Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) (shown above left) and The Washington Post’s fact-checker Glenn Kessler (above right) sparred back and forth on Twitter after the congresswoman accused Kessler of falsely fact-checking one of her very misleading claims.
The progressive Ocasio-Cortez does not like to be fact-checked. This isn’t the first time Ocasio-Cortez, who’s been in the House of Representatives all of three weeks, has fought back against fact-checkers who scrutinize her passionate claims and sometimes questionable statements.
This time around, the New York lawmaker took issue with a story Kessler published on Thursday called, “Ocasio-Cortez’s misfired facts on living wage and minimum wage.”
Kessler addressed a claim the congresswoman made during an interview with Ta-Nehisi Coates on Monday, Martin Luther King Day, in which she insisted, among other things, that the “vast majority of the country doesn’t make a living wage.”
“I think it’s wrong that you can work 100 hours and not feed your kids. I think it’s wrong that corporations like Walmart and Amazon can get paid by the government, essentially experience a wealth transfer from the public, for paying people less than a minimum wage,” Ocasio-Cortez said.
But Kessler warned that Ocasio-Cortez “is sometimes fast and loose with her facts,” noting the “torrent of claims in the statement above [are] worthy of further scrutiny.”
Kessler even noted that his team confronted Ocasio-Cortez’s spokesman in a “tense conversation,” prompting her to “preempt” the fact-check by tweeting on Tuesday: “Me: ‘I don’t think billionaires should concentrate wealth while employing people who are sleeping in cars working a zillion hours to survive.’ Next day: ‘That will be TEN PINOCCHIOS to Ocasio, ‘zillion’ is not a number and I found someone who sleeps in a tent, not a car.'”
Me: “I don’t think billionaires should concentrate wealth while employing people who are sleeping in cars working a zillion hours to survive.”
Next day: “That will be TEN PINOCCHIOS to Ocasio, ‘zillion’ is not a number and I found someone who sleeps in a tent, not a car.”
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) January 23, 2019
The fact-checker noted there is no known evidence supporting Ocasio-Cortez’s claim that “a vast majority” of Americans don’t make a living wage.
He also emphasized that both Walmart and Amazon pay “well above the minimum wage” — contrary to her claims.
All in all, Ocasio-Cortez earned Three Pinocchios from Kessler.
This fact-checking did not sit well with the congresswoman.
“If the point of fact-checking is to enforce some objective standard, why would @GlennKesslerWP use a Walmart-funded think tank as reference material for wage fairness? That’s like citing the foxes to fact-check the hens. Here’s 4 Geppettos for your contested Pinocchios,” Ocasio-Cortez tweeted on Thursday, taking issue with the 2005 paper by Jason Furman that Kessler cited.
If the point of fact-checking is to enforce some objective standard, why would @GlennKesslerWP use a Walmart-funded think tank as reference material for wage fairness?
That’s like citing the foxes to fact-check the hens.
Here’s 4 Geppettos for your contested Pinocchios ???????? https://t.co/uERpcjqvwT
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) January 24, 2019
Furman served as former President Barack Obama’s chairman of the Council of Economic Advisers.
Kessler replied, “Since @AOC accused The Fact Checker of relying on a Walmart-funded think tank paper when we fact-checked her, we need to set the record straight. She’s wrong. Don’t always believe what you see on Twitter.”
He added, “The article has been updated with a note explaining the provenance.”
Related: Are Americans ‘Ready to Be Ruled’ by ‘Progressives in New York and California’?
“Check the name of the author: Jason Furman, chairman of Council of Economic Advisers under Obama. He’s someone I have known for 20+ years and he is simply citing some basic economics. I included the link only because his discussion of the economics was detailed and thorough,” Kessler tweeted.
Since @AOC accused The Fact Checker of relying on a Walmart-funded think tank paper when we fact-checked her, we need to set the record straight. She's wrong. Don't always believe what you see on Twitter. The article has been updated with a note explaining the provenance. pic.twitter.com/9vVZNMuEPh
— Glenn Kessler (@GlennKesslerWP) January 25, 2019
Check the name of the author: Jason Furman, chairman of Council of Economic Advisers under Obama. He's someone I have known for 20+ years and he is simply citing some basic economics. I included the link only because his discussion of the economics was detailed and thorough.
— Glenn Kessler (@GlennKesslerWP) January 24, 2019
Ocasio-Cortez replied, “Revolving-door politics doesn’t care what admin a person worked for. The truth is, many folks come to govmnt to collect a title, & leave to collect a lobbyist check. WaPo itself touched on this by covering the Harvard Orientation. You’re legitimizing that by citing this study.”
Revolving-door politics doesn’t care what admin a person worked for.
The truth is, many folks come to govmnt to collect a title, & leave to collect a lobbyist check.
WaPo itself touched on this by covering the Harvard Orientation.
You’re legitimizing that by citing this study. https://t.co/wTsgwRu8vf
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) January 25, 2019
After some more back-and forth, Ocasio-Cortez finally tweeted, “I am criticizing the rationale of saying we should trust a questioned source paper because of a standing friendship and X admin, bc neither preclude the possibility of revolving door politics — if the tweet read as though I was going after @jasonfurman specifically, I apologize.”
I am criticizing the rationale of saying we should trust a questioned source paper because of a standing friendship and X admin, bc neither preclude the possibility of revolving door politics – if the tweet read as though I was going after @jasonfurman specifically, I apologize.
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) January 25, 2019
Check out more on all of this in the video below:
Join the Discussion
COMMENTS POLICY: We have no tolerance for messages of violence, racism, vulgarity, obscenity or other such discourteous behavior. Thank you for contributing to a respectful and useful online dialogue.