https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/03/06/1619-project-new-york-times-mistake-122248 The title of the piece: *I Helped Fact-Check the 1619 Project. The Times Ignored Me.*, is **grossly misleading**. It suggests that the errors were substantial, whereas Ms. Harris makes clear that they are more ones of emphasis and, as a whole, the *The 1619 Project* is a worthwhile work. And, as is ever the case, frequently the matter comes down to one single statement, and then the critics pull the *Falsus in uno, Falsus in omnibus* trick. That sentence in question reads: >“One critical reason that the colonists declared their independence from Britain was because they wanted to protect the institution of slavery in the colonies, which had produced tremendous wealth. At the time there were growing calls to abolish slavery throughout the British Empire, which would have badly damaged the economies of colonies in both North and South.” While vigorously disputing this claim, and several others that seem to logically derive from *foundational* nature of that claim, Ms. Lewis goes on to say... >"Both sets of inaccuracies [those of Hannah-Jones and the 5 lawyers who complained] worried me, but the Revolutionary War statement made me especially anxious. Overall, the 1619 Project is a much-needed corrective to the blindly celebratory histories that once dominated our understanding of the past—histories that wrongly suggested racism and slavery were not a central part of U.S. history. I was concerned that critics would use the overstated claim to discredit the entire undertaking. So far, that’s exactly what has happened." In short, by taking one sentence as if it reflected the entirety of the project, critics try to undermine the whole. As I said : **Falsus in uno, Falsus in omnibus**