Even though he was technically correct, Governor Gavin Newsom&#8217;s (D-CA) latest attempt to fact-check conservatives — over a protest video that circulated via X — went sideways in a hurry.
The video in question was shared by a number of accounts and showed protesters surrounding several LAPD vehicles that had been damaged and set on fire.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
🚨 CHAOS! Los Angeles now looking like a collapsing third world country under Mayor Bass and Governor Newscum’s lack of leadership.
🔥 Absolute MADNESS. <a href="https://t.co/3RdvrszCfk">pic.twitter.com/3RdvrszCfk</a>
— Jay Merz 🇺🇸 (@OopsYouMissed) <a href="https://twitter.com/OopsYouMissed/status/1931801788904305148?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 8, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Community notes clarified that the video was not from the recent confrontations between violent protesters and Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents. Rather, it was from the violent riots that took place in the aftermath of George Floyd&#8217;s death in May of 2020.
Both Newsom himself and his press office quickly capitalized on the error, responding to multiple accounts that shared the video and saying, &#8220;This video is from 2020,&#8221; or &#8220;FACT CHECK: This video is not from this year. Misinformation like this only adds to the chaos the Trump Administration is seeking. Check your sources before sharing info!&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
❌FACT CHECK: This video is not from this year.
Misinformation like this only adds to the chaos the Trump Administration is seeking.
Check your sources before sharing info! <a href="https://t.co/1dqJ1K3xI5">https://t.co/1dqJ1K3xI5</a>
— Governor Newsom Press Office (@GovPressOffice) <a href="https://twitter.com/GovPressOffice/status/1931841115290042630?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 8, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
And even though Newsom was correct regarding the origin of that particular video, critics quickly pointed out the fact that there were plenty of current videos — many depicting similar carnage on the streets of Los Angeles — to go around.
<a href="https://get.dailywire.com/gift/?utm_medium=website&amp;utm_source=wisepops&amp;utm_campaign=dad&amp;utm_content=fathersdaygiftpopups" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Gift Dad an All Access Membership. Use code DAD40 at checkout to save 40%!</a>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
This video is from 2025. <a href="https://t.co/W0ijR8TFSo">pic.twitter.com/W0ijR8TFSo</a> <a href="https://t.co/5G7ysK4z6o">https://t.co/5G7ysK4z6o</a>
— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) <a href="https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1931909430737518625?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 9, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
This isn’t… <a href="https://t.co/6XnIlhDIaU">https://t.co/6XnIlhDIaU</a> <a href="https://t.co/giyG1KFxCB">pic.twitter.com/giyG1KFxCB</a>
— Robert Greenway (@RC_Greenway) <a href="https://twitter.com/RC_Greenway/status/1931895849312752107?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 9, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
How about this one Gavin? <a href="https://t.co/z96KwJcgkB">https://t.co/z96KwJcgkB</a> <a href="https://t.co/vZUOnHHLWM">pic.twitter.com/vZUOnHHLWM</a>
— sikmedia.algo (@sik_media87) <a href="https://twitter.com/sik_media87/status/1931893537265885501?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 9, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
🚨 <a href="https://twitter.com/hashtag/BREAKING?src=hash&amp;ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">#BREAKING</a>: Rioters have SET FIRE to a California Highway Patrol vehicle while officers are trapped under an overpass
WHAT YEAR IS THIS FROM, <a href="https://twitter.com/GavinNewsom?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@GavinNewsom</a>?
YOU’RE A FAILURE! <a href="https://t.co/Qg6AbBJE2F">https://t.co/Qg6AbBJE2F</a> <a href="https://t.co/kJCSJRZ3qK">pic.twitter.com/kJCSJRZ3qK</a>
— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) <a href="https://twitter.com/nicksortor/status/1931908921175966173?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 9, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Others pointed out the fact that Newsom had failed to contain the riots in his state in 2020 and was once again failing to do so.
&#8220;&#8216;Five years later this place is still on fire&#8217; may not be the campaign slogan you’re looking for, tho?&#8221; Emily Zanotti posted.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
“Five years later this place is still on fire” may not be the campaign slogan you’re looking for, tho? <a href="https://t.co/ZyTANTjkeO">https://t.co/ZyTANTjkeO</a>
— Emily Zanotti 🦝 (@emzanotti) <a href="https://twitter.com/emzanotti/status/1932049756001329643?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 9, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Are you trying to imply that LA isn&#8217;t currently a hellscape?&#8221; Jillian Michaels asked.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
. <a href="https://twitter.com/GavinNewsom?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@GavinNewsom</a> are you trying to imply that LA isn&#8217;t currently a hellscape? <a href="https://t.co/Z6b6MVHaUG">https://t.co/Z6b6MVHaUG</a>
— Jillian Michaels (@JillianMichaels) <a href="https://twitter.com/JillianMichaels/status/1931931758490202571?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 9, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Yeah, you’ve been good at destroying this state for half a decade. Thanks for taking the bait,&#8221; actor James Woods said.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Yeah, you’ve been good at destroying this state for half a decade. Thanks for taking the bait. <a href="https://t.co/iULfqn0UbP">https://t.co/iULfqn0UbP</a>
— James Woods (@RealJamesWoods) <a href="https://twitter.com/RealJamesWoods/status/1931886323268473243?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 9, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;This video is from a different horrific failure of mine,&#8221; John Ekdahl added.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
“This video is from a different horrific failure of mine.” <a href="https://t.co/aTZkDoVmZf">https://t.co/aTZkDoVmZf</a>
— John Ekdahl (@JohnEkdahl) <a href="https://twitter.com/JohnEkdahl/status/1931876464250564906?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 9, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;Who was Governor of California in 2020?&#8221; Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) asked.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Who was Governor of California in 2020? <a href="https://t.co/v9VOPnBNwX">https://t.co/v9VOPnBNwX</a>
— Team Cruz (@TeamTedCruz) <a href="https://twitter.com/TeamTedCruz/status/1932088856762806451?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 9, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;I also allowed rioters to burn police cars and assault cops in 2020!&#8217; is not the own you think it is,&#8221; Libs of TikTok posted.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
“I also allowed rioters to burn police cars and assault cops in 2020!” is not the own you think it is <a href="https://t.co/5G7ysK4z6o">https://t.co/5G7ysK4z6o</a> <a href="https://t.co/tYnPRQy6ED">pic.twitter.com/tYnPRQy6ED</a>
— Libs of TikTok (@libsoftiktok) <a href="https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1931897410071957757?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 9, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The Daily Wire&#8217;s Matt Walsh weighed in as well, saying, &#8220;No, no, this is from a different time when leftist militants were torching police cars while I sat back and cheered them on.&#8217; Wow. You really dunked on us, governor. Good one.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
&#8220;No, no, this is from a different time when leftist militants were torching police cars while I sat back and cheered them on&#8221;
Wow. You really dunked on us, governor. Good one. <a href="https://t.co/Axi9terps5">https://t.co/Axi9terps5</a>
— Matt Walsh (@MattWalshBlog) <a href="https://twitter.com/MattWalshBlog/status/1931910202879783049?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 9, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;You’ll have to forgive the masses for mixing up which time you let Los Angeles descend into fiery chaos. To think, radical democrats want all of America to be run like California &#8230;&#8221; Rep. Eli Crane (R-AZ) added.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
You’ll have to forgive the masses for mixing up which time you let Los Angeles descend into fiery chaos.
To think, radical democrats want all of America to be run like California… <a href="https://t.co/ZX5G8aUgup">https://t.co/ZX5G8aUgup</a>
— Rep. Eli Crane (@RepEliCrane) <a href="https://twitter.com/RepEliCrane/status/1932055571072417818?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">June 9, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>

