Snopes Fact-Checkers Strangely Silent on NY Times' Kavanaugh Smear

[PeteS in CA]

https://pjmedia.com/trending/definitive-fact-checking-hacks-at-snopes-silent-on-the-ny-times-kavanaugh-smear/

Snopes Fact-Checkers Strangely Silent on NY Times' Kavanaugh Smear

With this weekend's high-profile screw-up by the New York Times—publishing (and then walking back) salacious, unsubstantiated sexual assault accusations against Justice Brett Kavanaugh that even the alleged victim says she doesn't recall—you'd think the self-described "definitive fact-checkers" at Snopes, those paragons of holier-than-thou virtue who are supposed to be holding America accountable, would have weighed in on the veracity of the story. You would be wrong—although I suspect astute PJM readers never expected them to play this story fairly.

If you search for "New York Times" at Snopes, you have to go all the way back to September 2018 for a story about how the Times had to walk back their claim that then-UN Ambassador Nikki Haley spent $52,000 on curtains for her official residence in New York (she didn't, but why let that get in the way of a good smear). And if you want to get technical, Snopes didn't actually fact check the story—it's listed as a "News" item on their website.

Snopes has time to "fact-check" a satire site that states plainly it is a satire site, but won't fact-check the NYT when it is dishonest and deceptive. Dogs usually don't bark at their owners.

[Applewood]

In all fairness though, what was there to fact check?  The Times, in an effort to promote a book by two of its people, sensationalized this tidbit from that book that two "officials" told the authors about a claim made by this guy Stier that he saw Kavanaugh assault a woman at a frat party.  Of course, the Times conveniently omitted the fact that the alleged victim never filed a complaint and that she has apparently said she doesn't even remember this alleged incident. 

But I think most normal people were able to figure this all out for themselves and don't need Snopes to investigate for them.    Only the Dems and those goofy Me2 feminists screaming for Kavanaugh's head are going to ignore the facts.  No one, not even Snopes, will convince them they are wrong.

[PeteS in CA]

The point isn't that Snopes could somehow make the NYT's falsehood any more genuinely false. The point is that Snopes' silence demonstrates its partisan bias.

[Applewood]

Well, I did a search on Snopes and while the site did not fact check the Times story directly, it has a couple of links to articles relating to the accusations. 

https://www.snopes.com/?s=Kavanaugh

I like the first article per the Associated Press:

Collins’ Aide: New Kavanaugh Accusation ‘Lacks An Accuser’

https://www.snopes.com/ap/2019/09/16/susan-collins-aide-new-kavanaugh-accusation-lacks-an-accuser/

[jafo2010]

Snopes is funded by Soros, need I say more?

[Applewood]

Snopes is funded by Soros, need I say more?

Do you have evidence of that?

[aligncare]

The point isn't that Snopes could somehow make the NYT's falsehood any more genuinely false. The point is that Snopes' silence demonstrates its partisan bias.

Exactly!

If there were “all fairness,” Snopes would come with warning labels.

[PeteS in CA]

Exactly!

If there were “all fairness,” Snopes would come with warning labels.

They used to have a hilarious page about the name change from Kentucky Fried Chicken to KFC.

[jmyrlefuller]

Do you have evidence of that?

They're not.

It's just a couple of exes who debunk Internet hoaxes... and get into feuds with the Babylon Bee.

Prone to bias and error, just like anyone else. It doesn't mean there's a Soros conspiracy behind everything.

Now Politifact? They're Soros-funded. Him, and other Democrat-friendly donors like billionaire Craig Newmark.