There are several issues with this argument. It's making a statement about hypothetical Credible Fact Checks instead of the fact checks that actually exists or

There are several issues with this argument. It's making a statement about hypothetical Credible Fact Checks instead of the fact checks that actually exists or that can exist (the "no true scotsman" fallacy). As far as contents go, in early 2020 the Fact Checked story was that there's a wetmarket selling bats and pangolins, which the Chinese eat, which is where it came from. Similarly, the evidence for a lab leak was that the ground zero is close to the lab, the lab handles SARS coronaviruses and it performs GoF research on them in a facility with a Bio-Safety Level (BSL) that's not quite right for that work. This theory was generally conflated with the "the virus was engineered at a secret Chinese bioweapons lab" theory. Fact Checks asserted this was false and people talking about it got banned. Later it became clear that the wetmarket didn't handle either bats not pangolins and The Chinese don't usually eat bats around there.