Vogue World: Hollywood Press Announcement

Gavin Newsom Blistered Over Fact-Check Gone Wrong: ‘This Video Is From 2020’

Gavin Newsom Blistered Over Fact-Check Gone Wrong: 'This Video Is From 2020'

2020

California

Crime

Donald Trump

Fact Check

Gavin Newsom

George Floyd

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)

Los Angeles

Politics

Riots

Meta, the parent company of Facebook, announced Friday that its fact-checking program in the United States would be &#8220;officially over&#8221; on Monday, when it will roll out the community notes feature across all platforms.
The news comes after Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg announced in January that the company would end fact-checking and move to restore free speech on Facebook, Instagram, and Threads. Starting Monday, fact-checkers will no longer be able to rate new content, and old fact-checks placed on content will no longer appear.
Instead of fact-checks, Meta will adopt an X-style community notes system where users can add context to posts, which are then rated by other users. Anyone will be able to sign up to be a contributor to community notes if they are over 18 and have had a verified account for over six months.
Joel Kaplan, Meta&#8217;s chief global affairs officer, announced the changes on Friday.
&#8220;By Monday afternoon, our fact-checking program in the US will be officially over. That means no new fact checks and no fact checkers. We announced in January we’d be winding down the program &amp; we haven’t applied penalties to fact-checked posts in the US since then. In place of fact checks, the first Community Notes will start appearing gradually across Facebook, Threads &amp; Instagram, with no penalties attached,&#8221; Kaplan posted on social media.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
By Monday afternoon, our fact-checking program in the US will be officially over. That means no new fact checks and no fact checkers. We announced in January we’d be winding down the program &amp; removing penalties. In place of fact checks, the first Community Notes will start…
&mdash; Joel Kaplan (@joel_kaplan) <a href="https://twitter.com/joel_kaplan/status/1908204701457236472?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 4, 2025</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The changes come after Meta was placed under congressional scrutiny for targeting conservative views on topics like the 2020 election, the COVID vaccine, and the Hunter Biden laptop story. Zuckerberg has pinned much of the blame for the censorship on former President Joe Biden, saying Meta was pressured to target conservative content.
Meta started testing out its community notes feature last month, allowing some 200,000 potential contributors to sign up.
&#8220;Meta won’t decide what gets rated or written – contributors from our community will. And to safeguard against bias, notes won’t be published unless contributors with a range of viewpoints broadly agree on them,&#8221; the company said. &#8220;This isn’t majority rules. No matter how many contributors agree on a note, it won’t be published unless people who normally disagree decide that it provides helpful context.&#8221;
In January, Zuckerberg <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/zuckerberg-says-meta-restoring-free-speech-will-get-rid-of-fact-checkers" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> that the move was part of Meta&#8217;s goal of restoring free speech on its platforms.
“We’re going to get back to our roots and focus on reducing mistakes, simplifying our policies and restoring free expression on our platforms,” Zuckerberg said. “We’re going to get rid of fact-checkers and replace them with Community Notes similar to X, starting in the United States.”
Zuckerberg said restrictions on discussions on topics like immigration and gender were “out of touch with mainstream discourse.”
“What started as a movement to be more inclusive has increasingly been used to shut down opinions and shut out people with different ideas,” he said.
In that same announcement, Zuckerberg said that Meta would work with the incoming Trump administration to fight censorship abroad.
“We’re going to work with President Trump to push back on governments around the world that are going after American companies and pushing to censor more,” he said. “The U.S. has the strongest constitutional protections for free expression in the world.”

US-TECHNOLOGY-INTERNET-CHILD-EXPLOITATION

Facebook To Shut Down Fact-Checking Program On Monday: ‘Officially Over’

Facebook

Mark Zuckerberg

Social Media Censorship

Taking a page out of X’s book, Meta <a href="https://about.fb.com/news/2025/03/testing-begins-community-notes-facebook-instagram-threads/">announced</a> on Thursday that it would start testing Community Notes on Facebook, Instagram, and Threads in the United States on March 18.
Meta offered implied criticism of “third-party” fact checkers, on whom it had heretofore relied, writing, “We expect Community Notes to be less biased than the third party fact checking program it replaces because it allows more people with more perspectives to add context to posts.”
Meta <a href="https://about.fb.com/news/2025/01/meta-more-speech-fewer-mistakes/">announced</a> in January it would move to a community notes-based approach, stating, “Starting in the US, we are ending our third party fact-checking program and moving to a Community Notes model. We will allow more speech by lifting restrictions on some topics that are part of mainstream discourse and focusing our enforcement on illegal and high-severity violations. We will take a more personalized approach to political content, so that people who want to see more of it in their feeds can.”
“Notes won’t initially appear on content,” Meta warned. “We will start by gradually and randomly admitting people off of the waitlist, and will take time to test the writing and rating system before any notes are published publicly.”
Meta acknowledged its debt to X, explaining, “Many of you will be familiar with X’s Community Notes system, in which users add context to posts. That’s the broad approach we are adopting. &#8230; Initially we will use X’s open source algorithm as the basis of our rating system. This will allow us to build on what X has created and improve it for our own platforms over time.”
Meta stated it would guard against bias in the notes by ensuring the notes would not be published unless “contributors with a range of viewpoints broadly agree on them. This isn’t majority rules. No matter how many contributors agree on a note, it won’t be published unless people who normally disagree decide that it provides helpful context.”
The notes are limited to 500 characters and require a link to support them. Contributors must be over 18 with an “account that’s more than 6 months old and in good standing, and either have a verified phone number or be enrolled in two-factor authentication.”

