@ProPublica broke the story of Justice Thomas' blatant corruption. In a follow-up after Thomas claimed he'd done nothing wrong, the news org quoted his BS and then, citing people who know what they're talking about, refuted the BS.

https://www.propublica.org/article/clarence-thomas-response-trips-legal-experts-harlan-crow

Contrast this with the Washington Post's coverage: A story uncritically amplifying the BS, and a less-prominent sidebar labeled a "fact check".

ProPublica did it right. The Post did it wrong.

Clarence Thomas Defends Undisclosed “Family Trips” With GOP Megadonor. Here Are the Facts.

In response to a ProPublica report, Thomas explained why he did not disclose lavish travel provided by billionaire Harlan Crow. But legal experts maintain the justice was required to make these disclosures.

ProPublica
@dangillmor @ProPublica If he really thought it didn't need to be reported, why did he report the first one and then stop reporting after it attracted press attention? Who specifically told him he didn't really need to report? Thomas asserts these kinds of gifts are fine if the rich friend doesn't have business before the Court, but how do we know if he doesn't report it? "This money isn't a bribe because I say so, and why would I lie about my bribe?"

@aglisson @dangillmor @ProPublica

The friend is basically a lobbyist.