresentation—of how legal proceedings function. Unlike your dismissive tone, Sen. Natasha’s approach is grounded in procedure and evidence, not political theater.

It is both misleading and irresponsible to imply that a lawyer’s duty begins and ends with filing a case. Serving a summon is part of due process—something that seems foreign to you, as you’ve conveniently stated you’ve “never entered court before.” That may explain your reckless confidence in publicly commenting on matters you clearly do not grasp.

As for the assertion that only Sen. Natasha “knows where it was dumped,” your deflection is noted. The truth does not need to hide behind sarcasm. Evidence speaks for itself, and the timeline of this case will not bend to political strategy or delay tactics. The law will take its course—whether that’s before or beyond 2027—and when it does, no feigned ignorance will serve as a shield.

emkz:
There are agents of the acc here on Nairaland. Their modus operandi are to attack Akpabio and Sandra Duru, while painting someone as purity.

Natashaba launched a shouting attack on the 20th of February 2025. One of her agents ed Nairaland on 18th of February 2025 and made a first comment on 21st February. What does this mean?

The shouting attack on Akpabio was likely premeditated. Those to spread the propaganda were already being planted here to carry out the job.

Throwing around vague accusations about ‘agents’ and ‘premeditated propaganda’ without a shred of verifiable evidence is not only irresponsible—it borders on defamation.

If your only defense of Akpabio and Sandra Duru is to manufacture timelines and imply some grand conspiracy from forum activity, it suggests you're more interested in distortion than truth.

Nairaland is not a courtroom, but even here, credibility demands more than paranoid speculation.

Perhaps instead of deflecting with fictional coordination plots, you should focus on the actual allegations—and why they provoke such fear in their defenders.

emkz:
The fundamental idea was to embarass, gaslight and control the narrative with unsubstantiated accusations. She never wanted a court case, except noise. She never wanted closure except playing the victim.

Claiming to know someone’s intentions while dismissing their actions as ‘noise’ is both arrogant and deeply dishonest.

This isn't about controlling a narrative—it's about speaking out, which people like you clearly can’t tolerate unless it fits your bias.

Dismissing someone’s pursuit of justice as ‘playing the victim’ says more about your mindset than hers.

If your instinct is to attack rather than understand, maybe you're part of the problem she's calling out.

bixton:



Imagine someone filing a case since February and is yet to serve summon letters to those whom they are accusing alledgly!!!!

This judge is very lenient. Next time they should be served with a severe fine for playing social media accusatio and not want to follow appropriate judicial proceedings.

It’s deeply ironic to see someone so concerned with due process while simultaneously making inflammatory assumptions based on incomplete information.

Judicial proceedings often involve delays that have nothing to do with leniency or neglect.

Making sweeping accusations from the sidelines, especially without insight into the legal complexities or procedural stages, only highlights a lack of understanding.

If there’s genuine concern for justice, it should begin with respecting the process—not distorting it to suit a narrative.

TopBanter:


People like you make me laugh. Natasha, the evil and wicked blackmailer, insisted, without supplying any proof whatsoever, that Akpabio instructed Yaya Bello to assasinate her.

Na beans to accuse the third citizen of Nigeria of that without proof whatsoever?

Some of you just have no sense of fairness and equity towards others and this the one of the main reason Nigeria is a mess.

You the misbehaviour of your own but scream childishly when they come for them for the misdeeds you once praises them for as is the case with Natasha and Nnamdi Kanu.

Did you condemn Natasha when she accused Apkpabio, the third most important Nigeria, of ordering her assasination without providing any proof whatsoever?

If Akpabio hired Susan Duru then so what? Which of us will not do same against someone determined to destroy our lives with wicked, malicious and life-destroying lies and accusations?

Has Natasha not done and said enough wicked and evil things against our SP for him to want to deal with her? Because you hate Akpabio, you must Lie-Tasha blindly, and never be fair to our SP when he deserves such as a human being?

As long as Sarah Duru has exposed Natasha truthfully and verifiably, with Lie-Tasha failing/refusing to go to court, then anything Akpabio does to clear his name and expose Natasha real character is 100% justified.

Especially in the eyes of fair-minded folks who strongly feel wicked human being like Natasha must be stopped by all means and not allowed to get away with their madness against others as Natahsa has been getting away with for a long time.

Blind Loyalty Is the Cancer

Defending Akpabio like he’s your god? Ridiculous. Screaming “no proof” while ignoring your own bias—typical hypocrisy.

If Natasha is lying, take her to court. But no—he hides behind smear agents like Sandra Duru, a well-known fraud. That’s not justice. That’s cowardice.

And you said “So what if he hired her?”
So what? You just justified political intimidation. That’s how dictators operate.

Stop pretending to care about fairness when you only defend your favorites. Until you hold everyone able, your outrage means nothing.

NetbizBoss:
This woman does not deserve to be a Senator, she behalf so childish. Anyone whom the Lord want to destroy must first of all be made mad

If Natasha was Bianca Ojukwu, she would have sue that white man below for sexual assault

First address your very horribly written English.

Your condescending tone and baseless insults reveal more about your own shortcomings than hers.

Dismissing someone as 'childish' or 'mad' is a weak attempt to undermine their credibility without engaging in real debate.

If you have legitimate criticisms, present them—otherwise, your words are nothing more than empty vitriol, unworthy of serious discussion.