American Social Media And IT Companies Photo Illustrations

Meta Follows X, Will Start Testing Community Notes On Facebook And Instagram Next Week

Community Notes

Instagram

Media

Social Media

World

Key Speakers At The Meta Connect Event

Massive MAGA Win: Facebook Reverses Its Censorship

Ben Shapiro

Daily Wire

Opinion

The hosts of ABC&#8217;s &#8220;The View&#8221; took aim at podcast giant <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/joe-rogan" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Joe Rogan</a>, claiming that his podcast was an unreliable source of information because Rogan &#8220;believes in dragons.&#8221; They went on to suggest that because their network, ABC News, occasionally sent them fact checks or legal notes, their program was a more legitimate news source.
The topic came up after cohost Sunny Hostin was forced to read her second legal note in the space of a week after she and the others repeatedly trashed President-elect Donald Trump&#8217;s cabinet picks — and Behar was also obviously less than thrilled: &#8220;Just call the show &#8216;Legal Note&#8217; from now on.&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Joy Behar falsely claims The View gets fact-checked by ABC News, and points to the legal notes as an example. But on their podcast last year executive producer Brian Teta claimed the notes are &quot;not a correction.&quot; LINK: <a href="https://t.co/QwzUsKn0r6">https://t.co/QwzUsKn0r6</a> <a href="https://t.co/ATcReWpifm">pic.twitter.com/ATcReWpifm</a>
&mdash; Nicholas Fondacaro (@NickFondacaro) <a href="https://twitter.com/NickFondacaro/status/1859638029498871980?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 21, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Sara Haines suggested people should be wary of the potential for social media, especially to spread misinformation, adding that they should &#8220;triple check&#8221; things before simply accepting them as true.
&#8220;That’s why people like our show because they know we are checked by ABC News,&#8221; Behar claimed.
&#8220;Checked by everybody,&#8221; Whoopi Goldberg agreed.
&#8220;And if we’re wrong, we have the legal note here,&#8221; Behar said, indicating former federal prosecutor and cohost Sunny Hostin. &#8220;We went from Walter Cronkite basically to this guy Joe Rogan who believes in dragons! I checked it!&#8221;
&#8220;He believes in dragons?&#8221; Hostin asked.
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/?_gl=1*jtghwp*_gcl_au*ODQ1NjYzNTg2LjE3Mjg5MDk3OTE.*_ga*MTc2NzM0NDQ2NS4xNzI4OTA5Nzkx*_ga_CZKR9ZYKJP*MTczMDEyMDgwOS40OS4xLjE3MzAxMjA4MzkuMzAuMC4w" target="_blank" rel="noopener">MATT WALSH’S ‘AM I RACIST?’ NOW STREAMING ON DAILYWIRE+</a>
Behar was adamant: &#8220;He believes in dragons!&#8221;
&#8220;Did you triple source that?&#8221; Haines wanted to know.
&#8220;Yes, I did and he also thinks that dragons — I guess like dinosaur-type animals — would roam the Earth when people did. So this is the type of really, really bad information that’s going out there,&#8221; Behar complained.
What Rogan <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p4WDBuS1-eE" target="_blank" rel="noopener">actually said</a> was that he was &#8220;fascinated&#8221; by the things that did not exist but still appeared across cultures — like dragons. He then explained that he believed people had seen something real, like a large lizard, which inspired exaggerations and stories that led to the legends. On the notion of fire-breathing dragons that hoarded treasure, Rogan&#8217;s assessment was simple: &#8220;Bulls***.&#8221;
Despite that, when video of Behar&#8217;s wild claim began circulating on X — and someone pointed out that &#8220;The View&#8221; had labeled him a &#8220;dragon believer,&#8221; Rogan announced: &#8220;That’s my new official X description.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
That’s my new official X description. <a href="https://t.co/rJ4Fozzmcd">https://t.co/rJ4Fozzmcd</a>
&mdash; Joe Rogan (@joerogan) <a href="https://twitter.com/joerogan/status/1859656754671575457?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">November 21, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The hosts of &#8220;The View,&#8221; who were not fact-checked despite a number of whoppers on Thursday&#8217;s show alone, are responsible for spreading such blatant misinformation on a regular basis that Goldberg was even <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/breaking-effective-immediately-abc-suspends-whoopi-goldberg-over-wrong-and-hurtful-holocaust-comments" target="_blank" rel="noopener">suspended</a> for a time for claiming that the Holocaust was &#8220;not about race.&#8221;

Joe Rogan

‘The View’ Tries To Discredit ‘Dragon Believer’ Joe Rogan, And He Hits Right Back

'The View' Tries To Discredit 'Dragon Believer' Joe Rogan, And He Hits Right Back

