So Who Fact-Checks the Fact-Checkers?

By Debra J. Saunders In 2009 the fact-checking organization PolitiFact run by the St. Petersburg Times (now the Tampa Bay Times) won a Pulitzer for its coverage of the 2008 election. But I dont think PolitiFact is likely to emerge from 2016 with its credibility intact. A recent NBC News poll shows that a mere 11 percent of voters would describe Clinton as honest and trustworthy. Yet in a complete repudiation of public sentiment PolitiFacts rating for Hillary Clinton finds her statements are true or mostly true half the time half-true 22 percent of the time and false or mostly false 26 percent of the time -- but pants-on-fire false 2 percent of the time. Donald Trump did not fare so well. PolitiFact rated 19 percent of his statements pants-on-fire false. Given Trumps cavalier approach to facts I assume he earned the bad rating. But I cannot say the same for Clinton and PolitiFacts generous assessment of her veracity. Clintons campaign has been plagued with the general impression that she has lied repeatedly about her decision to use a home-brew server for State Department emails -- as well as her assertion that the decision was done not to keep public information from public scrutiny but for the sake of convenience. Clinton said it was allowed. Not true. She said other secretaries of state did likewise when no other secretary of state exclusively used a private server. Clinton said that she handed over all of her work-related emails to the State Department. Wrong FBI Director James Comey testified before Congress: Thousands were not returned. PolitiFact rated the allowed assertion false -- not pants on fire. When Clinton said I have now put out all of my emails PolitiFact rated that half true and did not revise the rating later. It was not until Clinton told Fox News anchor Chris Wallace that Comey said my answers were truthful and what Ive said is consistent with what I have told the American people that PolitiFact gave Clinton a pants-on-fire rating on the subject. PolitiFact editor Angie Drobnic Holan told me that her organization purposefully didnt rate statements that we couldnt verify. Once Comey came forward the factual record got much richer and PolitiFact acted accordingly. And: Our main goal here with the rating is not to punish or reward politicians but to tell our readers what we know and what we dont know. PolitiFact never rated Clintons public statements in which she linked an awful internet video with the Benghazi terrorist attack. It wasnt clear at the time if it was true or false Holan explained. In October 2012 on CNN Clinton blamed the fog of war for her video remarks. CNNs Jake Tapper however determined for FactCheck.org that Hillary Clinton contributed to that false impression even though the State Department and Hillary Clinton seemed to know from the beginning that this was a terrorist attack. This month Bill Clinton went after Comey. The Washington Post fact-checker gave him three Pinocchios for a pathetic and misleading attempt to normalize Hillary Clintons use of her personal email account and play down the fact that she was the only secretary of state to use a private server. The decision to use a private server is the root of all of the political difficulties concerning her email practices. PolitiFact didnt chime in on Bubbas attack on Comey. I have sympathy for PolitiFacts efforts to rule down the middle. But when its decisions lead to such glowing numbers for a candidate who cant seem to tell the truth it has to rethink how it operates. Because when I look at Clintons high truthiness score I cant help but wonder if the verdict is -- forgive me -- rigged.