Examples of Snopes' Extreme Political Bias

[pknopp]

It is mostly false. She had no idea that the protesters hadn't made it to the offices. They all were hiding.

Which doesn't matter. This isn't about whether or not AOC actually feared for her life that day, it is about how Snopes, and other left of center supposed "fact checking" outlets skew their analysis of things to benefit Democrats.

And as such are NOT true fact checkers, but instead just more noise from a one sided debate, which really then, makes it no debate at all...

I have seen some media skew the narrative. I believe it was Newsweek that did that big time. Snopes is not doing that here.

Oh but they are, it was even pointed out in bold in the OP....

It's 100% irrelevant she wasn't in the area the rioters were at. They were told to get out that a mob had broke in and her office is accessible through the Capitol. She hears someone out in the hall looking for her (them) and she has no idea who they are.

What matters in this thread is how Snopes skewed the write up on it....If you want to debate AOC's instagram proclaimations, then start a thread on that...

They are saying her statements are true. They are.

Ok, you obviously didn't read the OP, or comprehend the topic....AOC was an example, not the topic....

Then they used a very poor example.

If one wants to argue that Snopes is biased, argue it but you have to use an example that shows that.

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

Here is another example...


No, Biden Didn’t Say ‘You Can’t Legislate by Executive Order Unless You’re a Dictator’

No, Biden Didn't Say 'You Can't Legislate by Executive Order Unless You're a Dictator'

Conservatives criticized the president's flurry of executive orders made in the first weeks of his term.

www.snopes.com

It's rated "mostly false." They are nitpicking literal details to propel their narrative.

He effectively said it. And in context, it's precisely what he meant, and here is the proof...

 

[WTH_Progs?]

None of the PROG-facts are accurate. They dress things up for a disable "rating", that's all.

Incidentally, when OAC spoke on the "threat" on live TV she didn't mention her near death experience at all, focusing on the Capital only. Since when do people speak of an incident they were never involved in after THEIR near death experience would be in context?

It's like someone only speaking of a train car that jumped the track, when supposedly they were in the car behind it that jumped the track as well.

 

[PoliticalChic]

I contend that Snopes is not a reputable fact checking website. It is their main job, they do it poorly, and they work harder to propel a narrative that is friendly to Democrats than they do to actually determine what is true and what is false.

Here is an example. I am interested in more, and I will likely contribute more here as I come across them...

Did AOC Exaggerate the Danger She Was in During Capitol Riot?

Did AOC Exaggerate the Danger She Was in During Capitol Riot?

AOC was targeted with another round of bad-faith smears after giving an emotional account of her experiences during the Capitol riot.

www.snopes.com

So the claim that they investigate is:

" Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez exaggerated the danger she was in during the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, in that she "wasn't even in the Capitol building" when the rioting occurred. "

Instead of rating it mostly true, or a mixture, they rate it mostly false, and then state:

"What's True
Ocasio-Cortez wasn't in the main Capitol building where the House and Senate Chambers are located."

Included in their "fact check" are the following politically-biased statements (emphasis added):

" It took less than 48 hours for the right-wing disinformation machine to contrive a way to minimize what Ocasio-Cortez said she had experienced. "

" In a circus of cyberbullying that began on Feb. 3, 2021, conservative news outlets and social media conspiracy trolls latched on to the misleading claim that Ocasio-Cortez “wasn’t in the Capitol building” and therefore was not in harm’s way, as she had described in the Instagram video."

To its credit, Snopes' main argument is that AOC never claimed she was in the Capitol building, which is an important point, but one example of "mostly-false right-wing disinformation" is a Red State headline, “AOC Wasn’t Even in the Capitol Building During Her ‘Near Death’ Experience.” Obviously, that headline is mostly true, arguably entirely true.

It just goes to show that you can't trust such websites. Wikipedia is also full of political bias these days. Their page on the Capitol riot reads like something CNN would put together.

Truth and facts are becoming harder to come by these days. When you have to fact check the fact checkers, things are pretty bad.

And social media companies will use "fact checks" like these to make censorship decisions, so they aren't simply "alternative viewpoints" on the internet; they have real-world First Amendment implications. (Please don't lecture me about private companies being able to make their own rules, I know.)