ABC News

The View

For all the differences between the presidential and vice presidential debates, there was one glaring similarity: the moderators weren&#8217;t able to keep their mouths shut. In the first debate, the rules allowed the moderators to &#8220;fact-check,&#8221; whatever that means exactly. In the second debate, the rules didn&#8217;t allow &#8220;fact-checking.&#8221; But in both cases, the moderators couldn&#8217;t help themselves. They weighed in, over and over again. And every single time, they interjected to help whatever Democrat was standing at the podium. And the format of these &#8220;fact-checks&#8221; was always the same, too. The moderators would wait for Donald Trump or JD Vance to stop speaking. Then they&#8217;d hastily recite a rehearsed, one-line &#8220;correction.&#8221; And then they&#8217;d immediately try to change the subject so that Trump or Vance couldn&#8217;t respond.
This would be disgraceful even if these moderators were telling the truth. The whole point of a debate is to hear from the candidates, not the moderators. But even if you disagree on that point — even if you think it&#8217;s good for the moderators to intervene when they think a candidate is lying — it&#8217;s still not clear why they would refuse to let the candidates respond to their &#8220;fact checks.&#8221; This wasn&#8217;t an accident; it was how they approached every single one of these fact checks, across two debates and two sets of moderators. And it&#8217;s worth figuring out why that is.
It could be that many on the Left don&#8217;t engage in any kind of critical thought anymore. They just look at the consensus view — as reflected by the &#8220;fact check&#8221; — and declare no further questioning is allowed. They genuinely can&#8217;t conceive of a situation in which the consensus might be mistaken. On the other hand, it could also be that, in this context, the moderators realized their &#8220;fact-checks&#8221; would fall apart under any form of scrutiny. And indeed, with every day that passes, that&#8217;s exactly what&#8217;s happening. One by one, every single one of these &#8220;fact-checks&#8221; from these two debates is collapsing.
These are not small errors I&#8217;m referring to. Take for example this moment from the debate between Donald Trump and Kamala Harris. Trump was asked about his position on abortion, and he gave a long answer. And then the moderator, Linsey Davis, fired off a one-line fact-check before pivoting immediately to Kamala Harris. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="YouTube video player" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/-xUEAF2iR-A?si=0bKHKiSeM2y2CAde" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
At the time, a lot of people pointed out the obvious problem with this fact-check. Donald Trump never actually said that it was legal to kill babies after they were born. But he did say it was happening. And he cited a very specific and well-known piece of evidence: The former governor of Virginia, Ralph Northam, strongly suggested to a radio show in 2019 that in certain cases, such as &#8220;fetal abnormalities,&#8221; his bill would <a href="https://www.reuters.com/article/world/fact-check-virginia-governors-2019-comments-about-abortion-bill-are-missing-co-idUSKBN27D2GS/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">allow doctors</a> to kill children after they&#8217;re born:
<blockquote>If a mother is in labor, I can tell you exactly what would happen. The infant would be delivered. The infant would be kept comfortable. The infant would be resuscitated if that’s what the mother and the family desired, and then a discussion would ensue between the physicians and the mother.</blockquote>
Defenders of Ralph Northam recognized how demonic this quote is. So for the past several years, they have insisted that he wasn&#8217;t talking about euthanizing children who survived failed abortions. And they claimed the governor wasn&#8217;t actually talking about allowing newborn infants to die for no medical reason, either. Presumably, that&#8217;s the spin Linsey Davis had in mind when she corrected Donald Trump during this debate. She declared, with authority, that there is &#8220;no state&#8221; in the entire country where it&#8217;s legal to kill children after they&#8217;re born.
What was missing from her fact check is what John Solomon at Just The News has now <a href="https://justthenews.com/politics-policy/elections/tueaftwalzs-history-born-alive-abortions-opens-door-trump-gop-flip" target="_blank" rel="noopener">proven</a> — which is that children are being born alive in this country, and then doctors are allowing them to die without even attempting any life-saving intervention. It turns out that, until 2023, the state of Minnesota kept records on how many infants were born alive during failed abortions. Those records showed that from 2019 to 2021 — during Tim Walz&#8217;s tenure as governor — at least eight infants were born alive following a botched abortion. Not a single one of these infants received &#8220;life-saving care.&#8221; Two infants in 2021 received &#8220;comfort care.&#8221; All eight of the children died.
None of the doctors involved were ever investigated or charged for any of this — even though, at the time, Minnesota law <a href="https://www.ncregister.com/news/tim-walz-born-alive-abortion">required</a>, “responsible medical personnel” to use “[a]ll reasonable measures consistent with good medical practice” to “preserve the life and health of the born alive infant.”
But just to cover his bases, Tim Walz changed the law in 2023. Now the law doesn&#8217;t require lifesaving measures at all for infants who survive abortions. Instead it requires that doctors &#8220;care for the infant who is born alive,&#8221; without specifying exactly what that care entails. The law also gets rid of the reporting requirement for the state health agency, so no one can learn how many children are being killed — or allowed to die — after they&#8217;re born.
<h4><a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1456-member-exclusive" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH: The Matt Walsh Show</a></h4>
If you look at the records Solomon found, you can see why Democrats might want to cover them up. They&#8217;re as ghoulish as you can imagine. Here&#8217;s the <a href="https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2024-08/MNAbortionReportJuly2020.pdf">July 2020 report</a> from Minnesota, for example.
<blockquote>In one instance, fetal anomalies were reported but residual cardiac activity was present at 2 minutes. Care of fetus was transferred to the second medical doctor. No measures taken to preserve life were reported and the infant did not survive. &#8230; In one instance, comfort care measures were provided as planned and the infant did not survive. &#8230; In one instance, the infant was pre-viable. No measures taken to preserve life were reported and the infant did not survive.</blockquote>
Notice the <a href="https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2024-08/MNAbortionReportJuly2020.pdf">report</a> doesn&#8217;t even bother to clarify whether lifesaving measures could have saved some of these infants. That&#8217;s not a piece of information the health department decided to track, for some reason. But the report is very clear on the fact that children who survived abortions were consistently allowed to die in the state of Minnesota without any attempt by a doctor to save them. &#8220;No measures taken to preserve life&#8221; is a consistent theme here. You don&#8217;t get any more information than that. And rather than provide any more transparency on this point, the state, under Tim Walz, has gone ahead and shut down record-keeping entirely.
The Dispatch looked into this reporting, and <a href="https://thedispatch.com/article/claims-about-children-born-alive-after-abortion-attempts-in-minnesota-are-true/">they confirmed</a> it&#8217;s all accurate.
<blockquote>[Charlie] Kirk and Solomon’s claims are correct. Minnesota Department of Health documents show that eight infants were born alive during abortion procedures between 2019 and 2022, and, in 2023, Walz signed legislation that repealed most of a statute designed to protect infants born alive after an abortion attempt.</blockquote>
So the truth is that Linsey Davis either has no idea what she was talking about, or she was deliberately lying. Either way, it&#8217;s beyond reprehensible that no mainstream media organization in this country has bothered to do any investigative reporting on this topic. Apparently, only John Solomon is interested in the question of whether or not children are being systematically killed — or &#8220;allowed to die&#8221; — after they&#8217;re born. The most we can expect from ABC is a drive-by &#8220;fact-check&#8221; during a presidential debate with a lot of snark and no substance whatsoever.
