This site doesn’t say where on Snopes they looked. I assume they are talking about this article.....
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthers/kagan.asp
If you read it you’ll see that Snopes did NOT say that the dockets in question don’t exist. Snopes says that none of them have anything to do with Obama’s eligibility. They discuss all nine cases including the three which your site links.
I agree that Snopes shows bias, mostly in terms of what stories they do and do not address. They are not, however; the sort of crude liars which this site suggests.
I have found Snopes to be convenient for quickly verifying that some of those emails that get forwarded to me are BS. Some of them are quickly seen as obvious fakes (the frequent one about Oliver North testifying before Congress about Osama bin Laden is a classic eye-roller) but others look genuine until you actually check them out. Snopes is usually a good starting point.
>>>I agree that Snopes shows bias, mostly in terms of what stories they do and do not address. They are not, however; the sort of crude liars which this site suggests.
Snopes is flat out an unreliable source on anything to do with politics. Period. They are Liberal biased. They try to deny that fact, but they can’t.