Which part of Hillary Clinton's résumé is patently false? I think this blogger is getting wigged out over nothing: they complain that they have the page up as "undertermined" after 6 weeks... The e-mail contains twenty unsourced statements. How long does it take to research each of them, especially if they are false? (it is harder to track down an event that never happened)

Snopes joins the anti-Clinton bandwagon? « Jesurgislac's Journal

Both are listed with Snopes' yellow "Undetermined" button, which usually indicates stories like the Presidents with Binoculars page - where Snopes rightly notes "whether real or manipulated, these photos don't show anything beyond the trivial - most of us have accidentally raised a capped pair of binoculars to our eyes for a few moments, but most of us aren't surrounded by photographers who can catch these moments". That's "undetermined" - the photographs may be real or photomanips, but either way, it doesn't matter.

These anti-Clinton webpages just have "research is continuing" at the foot: they include nothing but the attack e-mails which would normally be the source material. (To see how Snopes normally does this, check out last year's analysis of an attack e-mail outlining Marxist statements supposedly made by Clinton.)

Snopes has, in the past, without fear or favour, gone through a whole rack of urban myths and legends circulated about Presidents or Presidential candidates. I've never before seen them publish an incomplete webpage.

When the capital development of a country becomes a by-product of the activities of a casino, the job is likely to be ill-done. — John M. Keynes