Every conservative who is not brain-dead despises Big Media “fact checkers.” Nothing raises a conservative’s blood pressure like seeing a “fact checker” 1) evaluate a truthful claim by a conservative, 2) acknowledge that the facts are true, yet 3) refuse to admit the claim is true because spin spin spinnity spin.
So, for example, when Ted Cruz says the IRS tax code has more words than the Bible, a fact-checker analyzing that claim has an obligation to pronounce it true. Yet we have seen a Big Media fact-checker acknowledge the truth of Cruz’s facts, yet refuse to pronounce his claim true, because derp derp derp. When Carly Fiorina says she went from secretary to CEO, we have seen a Big Media fact-checker say: yep, she started off a secretary, became a CEO, therefore three Pinocchios, because derp derp derp.
So-called “conservatives” who go around touting such dishonest “fact checking” pieces, because those pieces favor the candidate for whom they are shamelessly cheerleading, deserve to have their conservative card revoked, for good. Then, someone should take a metaphorical two-by-four to their head, in the form of a scathing post that lays out their duplicity.
This is such a post. It is another in my series of posts debunking the absurd screeching of Rubio fan-boi “AG Conservative” in a post deceptively titled 6 Blatant Ted Cruz Lies about Marco Rubio. This evening’s debunked lie is this:
3) Cruz claims that Rubio “supports citizenship for 12 million people here illegally” (Debate) and “advocates amnesty for criminals who are here illegally”
As noted in the factcheck link above, this is clearly false. The assumption here is that Rubio advocates for citizenship for every illegal currently here, but even the dreaded Gang of Eight bill would have not allowed anything near that. Rubio has always said that anyone that is here illegally and convicted of another felony must be deported and given the requirements before anyone could possible obtain citizenship, the number that would actually ever reach that point is much smaller than 12 million.
Let’s look at the FactCheck.org analysis of Cruz’s claim that that “advocates amnesty for criminals who are here illegally.” The specific quote from Cruz was: “He even advocates amnesty for criminals who are here illegally.” How does FactCheck.org handle that?
The Gang of Eight Senate immigration bill, S. 744 — which Rubio voted for but later backed away from — would have withheld Registered Provisional Immigrant status from those convicted of felonies, three or more misdemeanors, certain foreign offenses or unlawful voting.
Rubio’s campaign noted that Rubio also supported a failed amendment to the Gang of Eight bill sponsored by Sen. John Cornyn that would have gone even further to preclude from residency anyone who had committed misdemeanor offenses including domestic violence, child abuse and neglect, assault resulting in bodily injury, the violation of a protection order, or driving while intoxicated. The amendment also would have excluded from residency anyone convicted of three or more misdemeanors other than minor traffic offenses. (See page 4427 of the Congressional Record.) Cruz also voted in favor of the amendment.
So one could argue that Rubio’s plan would allow those convicted of some misdemeanor crimes to obtain legal residency, but Cruz’s blanket claim that Rubio “advocates amnesty for criminals who are here illegally” omits the criminal exceptions that Rubio has outlined.
(I love that “one could argue” bit. That’s fact-checker speak for “it is true but we don’t like it, so rather than saying it’s true, we’ll say ‘one could argue’ it.”)
But Cruz didn’t say Rubio “advocates amnesty for all criminals who are here illegally.” He said Rubio “advocates amnesty for criminals who are here illegally.” And Rubio absolutely does advocate amnesty for criminals who are here illegally. Namely, criminals who meet the other requirements of the Gang of 8 law, whose specific crimes are not the crimes that the Gang of 8 bill (or the amendment that Rubio voted for) said would deprive them of a chance at legalization.
Therefore, to call this claim by Cruz a “blatant lie” is . . . well, we won’t call it a “lie.” But it’s not accurate.
P.S. It would end the post with a strong partisan flourish if I could devastatingly show that Cruz’s other claim — that Rubio “supports citizenship for 12 million people here illegally” — is also true beyond the shadow of a doubt. Vindicated, and vindicated again! Pow! Biff! Bam!
Unfortunately, intellectual honesty precludes me from saying this. Indeed, FactCheck.org quotes Cruz as saying: “He [Rubio] advocates legalization and citizenship for everyone here illegally.” That’s clearly not true. The Gang of Eight bill did not seek to legalize “everyone” here illegally. There were specific criteria set out in the bill. And Cruz has no other basis I am aware of to make the claim, besides Rubio’s support for the Gang of Eight bill.
Which doesn’t make Cruz’s statement a LIE, by the way. It’s just inaccurate. Maybe he forget the qualifier.
What you just witnessed was a Cruz supporter acknowledging that Cruz said something not entirely accurate. Fanbois like AG Conservative will never do that. Trust me. They scream liar at Cruz even when he is telling the truth, but if you give them evidence of Rubio lying, they’ll spin, ignore, and spin some more.
It’s why I have decided to have no more personal interaction with such people on Twitter. It just makes me mad. But I’ll continue refuting their BREATHLESS CLAIMS OF LIES BY CRUZ here on the blog.
I’m just getting started, in fact!
@Patterico You 3rd "debunking" concludes by admitting that Cruz lied about Rubio? hahaha these are hilarious. Keep going.
— AG (@AG_Conservative) February 23, 2016
My statement in the post, by the way, was “Which doesn’t make Cruz’s statement a LIE, by the way.”
Do you see what I mean?