'Clown-show' theory eviscerated by Republicans’ own local news program
Schmitt’s questioning of Jack Smith drew criticism after he confused which basketball game Smith had attended and accused him of perjury.
SOURCE CHECK
TAP FOR WHYAlternet is an opinion-oriented publisher, and this article uses openly evaluative framing. The named author and references to a local broadcast provide some transparency, but the short piece offers limited independent sourcing.
- Source type — Opinion-oriented publication; the piece is explicitly framed in strongly evaluative terms.
- Editorial standards — The article cites a local broadcast but provides limited visible sourcing or independent verification.
- Author attribution — A named author is credited.
The article identifies the hearing exchange and recounts details from a local news segment, including that the network sought comment from Schmitt’s office. It offers little independent sourcing or broader context and presents no response from Schmitt.
HOW WE SCORE ↗The piece is largely one-sided, relying on a critical local segment and presenting no substantive defense or explanation from Schmitt. It does report that his office was contacted but did not respond.
- Counterarguments presented — No response or defense from Schmitt is included; the article says his office did not reply to the request.
- Loaded language — The article uses strongly disparaging descriptions of Schmitt’s performance.
- Source diversity — The account chiefly relies on a local broadcast segment and a commentator’s post.
- Omitted context — The article gives little context about the hearing beyond the disputed exchange.
The article uses emphatically critical language about Schmitt and foregrounds a segment ridiculing his questioning. It offers little countervailing framing, though it reports that his office did not respond to a request for comment.
- Language tone — Terms such as “badly fumbled,” “eviscerating” and “grossly inaccurate” convey strong criticism.
- Framing — The article centers the episode as an embarrassing error and amplifies the local segment’s mocking account.
- Source selection — The local segment is the principal source presented; Schmitt’s office did not respond to a request for comment.
Sen. Eric Schmitt’s Senate questioning of former special counsel Jack Smith drew criticism after Schmitt confused the basketball teams Smith had attended and accused him of perjury. A local news segment highlighted the error, and Schmitt’s office did not respond to its request for comment or an apology.
At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Schmitt questioned Smith about an alleged connection to Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, citing Smith’s supposed attendance at an Atlanta Hawks game. The article reports that Smith had attended an Iowa Hawkeyes women’s game instead, and that Schmitt accused him of perjury before being corrected. The article says the incident was criticized by pundits and Schmitt’s colleagues.
A local news segment showed broadcast footage that the reporter said placed Smith at an Iowa game and noted that the cited seat did not exist in Atlanta. The reporter also said the network sought an explanation or apology from Schmitt’s office but received no response.
Community verdict
2 VOTES
People in this story
SWIPE →Senator who questioned Jack Smith at a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing
President whose investigations were discussed at the hearing
Part of a bigger story
4 OUTLETSAt a Senate Judiciary hearing, Eric Schmitt accused former special counsel Jack Smith of perjury over an alleged Atlanta matter; the exchange turned on Schmitt’s confusion about which basketball game Smith had attended. Left-leaning outlets frame the episode as a failed effort to target Smith, stressing Schmitt’s mistaken reading of texts and, in one account, that the texts had been flagged as unvetted. Center outlets focus on Smith correcting Schmitt and portray the questioning as a public failure for Schmitt.
- ARTICLES
- 4
- OUTLETS
- 4
- AVG CRED
- 62
Discussion · 0
Loading comments…