So far most of the links you supplied are either fake or just an opinion. Your brain is corrupted.
1. You used snopes as a source, but have you ever investigated the sources you use to fact check? Well I did.
Snopes is owned by PERFECT PRIVACY, LLC
Organization who has ties & dealt with Clinton.
2. Then I found others who found that same link to Perfect Privacy
Hillary Paid to Hide Identity of People Running Her Email Server
1. That is not a link. Just your opinion. Keep trying.
2. Rubbish I just saw the name Breitbart enough for my pubic hair to go straight up. Don't waste my time with this garbage.
If these are real news how come we didn't see it in real news?
So you know Bannon works for Trump and they been buddies for a long time. Keep trying.
Breitbart - Media Bias/Fact Check
These media sources are moderately to strongly biased toward conservative causes through story selection and/or political affiliation. They may utilize strong loaded words (wording that attempts to influence an audience by using appeal to emotion or stereotypes), publish misleading reports and omit reporting of information that may damage conservative causes. Some sources in this category may be untrustworthy.
https://www.usnews.com/opinion/thom...g-into-a-breitbart-copy-for-trump?context=amp
You don't read real news. You read Liberal hack crap like snopes and wikipedia.
You put demands on other people that you don't abide by yourself. Stop using fake news sites to back up your unfounded claims and start using more conservative, more honest reporting news sites like Drudge report, Fox, CNS, and WND.
Funny... I'm still waiting for some rightard to prove Snopes' articles are fake. I suspect Bigfoot will be caught riding on the Loch Ness monster before that ever happens.
Snopes Article Exposing “Fake News” Turns Out To Be “Fake News” - TruthTheory
the claim in this link is wrong, not Snopes
This is someone's opinion and contains zero evidence Snopes was wrong. In fact, the person posting this got the Snopes article wrong themselves.
This link falsely claims,
Snopes declared the video as a fake, but the only part of the video they discredited with any real concrete argument was that of Bartlett’s claims of “Eva” the child she claimed was “recycled” in news reports to promote the war.
While they credit Snopes with discrediting the one part about claims of s child being "recycled," they falsely claim Snopes "declared the video as fake." When in fact, Snopes only evaluated as false the one part your link admits they got right...
CLAIM
Victims of atrocities in Syria are being "recycled" by anti-government activists.
RATING
False
FACT CHECK: Syrian War Victims Are Being 'Recycled' and Al Quds Hospital Was Never Bombed
This is fake news
This link, which you either didn't bother to check or care about, is a fake story about Fox News suing Snopes. Your link is to the incredible, newsexaminer.net, which cites abcnews.com.co as their source.
abcnews.com.co is a fake ABC news site.
not a single Snopes article debunked
This link promotes:
- To combat “fake news,” Facebook will take steps to limit the amount of “misinformation” that can be spread on its site by relying on fact-checkers, including Snopes, PolitiFact, the Associated Press, FactCheck.org and ABC News
[*]The Daily Mail questions Snopes’ façade as the paragon of truth, noting the owners are embroiled in a legal dispute in which they cannot even agree on what the basic facts of their case are
[*]Snopes has no set professional requirements for its fact-checkers. They don’t even have a standardized procedure for conducting the actual fact-checking
... aside from pointing out that Snopes is accurate enough for Facebook to lean on for fact checking, a plus for Snopes, all this article does is to attack the character of Snopes' founders. It doesn't actually cite one single article Snopes got wrong.
no evidence Snopes was wrong
This link, much like the previous, attacks Snopes as being Liberal and attacks the character of Snopes' founders, as though that discredits they're veracity.
It doesn't.
But at least this link takes some stabs at specific Snopes' articles; like this one:
Jimmy Carter Banned Iranian Immigrants
But even there, the dailycaller (a very rightwing site) doesn't say Snopes was wrong. They merely whine that the Snopes article sounded like an opinion piece.
The next Snopes article they go after, dailycaller was wrong. They claimed Snopes was wrong in defending Hillary's claim that "we didn't lose a single person in Libya," and that Snope offered little evidence to support that article.
Well the truth is that Hillary was talking about the multinational invasion in 2011 and not the attack in Benghazi a year later. And Snopes did provide evidence to back their claim in the form of video with Hillary and Matthews discussing the multinational invasion and not Benghazi to put Hillary's quote in context.
Hillary Clinton: 'We Didn't Lose a Single Person' in Libya
Dailycaller whines about Snopes' rating of "unproven" when evaluating
Facebook routinely suppresses conservative news in favor of liberal content.
And while Snopes offers a lengthy reasoning to justify their rating, dailycaller offers squat to show Snopes was wrong
And finally, daily caller complains about a Snopes article on Hillary wearing an expensive Armani coat; and again, where Snopes provides a detailed reason to explain their rating, dailycaller offer nothing to refute Snopes.
________________________________________
That's 4 links.... one being fake news.... and zero Snopes articles refuted.