The Washington Post hit freshman Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) with a solid “three Pinocchios” on Tuesday for her “misleading comparison” in a tweet claiming that President Donald Trump did not allocate any money to combat the opioid addiction plaguing our nation.
Ocasio-Cortez — the social media-savvy Democrat freshman firebrand and self-described democratic socialist — claimed in a Friday tweet that President Trump did not allocate any money “to address the Opioid National Emergency” but moved millions of dollars “from other agencies to fund his ‘Build the Wall’ Emergency.”
💰Amount President Trump has transferred from other agencies to fund his ‘Build the Wall’ Emergency: $10s of millions, & has identified billions more.
💰 Amount he’s transferred to address the Opioid National Emergency: $0 https://t.co/KamONSr67q
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) March 8, 2019
The Post — using their famous fact checker first introduced in 2007 — slammed Ocasio-Cortez for the tweet, giving the New York Democrat “three Pinocchios” and saying that the tweet was “misleading” as “the situations are not comparable.”
The author, Glenn Kessler, went on to say:
“Trump has no need to transfer billions of dollars for the opioid emergency because Congress already has appropriated billions of dollars. Trump’s backing of a national public-health emergency did more than raise awareness; it triggered a congressional response. So it’s the exact opposite of the standoff over the wall.”
Kessler continued to say “one can question” the Trump administration’s handling of the opioid epidemic “without resorting to red herrings and false equivalency.” His only reason for not giving the New York Democrat a full “four Pinocchios” was that the claim was “[o]nly in the most narrow technical way” correct.
This is not the first time Ocasio-Cortez has had a Twitter claim refuted. In December 2018 — before she was sworn into Congress — she received a blaring “four Pinocchios” for a misleading tweet citing “$21T in accounting errors” and saying “66% of Medicare for All could have been funded already by the Pentagon.”
As IJR Red reported, the Post called the claim a “direct comparison” that was “badly flawed” before saying “the same article she referenced on Twitter would have set her straight.”