Well guess what! Breitbart isn't any better. If you dare ask any legit questions such as 'Show me proof that Trump did XYZ' instead of showing you proof you get name called. That's no way to welcome anybody who wants to understand about Trump and actually will get people to run back into the arms of the left as it's really hard to defend conservatism at this point. Sort of like how EA's dirty tactics that often land them in hot water make it hard to defend capitalism.

So, this is what they do:

In 2016, Mr. Caulfield met Mr. Wineburg, who suggested modeling the process after the way professional fact checkers assess information. Mr. Caulfield refined the practice into four simple principles:

1. Stop.

2. Investigate the source.

3. Find better coverage.

4. Trace claims, quotes and media to the original context.

Otherwise known as SIFT.

Mr. Caulfield walked me through the process using an Instagram post from Robert F. Kennedy Jr., a prominent anti-vaccine activist, falsely alleging a link between the human papillomavirus vaccine and cancer. “If this is not a claim where I have a depth of understanding, then I want to stop for a second and, before going further, just investigate the source,” Mr. Caulfield said. He copied Mr. Kennedy’s name in the Instagram post and popped it into Google. “Look how fast this is,” he told me as he counted the seconds out loud. In 15 seconds, he navigated to Wikipedia and scrolled through the introductory section of the page, highlighting with his cursor the last sentence, which reads that Mr. Kennedy is an anti-vaccine activist and a conspiracy theorist.

“Is Robert F. Kennedy Jr. the best, unbiased source on information about a vaccine? I’d argue no. And that’s good enough to know we should probably just move on,” he said.

TRANSLATED:

1. Close your mind
2. Ad hominem
3. Reassert the hegemonic narrative

Then,

4. Take active measures to have the source deplatformed.