This very first link about the bill extending section 215 (the section under which spying has been justified) until 2019 is pretty self-explanatorily demonstrat

This very first link about the bill extending section 215 (the section under which spying has been justified) until 2019 is pretty self-explanatorily demonstrated by this link, from the page, via a third party legislation tracking site, govtrack.us: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr2048/text/ih#link=VII_705_a_~T1&nearest=H3970213DCD8B4A7C9D2AC368B1ADFDCA https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/114/hr2048/text/ih#li... I'm on my phone so I can't check out the other ones, but perhaps you can point to specific claims that are not supported? At the very least this one seems clearly correct. Edit: also, I disagree with your implicit assertion that a site can't be credible if it has an opinion that it asserts and backs up with facts. It's not always true (frequently not, in the case of U.S. politics) that both sides are viable. Often, one side is just plain wrong or lying, as seems to be the case in this present situation.