What are we to makes of Snopes?

Snopes.com ^ | August 10, 2016 | Kim LaCapria

[MrChips]

"Slate also noted that the conspiracy theory version of Rich's death was lacking in both evidence and sense, yet WikiLeaks has since fanned the flames of speculation by offering a $20,000 reward for information about Rich's killer . . ."

[MrChips]

What are we to make of Snopes? This particular quotation from their website is a partial debunking of the theory that Seth Rich died at the hands of assassins for the DNC, or for the Clintons. Their argument seems rather perfunctory and insubstantial, particularly given the hints dropped by Julian Assange . . . whom the author dismisses in Cavalier fashion. Their arguments against any conspiracy involving John Ashe seems to hold more weight. But then, the argument against any conspiracy involving Shawn Lucas is utterly lacking in substance. I am just not familiar with Snopes, until now. Who are they? How accurate do they tend to be? They seem to be rather hasty in how quickly they pour water on conspiracy theories. Can someone clue me in?

[ConservativeMind]

It's funded by George Soros and run by Democrats.

That might be fine if the rumors were about aspartame, but not him or Hillary.

[BlackAdderess]

I like fact check better. Synopses seems to opinionated though they are good for some things, like chasing down internet hoaxes.

[Romans Nine]

Clue you in? Ok, Snopes is an extremely bias website that is controlled by far left libtards and is not worthy to be considered for any accuracy at all.

[Trumpnado2016]

I have heard that Snoopes is some lady with a cat who pretends to be an authority on everything.

[jospehm20]

Snopes sucks is a good explanation.

[BlackAdderess]

Synopses should be Snopes.

[Fungi]

Do not waste our time with Snopes.

[Intolerant in NJ]

They’re a left-wing shill group.......

[Paladin2]

‘Rat propaganda?

[867V309]

snopes=bought and paid-for. sound impartial?

[catnipman]

“I have heard that Snoopes is some lady with a cat who pretends to be an authority on everything.”

i heard it was a pair of white-trash Democrats who live in a trailer park.

[Bullish]

I stopped trying to make anything of Snopes long ago. They’re liberals on a mission and can barely hide it.

[Fhios]

I’ve read snopes at it’s inception. Like when Mosiac was your browser because it was the only browser. Back then it was considered bible, and had I think several News groups on it, like Alt.Urban-Legends. This is when drudgereport was emailed to you in ascii text.

Now I say they tread a fine line of political activism, and like wikipedia, is subject to perpetual edits.

[Impala64ssa]

When Snopes debunks the hands up don’t shoot narrative, then MAYBE then I would consider them to be slightly credible. But hell will freeze over, or longer than that the Jets will win another Super Bowl before that happens.

[MrChips]

Is it really funded by Soros?

[MrChips]

You mean they haven’t?! Oh.

[MrChips]

Got it. Thanks.

[TheCipher]

Snopes is a website run by a husband and wife ( both libtards ) out of their home. The husband does the website and the wife is the “researcher”. She bases her conclusions on “consensus” on the web- that is, she will look up an issue and if the majority of comments or websites declare it is false ( with no actual proof), she declares the issue false. Snopes is not a research organization ( though the media gives the impression that is exactly what it is ) with people on the payroll that delve into an issue and know something about what they are researching.

[MrChips]

Thank you. I just learned something.