Who Debunks The Debunkers? (III)

We have written about the true facts that snopes.com claimed were false. Another example: snopes.com writes about the claim "Did Trump Pay $35M to Settle Child Rape Claims Against Him?" that is "MOSTLY FALSE", but if you read the text it makes clear that it is completely false...

But if you read the text it says: "A woman using the pseudonym “Katie Johnson” has twice filed a civil lawsuit accusing Trump (...) when she was just 13 years old. However, her first complaint was dismissed by the court and the second was voluntarily withdrawn by Johnson..." And that "the case is not “pending,” and no evidence has ever been offered in court to support Johnson’s allegations.". So I wonder whre is the part of truth that justifies a "Mostly False" when there is NOTHING that supports that claim?

This a small example, but it helps to show that there is a serious bias in snopes.com analyses. But let's check this in another way: is nopes.com not debunking some false claims?

Let's check at the recurrent claim that the Norweigen far-right terrorist Anders Behring Breivik is an example of Christian terorism. We hear/read this every time an islamist attack takes place. 

 

Surprisingly, nowhere in snopes.com debunks the false claim that Breivik is not a "Christian fundamentalist" but a Christian at all.