On the first point, “factually correct” doesn’t mean “not misleading,” especially when some details are omitted. Which was the second point, but “I said something factually correct” doesn’t really seem like much of a defense against the claim that the extra details matter.
See my other comment explaining why I disagree with this.
Which part? The claim that an entity called CEA bought a manor house, or the claim that the extra details don’t substantially change the picture?
I claim the first of these is uncomplicatedly factually correct. The second is obviously more subjective.
On the first point, “factually correct” doesn’t mean “not misleading,” especially when some details are omitted. Which was the second point, but “I said something factually correct” doesn’t really seem like much of a defense against the claim that the extra details matter.