Washington Post Only Fact Checks Republicans In Impeachment Hearings

NightHawkeye said:

From the "We're so unbiased that we only need to advocate one side", files: Washington Post Only Fact Checks Republicans In Impeachment Hearings

Glenn Kessler, WaPo’s fact checker, told the Daily Caller News Foundation that nothing the Democrats said rose to “the level of being an interesting fact check.”
...
Despite numerous opportunities to fact check Democrats, WaPo instead stuck with Republicans. The publication did similar in July when it declined to fact check Democrats during the Mueller hearings.​

... and they wonder why people love it when Donald Trump attacks their blatant partisan bias.

Click to expand...

Orange Man Bad. No need to fact check his opponents.

Washington Post! They have documented over 10,000 times that Orange Man has lied or exaggerated to the point of lying . At this point you can’t really blame WAPO for making a mistake. If it is a mistake

Brightmoon said:

They have documented over 10,000 times that Orange Man has lied or exaggerated to the point of lying . At this point you can’t really blame WAPO for making a mistake.

Click to expand...

Yeah, man, my neighbor's dog bit me over ten thousand times. I must be a really bad man, and my neighbor must be a saint. I can't blame the dog for chewing off my last bit of meat when he mistakenly thought I glanced his way with malicious intent. It's not the dog's fault at all. I'm sure it isn't biased in favor of my neighbor. I deserve to get bit.

What particular statement do you think should have been fact checked?

Did the Democrats make as many outlandish claims as the Republicans?

Arcangl86 said:

What particular statement do you think should have been fact checked?

Click to expand...

According to WaEx:

WashingtonExaminer said:

One fact check WaPo omitted was Democratic California Rep. Adam Schiff’s assertion that the White House took an “extraordinary step” by moving the memo of President Donald Trump’s July 25 phone call with Ukraine’s president to a “highly classified server.”

Click to expand...

Although it is unclear when this statement was made.

Aldebaran said:

They're the ones who wanted these hearings. They're the ones who are making all the accusations. They're the ones who have something to prove.
Don't you think the things they say should be fact-checked?

Click to expand...

That didn't answer my question. I didn't watch much of the hearings, but from what little I saw, it seemed like the Dems spent more of their time asking questions while the Republicans spent more of their time bloviating. I don't know if that assessment is accurate, but generally speaking, asking questions doesn't provide much fodder for fact checkers while bloviating does.

LOL! This is like complaining that the refs only throw flags on the Cleveland Browns. If the refs were "unbiased", then they would be throwing an equal number of flags against both the Browns and the other team.

I'm sorry, that's not how it works.

Aldebaran said:

When the opportunity comes for the Republicans to tell the public and the dems about the frailty and speculative nature of the accusations those questions are based on, they should use it. Otherwise, all we have is the MSM parroting the claims of the dems.

Click to expand...

You're still avoiding the point. The complaint was that WaPo was being biased in its choices of which statements to fact check. That complaint is built on the assumption that both parties are guilty of making the sort of statements worthy of being fact checked. WaPo says that wasn't the case. My limited viewing of the hearings jives with WaPo's take.

If you think it was appropriate for the Republicans to "tell the public and the dems about the frailty and speculative nature of the accusations", that's fine, but that's exactly the sort of thing that's going to get fact-checked. You can't on one hand laud them for taking an approach so divergent from that of the Dems and then criticize WaPo for not spending the same amount of ink on each party's claims.

Aldebaran said:

They're the ones who wanted these hearings. They're the ones who are making all the accusations. They're the ones who have something to prove.
Don't you think the things they say should be fact-checked?

Click to expand...

Did they make any dubious statements or did they stick to asking questions? You can't fact check somebody unless they make make statements of facts.

usexpat97 said:

LOL! This is like complaining that the refs only throw flags on the Cleveland Browns. If the refs were "unbiased", then they would be throwing an equal number of flags against both the Browns and the other team.

I'm sorry, that's not how it works.

Click to expand...

Aldebaran said:

Then perhaps you should read the title of the thread again. They were biased in which political party they fact-checked.

Click to expand...

lol, seriously? That doesn't contradict what I said. They chose to fact check some statements made by Republicans and not statements made by Democrats.

Aldebaran said:

They're the ones who wanted these hearings. They're the ones who are making all the accusations. They're the ones who have something to prove.
Don't you think the things they say should be fact-checked?

Click to expand...

Of course, but the sites usually don't bother to post it when the facts check out.

Aldebaran said:

Are you admitting that the dems are only making statements of falsehoods?

Click to expand...

What nonsense, "are you admitting...stuff you never said?"!
Are you not aware that statements can be opinions rather than facts?