Yea, including from Scott himself.

Take the InfoWars birth certificate one: in addition to all the claims about layers and so on, it says "the document is a shoddily contrived hoax". That is a factual claim which is false. They offer support for that claim which isn't actually convincing, and the support they offer happens to be true but out of context, and I'm with you on calling the supporting evidence "not lies". But "the document is a shoddily contrived hoax" is in fact flatly false, and is asserted by the article itself, not just "someone said".

Disagree. They're stating their conclusion and the evidence that led to their conclusion. Their conclusion is wrong, but not a lie or "them making things up", just an incorrect inference.

Scott is choosing a fucking embarrassing hill to die on here.