To get a sense of how big the problem is, I went back and looked at every single fact-check from these two debates. And every single one of them was either obviously false or extremely misleading. I already <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/episode/ep-1449-the-matt-walsh-show">covered</a> the FBI&#8217;s crime numbers, which supposedly show that violent crime is down. The moderator, David Muir, cited those statistics in his &#8220;fact-check&#8221; without providing any context — including the missing law enforcement agencies who didn&#8217;t report data, or the DOJ&#8217;s report showing that crime has actually surged under the Biden-Harris administration. Then there was his claim that &#8220;no credible reports&#8221; indicated animals were being eaten in Springfield. Watch:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="YouTube video player" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4O382w20rpk?si=ATftcnAizEufZIia" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
So the city manager says it&#8217;s not &#8220;credible&#8221; to suggest that domesticated animals are being killed in the &#8220;migrant community.&#8221; And the moderator and Kamala Harris mock Donald Trump for saying he saw those reports on television. It turns out that, back in March, the Springfield city manager himself did say that there were &#8220;quite a few&#8221; credible reports of &#8220;horrid things&#8221; happening to domesticated animals in Haitian communities in the town. Watch:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Springfield City Manager back in March: I have heard residents complaining about Haitians eating the town animals.
Would be a shame if we tagged <a href="https://twitter.com/ABC?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ABC</a>.
 <a href="https://t.co/dxiQyGwScH">pic.twitter.com/dxiQyGwScH</a>
&mdash; End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) <a href="https://twitter.com/EndWokeness/status/1836193221614932393?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 17, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
So that&#8217;s another fact-check that was just a complete lie. And actually, Trump called it out in real-time. He said the city manager was probably just trying to give a political answer when ABC News called. And that&#8217;s exactly what was happening.
Let&#8217;s go down the list. There was also this fact-check from the other day:
<iframe loading="lazy" title="YouTube video player" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ioYlkDYBOSw?si=XiJriD2-orj3hDIu" width="560" height="315" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen="allowfullscreen"></iframe>
This was another drive-by fact-check that the candidates weren&#8217;t allowed to respond to. And it&#8217;s also completely false, as I&#8217;ve outlined many times before. 
Here&#8217;s how Chris Martz — the same meteorology student I mentioned the other day — <a href="https://x.com/ChrisMartzWX/status/1841291822846370094" target="_blank" rel="noopener">responded to</a> this particular fact-check. 
<blockquote>There is absolutely zero evidence that climate change makes hurricanes larger in size (i.e., diameter). There is little evidence that hurricanes are becoming stronger. The number of category 3-5 hurricanes globally exhibit no statistically significant trend since 1980. This is backed by peer-reviewed research. &#8230; There is no evidence that hurricanes are becoming deadlier because of better warning coordination. Deaths are down [by more than] 75% since 1900 because of that.</blockquote>
<div id="attachment_807403" style="width: 648px" class="wp-caption aligncenter"><img loading="lazy" decoding="async" aria-describedby="caption-attachment-807403" class="wp-image-807403 size-full" src="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/10/GY2VGW2WEAcOhDp.jpeg" alt="Colorado State University" width="638" height="522" srcset="https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/10/GY2VGW2WEAcOhDp.jpeg 638w, https://dw-wp-production.imgix.net/2024/10/GY2VGW2WEAcOhDp-300x245.jpeg 300w" sizes="(max-width: 638px) 100vw, 638px" />Colorado State University</div>
Chris Martz, again, is a meteorology student. And he knows enough to check the actual data before he makes wildly false claims about what &#8220;scientists say.&#8221; So what exactly is the excuse of a major media organization for doing this, in front of 40 million people?
Whatever that excuse is, they&#8217;re still doing it, long after the debate is over. Around midnight, CBS News posted <a href="https://x.com/CBSNews/status/1841346121949401372" target="_blank" rel="noopener">this</a>:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
During the vice presidential debate, Senator JD Vance claimed Vice President Harris “became the appointed border czar.” CBS News Confirmed rates this as false. Here’s why. <a href="https://t.co/Nz888H6x8i">https://t.co/Nz888H6x8i</a> <a href="https://t.co/qzJbHC4s3F">pic.twitter.com/qzJbHC4s3F</a>
&mdash; CBS News (@CBSNews) <a href="https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1841346121949401372?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 2, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The fact-check claims that Harris was just assigned to investigate the &#8220;root causes&#8221; of migration, rather than to oversee enforcement of the law. But if you pull up articles from CBS&#8217; own website, you&#8217;ll find out very quickly that they&#8217;re lying. Here&#8217;s <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/kamala-harris-immigration-lead-mexico-border-biden-administration/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">an article</a> from 2021, for example.
<blockquote>Harris to lead administration&#8217;s efforts to stem migration at border &#8230; President Biden announced Wednesday he had tapped Vice President Kamala Harris to lead the administration&#8217;s efforts to stem migration at the southern border.</blockquote>
At this point, I&#8217;m honestly looking for a single &#8220;fact-check&#8221; that pans out. From what I can tell, none of them have any validity whatsoever. It&#8217;s actually kind of incredible. And of course, there was no fact-check that was more incredible than this one, which I highlighted the other day:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
BREAKING: The CBS Moderators just tried to &quot;Fact-Check&quot; JD Vance, but he stopped them in their tracks and FACT-CHECKED them instead. They then proceeded to mute his mic
THESE PEOPLE ARE DISGUSTING. <a href="https://t.co/thdFNAfXA0">pic.twitter.com/thdFNAfXA0</a>
&mdash; George (@BehizyTweets) <a href="https://twitter.com/BehizyTweets/status/1841291463226712485?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 2, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
This was egregious for all of the reasons that I&#8217;ve shown you. Yes, the moderators decided to break the rules to enter the debate on behalf of Kamala Harris. Yes, JD Vance was right that, to the extent these tens of thousands of Haitians are &#8220;legally&#8221; in the country, it&#8217;s only because the federal government has decided to bend the rules and award them mass amnesty. And yes, it&#8217;s comical that the moderator doesn&#8217;t fact-check Tim Walz&#8217;s claim that this has been going on, to the same extent, since the 90s.
But in retrospect, you can kind of see why the moderators decided to cut the microphones. After all, every single one of their fact-checks up to this point had been wrong. Some of them were called out in real-time, while others fell apart immediately on social media. And now, after all of that, they realized that yet another one of their fact-checks was blowing up in their faces. So they pressed the panic button.
At this point, the only viable solution is to eliminate moderators from future debates entirely. They&#8217;ve inserted themselves repeatedly into the discussion, only to spread falsehoods and confuse the issues. And they haven&#8217;t been wrong about insignificant topics, either. They&#8217;ve been wrong about whether illegal aliens are killing animals. They&#8217;ve been wrong about how many Americans are being victimized every year by violent criminals. And they&#8217;ve been wrong about whether children are being allowed to die after they&#8217;re born. These &#8220;mistakes&#8221; only go in one direction for a reason, which is that they&#8217;re not mistakes at all. The truth is that there are very powerful forces in this country that want to enable these atrocities. And after these moderators are all discarded along with their useless &#8220;fact-checks,&#8221; we need to make sure those ghouls never hold power again.

