Like more than a few people, Weijia Jiang was not familiar with Trump’s aborted video from 2012 in which he fires “Obama.” After realizing the background, she deleted a tweet about it.
Because that is how you demonstrate credibility: acknowledging errors.
(1/)
By being mentioned in her tweet, I got a reminder of how things work today.
If you admit error, you acknowledge error. If, on the other hand, you deny making an error? You can try to push every issue into a he-said-she-said battle.
(2/)
If you deny that you were wrong or that you lied or that you had an affair, people who seek to defend you can live in the gray area, however narrow.
If you admit your mistake, as you should and as you might be professionally obligated to do? You allow bad-faith critiques.
(3/)
So you can say untrue things thousands of times without admitting it and be a truth-teller. Or you can say true things thousands of times and be dismissed out of hand because of the time you admitted you were wrong.
(4/)
And yet it still gets worse.
(5/5)
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
So Jonathan Turley wrote over the weekend that "Bump has repeatedly spread false stories and then refused to accept the falsity of his own earlier claims, even after most of the media have admitted the errors."
The just-released transcript of the Devon Archer testimony just completely eviscerates what Comer and Jordan were saying on TV. Totally embarrassing.
Here's how it works. In the headline, Fox suggests that Hunter used Joe Biden. In the copy, they accurately indicate that he used "the name," which was Archer's point. But people don't read the copy.
Whether or not Archer was sworn in, he was testifying under penalty of perjury because you can't lie when giving testimony to Congress.
A particularly shoddy effort to undermine fact-checkers — a thread
So you remember Stephen Miller. Out of the White House, he is now the president of something called America First Legal. This afternoon, he hyped some of its work. 1/
The group obtained a list of fact-checkers with whom the State Department was apparently consulting. These people are scare-quoted as "journalists." 2/
Then each is disparaged separately, starting with Politifact's Angie Holan. She is described as being "deeply intertwined in the Poynter network and lectures and teaches others the ways of censorship" — Millerspeak for pointing out the falseness of false information. 3/
They thought the checkmark was the cachet, not the celebrity status that warranted the checkmark. Then Musk obliterated the connection between celebrity and cachet.
Now they want celebrities back because they realize the cachet is gone.
But to make it stupider, they think celebrities won’t come back out of spite, because they don’t want to share their cachet — a recognition that the cachet was never inherent to the checkmark!
It’s like a club invited celebs to drink free to boost business and they did and then the club owner was like “now everyone pays” so the celebs bounced. Now the club is just people who are mad they paid for a membership but they’re mad at the celebs for leaving not the owner.