[davikkm]

Crazy Grandma go home to California. Leave us alone.

[Vaquero]

Botox....meet brain.

[circlecity]

"but according to the fact checkers at Snopes,"

I don't consider Snopes to be authority for anything.

[Ray76]

Snopes??? Ha! Yeah right.

[InABunkerUnderSF]

Rush has read the same essay on the air. I’d be interested to know which specific details are inaccurate. Can we really regard Snopes as universally credible?

[bigbob]

well she probably got it off the internet so it’s got to be true

[petro45acp]

'...but according to the fact checkers snopes checkers at Snopes...'

There, fixed it.....

KYPD

[C210N]

She is forced to rely on Snopes for the content.

Since Pelosi never voted for the Declaration, she would not know what is inside it.

[hinckley buzzard]

This sounds like the piece read by Rush and other conservatives on July Fourth's in years past.

[Hugin]

“and #wethepeople campaign”

Who are the “wet he people”?

[x]

That thing has been going around for a long time. Some of its true. Some isn't. I think Rush Limbaugh or Paul Harvey read some of it on the air and got in trouble for the inaccuracies. More here.

[Hugin]

Snopes debunking mainly consists of saying that while most (but not all) of those things actually happened, they weren’t singled out specifically because they were signers, but just stuff that happens in the course of war. But the essay doesn’t claim that they were singled out. The point is by issuing what was essentially a declaration of war, what happened to them in that war was a result of their action in signing. Snopes is knocking down a straw man.