No, I'm making a point for not overloading the meaning of the word "fact" to something it can't actually support. There exists no validation or falsification of

No, I'm making a point for not overloading the meaning of the word "fact" to something it can't actually support. There exists no validation or falsification of the statement, so there can be no fact - after all, it's about personal belief in a set of ideas that are themselves notoriously slippery to validate or falsify. It's a distracting point, and I shouldn't have included it - my main argument is the other part of my comment: That too often the facts of fact checks are, in fact, arguments.