Snopes Rates AOC's Account Of Capitol Attack As 'Factually Inaccurate But Morally True'
February 4th, 2021

U.S.—Snopes has fact-checked Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's account of the attack on the Capitol, rating her claim that she was in mortal danger with rioters literally inches away from her as "factually inaccurate but morally true."

The fact-check pointed out that while Ocasio-Cortez's wild claims were factually untrue, they supported the narrative that the unbiased fact-checkers at Snopes approve of, and so they were compelled to rate her claims as "morally true."
Snopes was slammed on social media for the rating. But the founder of Snopes, Bob Snopes, says he stands by the decision. "We ran it by the Snopes cat, and he said it checks out," Bob Snopes said. "Anyone who criticizes Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for lying at least as much as Trump did is obviously an alt-right troll, a Russian bot, or someone with a huge crush on her."
He then glanced up at his framed picture of Ocasio-Cortez on the wall and smiled. "We're doing it all for you queen!"

Snopes Rates AOC's Account Of Capitol Attack As 'Factually Inaccurate But Morally True'

U.S.—Snopes has fact-checked Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's account of the attack on the Capitol, rating her claim that she was in mortal danger with rioters literally inches away from her as "factually inaccurate but morally true."

babylonbee.com

 

[pknopp]

Here is another example...


No, Biden Didn’t Say ‘You Can’t Legislate by Executive Order Unless You’re a Dictator’

No, Biden Didn't Say 'You Can't Legislate by Executive Order Unless You're a Dictator'

Conservatives criticized the president's flurry of executive orders made in the first weeks of his term.

www.snopes.com

It's rated "mostly false." They are nitpicking literal details to propel their narrative.

He effectively said it. And in context, it's precisely what he meant, and here is the proof...

How could that statement be correct when it completely misquotes him even using "quotes"?

Just because he didn't even say what is claimed he said, it should be deemed true?

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

Then they used a very poor example.

If one wants to argue that Snopes is biased, argue it but you have to use an example that shows that.

Can you not read?

They included this verbiage in their fact check...

"the right-wing disinformation machine"

and

"conservative news outlets and social media conspiracy trolls"

But you are entitled to your opinion that it does not show political bias. I think it is obvious bias.

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

I contend that Snopes is not a reputable fact checking website. It is their main job, they do it poorly, and they work harder to propel a narrative that is friendly to Democrats than they do to actually determine what is true and what is false.

Here is an example. I am interested in more, and I will likely contribute more here as I come across them...

Did AOC Exaggerate the Danger She Was in During Capitol Riot?

Did AOC Exaggerate the Danger She Was in During Capitol Riot?

AOC was targeted with another round of bad-faith smears after giving an emotional account of her experiences during the Capitol riot.

www.snopes.com

So the claim that they investigate is:

" Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez exaggerated the danger she was in during the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, in that she "wasn't even in the Capitol building" when the rioting occurred. "

Instead of rating it mostly true, or a mixture, they rate it mostly false, and then state:

"What's True
Ocasio-Cortez wasn't in the main Capitol building where the House and Senate Chambers are located."

Included in their "fact check" are the following politically-biased statements (emphasis added):

" It took less than 48 hours for the right-wing disinformation machine to contrive a way to minimize what Ocasio-Cortez said she had experienced. "

" In a circus of cyberbullying that began on Feb. 3, 2021, conservative news outlets and social media conspiracy trolls latched on to the misleading claim that Ocasio-Cortez “wasn’t in the Capitol building” and therefore was not in harm’s way, as she had described in the Instagram video."

To its credit, Snopes' main argument is that AOC never claimed she was in the Capitol building, which is an important point, but one example of "mostly-false right-wing disinformation" is a Red State headline, “AOC Wasn’t Even in the Capitol Building During Her ‘Near Death’ Experience.” Obviously, that headline is mostly true, arguably entirely true.

It just goes to show that you can't trust such websites. Wikipedia is also full of political bias these days. Their page on the Capitol riot reads like something CNN would put together.

Truth and facts are becoming harder to come by these days. When you have to fact check the fact checkers, things are pretty bad.

And social media companies will use "fact checks" like these to make censorship decisions, so they aren't simply "alternative viewpoints" on the internet; they have real-world First Amendment implications. (Please don't lecture me about private companies being able to make their own rules, I know.)

