[jayrox]

I try to keep my facts in check, any examples of questionable politifact judgements?

[spiderfarmer]

Even if some were questionable, it doesn't mean there's a hidden agenda. Unlike the real 'fake news' outlets, where truth is intentionally skewed, hidden or muddied, with the intent of attracting the most eyeballs.

[scholia]

Attacking reputable sources -- which Trump does all the time -- is the main way to con supporters so they'll keep believing their #fakenews lies.

[dingo_bat]

A nice analysis of one politifact article:

http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2017/02/trump-4-politi...

Note that there are many such examples. Another exceedingly silly piece:

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/jan/...

It's almost like a child wrote it. It "fact-checks" a reasonable guess.

[stvswn]

Here you go:https://www.google.com/amp/www.wsj.com/amp/articles/politifa... ,and this one:http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/414434/politifact-and-m...

[croon]

I couldn't read the WSJ article through that link or through a google search.

I read through the NR article, and while the attempts to contact the authors of the fact check was lacking, I don't see the problem in the fact check itself.

ACA was basically saying you can't discriminate against any state licensed and certified health practitioner.

While I think homeopathy is bullshit, I don't see how else to do it, and claiming it gives "elevated legitimacy to alternative medicine" is misleading at best.

It's really far fetched as an attempt to show politifacts questionability.

I'm more inclined by the lack of evidence to the contrary to consider them generally trustworthy.

[Bahamut]

Can't read the first source, but the National Review should never be cited as a legitimate source (the second link). It also reads like an almost raving rant...