Rabid right wingers don't actually know what George Clooney looks like

by Admin Fri 02 Oct 2020, 13:50

Ah, THIS story. I've had a number of rather-confused right-wingers tweeting this at me recently. As far as I can understand from their rather incoherent tweets, they can't tell the difference between Jeffrey Epstein and George Clooney in a photo. It's like they're all really dumb or something . . .

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

Republicans Sow Doubts About Debate Fairness

By Kevin Roose

Conservative social media was full of attacks on Chris Wallace, the debate moderator on Tuesday.Credit...Jordan Gale for The New York Times
After Tuesday’s chaotic presidential debate, in which President Trump repeatedly ignored the ground rules, his supporters turned their anger on Chris Wallace, the Fox News anchor who served as the debate’s moderator, accusing him of being biased against the president.

Posts attacking Mr. Wallace dominated conservative social media on Wednesday and Thursday. One meme, which got more than a million interactions on Facebook after the president shared it, depicted Mr. Trump taking on both Mr. Wallace and Joseph R. Biden Jr., the Democratic nominee, in a Street Fighter-style two-on-one brawl.

Another meme, shared by the conservative influencers the Hodgetwins, depicted Mr. Wallace as Mr. Biden’s knight in shining armor.

Other conservatives tried to paint Mr. Wallace as a Trump hater in disguise, pointing out that he is a registered Democrat. This is true. Mr. Wallace has described himself as “independent,” and has said he registered as a Democrat because “where I live, in Washington, D.C., the only elections that count are the Democratic primaries.”

But other claims about Mr. Wallace were not true, such as a rumor that circulated on WeChat, the Chinese messaging app, that claimed he was “fired” from moderating any future debates. Some users also shared an image that was falsely labeled as showing Mr. Wallace with Jeffrey Epstein, the financier and accused sex trafficker. (The photo actually showed Mr. Wallace with the actor George Clooney, a vocal liberal with whom he is friendly.)

The right-wing attacks have not stopped at Mr. Wallace. Conservatives have also begun casting doubts about the fairness of the second presidential debate, which is scheduled for Oct. 15 and is slated to be moderated by Steve Scully, a longtime C-SPAN political editor and host.

One right-wing meme accused Mr. Scully of being connected to the “deep state.” Other conservatives referred to him as a former Biden intern, or said he and Mr. Biden had gone to college together. (They did not go to college together, although Mr. Scully did intern with Mr. Biden’s Senate office while an undergraduate at American University. He also was an intern for Senator Edward M. Kennedy.)

Senator Ted Cruz, Republican of Texas, called the choice of moderator “NUTS,” and proposed having future debates moderated by teams of one Republican and one Democrat.

Pro-Trump partisans also began digging for evidence that the Commission on Presidential Debates, the bipartisan organization that sponsors the debates, was biased against Mr. Trump. Mr. Trump has complained about the commission in the past, calling it “very biased” and saying it is “stacked with Trump Haters & Never Trumpers.” (The group’s leadership consists of both Democrats and Republicans.)

Those claims have been renewed after Tuesday’s debate. On Thursday, supporters of QAnon, the pro-Trump conspiracy theory, began posting unfounded rumors about members of the debate commission, and pointing out that President Barack Obama is an honorary co-chair. (He is, as are former presidents from both parties, including George W. Bush.) Q, the pseudonymous message board poster whose posts fuel the theory, also weighed in, calling the commission’s choice of Mr. Scully as a debate moderator evidence of a “rigged system.”

by Admin Sat 03 Oct 2020, 10:39

d here's a full article about it.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

[size=37]Photo shows Chris Wallace and Jeffrey Epstein on Epstein’s private island.
[/size]
[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

FACEBOOK FACT-CHECKS

VIRAL IMAGE

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]
By Ciara O'RourkeOctober 2, 2020

No, that’s not Epstein with Chris Wallace. It’s George Clooney.

IF YOUR TIME IS SHORT

These photos are from a 2012 trip Chris Wallace took to visit George Clooney at his home in Lake Como, Italy.

See the sources for this fact-check

Some Republicans have accused Fox News anchor Chris Wallace of being biased against President Donald Trump as he moderated the first presidential debate on Sept. 29.

Several Facebook posts being shared widely on the social media platform offer an explanation why: He was cozy with the late financier and sex offender, Jeffrey Epstein, and there are pictures to prove it.

"Chris Wallace with Jeffrey Epstein on pedophile island," one post says, referring to the private island Epstein owned. "I wonder why there was bias during the debate."

