Image 01 Image 03

WaPo ‘Fact-Checker’ Admits Cotton Was Right That Boston Bomber Would Get COVID Stimulus Money

WaPo ‘Fact-Checker’ Admits Cotton Was Right That Boston Bomber Would Get COVID Stimulus Money

Maybe WaPo should stop griping about everything Cotton says because the paper has to constantly correct itself regarding Cotton’s claims and predictions.

In March, Sen. Tom Cotton slammed the COVID relief package because murderers would receive a $1,400 check.

The Washington Post‘s Glenn Kessler called out Cotton’s “hyped-up” claims. He tried to make it seem someone like Boston Bomber Dzhokhar Tsarnaev would not receive a stimulus check.

But Kessler’s article spent more time reminding people that Cotton voted for COVID stimulus packages under President Donald Trump. Those packages also did not eliminate murderers from check eligibility.

That’s not the point. Kessler’s supposed job is to fact-check. He should have swum through the current stimulus bill to prove Cotten wrong. It doesn’t matter how Cotton voted in the past. Maybe make a mention of it, but to concentrate on it made me think Kessler knew Cotton was right.

Also, Cotton’s tweets specifically named people on death row like Tsarnaev.

Oh, look. Tsarnaev received a $1,400 stimulus check! Kessler backtracked on Thursday…sort of. He still gave Cotton one Pinnochio because Cotton’s tweet lacks “context” even though it doesn’t:

Cotton primarily received the Two-Pinocchio rating because his comments lacked context. He suggested this problem was the result of something Democrats did, when he had previously voted for legislation with the same language that allowed for checks to be issued to prisoners. He also made it clear that he intended weaponize this debate for campaign ads.

Still, Cotton’s predictive powers should be acknowledged. He said the Boston bomber would get a stimulus check — and Tsarnaev did. Now, if the government is successful, this money will go to victims. So Tsarnaev still will not keep it. But in retrospect, the use of the phrase of “scaremongering” was inappropriate. Cotton had raised a legitimate issue of concern, even if he framed it in a political way. The term “hyped up” in the headline went too far as well.

Thus, we will reduce the rating on this claim to One Pinocchio — our version of “mostly true.” His statement still lacks some context but he was certainly correct that Tsarnaev would receive a stimulus check.

“Political way?” Cotton is a senator. Of course he framed his prediction in a “political way” even though anyone could have made the tweet the way he wrote it.

By the way, WaPo had to make a correction on another Cotton story. At the beginning of Covid, everyone threw out theories about how the virus emerged into the public. Cotton and a few others said it is possible it leaked out of the Wuhan lab.

Out of all the theories WaPo latched onto Cotton speaking about this “fringe theory” because God forbid we upset the Commies in China.

Here’s the thing. Cotton only said it is a possibility! Again, one of many theories that floated around when Covid first emerged.

The Washington Post issued a correction 15 months later. Don’t you love how we’re all smarter than the mainstream media?


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


As the ol’ expression says, “As dumb as The Post.”

It is pretty wise to take the opposite position of any corporate propaganda “fact checker”.

So, the WaPo gave him 2 Pinocchios because ‘his statements lacked context’. Isn’t that the same as giving 2 Pinocchios because ‘he does not agree with us’?

Now might be a good time to remind people that the same media organizations that pay for fact-checkers also pay for pollsters.

They’re getting what they’re paying for.

Funny, everything WaPoo publishes starts off with a three-Pinocchio default assumption until proven otherwise.

“That’s not the point. Kessler’s supposed job is to fact-check.”

And the record shows he’s been abysmally bad at it. He shouldn’t have a job.

WaPo “fact checkers” and columnists are where the term Post Turtle came from. No-one can figure out where they came from or why they are there