Rod Thomson

The most recent Politifact story “fact-checking” President Trump is a perfect example of why no one should trust this organization — other than liberals looking to buttress their beliefs with partisan hackery. Sorry, it’s just really that bad.

This sort of breakdown can be done on fact-check after fact-check after fact-check. The assessment ranges from overtly biased negativity for Republicans and Trump and positivity for Democrats and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. This is measurable below.

During the presidential campaign, Politifact rated well-known truth-purveyor Clinton as true or mostly true 51 percent of the time. Trump came in at a grudging 9 percent. Hillary was false or pants-on-fire false 14 percent of the time, while Trump was at whopping 61 percent.

These numbers alone are more than enough to convince conservatives about the veracity of Politifact. But a quick look at the most recent attack on Trump is just a glorious exposition on either purposeful deception or utter stupidity. (As a recovering journalist, my money is on purposeful deception.)

Politifact took this quote from President Trump’s State of the Union address to do their “fact-checking:”

“Under the current broken system, a single immigrant can bring in virtually unlimited numbers of distant relatives…Under our plan, we focus on the immediate family by limiting sponsorships to spouses and minor children.”

Join the Revolution on Youtube

The first problem they found with it is this:

“Neither U.S. citizens nor lawful permanent residents can directly petition for an aunt, uncle, cousin, niece, nephew, in-law relative or grandparent to come to the United States.”

Ummmm, right. That’s why it’s called “chain” migration, because it is not direct migration. One link leads to another which leads to another into an ever expanding universe of immigration off of the one — but not directly by the one. This is a great example of a favorite ploy of progressives; create straw men to knock down and look brilliant and so obviously right. But straw men are just that. No one is saying it is direct. It’s a chain.

The next problem comes in the following paragraph:

“Theoretically, one immigrant’s arrival in the United States could lead to the immigration of an aunt or uncle — if the first immigrant becomes a U.S. citizen and petitioned a parent, that parent could eventually become a U.S. citizen and petition his or her siblings.”

I don’t think “theoretically” means what they think it means. If it happens in real life, it is not theory. It is reality. And this indirect immigration happens constantly and is documented, usually being uncovered when an immigrant commits a crime, and they are discovered to be in the country through chain migration several steps removed from the original immigrant.

Aren’t you supposed to be Politifact? Suggestion: Work on using the right words.

Next problem, same as the first:

“…there are restrictions. No one can directly petition for an aunt, uncle, cousin, niece, nephew, in-law relative or grandparent, according to USCIS.”

But an immigrant can bring his dad, who can then bring his brother, who can then bring his son and bingo-bango-bongo, you have an uncle and a cousin through chain migration from the original immigrant.

And finally:

“Trump’s statement contains an element of truth but ignores critical facts that would give a different impression. We rate it Mostly False.”

Except of course, it’s entirely true — factually. Impressions are not facts. This organization isn’t called Politimpression, it’s called Politifact. According to the facts (not theoreticals and not impressions) Trump’s statement is undeniably true. You can make the argument that it does not include every nuance of the immigration code — the speech was long enough — but it is factually wrong to call it false.

We’ll pass on Snopes, but the exact same problem is at work there. It is led and staffed by publicly known liberals and it does the same type of work as Politifact. In addition to the above  example of how they arrive at a totally true statement being ruled mostly false, they cherry-pick what they fact-check, never going after Hillary Clinton’s endless lies or Barack Obama’s deceptions and errors, but most often fact-checking the non-controversial true things they say.

Liberals and Democrats can rely on Politifact to buttress their worldview. Moderates and conservatives should not waste their time or be sucked in. And if you still get your local paper, tell them to stop running Politifact.


Rod Thomson is an author, TV talking head and former journalist, and is Founder of The Revolutionary Act.

Today’s news moves at a faster pace than ever, and a lot of sources are not trustworthy. Whatfinger.com  is my go-to source for keeping up with all the latest events in real time from good sources.


 

Rating Politifact Objectivity: Pants on Fire False
Liked it? Take a second to support Rod Thomson on Patreon!

Get more stuff like this

Don’t miss a single act of Revolutionary Truth... delivered to your inbox!

4 thoughts on “Rating Politifact Objectivity: Pants on Fire False

  • February 5, 2018 at 3:46 pm
    Permalink

    Congressional Democrats,The Media And The FBI/DOJ Scandal.