"Chris Wallace with Epstein, now you get it," another says.

The posts each show a different photo of Wallace — one getting help climbing onto a boat, and another by the water. But the photos don’t show Jeffrey Epstein with the Fox News anchor — they show Wallace on vacation in Lake Como, Italy, where he and his wife were visiting George Clooney’s home in August 2012.

These posts were flagged as part of Facebook’s efforts to combat false news and misinformation on its News Feed. (Read more about our partnership with Facebook.)

Both images are shown in this Politico interview with Wallace after the trip.

"He’s a heck of a nice guy," Wallace said in the interview, later adding, "He’s liberal … and we don’t always agree on the issues, but we can disagree agreeably."

More photos from that trip can be seen here and here. Jeffrey Epstein is not pictured, nor is he mentioned in news coverage.

Because he wasn’t there. We rate these posts Pants on Fire!

by Admin Tue 06 Oct 2020, 10:52

I realise from the lack of comments, that I'm the only one who finds this remotely amusing.

Anyway, please let me amuse myself about this a while longer: in latest tweets, they've now figured out that it's George Clooney in the photos with Chris Wallace, not Jeffrey Epstein (hoorah!) BUT they've now transfigured George's little speedboat boat into a yacht and moved it from Lake Como in Italy to the US Virgin Islands in the Caribbean!!

Honestly, it wouldn't be possible to make up such stupidity.

by party animal - not! Tue 06 Oct 2020, 11:19

What astounds me, Katie, is the effort and work and time they choose to put in to achieve what

is clearly false.........

Chris Wallace and George must be having a good laugh. Maybe these are Q'Aanon types at

'work'!

by Admin Tue 06 Oct 2020, 11:47

I know, right? I just can't figure out what the point of these posts are. It's clearly false, and moreover, clearly maliciously false because it's not possible to accidentally confuse these people/locations. What kind of person would then, knowing that it's untrue, continue to insist that it's true?

I've worked with these kind of people in the past, so I suppose I ought not to be surprised, but I continue to be astounded that anyone would lie so hard and genuinely expect to be believed.

by annemarie Tue 06 Oct 2020, 16:51

Katie your right complete stupidity.

by LizzyNY Wed 07 Oct 2020, 01:37

Well, if this country is any example, even when the lies are so blatant that anyone with a brain knows they're lies, there are still sheeple who will believe whatever they're told.

I wonder how far they're going to take this "story".

by Admin Wed 07 Oct 2020, 11:15

As far as they can, I'm guessing. They're already telling me George was a regular to this 'Epstein Island'!! I'm still shocked at the blatant lies.

by annemarie Wed 07 Oct 2020, 12:27

It may be George will have to sue , then they will stop.

by LizzyNY Wed 07 Oct 2020, 14:25

I don't think he'd bother if they just mis-identified him in a photo, but if they try to link him to Epstein isn't that grounds for a slander suit? I'm guessing his lawyers are readying a cease-and-desist letter to warn them off.

by Admin Wed 07 Oct 2020, 15:56

I don't see how he can sue. It's just social media accounts. To sue someone, you need their name and address, don't you?

by LizzyNY Wed 07 Oct 2020, 16:40

Katie - I'm not sure how a lawsuit would work. I guess it depends on what social media platform is being used to post these articles, what their policies are and what their legal liabilities are.

Right now drumpf is being sued for tweeting that one of his accusers is a liar, so I guess there is a way to sue if someone lies about you online.

by Admin Wed 07 Oct 2020, 18:18

Yes, you can easily sue if you know the person who's doing the tweeting. But these accusations are being posted by people hiding behind usernames. Could be anyone's guess who they are - if they're even people at all and not bots!

by LizzyNY Wed 07 Oct 2020, 21:04

Maybe it's the platform that has to be sued for not removing provably false information - if that's at all possible. I don't know what the current status of legislation is on what the online services are responsible for in terms of content.

by annemarie Wed 07 Oct 2020, 21:55

Here is what I found:

[size=40]Social Media and Online Defamation[/size]

Understand key legal issues related to potential defamation on Facebook, blogs, Twitter, and elsewhere.

There are two main types of defamation: libel, or written defamation, and slander, or verbal defamation. When a potentially defamatory statement is made online or through social media -- such as via Facebook or Linkedin -- that involves the written (or "posted") word, and so it is considered libel.

In this article, we'll discuss key legal issues related to online defamation, and we'll look at some real-life examples. (For in-depth information on defamation law, check out all of the articles in Nolo's Defamation, Libel & Slander section.

