Bạn có thể thêm thông tin vị trí vào các Tweet, như như thành phố hoặc vị trí chính xác của bạn, từ web và qua các ứng dụng của bên thứ ba. Bạn luôn có thể xóa lịch sử vị trí Tweet của bạn. Tìm hiểu thêm
SCOOP: Jacob Wohl and Jack Burkman are behind the sexual assault allegations against Pete Buttigieg. And we got screenshots of Wohl buying the real Hunter Kelly's plane tickets - who now denies the story.http://advocate.com/news/2019/4/29/far-right-activist-created-fake-sexual-assault-story-involving-pete …
This is definitely grounds for a very successful civil case from the looks of it. Defamation requires the accused to have knowingly spread false information, which is exactly what they were doing here. But it requires a plaintiff.
IIRC, public person's must establish real damages, which would be tricky in this case because Wohl is coagulated fail animated.
This is true. I neglected to consider that Pete is a public figure.
Being a public figure only matters for privacy of information. You still can't spread lies in media without the threat of lawsuit.
@opendna is partially correct. Pete Buttigieg is a public figure and thus subject to a higher standard of proof in defamation claims. Actual malice or disregard for the truth is the standard. Again, it requires a plaintiff (Buttigieg in this example).
That makes sense. I think the fact that the proof of intent is part of the story in the form of audio tape could make it a stronger case. Sure, there has to be a plaintiff. I'm sure he will study the evidence himself before deciding to sue.
Important for those following along: defamation is a civil matter, not a criminal.
Fun. Do Dr. Ford next. This is a fun game.
Don’t be an asshole.
Don’t be one sided.
I’m not. This is direct evidence of a fraud and a false accusation. There was no such example with Ford.
Yes there was. Her friends wouldn’t collaborate her story and she changed it multiple times. This is the same thing except these people got caught and didn’t make a quick million in the process.
That is not the same. No one accused her of conspiracy. She also didn't make a "quick million." In fact, she had to hire private security because of the death threats she received. Any funds donated to her that were not used for this were given to women's charities. Nice try tho
Your definition of defamation is definitely wanting....especially where the defamed is a public official. Practicing law w/o a license is a felony, FYI.
Sir this is a Wendy’s
I knew that
Twitter có thể đang bị quá tải hoặc tạm thời trục trặc. Thử lại hoặc truy cập Trạng thái Twitter để biết thêm thông tin.