    The counsel for the defense (read: Congressional Democrats) now claim that attempting to charge the driver of the get away car, or the gun man covering the door (read: Rosenstien) would be to go too far? The media duly reports this as, if it might have some legitimacy, or credence while the rest of us ask, “…Going too far…” well, according to who exactly? Excuse us for asking, but according to what standard is the dismissal of any employee for cause, much less the Deputy Director of the FBI for the commission of a felony, or a string of felonies (more likely,) going too far? Huh?

    Have we as a nation then, gone completely crazy, stark raving mad? Are we all having a collective episode, or suffering from some mass hallucinatory phenomena? Or could it possibly be that this is just one more instance of a manipulative, cognitive dissonance being applied by the media to obscure the truth and shape the news? What we really have is the criminal intent of a failed establishment, a privileged, corporate segment of the social order, a ruling elite caught red handed while attempting to encourage and support subversion of the electoral process in order to illegally allow a favored, political faction to gain control of the government?

    Since when do defendants and suspects get to determine the scope of an investigation, or the prerogatives of the prosecutor’s office? On what planet do these people live? Since when does the threat of political discord threaten the rule of law? Who do these Democrats and their media apologists think they are? We are talking about sedition and treason and nothing less! Hello?

    There was a fraud committed upon the court, the FISA court. In most organizations, Rosenstien would have accepted responsibility and resigned immediately. He was the Deputy Director of the FBI and, in at least one instance we know sure certain, he actually committed the fraud himself. He did sign the application didn’t he? He did know the dossier was funded by both the DNC and the Hillary campaign and he did withhold that information from the court didn’t he? Would anyone care to wager there was at least one phone call connected to these four (4) fraudulent applicants? That would constitute an additional charge of conspiracy for Mr. Rosenstien.

    Looking at the official record of Congressional Democrats before and after the fact makes it seem as, if they may all be considered co-conspirators. What we may very well have, indeed by all appearances is a coordinated act to overthrow the government by virtue of tampering with the election process to obtain a certain, prejudicial result. And there is ample evidence to indicate both Obama and Hillary Clinton were responsible. In any event, ultimate responsibility and perhaps actual criminality will inevitably be shown to lay at their feet.

    Even, if we forget about the Justice department and the FBI per se, a Special Council is needed to examine a possible conspiracy by Congressional Democrats as well as the apparent crimes of at least a dozen high ranking officials. We also need a major, independent investigation into the dissemination of false information and outrageous opinion by the media. That which is commonly referred to as the news is so tainted by opinion and spin as to simply be unsupportable by the factual record. The nation is daily exposed to, nay smothered in false information, or fake news, which is methodically and consistently disseminated by a media with its own agenda, 24/7.

    We simply cannot and will not long endure as a nation of 320 million schizophrenics processing two separate and opposing realities. Every reasonable person in America today can tell you something isn’t right, or legitimate as far as the main stream media is concerned. I believe the time has come for a good look at anti monopoly law. In a modern 21st/c paradigm, the public must be allowed quick and easy access to everyday, factual, objective information. As it stands, the corporate dominated market place simply doesn’t allow for very much competition, or the free flow of information either.

    The main stream media controls the lion’s share of our media coverage yet it never makes any attempt to include a dissenting voice to its outrageous presentation and incredible interpretation of factual material. The truth is simply the nightly news resembles more the birthday party at the red queen’s court than anything anyone would confuse with reality. The entire nation can see conspiracy and conspiracy working hand and glove with the Democratic Party, the Congressional Democrats most particularly. Examine the record starting as far back as anyone cares to go. Democrats misrepresent and the media swears to it, presenting false narratives. False narratives and false conspiracy theories saturate the mainstream cable outlets and network news and everyone knows it.

    The nation can now see plainly that a fifth column within government aided and abetted by a media determined to present a false and malicious version of factual information interfered with the election of President Trump. I may not be the first to make the comment, but allow me add my voice. It is a disgrace, an absolute disgrace, an insult to the republic, our democratic form of government and free men everywhere and, almost as aside an insult to our collective intelligence. It is an absolute disgrace that leaves us repeating ourselves, almost stuttering and stammering in disbelief.

    Reply
    • February 5, 2018 at 3:48 pm
      Permalink

      I don’t understand how this works and I don’t wish to participate in any site that practices censorship

      Reply
      • February 5, 2018 at 4:01 pm
        Permalink

        No censorship. Many sites do a check on first-time commenters because of all the creepy spammers out there.

        Reply
  • Pingback: The Reasoned Response To Mass School Shootings -

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Learn How to
Decode the Media.
Download your free copy now!

3 Keys to Decoding the Media by Rod Thomson