[syriacus]

One notes that instead of enganging in the scholarship that FactChecks says they will do, Seth Goldman simply relies, as footnoted documentary evidence, opinions stated in other (leftest liberal) newspapers.

Yes!!

• The commentary on FactCheck is, at best, a secondary source.
• The primary sources that FactCheck provides are hand-picked by FactCheck folks.

Yet, to folks like Neal Gabler, FactCheck is permitted to have the aura of a primary source.

How ironic it was yesterday, that Neal Gabler and the others on FoxNewsWatch were discussing whether celebrities really had the credentials to be journalists.

Jane Hall said that she's gotten her credentials. She said she went to Columbia U School of Journalism.

Yet, on the same show, in face of all the evidence to the contrary, Hall showed she was entirely willing to swallow the Boston Globe account that Elliot recanted his testimony.

[AndyJackson]

The commentary on FactCheck is, at best, a secondary source

In no scholaraly work would an opinion stated in a newspaper be accepted as even a legitimate secondary source in evidence of any fact, especially an opinion stated as a rebutal to a primary source - a sworn statement by an eyewitness to the events. This is not scholarship; it is liberal journalism at its best [worst].