[Political Junkie Too]

Okay, I'm doing this from memory, so you can question my memory if you like (I don't trust the "history" of the internet because it is scrubbed daily).

Not from what I read. If you can find where they said it, please let me know.

The original FactCheck article (Born in the USA) made several claims. Those claims were investigated by others. I am not going to trace the links to links this far away from the real-time events. I'm sorry that you weren't here at the time to debate it with us. You can chug through all the old threads if you like. What I recall is that they were invited and given very limited time to see the document.

Factcheck is not a partisan group.

The original facsimile of the document was released to the Daily Kos website. Everything from there is tainted fruit, as far as I'm concerned. They should have released it to the AP, or the NYT, if they wanted impeccable credibility.

-PJ

[curiosity]

The original FactCheck article (Born in the USA) made several claims. Those claims were investigated by others. I am not going to trace the links to links this far away from the real-time events. I'm sorry that you weren't here at the time to debate it with us. You can chug through all the old threads if you like. What I recall is that they were invited and given very limited time to see the document.

Well, what you recall is wrong.

The original facsimile of the document was released to the Daily Kos website. Everything from there is tainted fruit, as far as I'm concerned. They should have released it to the AP, or the NYT, if they wanted impeccable credibility.

Yes, sending the firt fascimile to daily kos was a mistake, I agree. However, I fail to see how that taints the document. A document does not become invalidated just because an electronic copy of it gets emailed to some suspect group.