Do you really think like this?
Something that is not a fact, cannot be correctly thought of as almost a fact.
You are really getting hung up on semantics. Take a breath, and try to read with an understanding of what I am trying to say.
“It was almost a fact” means that it ALMOST happened, meaning that it was scheduled to happen, but something intervened so it didn’t happen, but it easily COULD have happened.
Remember, my point was that Hillary couldn’t possibly have been named for Sir Edmund Hillary’s climb, since the climb happened later. But Elder Romney COULD HAVE, and ALMOST DID, march with King.
Maybe I should have said “almost did” rather than “it almost was a fact”, but I was using the term “almost” as in “it nearly happened”, not in “it was just about but not quite”.
Anyway, now it appears that several other sources think the march happened in July and Elder Romney was in the march.
I find it very revealing that we can’t pin down WHEN a march happened only 40 years ago. It greatly strengthens my argument, which is that the possible error in a minor fact from that long ago is of absolutely no concern of mine, because people get facts like that wrong all the time.
If 4 days after he is called a deliberate liar, we still can’t even figure out whether what he said was a lie or not, it pretty much shows how minor a fact it is.