CBS Hosts Vice Presidential Debate

Why Debate ‘Moderators’ Prove That The Media Is The True Enemy Of The American People

Why Debate 'Moderators' Prove That The Media Is The True Enemy Of The American People

2024 Election

Abortion

Debates

Democrats

JD Vance

Kamala Harris

Leftists

Legacy Media

Matt Walsh

Tim Walz

CNN fact-checker Daniel Dale delivered a <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/14/politics/fact-check-harris-campaign-social-media/index.html" target="_blank" rel="noopener">brutal</a>, eight-part takedown of the @KamalaHQ X account, which has been named as the Vice President&#8217;s official rapid response account, noting that it had &#8220;made a habit of misleadingly clipping and inaccurately captioning video clips to attack former President Donald Trump.&#8221;
&#8220;Fact check: Harris campaign social media account has repeatedly deceived with misleading edits and captions,&#8221; the headline read, noting that the account then blasted those misleading edits out to more than 1.3 million followers on X, formerly Twitter.
From the CNN article:
<blockquote>The Harris campaign deploys @KamalaHQ as a kind of irreverent attack dog, using jocular posts to draw attention to controversial, incorrect, or dubious comments by Trump and his allies. But the account, which the Harris campaign calls its “<a href="https://x.com/KamalaHQ/status/1815212766912803099" target="_blank" rel="noopener">official rapid response page</a>,” has itself made inaccurate comments on multiple occasions.</blockquote>
Dale then laid out a series of eight examples of the @KamalaHQ account doing just that.
In the first case, they edited video of Trump to make it appear as though he had forgotten where he was.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Trump: Would that be okay, North Carolina?
(He is in Pennsylvania) <a href="https://t.co/TcymR609Rg">pic.twitter.com/TcymR609Rg</a>
— Kamala HQ (@KamalaHQ) <a href="https://twitter.com/KamalaHQ/status/1824917619503239193?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 17, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
But the full video of that Pennsylvania rally showed that there was a small group of attendees who were there from North Carolina — and that Trump, aware of that, pointed them out several times throughout the rally and referred to that section of the audience as &#8220;North Carolina&#8221; when he did so.
The @KamalaHQ account made a similar post last week, claiming again that Trump had forgotten what state he was in. This time, unedited footage showed that he was clearly referencing the migrant crisis affecting Pennsylvania during a rally in Arizona.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Trump: “Pennsylvania, remember this when you have to go to vote”
(He is in Arizona) <a href="https://t.co/lMEJwwvQ3I">pic.twitter.com/lMEJwwvQ3I</a>
— Kamala HQ (@KamalaHQ) <a href="https://twitter.com/KamalaHQ/status/1834363376916484344?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 12, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
A third example from @KamalaHQ showed a clip of Trump, claiming he was saying &#8220;nothing was done wrong&#8221; in Charlottesville in 2017. The full video showed Trump clearly stating that he was not referring to the neo-Nazis or the counterprotestors who killed Heather Heyer, but  to his own comment about there being &#8220;fine people on both sides&#8221; — which he and numerous outlets, CNN included, have said did not include white nationalists.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Trump says “nothing was done wrong” in Charlottesville in 2017 when neo-Nazis chanted “Jews will not replace us” and killed an innocent woman <a href="https://t.co/rQEuzPp3KP">pic.twitter.com/rQEuzPp3KP</a>
— Kamala HQ (@KamalaHQ) <a href="https://twitter.com/KamalaHQ/status/1834656890350932410?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 13, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
&#8220;I think he (Muir) corrected me 11 times. Of the 11 times, I don’t think he had the right to correct me at all. Didn’t correct her once. Like on Project 2025, I have no idea about — had nothing to do with me, he didn’t correct her, he knew that,&#8221; Trump said. &#8220;Charlottesville — nothing was done wrong. All you had to do is read my statement one more sentence and you would’ve seen that. Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham, Jesse (Watters), all of them, they — Greg Gutfeld — they all took that and they corrected it many times. But they keep coming with the same lies.&#8221;
And while Harris&#8217; campaign did not respond to CNN on the first two examples, they did attempt to defend the Charlottesville reference.
&#8220;He’s saying he did ‘nothing wrong’ in relation to him saying ‘very fine people’ who did what is described in the tweet,&#8221; the campaign said in an email.
A fourth example showed the account deceptively editing a comment from vice presidential candidate and Senator JD Vance (R-OH) regarding veterans&#8217; health care.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Q: Would you consider privatizing veterans health care?
Vance: I think I’d consider it <a href="https://t.co/wmjJq59vNJ">pic.twitter.com/wmjJq59vNJ</a>
— Kamala HQ (@KamalaHQ) <a href="https://twitter.com/KamalaHQ/status/1834244633372619063?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">September 12, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
When asked whether he&#8217;d consider privatizing health care for veterans, @KamalaHQ claimed that he responded, &#8220;I think he&#8217;d consider it.&#8221;
&#8220;I think I’d consider — and Donald Trump was really good at this, doesn’t get enough credit for this particular innovation — giving veterans more choice. Right? So let’s say you’re in a rural hospital. Your closest VA is 120 miles away. Why force a veteran to drive two-and-a-half hours to that VA facility when he can get cheaper and good care right in his backyard? Right? So I do think that we ought to open up choice and optionality for veterans. You know, I think that there is areas where the VA actually works very well, so I wouldn’t say get rid of the whole thing. I would say give people more choice, I think you’ll save money in the process, you’ll also give veterans a lot more optionality.&#8221;
Harris&#8217; campaign also pushed back on this fact-check, claiming that they never said he meant to privatize everything. But as Dale noted, they still cut off the video before he explained exactly what he intended to &#8220;consider,&#8221; suggesting that the privatization of all veterans&#8217; care was the only thing on the table.
Dale outlined four additional examples, each of which involved @KamalaHQ either posting video clips without relevant context or overtly mischaracterizing things that Trump said in order to attack him.

TOPSHOT-US-VOTE-POLITICS-HARRIS

Plot Twist: CNN Drops Brutal Fact-Check On Kamala’s Campaign HQ

Plot Twist: CNN Drops Brutal Fact-Check On Kamala's Campaign HQ

TIME Magazine issued an embarrassing correction to its post-debate report about how former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris fared against each other on Tuesday night.
Breitbart columnist John Nolte <a href="https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2024/09/11/nolte-time-issues-humiliating-correction-admitting-kamala-supports-taxpayer-funded-gender-surgery-for-illegals/">noted</a> that the left-wing publication initially <a href="https://archive.is/VmxAA#selection-883.0-892.0">reported</a>:
<blockquote>The former President &#8230; falsely claimed that Harris “wants to do transgender operations on illegal aliens in prison.”</blockquote>
Trump made the factually correct statement when talking about the litany of issues that Harris has flip-flopped on since becoming the Democrat Party&#8217;s presidential nominee.
&#8220;She did things that nobody would ever think of,&#8221; Trump said. &#8220;Now she wants to do transgender operations on illegal aliens that are in prison. This is a radical Left liberal that would do this.&#8221;
Trump&#8217;s comment came after CNN recently <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/harris-pledged-to-use-taxpayer-money-to-fund-sex-change-surgeries-for-illegal-aliens-in-detention-report">unearthed</a> a questionnaire Harris filled out for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) during her failed 2020 presidential campaign. She was asked if she, as president, would use “executive authority to ensure that transgender and non-binary people who rely on the state for medical care – including those in prison and immigration detention – will have access to comprehensive treatment associated with gender transition, including all necessary surgical care.”
She answered, “Yes.”
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://www.amiracist.com/&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1723831707612000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0pyrv88A5nsmWM2F2Wr9As">Tickets for “Am I Racist?” are on sale NOW! Buy here for a theater near you.</a>
Harris explained her answer by claiming that it was “important that transgender individuals who rely on the state for care receive the treatment they need, which includes access to treatment associated with gender transition.”
“Transition treatment is a medical necessity, and I will direct all federal agencies responsible for providing essential medical care to deliver transition treatment,” she claimed.
TIME issued the following correction to their report:
<blockquote>
The original version of this story mischaracterized as false Donald Trump&#8217;s statement accusing Kamala Harris of supporting “transgender operations on illegal aliens in prison” As a presidential candidate in 2019, Harris filled out a <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/09/politics/kfile-harris-pledged-support-in-2019-to-cut-ice-funding-and-provide-transgender-surgery-to-detained-migrants/index.html">questionnaire</a> saying she supported taxpayer-funded gender transition treatment for detained immigrants.
</blockquote>
However, the edit that the publication made inside the piece was still insufficient as they simply removed the word &#8220;false&#8221; so the sentence now reads: &#8220;The former President &#8230; claimed that Harris &#8216;wants to do transgender operations on illegal aliens in prison.'&#8221;
The fact that the publication still uses the word &#8220;claimed&#8221; to hedge Trump&#8217;s statement shows that they are intent on casting doubt on the veracity of what he said, even though it&#8217;s a position that Harris put in writing.

