A near-perfect example of the sort of useless stenographers who make up our corporate media, and how these motherfuckers will use false equivalency, misstatements and misdirection to create their both-side narratives, the story contains this lovely line:
"O’Rourke’s claim about the number of rape offenses in Texas and the rate of arrests for those crimes is supported by data, but lacks important context."
Know what "supported by data means? This "journalist" hopes you don't - that's why they're using weasel words instead of just saying the obvious. Right. Supported by data means Beto was right. But this "journalist's" job isn't to tell you that. Their job is to AVOID telling you Beto is right, because that might lead to unpleasant calls from wingnuts, possibly including their boss, accusing them of taking sides.
This entire "fact check" is a bullshit attempt to smear Beto, which is clear to anyone who looks past the "journalist's" homina-homina-homina routine to the actual facts.
Beto's statement was supported by data, i.e. true. Any "fact check" not making that clear right out of the gate isn't a fact check. It's propaganda.
https://news.yahoo.com/fact-check-does-texas-highest-110016476.html