Oh, C'mon! 'Fact-Checking' Night 3 of Democrat Convention, CNN-Style

In my book, "CNN" and "fact-checking" are mutually exclusive notions. Hence, when I happened upon a story titled "Fact-checking Night 3 of the Democratic National Convention," I was more than amused.

Upon reading the first line, "For the second straight night, there were few false or misleading claims at the Democratic National Convention on Wednesday," I laughed out loud. So naturally, I couldn't pass it up.

It immediately got even better (more hilarious).

Speakers tended to stick to factual statements, thematic rhetoric, personal stories and uncheckable predictions.

Wait— "thematic rhetoric"? "Uncheckable predictions"? CNN, you're joking, right?

For starters, three words: Michigan attorney general.

Yep, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel was just full of ... "facts." Here's a snippet:

By the way, I got a message for the Republicans and the justices of the United States Supreme Court: You can pry this wedding band from my cold, dead, gay hand! And I'm retaining a lot of water, so good luck with that.

Huh? Memo to Ms. Nessel: The Republicans have no desire to pry your wedding band from your hand — dead or alive — retained water notwithstanding.

Michigan AG: “I have a message for the Republicans and the justices of the United States Supreme Court: You can pry this wedding band from my cold, dead, gay hand!”

pic.twitter.com/KScOP2Gfcz
— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) August 22, 2024

Incidentally, Ric Grenell, former Acting Director of National Intelligence under then-President Trump —who happens to be a gay man — had a few thoughts here.

Any homosexual who believes that gay marriage is threatened by Donald Trump is a mindless sheep.
You are being used.
Wake up. They control you.

Bingo.

Any homosexual who believes that gay marriage is threatened by Donald Trump is a mindless sheep.

You are being used.

Wake up. They control you.
— Richard Grenell (@RichardGrenell) August 22, 2024

To CNN's credit, The Most Trusted Name in News™ did point out two glaring night-3 lies.

Colorado governor makes false claim about Project 2025

Colorado Gov. Jared Polis joined other speakers at the Democratic National Convention on Wednesday in attacking Project 2025, an effort by dozens of conservative organizations, led by the Heritage Foundation think tank, to lay the groundwork for the next Republican presidency.
After holding up what he said was a copy of the 920-page Project 2025 policy document, which is called “Mandate for Leadership,” Polis said at one point: “Page 451 says the only legitimate family is a married mother and father, where only the father works.”

Incorrect. Here's CNN''s surprising response:

Facts First: Polis’ claim is false. Though the Project 2025 policy document argues for the importance of the “nuclear” family made up of a married mother and father, it does not say that this is the only “legitimate” family – and it certainly does not say that a family with a working mother is illegitimate. Polis’ inaccurate claim echoes an online meme that was debunked last month by Snopes, USA Today and others.
Mary Vought, vice president of strategic communications for the Heritage Foundation, told CNN in a message on Wednesday night: “As a working mother myself, I know this claim is simply a lie. The Mandate for Leadership says nothing about which families are ‘legitimate.’ If Gov. Polis actually read the page he cited, he would know that.”

And...

Congresswoman falsely claims Trump wrote Project 2025

Rep. Lisa Blunt Rochester of Delaware, who is also a US Senate candidate, said Wednesday of former President Donald Trump: “He has with his friends said the quiet parts out loud – but not only said it out loud, he wrote a book about it. What’s it called? Project 2025.”
Facts First: The claim that Trump “wrote” Project 2025 is false. There is no evidence that Trump was personally involved in writing the Project 2025 policy document, let alone that it was his own “book.” He is not among the document’s listed authors, editors and contributors, though dozens of people who served in his administration are on the list.
CNN reported in July that at least 140 people who worked in the Trump administration had a hand in Project 2025, including more than half of the people listed as authors, editors and contributors to the policy document. But noting that Trump has extensive ties to Project 2025 is significantly different than claiming that Trump actually wrote Project 2025.
Noah Weinrich, a spokesperson for Project 2025, said in a message to CNN on Wednesday night: “Project 2025 is not affiliated with any candidate, and no candidate was involved with the drafting of the Mandate for Leadership, which was published by Heritage in April 2023.”

As I reported on July 6, Trump has claimed to know "nothing about" Project 2025.

I know nothing about Project 2025. I have no idea who is behind it. I disagree with some of the things they’re saying, and some of the things they’re saying are absolutely ridiculous and abysmal. Anything they do, I wish them luck, but I have nothing to do with them.

So here's the thing. Democrat elites don't give a damn about whether or not Trump authored "Project 2025" or had a hand in its input. What they very much give a damn about is convincing low-information, rank-and-file Democrat voters that he did.

Anyway, let's give CNN a D+ for effort.

However, the quasi-official mouthpiece of the Democrat Party did "forget" to include more than a few Wednesday-night whoppers, as reported by Roll Call.

Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz accepted his party’s vice presidential nomination, and repeated claims he has made before about the Republican ticket. Walz made the unsupported claim that Trump and his running mate, Sen. JD Vance, will “gut Social Security and Medicare.” Trump has promised not to cut either program.

And this:

Walz, like other convention speakers this week, made the unsupported claim that Trump and his running mate, Sen. JD Vance, will “gut Social Security and Medicare.” He said it while predicting what will happen “if these guys get back in the White House.”

On the other hand, Trump has promised to protect both programs for seniors, if elected, and he hasn’t released any detailed proposal to cut either program, Timmy.

Oops, "Coach."

Walz also said the Republican ticket “will ban abortion across this country with or without Congress.” Trump and Vance voiced support for a national ban of some kind in the past, but now both say the abortion issue should be left to the states.

And that it should be, which drives the left absolutely insane.

Here's more:

House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries misleadingly claimed that “83 percent of the benefits” from the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act “went to the wealthiest 1 percent in America.” That’s estimated to be the case in 2027, if the income tax changes in the 2017 law expire. In earlier years, the top 1 percent of income earners received a much smaller share of the benefits.
Along the same lines, Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg claimed that Trump only kept a promise to “cut taxes for the rich,” when the Tax Policy Center estimated that the tax law “would reduce taxes on average for all income groups.”
Former President Bill Clinton said Trump had “implied that if his beautiful people voted one more time, they’d be able to rig it. From now on, they wouldn’t have to vote again.” Trump didn’t say he would rig anything.
Buttigieg said that “crime was higher on his watch,” referring to Trump’s presidency. Murders and aggravated assaults went up, though the increase all came in 2020. The overall violent crime rate, however, declined slightly.

Speaking of Bill Clinton, the decrepit former president, hands shaking, also claimed that since 1989, a total of 50 million jobs were added under Democratic presidents, while just 1 million were added under Republican presidents. The stat checks out, but it’s cherry-picked as hell and is greatly influenced by factors outside a president’s control.

Still a Rock Star in His Party, Bill Clinton Praises the Next Generation

CNN Contributor Scott Jennings Silences CNN Panel After Giving Them a Much Needed Reality Check

Oh, just one more thing: CNN? How about leaving the fact-checking to organizations that can objectively determine what facts are? You know, vs. politically predisposed bias.