Nearly 100 Percent of Political Contributions From Fact Checkers Go to Democrats

The total from the fact-checkers was $23K?

Ha, playas!

 

It would be odd if people who fact checked for a living contributed to pathological liars.

 

they did

 

This just shows the complete pointlessness of discussing these things with you. You have a completely different set of “facts” that by any objective measure are complete non sense. Historically people who believed ridiculous shit like you do tended to be tight lipped about it due to embarrassment. Now people seem to be proud about their willful ignorance.

 

So skimming through this verbiage, you are suggesting the Democratic Party is the party of truth? Hardly breaking news, Plank. The "Christian" (snicker, snicker) you voted for is a serial liar and has broken how many of the Ten Commandments Suggestions If Convenient? (Eight, if I'm not mistaken. He's one murder and calling his mother a bad word away from running the table.)

 

It's a brilliant scheme. Names like "Politifact" are really good, yet a quick Google search shows you they are run by the leftist Poynter Institute in St. Pete. Americans are catching on.

 

This. They've broken the social compact we have of generally trying to respect, and tell, the truth. Probably because they ve accepted that, and outright criminality, from their revered leader.

And its not just the ones at the "tip of the spear"*, who argue and abuse the truth. The silent ones have failed our social compact as well : with their failure to speak a word in defense of truth, they enable the lying to continue. Some of our basic social norms require polite group enforcement. Such as respecting the truth.

Similarly, we have people who vote for the political party that enables the criminal and the lying.....yet want to pretend they're not also enabling it.

There were lines not to be crossed - threshholds of decency, normalcy and yes, legality. Enablers and supporters of Trump crossed them.







* F$U allusion intended

 

Seeing as all donations to political candidates and certain groups is publicly available information, what did the Free Beacon get wrong in this article? Interesting that you did not include the source for your graphic on the Free Beacon.

FYI, Eliana Johnson is the Editor in Chief of the Free Beacon right now. She is more of a traditional Republican and not a MAGA.

 

What Beacon got wrong was the headline. Should have read: Nearly 100% of organizations refuse to waste money on Republican leaning fact-checkers." One must believe in the free market choice of ROI.

 

Fact checkering doesn't exist. For instance, did politician say "X"? The only fact is yes or no. Was he joking? In what context? What is the historical context?

I've never seen a fact check without context. Context is opinion. Ergo "fact checks are OP-EDs.

The only thing I find is interesting is that Democrats want to present this way and Republicans have no interest in that presentation.

 

Are you on the Matt Gaetz legal team?

 

Facts aren’t real!

 

“Context is opinion”? So if a sentence from a speaker’s statement is published alone (aka taken out of context) to make the speaker look bad and the fact check provides the entire paragraph/s and/or links to the full body of the speech, in your estimation that is only “opinion”? Make it make sense.

 

but they do.

 

There are a lot of media critics on the right but the majority of this board has never heard of them.

 

"$22,580 of the $22,683 in political donations that came from self-identified fact checkers during that time—a whopping 99.5 percent—went to Democrats and liberal groups."
This is such a small amount of donations as to be worthless for the proposition that fact checkers are overwhelmingly democrats. It is valid for the proposition that fact checkers don't donate much and try to remain neutral.

The reference to Cotton being right after all about the origin of Covid does not mean he's not otherwise a tool.

 

Amazing analysis - what you are suggesting is that people who care about facts want nothing to do with MAGA and "America First", a slogan used by the American Nazi friendly Americans of the 1930s?!?!

Imagine that? Just astounding analysis there!

 

No problem, here’s the link below. Not sure it’s a “gotcha”—it takes 20 seconds to find. I can provide more links if needed.

I’m not familiar with the data, but it will take more than per the article basis “Free Beacon analysis” to make the case. It’s not surprising they would target anyway who fact-checks since they are frequently mentioned as a far-right site with a questionable reputation.

Washington Free Beacon - Bias and Credibility

 

When your dog turns up missing, do you start your search at a Haitian restaurant? If Trump is not a liar, that's what you should do.