Schmitt's Own Hometown Paper Just ROASTED Him Over Brutal Public Humiliation
Schmitt is criticized for accusing Jack Smith of perjury based on mistaken information about a basketball game.

SOURCE CHECK
TAP FOR WHYCrooks and Liars is a blog with a strongly opinionated presentation, which lowers confidence in its institutional neutrality. The article identifies its author and quotes a named newspaper editorial, but offers limited independent sourcing of its own.
- Source type — Blog format and explicitly partisan, highly opinionated presentation.
- Transparency — The piece identifies the newspaper editorial it quotes, but provides little original sourcing.
- Author attribution — A named author is credited.
- Editorial standards — The text does not establish clear corrections practices or independent editorial safeguards.
The article identifies the senator’s remarks and quotes a named newspaper editorial, but relies heavily on ridicule and the editorial’s assessment. It provides little direct evidence or independent sourcing for its account of the hearing and Schmitt’s response.
HOW WE SCORE ↗This is a one-sided opinion piece that amplifies a critical editorial and mocks Schmitt. It briefly reports that he denied making a mistake, but does not meaningfully examine his explanation or offer another perspective.
- Loaded language — The author uses repeated insults and ridicule in the narration.
- Counterarguments presented — Schmitt’s denial of a mistake is mentioned, but not developed or tested.
- Opinion vs reporting — The article is written as overt opinion, not neutral reporting.
- Source diversity — The piece relies mainly on its author’s judgment and one newspaper editorial.
The article uses openly derisive language about Schmitt and endorses a sharply critical editorial, while presenting no meaningful alternative perspective. Its framing is strongly hostile to Schmitt and the MAGA movement.
- Language tone — Uses insults and ridicule, including “shit the bed,” “shoddy,” and “humiliation.”
- Framing — Frames the episode as a conspicuous failure and adopts the editorial’s criticism.
- Source selection — Centers a critical newspaper editorial and gives little space to Schmitt’s explanation.
- Headline — The headline describes the episode as a “ROAST” and “Brutal Public Humiliation.”
The article says Sen. Eric Schmitt accused former special counsel Jack Smith of perjury based on a mistaken account of which basketball game Smith attended. It highlights a sharply critical editorial from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and condemns Schmitt’s response to the error.
The article reports that Schmitt accused Smith of perjury and called him a “dirtbag” during an interrogation, alleging that Smith attended an Atlanta Hawks game as evidence of collusion with Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis. It says Smith was instead in Maryland watching the Iowa Hawkeyes play, and that Schmitt later told reporters he was not embarrassed and had not made a mistake.
The article quotes the St. Louis Post-Dispatch editorial board criticizing Schmitt’s accusation as based on mistaken information and calling his continued insults embarrassing. The editorial also contrasts Smith’s efforts to hold Donald Trump accountable with Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election. The author echoes the criticism and suggests Schmitt leave office.
Community verdict
7 VOTESCounts every outlet’s report of this story. See all 51
Votes cast on this page
Votes cast on this page: ▲ 0 · ◆ 0 · ▼ 0
People in this story
SWIPE →Senator whose questioning of Jack Smith included an accusation of perjury
President whose effort to overturn the 2020 election is discussed in the quoted editorial
Part of a bigger story
21 OUTLETSAt a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Eric Schmitt questioned Jack Smith about whether Smith attended an Atlanta Hawks game and accused him of perjury. Amy Klobuchar said Schmitt may have confused the Hawks with the Iowa Hawkeyes; Smith had attended an Iowa-Maryland game in Maryland. Left-leaning outlets frame the exchange as Schmitt's mistaken accusation and emphasize his continued defense and the political fallout. Center outlets focus on the team confusion and criticism, with some connecting it to Schmitt's political profile. Right-leaning outlets split: one presents Schmitt's questions as catching Smith, while the other foregrounds Lawrence O'Donnell's criticism of Schmitt.
- ARTICLES
- 51
- OUTLETS
- 21
- AVG CRED
- 64
Discussion · 0
Loading comments…