TOPSHOT-US-VOTE-POLITICS-DEMOCRATIC-CONVENTION

TIME Corrects Report On Kamala Wanting Taxpayer-Funded Trans Surgeries For Illegal Aliens

Presidential Debate

Prison

TIME

Time Magazine

transgender surgery

The Washington Post gave Democrat Gov. <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/tim-walz" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Tim Walz</a> (MN) &#8220;four Pinocchios&#8221; in a Thursday fact-check for lying about Republican Sen. <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/jd-vance" target="_blank" rel="noopener">JD Vance</a> (OH) during a recent campaign event.
Walz, who&#8217;s been slated to be Kamala Harris&#8217; VP pick, claimed Vance, Donald Trump&#8217;s VP pick, is not pro-worker and has &#8220;never cast a vote on a pro-worker bill in his life.&#8221;
“I’ll tell you, [Trump&#8217;s] running mate, I don’t know if that was a value-add to this campaign or not, but he’s one of four senators, four, that has never cast a vote on a pro-worker bill in his life. Not once,&#8221; Walz said Tuesday to a union audience. &#8220;A stopped clock’s right twice a day, this guy can’t get it right once, not once, for workers.”
“The only thing those two guys know about working people is how to work to take advantage of them,&#8221; the governor added.
<a href="https://www.amiracist.com/">Tickets for “Am I Racist?” are on sale NOW! Buy here for a theater near you.</a>
The Post <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2024/08/15/walzs-false-claim-that-vance-never-voted-any-pro-worker-bills/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> they were &#8220;struck&#8221; by such false language from Walz and suggested he borrowed the talking point directly from a far-Left interest group. The Democrat earned four Pinocchios for the remarks &#8212; the most a false rating can receive.
&#8220;We were struck that Walz said that Vance was one of four senators who had never cast a vote for a pro-worker bill,&#8221; the fact-check said. &#8220;That was rather specific and sounded as if he was borrowing from a legislative scorecard compiled by an organization or interest group.&#8221;
Walz&#8217;s &#8220;source&#8221; for the attack &#8220;was a union report card that covered only two bills in one year,&#8221; the Post continued. &#8220;Vance has voted for at least two bills that helped workers and had union support.&#8221;
Walz&#8217;s claim that Vance knows nothing about working people was also untrue, the fact-check said, noting it was literally the &#8220;subject of his book,&#8221; &#8220;Hillbilly Elegy.&#8221;
<a href="http://www.amiracist.com/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">WATCH THE TRAILER FOR &#8216;AM I RACIST?&#8217; — A MATT WALSH COMEDY ON DEI</a>
Since becoming a senator, Vance has pushed pro-worker and pro-family legislation. Notably, just last month, the Republican was praised by Teamsters President Sean O&#8217;Brien for caring about working people and supporting pro-worker legislation.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
Teamsters President Sean O&#8217;Brien is impressed with VP pick JD Vance:
&#8220;He&#8217;s been great on Teamster issues. He&#8217;s been right there on all our issues.&#8221; <a href="https://t.co/c0eip1yGfZ">pic.twitter.com/c0eip1yGfZ</a>
— The American Conservative (@amconmag) <a href="https://twitter.com/amconmag/status/1812960210853462137?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 15, 2024</a></blockquote>
This was not Walz&#8217;s first fib against Vance. Walz suggested a false, vulgar smear about Vance and a &#8220;couch&#8221; was true during his first rally with Vice President Kamala Harris. The comment was so false and egregious that CNN&#8217;s Jake Tapper brought it up on his show, calling it a &#8220;gross smear.&#8221;
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-media-max-width="560">
CNN&#8217;s Jake Tapper Revolted By Couch-Sex-Involved &#8216;Gross Smear&#8217; Of Trump VP Pick Vance: &#8216;What Happened To We Go High?&#8217; <a href="https://t.co/8VaJeevpxM">https://t.co/8VaJeevpxM</a> via <a href="https://twitter.com/Mediaite?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@mediaite</a> <a href="https://t.co/UiiCXIE83M">pic.twitter.com/UiiCXIE83M</a>
— Tommy moderna-vaX-Topher (@tommyxtopher) <a href="https://twitter.com/tommyxtopher/status/1821565579700101509?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">August 8, 2024</a></blockquote>
Related: <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/jake-tapper-slams-walz-for-repeating-gross-smear-targeting-jd-vance" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Jake Tapper Slams Walz For Repeating ‘Gross Smear’ Targeting JD Vance</a>

4 Pinocchios: WaPo Fact-Checks Tim Walz’s Latest Lie About JD Vance

Elections

Washington Post

Rep. Mike Waltz (R-FL) tore into CNN senior fact-checker Daniel Dale over his on-air declaration that Waltz was wrong about the Biden administration leaning in to developing and building electric tanks for the U.S. Army.
Waltz made the comment during his speech at the Republican National Convention (RNC), where he talked about military strength and readiness and argued that under President Joe Biden — and under the thumb of the climate agenda — American military priorities were all wrong.
Dale responded by claiming that Waltz — a combat veteran and a Green Beret — was wrong about the Biden administration&#8217;s push to build electric tanks.
Waltz pushed back first in a post on X, sharing an article from Inside Defense with the comment, &#8220;&#8216;The Army intends to field all-electric tanks by 2050, a top service energy and environment official told Inside Defense.&#8217; You can retract your &#8216;fact-check&#8217; from TV last night on my speech.&#8221;
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
<a href="https://t.co/pTAot3EdhS">https://t.co/pTAot3EdhS</a>
— Rep. Mike Waltz (@michaelgwaltz) <a href="https://twitter.com/michaelgwaltz/status/1814018442699141150?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 18, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Waltz took it a step further during a follow-up appearance on CNN, where he argued that Dale should not have delivered a fact-check on national television if he did not have all of the facts himself.
WATCH:
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet">
CNN “fact checker” <a href="https://twitter.com/ddale8?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@ddale8</a> should actually CHECK HIS FACTs before going on live national television after my RNC speech and questioning my credibility about Biden‘s electric tanks! <a href="https://t.co/mPx9Sm4RiZ">pic.twitter.com/mPx9Sm4RiZ</a>
— Rep. Mike Waltz (@michaelgwaltz) <a href="https://twitter.com/michaelgwaltz/status/1814349435398127967?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">July 19, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Waltz brought Dale into the conversation, prompting his interviewer to read back what he&#8217;d said about Biden &#8220;focusing on building electric tanks&#8221; and noting that it appeared to come from an Army climate strategy plan that mentioned going electric with tactical vehicles.
&#8220;Wrong,&#8221; Waltz cut him off, citing a Bloomberg report and testimony from the Secretary of the Army — along with a budget report indicating that funding was being set aside for development — and argued that Dale should sit down with some of the same people he had if he really wanted the facts.
The interviewer tried to object, saying that Dale would probably be happy to speak with anyone — but Waltz pointed out that he should have done so before he called into question the &#8220;credibility&#8221; of a sitting member of Congress on live television.
&#8220;Getting to the truth is a process,&#8221; the interviewer hedged.
Waltz made it clear that he was having none of it, adding, &#8220;But literally minutes after my speech, he&#8217;s telling the world I&#8217;m misleading. There&#8217;s no way he could review the Army&#8217;s budget, the research and development, the testimony that I personally received under oath – or how about just Google and get the facts?&#8221;

2024 Republican National Convention: Day 1

‘How About Just Google?’: GOP Rep. Fact-Checks CNN Fact-Checker In Brutal Segment

'How About Just Google?': GOP Rep. Fact-Checks CNN Fact-Checker In Brutal Segment

