Friday, July 10, 2026

USA Today fact checker clarified who was the real victim in the “fact check” on Biden watches – RedState


US Reported earlier Regarding the shocking “fact check” of the “USA Today” fact checker and the subsequent “correction” of Joe Biden’s watch check at the solemn handover ceremony of Dover Air Force Base.

Fact checker Daniel Fink appeared to be committed to refuting the claim that Biden checked his watch at the ceremony. These claims come from multiple sources, including the Venus family, who actually attended the ceremony and witnessed what Biden did.

The statement is misleading, Funke Initially said.

But this is not misleading. Fink thought this was misleading because he concluded that Biden checked his watch at the end of the ceremony.

First, claiming that it was at the end of the ceremony is a very lame excuse, thinking it is wrong. If it happened at the end, it still happened. Of course, according to some families, the problem is that Biden repeatedly checked it during the ceremony.

“USA Today” later acknowledged this and corrected it to now say that he checked his watch “lack of context.”

What is the “missing context”? Are you totally wrong? Do you want to find some why do you want to cover Biden? What is fact checking! This statement is obviously correct.

But Funke received so much backlash for the absurd fact-checking that he gave a speech on Twitter today.

Yes, everyone makes mistakes.

It was found to be wrong from the beginning, and it will not take more than a few minutes. He didn’t do this because he had preconceived ideas about where he wanted to go. So the facts are not important, even if he secretly criticized what the Venus family said in the process.

The problem is also that mistakes always seem to be aimed at the person on the right or defending the person on the left. What’s interesting is how this seems to happen.

So who are Funke’s victims? he is. It is not those people-including the Venus family-whose speeches were tainted by him.

Let’s also check the claim that he is easy to dunk. Not so much, at least not in front of him, because he limits those who can respond to him. So, no, it is not.

If he restricts those who can respond, he really doesn’t want to hear what people have to say. This is a bad strategy for people who claim to care about the facts. It’s a bit too late to try to clean it up now.





Source link

Related articles

spot_imgspot_img