PolitiFact Tries to Protect Dem Candidates, Exposed For Bogus ‘Fact-Checking’

[Swordsmyth]

PolitiFact, which is absolutely a non-partisan “fact-checking” organization (and don’t you dare suggest otherwise, you looney conspiracy theorist) was forced to retract a bogus ruling that sought protect Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) from a Republican attack ad.
“You know, that’s one thing the United States has that nobody else has, is the freedom to fly around and be affordable where a normal person can afford it,” a constituent told McCaskill at a 2017 town hall.
The constituent was referring to his own own private plane, which McCaskill confirmed to Free Beacon at the time.
“Will you remind them when they come after me about my husband’s plane that normal people can afford it?” McCaskill responded to her constituent.


But when the Senate Leadership Fund ran an ad attacking McCaskill for being out of touch with her constituents for thinking that “normal people” can afford private planes, it struck a chord with the arbiters of truth over at PolitiFact.

“Did Claire McCaskill say normal people can afford a private plane? No,” the organization said definitively, attaching a link to its story.

Shortly thereafter, they unpublished the story, claiming that they received “new evidence” that may not support their “False” rating of the original story.

To be clear, that “new evidence” was readily available before they published the original story – they either chose to ignore it, or did not properly research the evidence before publishing their story. After all the hoopla, PolitiFact issued a new “fact-check.”


This time they labeled the ad “half-true,” claiming that it “exaggerated” McCaskill’s statements.

More at: https://bigleaguepolitics.com/politi...fact-checking/

[kpitcher]

Hopefully this is a one off as politifact appears to try to be accurate. If this becomes a pattern then it destroys the purpose of their site.

[Swordsmyth]

Hopefully this is a one off as politifact appears to try to be accurate. If this becomes a pattern then it destroys the purpose of their site.

It is a pattern.

[angelatc]

Hopefully this is a one off as politifact appears to try to be accurate. If this becomes a pattern then it destroys the purpose of their site.

They rated a Rand Paul statement as false while saying that technically it was true, but most people wouldn't understand it.

[Krugminator2]

They rated a Rand Paul statement as false while saying that technically it was true, but most people wouldn't understand it.

I assume this is what you are talking about. Politifact is just liberal propaganda masked as "fact checking".

https://www.politifact.com/truth-o-m...20000-private/


Rand's numbers were 100% correct. Everything was correct in what he said. Rand even phrased it the correct way taking into account total compensation. Reason rebutted Politicfiction but there was no retraction.

[Krugminator2]

Hopefully this is a one off as politifact appears to try to be accurate. If this becomes a pattern then it destroys the purpose of their site.

HHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHAHHAHAHAHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHAHAHAHAHHAHA HHAAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHBWAHAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH AHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHBWAH



LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOLLLLLLLLLL


I could come up with dozens of examples (literally) if I had to of cases where they were clearly wrong and chose to rate something the opposite of what is true. I am not going to Google and find all of them but I remember Ted Cruz said most violent criminals were Democrats (overwhelmingly True, like 6 to 1 ratio true) and Politifact rated it false because it had to do with minorities committing crimes and race was the reason. Or Tom Coburn said unfunded liabilities were into the hundreds of trillions (completely true) that I don't even know how they rated false. Marco Rubio had one that I have forgotten but Rubio was completely correct. There was was another one where someone made the claim that the welfare state caused single mothers (certainly debatable but a credible statement) that they rated outright false. I listed the Rand Paul example in the previous post.

It is just a disgusting site. It would be like calling Paul Krugman a fact checker. It is an opinion site.

[Danke]

https://mobile.twitter.com/Pegger420...579%2Fpage-124

[Anti Globalist]

Politifact is a bunch of garbage.

[eleganz]

Why is it only the liberals that have fact checking sites? Do conservatives have one?

I already know libertarians don't have one, we are that weak. Sorry but its true guys!

[kpitcher]

Why is it only the liberals that have fact checking sites? Do conservatives have one?

I already know libertarians don't have one, we are that weak. Sorry but its true guys!

Alright, that Rand example shows politifact is full of $#@!. The average person understands jobs include benefits.

I come from a heavy Red area, I don't have many outright Dem social media connections. I do see a whole lot of totally bogus made up things from the conservative side - mainly from the same people, often shares from groups with the name "Trump" in them. Kurt Cobain and Shaq were all praising Trump in the last week - that sort of thing.

Do the diehard trumpers fall for anything so more fake news coming from their side than the dem side? Or is it across the board on promotingt lies ?