Keeping up with politicon facts.

Has anyone bothered to actually log some of those fact checking websites with proof of twisted words, manipulated dates or lies. If so which ones have you noticed twisted words on?

A couple off hand I can think of was Nancy in Wuhan 2019(real date was 2016 - she was there but they labelled it 2019 to write false on the paper.)

There have been plenty more instances where claims have been labelled wrong(correctly) because of changed set parameters.


www.politifact.com...

This one claims fertility is not affected by being around someone who was vaccinated. Now this is another true persay, it wouldn't be because they are vaccinated. It would be because women in close proximity sync cycles. So if one woman is sending off a "danger signal" hormonally. In theory this could prevent the fertility of other women. This is seen all across the animal kingdom in times when food is scarce. But this is labelled false because of it being "directly to the vaccine" instead of possible side effects.

www.politifact.com...

This one all they did was change the name of the company to label it false. But again it's a true statement that "A company" gave 200Million to BLM.

This company was Progressive, and George Soros for 220Million.


This wonderful claim decides to be ambiguous and just hand out a list of companies not supporting the riot instead of doing research "for" the actual claim.

www.politifact.com...

The companies that supported the riot were real estate. Because of property damage and individual loss of income to maintain these buildings that got damaged they were able to snatch up 1000s of prime real estate for cheap. Often as low as 1/4th the value as owners became closer to foreclosure, and we're force to sell because of repair costs... With little to no income.


www.politifact.com...
This one is just denying that the Biden administration "oopsied" in spanish "the borders are open" during the lockdown. By changing the person who claimed it to Facebook instead of the democrat bish who declared open season at the border.


Fun little tidbit about kids in cages, we ll know Obama built those cages. So the only "false" fact here is that it was Trump.
www.politifact.com...
So even while it says mostly true it just tries to pin the worst on Trump. Which is where things are actually false. (They are blaming someone else while keeping true facts- hence Mostly true rating.)


There is racism physically built into some of our highways
www.politifact.com...

The highway in question was artistically designed by a black man. But somehow is still racists... Next you will hear the trees and grass are racist as well as soon as a black man or woman gets seasonal allergies.. Physical objects; no matter how they are constructed cannot be racist. A road is a road, nothing more. History is not racist, only your interpretation. End of it, this should be labelled false.. but due to ongoing political agenda it was labelled true.

DMX's death

www.politifact.com...

DMX's family have clearly stated he died from the covid vaccine, and although he had drug issues in the past (20-40s), he had been clean for years. His personal doctors told the family he had died of a heart attack after an autopsy. They are furious about the lies saying he overdosed on drugs, instead of the media admitting the truth. He is also not the first celebrity to die randomly at a young age after getting the shot.

www.politifact.com...

This one claims that the claims are false but can easily be rebuked by the fact life in itself is not permanent, as there are thousands of cases where death has occured due to "underlying conditions" to become more pronounced. So the vaccine will never be the cause for an underlying condition going into hyperdrive. There is science that backs up this claim. However they get away with calling it false due to the fact "nothing is permanent" or "your going to die from the underlying condition anyway."















I will add more... As I see them.

a reply to: BlackArrow

Now there you have an application where AI could be very useful... You wouldn't want to gather attention while working on something like that....

originally posted by: BlackArrow
Dr. Seuss - fact websites labelled the thing false but changed the wording, as to reference the author instead. Labelling it truly false by claiming "The author did not cancel the cat in the hat". Instead of labelling true that the biden administration cancelled the series.

ummmm no... the seuss estate decided to stop publishing the books in question. nobody 'cancelled' the cat in the hat.

the only thing biden did was not mention dr seuss in his read across america proclamation... which is only a big deal if you are already ready to look for a reason to be outraged.

not sure you're the one to be fact-checking the fact-checkers, to be honest

If a facebook or twitter ‘fact checker’ says something is true or something is false

The exact opposite of their claim is the reality

This is the case 100% of the time

I dont care either way what really happened with that one. As there was 50different stories depending on which fact check website you went to. But again, his estate didn't cancel the books either.


Tbh, I am not wanting to do them all myself anyway. Nor do I want to, but I have been pretty good at pointing out the "twists" to friends. Who get stuck arguing something to have those fb posts dropped in their face to see they just change a date, location or name to get what they want.

Some have gotten a bit more creative in their lies though, using the entire nothing is something ideal..

a reply to: BlackArrow

no, his estate did elect to stop publishing several books. that is the factual story. but since you don't care then i don't know why you'd bother citing it.

K I will remove that one go rebuke the others, you won't be able to. As I spend more time on politics then I do children's books.

My favorite is when a fact check organization such as Snopes labels something as false or a "mixture" because of an unclear definition of a word.

www.snopes.com...

a reply to: AutomateThis1
Yeah, they often use definition alternatives to their advantage, and then expect people to look at the rating and follow that instead of actually reading it.

I can't tell how many times I have seen this particular treasure.... Where the article itself goes into agreement but then turns around and goes.. "since neither party are responding we are labelling it false.". I saw that on a dozen or so. Even with unaltered photos and video.