Jim Jordan Gets Flustered As Simple Question Turns Awkward On '60 Minutes'
Jim Jordan Gets Flustered As Simple Question Turns Awkward On '60 Minutes'
The Ohio lawmaker was asked about Donald Trump’s debunked claims about the 2020 election.
The Ohio lawmaker was asked about Donald Trump's debunked claims about the 2020 election.
Rep. Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) seemed to have an uncomfortable moment on “60 Minutes” during Sunday night’s segment on social media disinformation.
Jordan argued against social media companies taking down inaccurate posts, saying the American people should figure out what’s true and what’s not.
“What about this idea that the 2020 election was stolen?” asked correspondent Lesley Stahl. “You think that these companies should allow people to say that and that individuals can make up their own mind.”
“I’ve not said that,” said Jordan, who is on the record pushing conspiracy theoriesabout the 2020 election. “What I’ve said is there were concerns about the 2020 election, I think Americans agree with that.”
“No they don’t,” said Stahl.
“I’ve not said that,” said Jordan, who is on the record pushing conspiracy theories about the 2020 election. “What I’ve said is there were concerns about the 2020 election; I think Americans agree with that.”
“No, they don’t,” said Stahl.
This is how you need to talk to republicans.
Be firm, short, and too the point.
Like a toddler throwing a tantrum. Try to explain anything with facts or logic and it goes right over their heads. They respond well to authority and are mostly cowards. So just like Jordan, they'll quickly shut down.
If you try to use facts and logic, they argue against what you said with no logical consistency. If you just tell them they're wrong, they have to try and come up with facts and logic to prove theyre right rather than just fight what you said.
Which is a lot harder.
If you just tell them they’re wrong, they have to try and come up with facts and logic to prove theyre right rather than just fight what you said.
This only works in situations where they cannot run back to the cult for overwhelming reinforcement .
In rural red areas most MAGAs have their heads so far up each other's asses that a breath of honest truth would kill them.
Shows how big a lie the election is stolen narrative is.
Jordan, if he were in Congress where he knows he can't be sued for defamation, would have ranted for 20 minutes about Dominion voting machines. But put him in a place where he knows he'd get a defamation lawsuit and all the sudden that congressional fire goes ice cold.
He's a supreme weasel and he covered up rape for years.
I remember Rush Limbaugh. He'd never talk about African Americans on his show, but those "inner city rappers" and "affirmative action losers" always got a good drubbing.
They always speak their minds, after vetting it with the legal team.
This is what happens when a guilty man thinks he just got caught. Heart rate goes through the room, stammers. She did a good job steering that interview back on the road.
I don't see this interview as too much of a "gotcha"... it still lets the whole thing get framed in a very weird and deliberately-conservative-friendly way.
The core issue is, big tech companies have identified deliberate misinformation as a major problem on their platforms, and they're trying to fight it. Conservatives don't like that, because a lot of the deliberate misinformation is being spread by them and by professionals that they're employing. So they're trying to reframe the reality to justify their desire to make it illegal or at least difficult for tech companies to fight misinformation.
- There's a myth that government is telling social media companies to censor certain viewpoints, which simply isn't happening, and any communication at all (e.g. if the FBI learns that some misinformation campaign is on behalf of a state adversary and communicates some details about it to a social media company) gets seized on and misrepresented to make it look like that.
- There's a myth that this "censorship" is happening based on viewpoint, or whether something is true (like if I go on Facebook and say the sky is orange someone will take it down), rather than based on it being specifically dangerous misinformation or not.
- There's very little discussion of the fact that a lot of what's being "censored" is professional misinformation, and only tangentially (through someone reposting or repeating something that a professional outfit originated) does someone's actual organic post go into the crosshairs.
Which big tech companies are trying to fight misinformation?
Pretty much every one except X/Twitter. If you don't make some effort in that direction then your platform quickly becomes an absolute cesspool (see Twitter).
Trump rewarded Jordan with the Presidential Medal Of Freedom before leaving office.
Fuck, I either didn't know that or blocked it out entirely. What an embarrassing shitstain.
Gym Jordan has an uncomfortable interview and it's about the idiotic "Big Lie" not the fact that he oversaw sexual abuse and is still a Representative.
Remember the reason Representative Jim Jordan loves encouraging dishonesty is the fact he's protected under Speech and Debate Clause.