Snopes Rates AOC's Account Of Capitol Attack As 'Factually Inaccurate But Morally True'
February 4th, 2021

U.S.—Snopes has fact-checked Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's account of the attack on the Capitol, rating her claim that she was in mortal danger with rioters literally inches away from her as "factually inaccurate but morally true."

The fact-check pointed out that while Ocasio-Cortez's wild claims were factually untrue, they supported the narrative that the unbiased fact-checkers at Snopes approve of, and so they were compelled to rate her claims as "morally true."
Snopes was slammed on social media for the rating. But the founder of Snopes, Bob Snopes, says he stands by the decision. "We ran it by the Snopes cat, and he said it checks out," Bob Snopes said. "Anyone who criticizes Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez for lying at least as much as Trump did is obviously an alt-right troll, a Russian bot, or someone with a huge crush on her."
He then glanced up at his framed picture of Ocasio-Cortez on the wall and smiled. "We're doing it all for you queen!"

Snopes Rates AOC's Account Of Capitol Attack As 'Factually Inaccurate But Morally True'

U.S.—Snopes has fact-checked Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's account of the attack on the Capitol, rating her claim that she was in mortal danger with rioters literally inches away from her as "factually inaccurate but morally true."

babylonbee.com

That is just over the top. Thanks.

Now I understand what Joe meant when he said "we choose truth over facts."...

 

[EvilCat Breath]

I contend that Snopes is not a reputable fact checking website. It is their main job, they do it poorly, and they work harder to propel a narrative that is friendly to Democrats than they do to actually determine what is true and what is false.

Here is an example. I am interested in more, and I will likely contribute more here as I come across them...

Did AOC Exaggerate the Danger She Was in During Capitol Riot?

Did AOC Exaggerate the Danger She Was in During Capitol Riot?

AOC was targeted with another round of bad-faith smears after giving an emotional account of her experiences during the Capitol riot.

www.snopes.com

So the claim that they investigate is:

" Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez exaggerated the danger she was in during the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, in that she "wasn't even in the Capitol building" when the rioting occurred. "

Instead of rating it mostly true, or a mixture, they rate it mostly false, and then state:

"What's True
Ocasio-Cortez wasn't in the main Capitol building where the House and Senate Chambers are located."

Included in their "fact check" are the following politically-biased statements (emphasis added):

" It took less than 48 hours for the right-wing disinformation machine to contrive a way to minimize what Ocasio-Cortez said she had experienced. "

" In a circus of cyberbullying that began on Feb. 3, 2021, conservative news outlets and social media conspiracy trolls latched on to the misleading claim that Ocasio-Cortez “wasn’t in the Capitol building” and therefore was not in harm’s way, as she had described in the Instagram video."

To its credit, Snopes' main argument is that AOC never claimed she was in the Capitol building, which is an important point, but one example of "mostly-false right-wing disinformation" is a Red State headline, “AOC Wasn’t Even in the Capitol Building During Her ‘Near Death’ Experience.” Obviously, that headline is mostly true, arguably entirely true.

It just goes to show that you can't trust such websites. Wikipedia is also full of political bias these days. Their page on the Capitol riot reads like something CNN would put together.

Truth and facts are becoming harder to come by these days. When you have to fact check the fact checkers, things are pretty bad.

And social media companies will use "fact checks" like these to make censorship decisions, so they aren't simply "alternative viewpoints" on the internet; they have real-world First Amendment implications. (Please don't lecture me about private companies being able to make their own rules, I know.)

If the mob wanted to hang Pence one could only imagine what they might have done if they had found AOC. No one knew what would happen and who was in danger and bombs were found in other buildings. She was justified to be terrified and the conservative media was not justified in minimizing what she experienced with the benefit of hindsight.

Even if you give Occasional-Smolett the benefit of doubt, she was terrified. She was plainly lying when she said she could hear people going door to door yelling "where is she". No one was banging on her door. That was a lie. She lies like a democrat.

 

[pknopp]

Then they used a very poor example.

If one wants to argue that Snopes is biased, argue it but you have to use an example that shows that.

Can you not read?

They included this verbiage in their fact check...

"the right-wing disinformation machine"

and

"conservative news outlets and social media conspiracy trolls"

But you are entitled to your opinion that it does not show political bias. I think it is obvious bias.

