Don't Believe the Liberal "Fact-Checkers"!

More and more, major news outlets are relying on “fact checkers” to, allegedly, ensure that the news is factual, sources are reliable, and statements are accurate.

In theory, this is admirable. In practice, it has proven to be simply another opportunity for the media to push their leftist agenda.

Fact checking groups — such as PolitiFact — routinely cast judgments while failing to disclose their own left-wing bias. Their allies in the media try to cast these groups as neutral third parties when, in fact, they are card-carrying members of the liberal echo chamber.

It’s no wonder that the public has so little faith in the fact-checkers. A 2016 Rasmussen poll found that an astonishing 62% of American voters think the fact-check-ers are biased.

The Media Research Center is flipping the script on these faux-fact-checkers. It’s time to turn the tables and give the public the real facts.

 

Republican John Cox is the dictionary definition of an underdog in the California governor's race against liberal Democrat Gavin Newsom. On average, he's down 29 points in the polls. So why are the "fact checkers" focusing on him? Bill Zeiser, editor of the Real Clear Politics Fact Check Review, noted both PolitiFact and The Washington Post are trying to pick apart Cox's claims. 



It's the fall campaign season, so it's not surprising that PolitiFact is going to start providing the liberal spin to evaluate Republican campaign ads. On Monday, they threw a "Mostly False" rating at Rep. Martha McSally in the U.S. Senate race. Yes, Rep. Kyrsten Sinema wore a pink tutu to "No War" protests, but "we found no evidence of her disparaging troops."



The very political act of “fact checking” emerged again in a Washington Post Fact Checker article on Rep. Duncan Hunter (R.-Calif.), indicted for abusing his campaign kitty. The Post’s watchdog was Salvador Rizzo, and he ruled Hunter was “mostly false” (“3 Pinocchios”) for arguing his prosecution is partisan...based on two of his prosecutors went to a 2015 fundraisers for Hillary Clinton. That fact was "unconvincing." 



We noted PolitiFact gave ultraliberal Sen. Kamala Harris a "Mostly True" on July 25 when her facts on apartment rentals weren't factual. By contrast, on July 20, PolitiFact declared it "Mostly False" when a Republican challenger tweeted that ultraliberal Sen. Tammy Baldwin of Wisconsin "opposed displaying the flag and reciting the Pledge of Allegiance or singing the National Anthem in our classrooms." Did she vote that way? Yes. But she later made other more patriotic votes in Congress.

Did she? Yes, that's true.



PolitiFact's kid-gloves treatment of prominent Democrats is on display again. Twitchy noted ultraliberal Sen. Kamala Harris drew a rare evaluation, but of course, the ruling was "Mostly True." PolitiFact has only evaluated Harris nine times -- five Mostly True, two True, and two Half True (and one of those was Democrat-on-Democrat warfare).



Flying in the face of reality, CBS News and the Associated Press issued a joint “fact-check” of the President this week, claiming that he was wrong to call the infamous DNC-funded Steele dossier a “Clinton campaign document.”



The "independent fact checkers" have a funny way of finding "technically correct" claims by conservatives to be "Mostly False." W. Gardner Selby at PolitiFact hammered that rating on Sen. Ted Cruz as he consulted liberal lawyers to insist Cruz left an "inaccurate impression" separation was required, when Trump could have chosen to let every illegal-immigrant parent and child go free into America. 



It's not surprising that PolitiFact would rule that a CNN host was "True." But it was surprising that Fareed Zakaria's "True" statement was "Yes, the Democratic Party is at nearly its weakest point in a century." So why is that a surprise? Because our liberal media has this amazing tendency to spend all its political-pundit time discussing the terrible shape the Republican Party is in.



On Monday evening Pacific Time, former Washington Post reporter Jose Antonio Vargas posted a photo on Twitter of children inside a cage. He assumed that the photo depicted unaccompanied illegal-immigrant children recently detained by ICE. He was wrong; but as of late Wednesday morning, he has from all appearances only indirectly admitted his error. An alleged "fact-check" at Snopes.com would not declare that Vargas's obviously fake-news tweet was false. Instead, it absurdly declared that the photo involved had only been "Miscaptioned."



Snopes.com's so-called "fact checks" are so often inane — NewsBusters has caught it "fact-checking" an obviously satirical post — that it's tempting to dismiss it as irrelevant. That would be a mistake. It's therefore important to call sites like Snopes out when they play their deceptive "fact check" games. That's what the site's Bethania Palma definitely did in discussing a claim about California's recently-passed water-use legislation.



Washington Post “Fact Checker” Glenn Kessler has concentrated most of his firepower on Donald Trump. A June 1 blog post touted “President Trump has made 3,251 false or misleading claims in 497 days." So Kessler offered a tiny nod toward balance on Monday by picking apart two claims Bill Clinton made when he had a "meltdown" with NBC’s Craig Melvin.



New York Times "fact checker" Linda Qiu is the latest example of knee-jerk defense of the Democrats masquerading as a truth-cop ticket on a Trump tweet. "Democrats have neither cheered on Mr. Trump's withdrawal from a summit with the North Korean leader...nor defended the violent gang MS-13."