Joe Biden

Mike Waltz

Military

Republican National Convention

A <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/fact-checking" target="_blank" rel="noopener">fact-checker</a>&#8216;s assessment of a claim about noncitizens registering to vote has prompted blowback from Republican lawmakers who are pushing election integrity legislation.
The spat took off on Tuesday after <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/politifact" target="_blank" rel="noopener">PolitiFact</a> gave House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) a <a href="https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2024/may/20/mike-johnson/mike-johnsons-false-claim-that-immigrants-paroled/?utm_medium=Social&amp;utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1716295642-1" target="_blank" rel="noopener">&#8220;False&#8221; rating</a> for saying that migrants released on parole can register to vote at their local welfare office or the DMV.
&#8220;It&#8217;s illegal for noncitizens to vote. If parolees register, election officials would vet their applications,&#8221; the fact-checker said in a <a href="https://x.com/PolitiFact/status/1792924207136866347" target="_blank" rel="noopener">post</a> to X summarizing the review.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Speaker Mike Johnson said immigrants who came to the U.S. under humanitarian parole programs can register to vote at DMV and “welfare” offices. It&#39;s illegal for noncitizens to vote. If parolees register, election officials would vet their applications. <a href="https://t.co/lM7WA42hoi">https://t.co/lM7WA42hoi</a> <a href="https://t.co/4InAxjndUM">pic.twitter.com/4InAxjndUM</a>
&mdash; PolitiFact (@PolitiFact) <a href="https://twitter.com/PolitiFact/status/1792924207136866347?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">May 21, 2024</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Johnson made the comment earlier this month while <a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tGeQRt1WDRo" target="_blank" rel="noopener">promoting companion bills</a>, dubbed the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility (SAVE) Act, that <a href="https://roy.house.gov/media/press-releases/rep-roy-leads-fight-save-american-elections" target="_blank" rel="noopener">would require proof of U.S. citizenship for voter registration</a>.
Rep. Chip Roy (R-TX), whose version of the legislation <a href="https://cha.house.gov/_cache/files/9/4/9481c1c3-fbbe-43da-be01-8160304debbd/7B3AAB700E4EC1DBC9A2D00FF651F2B8.notice-5.23.24.pdf.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">may be considered</a> by a committee later this week, fired back at PolitiFact on X while taking a shot at the Biden administration for its handling of the migrant crisis.
&#8220;Whether it’s at the DMV or welfare offices, non-citizens have myriad opportunities to register to vote, as non-citizens are obviously eligible for government benefits under current federal and state policies,&#8221; Roy <a href="https://x.com/RepChipRoy/status/1792963711805853842" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> in a thread on X.
&#8220;Biden&#8217;s mass release of millions of illegal aliens into the U.S. – including over 1 million via parole – will only make this worse,&#8221; he added.
&#8220;But even if the ideological operatives at Politi-&#8216;fact&#8217; want to torture the statistics to say that this somehow isn&#8217;t a problem, then nobody should mind if we put safeguards in place to prevent it from becoming one — that is, unless you actually want noncitizens voting in federal elections,&#8221; Roy concluded.
Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT), who introduced the Senate version of the SAVE Act, also took a crack at PolitiFact.
&#8220;Politifact rates a true claim false, yet again, simply because the writer doesn’t like it,&#8221; his verified senator account <a href="https://x.com/SenMikeLee/status/1792960860593484204" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said on X</a>.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
&#8220;Illegals can easily register to vote across America. Politifact wrongly pretends that &#8216;it is illegal&#8217; is somehow an argument against this fact,&#8221; the account continued.
The senator also responded through his <a href="https://x.com/BasedMikeLee/status/1792981567591059714" target="_blank" rel="noopener">&#8220;BasedMikeLee&#8221; personal account</a>.
&#8220;States are prohibited, under [the Supreme Court&#8217;s] interpretation of the [National Voter Registration Act], from requiring proof of citizenship to register to vote in federal elections,&#8221; he said.
&#8220;So yes, while it is in fact &#8216;illegal for noncitizens to vote&#8217; in federal elections, that’s not the end of the matter,&#8221; Lee added. &#8220;#PassTheSAVEAct.&#8221;

Speaker of the House Mike Johnson, R-La., Rep. Chip Roy, R-Texas, and Sen. Mike Lee, R-Utah

Republicans Dismantle Fact-Check On Non-Citizens Registering To Vote

Chip Roy

Congress

Media Bias

Migrants

Mike Johnson

Mike Lee

PolitiFact

Voting

Fact-checking website <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/snopes" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Snopes</a> has updated its assessment of the contents of a stolen diary that belonged to President <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/joe-biden" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Joe Biden</a>’s daughter, Ashley Biden, to say they have been verified.
An article published in early April explored the claim that Ashley Biden&#8217;s diary &#8220;describes actions taken toward her by her father when she was a child as &#8216;probably not appropriate.'&#8221;
Whereas the article <a href="https://web.archive.org/web/20240405205118/https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ashley-biden-diary-claims/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">initially said</a> the claim had been &#8220;Unproven,&#8221; a <a href="https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ashley-biden-diary-claims/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">revised version</a> published at the end of the month changed the rating to &#8220;True.&#8221;
A note affixed to the top of the article cites an April 8 letter to a New York judge requesting jail time for one of the two people <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/woman-gets-sentenced-to-prison-for-selling-ashley-bidens-diary" target="_blank" rel="noopener">convicted of stealing</a> Ashley Biden&#8217;s diary in the run-up to the 2020 election.
&#8220;I will forever have to deal with the fact that my personal journal can be viewed online,&#8221; Ashley Biden wrote in the letter, which The New York Times <a href="https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/documenttools/654c5f7182bca1ee/6fe57478-full.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">published online</a>.
Snopes said previous versions of the fact-check noted &#8220;strong evidence&#8221; that the diary existed but argued no source had authenticated the contents of the pages that were published online.
<a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/217072/cotton-probes-for-doj-employees-spilling-beans-on-investigation-into-missing-ashley-biden-diary/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Alleged pages</a> from the first daughter&#8217;s diary, including one talking about being &#8220;hyper-sexualized&#8221; at a young age and &#8220;showers w/ my dad (probably not appropriate),&#8221; were <a href="https://nationalfile.com/official-national-file-statement-regarding-fbi-interest-in-ashley-bidens-probably-not-appropriate-showers-diary/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">published</a> by a website called National File.
The earlier iteration of the Snopes fact-check claimed &#8220;the authenticity of photographs purported to be from a diary is a separate question from the factual existence of a diary.&#8221;
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1712242396228000&amp;usg=AOvVaw3WzjrNXCr1KblP2z8dS_jB">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
With the latest assessment, the update note concluded, &#8220;Ashley Biden&#8217;s letter to the court, in Snopes&#8217; view, provides that authentication.&#8221;
In her letter to the court, Ashley Biden said her journal was part of her efforts to heal after being the victim of a crime in her early 20s.
Ashley Biden claimed that she was targeted because her father had been running for president, and the publicity the diary had drawn led her to be &#8220;constantly re-traumatized by it.&#8221;
She also said: &#8220;Repeatedly, I hear others grossly misinterpret my once-private writings and lob false accusations that defame my character and those of the people I love.&#8221;

Joe and Ashley Biden

Snopes Changes Fact-Check Rating On Contents Of Ashley Biden’s Diary From ‘Unproven’ To ‘True’

Snopes Changes Fact-Check Rating On Contents Of Ashley Biden's Diary From 'Unproven' To 'True'

Biden

Executive

Project Veritas

Snopes

Menu