"Without evidence" and "unsubstantiated claims" are just a couple of newly popularized terms being used on mainstream news chyrons and social media posts in an attempt to sway public opinion.
They've been most recently deployed under claims of election fraud, often citing different stories or slight discrepancies to discredit the claim entirely.
For example, evidence of poll watchers being unfairly denied access in Philadelphia was presented via a list of Republicans who were to be stopped at the door.
One of which is Corey Lewandowski, Trump adviser and former campaign manager. However, due to some GOP being allowed to enter, the story has been largely dismissed.
In the days leading up to and following the election, Project Veritas saw a small but steady stream of whistleblowers coming out of the woodwork with first-hand accounts of election fraud.
One of those whistleblowers even came forward publicly using his actual name. But Twitter, Washington Post and more of the self-declared arbiters of truth decided, without reaching out to the whistleblower, that he had recanted his story.
While they circulated their stories dismissing the man's claims — he himself pushed back, releasing secret audio of federal agents trying to coerce him into misrepresenting his account.
Well over a day after this new information has been made public, and Twitter still claims the opposite.
In similar news, Austen Fletcher (a.k.a. Fleccas Talks) has faced “fact checking” from CNN regarding his recent assertion that a list of dead people were registered in Michigan as voters.
We even featured his findings in an article, which Facebook quickly deemed to be “fake news.”
The only problem is, the fact checkers, according to Fletcher, are attempting to debunk an entirely different list.
With recounts and lawsuits underway in several contested swing states, any given social media post appears to be ripe for “fact checking,” “debunking” or straight-up censorship.