What do you propose they call those who misrepresent the facts?

 

[pknopp]

I contend that Snopes is not a reputable fact checking website. It is their main job, they do it poorly, and they work harder to propel a narrative that is friendly to Democrats than they do to actually determine what is true and what is false.

Here is an example. I am interested in more, and I will likely contribute more here as I come across them...

Did AOC Exaggerate the Danger She Was in During Capitol Riot?

Did AOC Exaggerate the Danger She Was in During Capitol Riot?

AOC was targeted with another round of bad-faith smears after giving an emotional account of her experiences during the Capitol riot.

www.snopes.com

So the claim that they investigate is:

" Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez exaggerated the danger she was in during the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot, in that she "wasn't even in the Capitol building" when the rioting occurred. "

Instead of rating it mostly true, or a mixture, they rate it mostly false, and then state:

"What's True
Ocasio-Cortez wasn't in the main Capitol building where the House and Senate Chambers are located."

Included in their "fact check" are the following politically-biased statements (emphasis added):

" It took less than 48 hours for the right-wing disinformation machine to contrive a way to minimize what Ocasio-Cortez said she had experienced. "

" In a circus of cyberbullying that began on Feb. 3, 2021, conservative news outlets and social media conspiracy trolls latched on to the misleading claim that Ocasio-Cortez “wasn’t in the Capitol building” and therefore was not in harm’s way, as she had described in the Instagram video."

To its credit, Snopes' main argument is that AOC never claimed she was in the Capitol building, which is an important point, but one example of "mostly-false right-wing disinformation" is a Red State headline, “AOC Wasn’t Even in the Capitol Building During Her ‘Near Death’ Experience.” Obviously, that headline is mostly true, arguably entirely true.

It just goes to show that you can't trust such websites. Wikipedia is also full of political bias these days. Their page on the Capitol riot reads like something CNN would put together.

Truth and facts are becoming harder to come by these days. When you have to fact check the fact checkers, things are pretty bad.

And social media companies will use "fact checks" like these to make censorship decisions, so they aren't simply "alternative viewpoints" on the internet; they have real-world First Amendment implications. (Please don't lecture me about private companies being able to make their own rules, I know.)

If the mob wanted to hang Pence one could only imagine what they might have done if they had found AOC. No one knew what would happen and who was in danger and bombs were found in other buildings. She was justified to be terrified and the conservative media was not justified in minimizing what she experienced with the benefit of hindsight.

Even if you give Occasional-Smolett the benefit of doubt, she was terrified. She was plainly lying when she said she could hear people going door to door yelling "where is she". No one was banging on her door. That was a lie. She lies like a democrat.

Link?

 

[Dogmaphobe]

It's a neat trick if you can pull it off -- just claim that you are the ultimate fact checker and proceed with your agenda knowing that most people are too stupid to question YOU.

Just looking around at the mindless sheeple in this thread defending snopes -- they don't.

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

Here is another example...


No, Biden Didn’t Say ‘You Can’t Legislate by Executive Order Unless You’re a Dictator’

No, Biden Didn't Say 'You Can't Legislate by Executive Order Unless You're a Dictator'

Conservatives criticized the president's flurry of executive orders made in the first weeks of his term.

www.snopes.com

It's rated "mostly false." They are nitpicking literal details to propel their narrative.

He effectively said it. And in context, it's precisely what he meant, and here is the proof...

How could that statement be correct when it completely misquotes him even using "quotes"?

Just because he didn't even say what is claimed he said, it should be deemed true?

Don't you see that they created a straw man? They put it it in quotes, but the things that they fact check, did not have his statement in quotes.

In short, Snopes is lying.

See, here is what they fact checked....

Sen. Mitch McConnell: "As recently as October, now-President Biden said you can't legislate by executive action unless you are a dictator. Well, in one week, he signed more than 30 unilateral actions."

It's not in quotes. It is an accurate summary by McConnell.

Fox News personality Sean Hannity posted on his blog, purporting to quote Biden: “‘I have this strange notion, we are a democracy … if you can’t get the votes … you can’t [legislate] by executive order unless you’re a dictator. We’re a democracy. We need consensus,’ said Biden.”

