Deadly DEI: UC Davis Breast Cancer Surgical Applicant Requirements Show Danger of Woke...
Way to Go, Grandpa Joe! Biden's Cannibal Story Has Made Papua New Guinea...
She'll Fit Right In! New Planet Fitness CEO Loves DEI, 'Unconscious Bias' Training
Everything Is Fine: FBI Warns Chinese Hackers Threaten U.S. Infrastructure
'Nixon Singularity': Bizarre Presidential Racism Chart Gets All the Mockery It Deserves
STEALTH ATTACK: While Europeans Sleep, Americans Flood Twitter With Things They Can't Unde...
What Did You Expect? Fast Food Prices SKYROCKET in California After New Minimum...
Speaker Johnson Under Fire, NPR Underwater, Trump Jury Under Investigation!
Elon Musk Says Accounts Caught 'Engagement Farming' Will Be Suspended, Users Have Question...
Karine Jean-Pierre Warns Peter Doocy It's Inappropriate to 'Make Jokes About' Biden's Cann...
Man Sets Himself on Fire Outside Trump Trial Courthouse; Updated With Man's Identity...
Dumpster Fire in Waiting: Stephen Colbert to Broadcast The Late Show Live From...
Gen-Z Biden Shill Claiming He Left Trump Supporter Speechless Listing Biden's Accomplishme...
Since Dems Have Officially Deserted Women, Female WV Athletes Take Matters Into Their...
Here's What the Biden WH Is Touting As 'Campaign Rallies' (Beverage Warning)

Snopes explains why Trump's claim about 'under God' being omitted from Pledge of Allegiance recitations at Dem convention is false (if you don't count the couple times it happened)

President Trump’s tweet this morning saying that the Democrats excluded “under God” from Pledge of Allegiance recitations had the media doing their stuff. Jim Acosta was among them of course:

Advertisement

Snopes has ruled the claim that “under God” was omitted from recitations of the Pledge of Allegiance is “mostly” false:

Why just “mostly” false? Because it actually happened a couple of times, as Snopes noted:

Snopes mentioned a couple of occasions where Trump’s claim was accurate. Here’s one such instance:

Advertisement

For some reason we’re guessing if the political roles were reversed Snopes’ ruling on the original claim would have been “true.”

“Fact-checkers” have been taking the “false (but kinda true)” approach a lot lately.

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement