They are mimicking the news practices that also tend to just quote people who speak bullshit with a simple attribution and leave it to the reader to determine whether they are a lying liar. That approach doesn’t work when the reader isn’t aware they are a lying liar because all news sources avoid pointing it out.
I’ve noticed this sort of equivocating and reaching to cast doubt a lot from Snopes for a while now.
"Sure, those are the literal words that were said but did they reallllllly mean it???”
Honestly feels like they’ve been intentionally both sidesing things. I’ve stopped paying them much attention as a result.
They are mimicking the news practices that also tend to just quote people who speak bullshit with a simple attribution and leave it to the reader to determine whether they are a lying liar. That approach doesn’t work when the reader isn’t aware they are a lying liar because all news sources avoid pointing it out.