See that? This example too. Hannity put [legislate] in brackets, which is a way of paraphrasing, and it is arguably an accurate summary of what Biden said.

Biden basically said that there are certain things that have to go through the legislature, and that you can't legislate through executive order. I think that is an accurate paraphrase of what he said, and not misleading nor mostly false.

They do this straw man thing constantly...

How Snopes Lies and Misleads Readers

by Jerome William Berglund

medium.com

 

[pknopp]

It's a neat trick if you can pull it off -- just claim that you are the ultimate fact checker and proceed with your agenda knowing that most people are too stupid to question YOU.

Just looking around at the mindless sheeple in this thread defending snopes -- they don't.

Are these two quotes the same thing?

"You can't legislate by executive order"

Is that a factual accurate quotation of

“things you can’t do by executive order unless you are a dictator. We’re a democracy, we need consensus.”

How does one completely misquote someone, claiming it was a factual quote and expect anyone to rate it as true?

 

[pknopp]

Here is another example...


No, Biden Didn’t Say ‘You Can’t Legislate by Executive Order Unless You’re a Dictator’

No, Biden Didn't Say 'You Can't Legislate by Executive Order Unless You're a Dictator'

Conservatives criticized the president's flurry of executive orders made in the first weeks of his term.

www.snopes.com

It's rated "mostly false." They are nitpicking literal details to propel their narrative.

He effectively said it. And in context, it's precisely what he meant, and here is the proof...

How could that statement be correct when it completely misquotes him even using "quotes"?

Just because he didn't even say what is claimed he said, it should be deemed true?

Don't you see that they created a straw man? They put it it in quotes, but the things that they fact check, did not have his statement in quotes.

In short, Snopes is lying.

See, here is what they fact checked....

Sen. Mitch McConnell: "As recently as October, now-President Biden said you can't legislate by executive action unless you are a dictator. Well, in one week, he signed more than 30 unilateral actions."

It's not in quotes. It is an accurate summary by McConnell.

Fox News personality Sean Hannity posted on his blog, purporting to quote Biden: “‘I have this strange notion, we are a democracy … if you can’t get the votes … you can’t [legislate] by executive order unless you’re a dictator. We’re a democracy. We need consensus,’ said Biden.”

See that? This example too. Hannity put [legislate] in brackets, which is a way of paraphrasing, and it is arguably an accurate summary of what Biden said.

Biden basically said that there are certain things that have to go through the legislature, and that you can't legislate through executive order. I think that is an accurate paraphrase of what he said, and not misleading nor mostly false.

If you have a point to make, you make it off the actual quote. You don't change the quote to make your point.

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

Here is another example...


No, Biden Didn’t Say ‘You Can’t Legislate by Executive Order Unless You’re a Dictator’

No, Biden Didn't Say 'You Can't Legislate by Executive Order Unless You're a Dictator'

Conservatives criticized the president's flurry of executive orders made in the first weeks of his term.

www.snopes.com

It's rated "mostly false." They are nitpicking literal details to propel their narrative.

He effectively said it. And in context, it's precisely what he meant, and here is the proof...

How could that statement be correct when it completely misquotes him even using "quotes"?

Just because he didn't even say what is claimed he said, it should be deemed true?

Don't you see that they created a straw man? They put it it in quotes, but the things that they fact check, did not have his statement in quotes.

In short, Snopes is lying.

See, here is what they fact checked....

Sen. Mitch McConnell: "As recently as October, now-President Biden said you can't legislate by executive action unless you are a dictator. Well, in one week, he signed more than 30 unilateral actions."

It's not in quotes. It is an accurate summary by McConnell.

Fox News personality Sean Hannity posted on his blog, purporting to quote Biden: “‘I have this strange notion, we are a democracy … if you can’t get the votes … you can’t [legislate] by executive order unless you’re a dictator. We’re a democracy. We need consensus,’ said Biden.”

See that? This example too. Hannity put [legislate] in brackets, which is a way of paraphrasing, and it is arguably an accurate summary of what Biden said.

Biden basically said that there are certain things that have to go through the legislature, and that you can't legislate through executive order. I think that is an accurate paraphrase of what he said, and not misleading nor mostly false.

If you have a point to make, you make it off the actual quote. You don't change the quote to make your point.

