As Twitchy reported earlier, CNN hired as a political editor Jeff Sessions’ former spokeswoman, and liberals like Obama bro Tommy Vietor are having quite the hissy fit over it.

Vox journalist Aaron Rupar did what all good journalists do: he scoured Twitter for her old tweets to see if there were any that could bring her down. We don’t think he quite hit paydirt, though, claiming that Sarah Isgur Flores pushed “conspiracy theories” about Planned Parenthood selling baby parts based on those “misleadingly edited” undercover videos.

CNN's new political editor pushed conspiracy theories about Planned Parenthood that were based on misleadingly edited videos https://t.co/aAugMf5XaL — Aaron Rupar (@atrupar) February 19, 2019

Um, no. Be a crappy journalist, fine, but no rewriting history.

Except the 5th Circuit Court confirmed the opposite of this claim. The actual sentence from the decision: "[T]he record reflects that OIG had submitted a report from a forensic firm concluding that the video was authentic and not deceptively edited."https://t.co/fUxCnVZUw4 https://t.co/zG9d1Amt79 — Dana Loesch (@DLoesch) February 19, 2019

Liberals might not want to face it, but those videos were real and unedited: remember when Nancy Pelosi called for an investigation to see if the videos were faked, even though she admitted she hadn’t watched them?

At the time of this writing, Rupar’s tweet had been retweeted 921 times.

This is inaccurate. Don’t believe me? Ask the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which considered the Planned Parenthood footage in a recent case and noted that a forensic firm concluded “the video was authentic and not deceptively edited.” https://t.co/XYaGOJVxnH — Alexandra DeSanctis (@xan_desanctis) February 19, 2019

Hi Aaron, This is really embarrassing for you, but a federal court ruled that the videos weren't misleadingly edited. Please try to keep up on the matters you tweet about. Thanks. https://t.co/1nBqmEOuZX — RBe (@RBPundit) February 19, 2019

Hey @atrupar — You’re repeating Planned Parenthood’s talking points, but the Fifth Circuit recently ruled on a Planned Parenthood case & included a footnote stating that a forensic firm reviewed these videos & concluded they were NOT deceptively edited.

?https://t.co/g2CQzmn6FJ https://t.co/Lluzingfr4 — Jerry Dunleavy (@JerryDunleavy) February 19, 2019

A Court determined this is a lie. https://t.co/cGdT5g55qs — Lee Doren (@LDoren) February 19, 2019

5th circuit one month ago: “[T]he record reflects that OIG had submitted a report from a forensic firm concluding that the video was authentic and not deceptively edited.”https://t.co/nhbAJc8bi2 https://t.co/TTSNZt0cAN — (((AG))) (@AG_Conservative) February 19, 2019

A "journalist" at @voxdotcom is saying this… Hi, Kettle? It's Pot. I hate to break it to you, but…https://t.co/HfqnDNZhcM — GoGoGary (@GoGoGaryUnicorn) February 19, 2019

The videos that were affirmed by the 5th circuit? Yeah, those were real… — Ashkahn Faran (@AshkahnF) February 19, 2019

You don't actually pay much attention to the news, do you? Court has literally ruled that the videos were not edited. #Pounce — Saltine Warrior (@dap260) February 19, 2019

The fifth circuit court of appeals said they weren’t deceptively edited. — Noah M. Schleusener (@NoahSchloy) February 20, 2019

Narrator: but the videos did exist. They were not deceptively edited. https://t.co/Pja3I9MhUl — Jack Martens (@JackMartensite) February 19, 2019

You are lying. Or are you just stupid? — Boris_Badenoff (@Boris_Badenoff) February 19, 2019

Another Juice-Box-Voxer industrial-size misleading claim. Good work! — Arthur Koenig (@Sir_Arthur_BSD) February 19, 2019

Deleting this soon??? — J Deischer (@JulieDeischer) February 19, 2019

hope @ReliableSources will be reporting on this soon. https://t.co/lvkAjI6iTQ — Stuart Elliott (@stuartenyt) February 19, 2019

We do too … hey Brian Stelter, book Aaron Rupar for Sunday’s “Reliable Sources” and ask him about this tweet.

Related: