This week, we pointed out that when Joe Biden was visiting Wisconsin, he was photographed wearing a hard hat backwards.
The left wing ‘fact checker’ site Snopes defended Biden, of course, claiming that the hard hat was not backwards.
RedState reported:
Snopes Sets Itself on Fire With ‘Fact-Check’ of Biden Wearing a Hard Hat Backwards
Did Snopes just engage in the most dishonest “fact-check” of all time? That may be a little strong given how awful the fact-checking industry is, but their latest work has to be up there.
The setup, which was reported by RedState on Friday, involves Joe Biden wearing a hard hat backwards while trying to pander to union workers in Wisconsin. The photo itself is comical, and it was only a small part of the senility displayed during his trip.
The picture received the appropriate amount of ribbing from people online. I mean, it is objectively funny that, while trying to project himself as working-class, Biden managed to screw up wearing a hard hat. Snopes couldn’t just leave well enough alone, though. One of their “fact-checkers” sprung into action to deliver one of the dumbest “ackshually” moments in recent political history. It’s so bad that some thought it was fake, but it’s real.
It’s real. https://t.co/eSOG8BobpS https://t.co/NPPaoldb84 pic.twitter.com/Vyrl7mWcCi
— Stephen L. Miller (@redsteeze) January 27, 2024
Snopes got roasted on Twitter/X over this.
Snopes fact-check: “Biden wore a hard hat backwards” is misinformation
Who are you going to believe:
Snopes or your lying eyes? pic.twitter.com/p30Qu0uWlY— End Wokeness (@EndWokeness) January 27, 2024
And then they changed their rating and admitted the truth.
BREAKING: @snopes wears credibility backwards: pic.twitter.com/PWStY1XI9X
— NeverTweet (@LOLNeverTweet) January 27, 2024
Snopes changed Joe Biden backwards hard hat to TRUE
We did it, X! pic.twitter.com/7QWawpeKNz— Brendan (@BrendanMcInnis) January 27, 2024
It’s absolutely amazing that they went to bat for Biden over something so obvious. How many other times have they been wrong?
