Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Facts First: Trump’s claim is false. Trump has been indicted four times, while Capone was indicted at least six times, as A. Brad Schwartz , the co-author of a book on Capone, told CNN in 2023 .
The legal rule itself – how to apply this exception – is complicated, as it is often dependent on who said the statement and which actor it was directed towards. [6] The analysis is thus different if the government or a public figure is the target of the false statement (where the speech may get more protection) than a private individual who is being attacked over a matter of their private ...
Fact-checkers from The Washington Post [1] (top, monthly), the Toronto Star [2] and CNN [3] [4] (bottom, weekly) compiled data on "false or misleading claims", and "false claims", respectively. The peaks corresponded in late 2018 to the midterm elections , in late 2019 to his impeachment inquiry , and in late 2020 to the presidential election.
Trump made a series of misleading claims on topics ranging from Jan. 6 to terrorism to taxes at the first 2024 presidential debate, while Biden flubbed some facts.
Here's what the USA TODAY Fact Check Team found on how Trump's statements compare to Federal Aviation Administration standards and past changes. Claim: Air traffic controllers can have epilepsy ...
Different fact-checking organizations have shown different tendencies in their choice of which statements they publish fact-checks about. [13] For example, some are more likely to fact-check a statement about climate change being real, and others are more likely to fact-check a statement about climate change being fake. [13]
Despite the fact that U.S. troops continue to serve in global hot spots like Iraq, Syria and Somalia, Harris made a claim that made it sound as if America’s soldiers were not deployed in combat ...
Statements of value (normative or prescriptive statements), which encompass ethics and aesthetics, and are studied via axiology. This barrier between fact and value, as construed in epistemology, implies it is impossible to derive ethical claims from factual arguments, or to defend the former using the latter. [2]