CNN report said North Carolina candidate for governor made explicit posts on website’s message board
CNN report said North Carolina candidate for governor made explicit posts on website’s message board
Mark Robinson, North Carolina’s lieutenant governor, announced a lawsuit Tuesday against CNN over its recent report alleging he made explicit racial and sexual posts on a pornography website’s message board, calling the reporting reckless and defamatory.
The lawsuit, filed in Wake county superior court, comes less than four weeks after a television report that led many fellow GOP elected officials and candidates, including Donald Trump, to distance themselves from Robinson’s gubernatorial campaign. Robinson announced the lawsuit at a news conference in Raleigh.
Sadly it won't ever get to that phase. This is just so he can claim it's a lie between now and election day. He'll quietly drop the lawsuit about a week after the election.
I wish it were required that both parties agree to the lawsuit being dropped for it not to continue. I'd love to see this frivolous bullshit forced into a courtroom against the plaintiffs will by the defendants.
His biggest problem is North Carolina has a big Dixiecrat/ Republican base. He was getting a pass due to having a R next to his name. Now, they will vote for a white guy.
Real news media doesn't make controversial statements about individuals unless they have proof. I am quite certain that before this story went to press, there were serious internal discussions at CNN about not only its validity, but about CNN's ability to demonstrate that validity in court.
He's not planning to get that far... Just needs the optics a few weeks before the election and then, win or lose, will drop the case without going through discovery.
True. Though if you read the original CNN article, the circumstantial evidence is fairly damning. I don't think he has any chance of
getting out from under this.
Also, in a legal context, I think there very well may be a distinction between claiming a report is defamatory versus claiming it is false. As per Wikipedia:
The precise legal definition of defamation varies from country to country. It is not necessarily restricted to making assertions that are falsifiable
Actually he is. Calling something defamatory implies that the statement is false. The inverse is also true: if a statement is true, then it's not defamation.
(source: I was hyperfixated on the Depp v. Heard trial)
It’s almost impossible to win a defamation lawsuit as a public person. This is just being used as a flimsy shield before the election to try to give his denials some credibility. The standard is so high that unless someone at CNN was recorded as admitting to making this up then this case won’t make it very far.
Robinson's entire defense so far has been to claim this is a hoax and when asked how posts on pages going back years can be hoaxed, he gives a "trust me, bro" response.
If cnn can’t prove it they are in deep doggy doo doo.
Not really. They came with the receipts, showing time after time that the commenter shared personal details and used indiosyncratic turns of phrase that Robinson repeated on public accounts and forums. They had a very reasonable belief that it was true, and never claimed more than that. In the US, for a public figure, that's generally more than enough.