The Problem of Online Defamation

The internet and social media are certainly a great thing for people and society in general, but they are also a uniquely effective breeding ground for potentially libelous statements.
Many people have learned (to their dismay) that the internet allows people to speak their mind almost too easily. The internet is chock-full of interesting web sites where someone could intentionally or accidentally leave a potentially defamatory comment or post.
Just a few of these locations are:

letters to the editor of local newspapers
public comments on media (i.e., newspaper or magazine) web sites
blogs and comments to blog postings
social media like Facebook, Linkedin, and Twitter, and
chat rooms or listservers.

While some web sites screen posts for inflammatory or illegal content, the screening systems are not geared to examine every post for defamatory content, and so many defamatory postings end up online.

What State’s Law Applies? Where Can I Sue?

This is a complicated issue that depends on what state you live in, what state the alleged defamer lives in, and the contacts that the defamer has had with your state, if any. If you think that you have been defamed online, you should contact a qualified attorney as soon as possible to discuss your legal options and the best course of action.

Can You Sue an Internet Service Provider?

One reason you might want to sue the host or internet service provider (ISP) of the website that posted a defamatory statement is the "deep pockets" argument.
ISPs or website hosts might have more money -- and therefore more ability to pay a judgment -- than some blogger who posted a defamatory statement about you. But, for better or for worse, a federal law called the Communications Decency Act has specifically exempted website hosts and ISPs from most defamation claims.

Let’s look at a couple of examples of the kinds of communications that might amount to online defamation.
Let’s say that you have a blog and that you wrote that John Smith hit his wife two weeks ago. If this statement is not true (remember, truth is one of the absolute defenses to defamation), it is defamatory. There is no way that this statement, if false, is not defamatory.

Are Opinions Protected?

But let’s qualify this statement. Let’s say that you wrote, “I think that John Smith hit his wife two weeks ago.” Statements of opinion are not statements of fact, and so theoretically are protected from libel suits. But is this really a statement of opinion? Sometimes statements of opinion really are viewed as statements of fact, depending on the circumstances. In this case, the average person may very well look at your statement as a statement of fact, depending on how well you know John Smith and his wife, and why you believe that Smith hit his wife.
The bottom line: Just because you phrase something as a statement of opinion -- "I think" or "I believe" -- does not automatically protect you from a defamation claim.

What If a Statement Is Only Partially True?

Let’s take another example. Let’s say that you wrote on someone else’s Facebook page that Mary Johnson was fired from her job because she made a serious mistake and, as a result, her company lost an important client. Again, if this is a false statement, it is almost certainly defamatory. But what if it is true that she made the mistake, but that the company did not lose the client? What if, in fact, her company fired her to appease the client? You have certainly written something that was false (at least in part), but maybe overall it was not defamatory.
The bottom line on this type of situation: If you are blogging or writing on your Facebook page, or submitting comments on someone else’s blog or Facebook page, make sure that you have all of your facts absolutely straight before posting your statement to the internet. Once you have clicked “send,” you can’t take it back.
Or, alternatively, if it is a close call, why say it at all? To use our example, why do you need to write on someone else’s Facebook page about Mary Johnson being fired? Unless you’re the one who fired her, you don’t know all the facts. In submitting posts or comments online or on social media, it is a good idea to exercise the utmost caution and avoid making any "gray area" statements that could be construed as defamation.

by party animal - not! Wed 07 Oct 2020, 23:10

The biggest problem with all of this, regardless of the subject, is that Facebook are not fast

enough at pulling that which is deemed defamatory or anything else that may be offensive,

including child abuse, rape etc, and do not want to employ enough people to fact check

everything, despite their billions, hence Cambridge Analytica invading 70 million accounts,

Russian influence in elections, etc etc. In fact they have handed their 'checker' contract

to the Daily Caller, and right wing organisation with shareholders like Steven Bannon.

So this is very small fry really.........

This is very revealing:

[You must be registered and logged in to see this link.]

contracted

by Admin Thu 08 Oct 2020, 07:57

Very annoying indeed. As always, it comes down to self-control and individual posters managing what they write about a person, but as we can see, the far-right just don't do that.

by LizzyNY Thu 08 Oct 2020, 15:22

I love Katie Porter! No one does a better job of interrogation than she does. I wish she was moderating the presidential/vice presidential debates. Hell, I wish she was running for president!

Mark Zuckerberg claiming not to know this, that and the other about what his company does is typical of the kind of testimony most CEOs give when questioned. It's no wonder nothing changes.

by Sponsored content

Rabid right wingers don't actually know what George Clooney looks like