I made my points, very clearly. You either decided not to understand them or failed to do so. That's your prerogative.

The things they fact checked did not even have "legislate" in quotes.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Here is another example, coming from the beginning of the Trump Admin.

Here is their page on a comparison of the Obama and Trump inauguration crowds....

Was Obama's Inauguration Crowd Larger Than Trump's?

While no official crowd count has yet been released for Trump's inauguration, Obama's inauguration in 2009 set a record for attendance.

www.snopes.com

It includes this well-known blurry picture comparison (a meme, no less), and you can't even tell if it is a reliable comparison, as you can't even tell if President Trump is on stage yet...

Here are better pictures....

Obama crowd, with Obama on stage:

Trump crowd, with Trump on stage:

I had contacted Snopes a few times to point out the problems with their fact check, including links to these pictures. They never replied nor updated their narrative, despite it being a hot topic in the press for quite a while.

Snopes is for dopes.

Snopes4Dopes!

love it!

 

[pknopp]

Here is another example...


No, Biden Didn’t Say ‘You Can’t Legislate by Executive Order Unless You’re a Dictator’

No, Biden Didn't Say 'You Can't Legislate by Executive Order Unless You're a Dictator'

Conservatives criticized the president's flurry of executive orders made in the first weeks of his term.

www.snopes.com

It's rated "mostly false." They are nitpicking literal details to propel their narrative.

He effectively said it. And in context, it's precisely what he meant, and here is the proof...

How could that statement be correct when it completely misquotes him even using "quotes"?

Just because he didn't even say what is claimed he said, it should be deemed true?

Don't you see that they created a straw man? They put it it in quotes, but the things that they fact check, did not have his statement in quotes.

In short, Snopes is lying.

See, here is what they fact checked....

Sen. Mitch McConnell: "As recently as October, now-President Biden said you can't legislate by executive action unless you are a dictator. Well, in one week, he signed more than 30 unilateral actions."

It's not in quotes. It is an accurate summary by McConnell.

Fox News personality Sean Hannity posted on his blog, purporting to quote Biden: “‘I have this strange notion, we are a democracy … if you can’t get the votes … you can’t [legislate] by executive order unless you’re a dictator. We’re a democracy. We need consensus,’ said Biden.”

See that? This example too. Hannity put [legislate] in brackets, which is a way of paraphrasing, and it is arguably an accurate summary of what Biden said.

Biden basically said that there are certain things that have to go through the legislature, and that you can't legislate through executive order. I think that is an accurate paraphrase of what he said, and not misleading nor mostly false.

If you have a point to make, you make it off the actual quote. You don't change the quote to make your point.

I made my points, very clearly. You either decided not to understand them or failed to do so. That's your prerogative.

The things they fact checked did not even have "legislate" in quotes.

He was misquoted but you want them to rate it as accurate.

 

[Jim H - VA USA]

Here is another example. I find it funny.


Did Trump Say Wildfires Are Caused by Exploding Trees?

Did Trump Say Wildfires Are Caused by Exploding Trees?

Trump made a comment about trees and wildfires during a visit to fire-ravaged California.

www.snopes.com

What Trump said...

You have forests all over the world. You don’t have fires like you do in California. You know, in Europe they have forest cities. You look at countries, Austria, you look at so many countries, they live in the forest. They’re considered forest cities, so many of them. And they don’t have fires like this. And they have more explosive trees. They have trees that will catch easier. But they maintain their fire, they have an expression, they thin the fuel. The fuel is what’s on the ground, the leaves. The trees that fall, that dry, they’re like a matchstick. After 18 months. If they’re on the ground longer than 18 months, they’re very explosive. And they have to get rid of that stuff.

To most people with a brain, we understand that Trump is talking about trees that burn very quickly during a wildfire, as they are well-cured and dry, and failure to do proper forest management and banning logging can cause wildfires to be more commonplace and severe.

 

[miketx]

I just submitted a story to them for fact checking.

I heard the you people eat re-manufactured dog shit when you fact check a story? True or mostly true?

 

[Godboy]

It is mostly false. She had no idea that the protesters hadn't made it to the offices. They all were hiding.

Being an uninformed fool doesnt mean she was in danger. Snopes lied. AOC is a complete retard.