Amy Klobuchar Explains How She Knew Eric Schmitt Was Putting On A Clown Show Before He Did
Schmitt questioned Smith about an Atlanta Hawks game, while Klobuchar said the reference had been confused with the Iowa Hawkeyes.

SOURCE CHECK
TAP FOR WHYHuffPost is an established national outlet with an identified author, but this article uses conspicuously mocking language and relies in part on another outlet’s interview rather than showing extensive independent reporting. The score reflects the publisher’s general institutional standing, not the article’s tone.
- Source type — An established national news publisher, though not a newspaper of record.
- Editorial standards — The publisher has a recognizable editorial operation, but this piece’s presentation is strongly opinionated.
- Author attribution — The article names its author.
- Transparency — The piece attributes Klobuchar’s remarks to The Independent and refers to hearing footage, but supplies limited detail about its reporting process.
The article gives a clear account of the hearing exchange and attributes Klobuchar’s comments to an interview and hearing footage. It offers little response or context from Schmitt, and its mocking framing and unsubstantiated assertions about the hearing’s purpose and the affordability crisis limit its balance and precision.
HOW WE SCORE ↗The story mainly presents Klobuchar’s interpretation and a critical social media post. Schmitt is shown questioning Smith and chastising Klobuchar, but the article offers little of his perspective or context for the hearing.
- Counterarguments presented — Schmitt’s perspective is not meaningfully explained or defended.
- Loaded language — The article repeatedly uses mocking and condemnatory language.
- Source diversity — Klobuchar’s account dominates, with an embedded social media post and little other sourcing.
- Omitted context — The article gives limited context for Schmitt’s questioning or the hearing’s broader purpose.
The article frames Schmitt’s conduct as a humiliating failure and presents Klobuchar’s criticism sympathetically. Its language and inclusion of an unchallenged criticism of Trump’s war reinforce a left-leaning frame.
- Language tone — Uses derisive terms such as “self-own,” “humiliated himself” and “charade.”
- Framing — Centers Klobuchar’s account of Schmitt’s mistake and treats the exchange as evidence of a failed hearing.
- Source selection — Relies on Klobuchar’s comments and a social media post, without presenting Schmitt’s explanation.
Amy Klobuchar said she realized Eric Schmitt had mistaken references to the Iowa Hawkeyes for the Atlanta Hawks during Jack Smith’s Senate testimony. She criticized Schmitt’s questioning and said the hearing was intended to distract from other issues.
At a Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, Schmitt questioned former special counsel Jack Smith about whether Smith had been at an Atlanta Hawks game. Smith recalled attending a University of Iowa women’s basketball game against Maryland, and Klobuchar said she recognized that “Hawks” could refer to the Hawkeyes. She also told The Independent that Schmitt should have checked his information more carefully.
Klobuchar said the hearing was meant to distract from other issues. The article also says millions of people are struggling with affordability and links that crisis to President Donald Trump’s war with Iran, while noting that the midterm elections were about a month away.
Community verdict
7 VOTESCounts every outlet’s report of this story. See all 2
- Readers of left-leaning coverage: 20% good look
- Readers of right-leaning coverage: not enough votes yet
Votes cast on this page
Votes cast on this page: ▲ 1 · ◆ 2 · ▼ 4
People in this story
SWIPE →Senator who questioned Jack Smith about whether he had attended an Atlanta Hawks game
Senator who questioned Jack Smith and criticized Eric Schmitt’s questioning
Klobuchar's version of this story ↗President whose 2020 election interference was investigated by Smith and whose war with Iran is mentioned
Part of a bigger story
2 OUTLETS- ARTICLES
- 2
- OUTLETS
- 2
- AVG CRED
- 66
Discussion · 0
Loading comments…


