Shouldn't a documentary be based on facts? Or should we brace ourselves for another spin-cycle from you and others who were stupid enough to watch a propagandists film and take it as fact instead of fiction?

Quote from Forrest Gump: Stupid is as stupid does.

Chow commies....
I haven't seen the movie...

And what exactly is your problem? !mitationRust quoted someone stating that that particular part of the movie is not true. I proved with facts that that person is wrong.
Moore did quote an existing Washington Post article. Whether it is true or not, doesn't really matter in this case.

Compare it to this:
Someone posts an article stating that AntiOnline is not owned by JupiterMedia.
I say: "So and so stated that AntiOnline is not owned by JupiterMedia."
My statement is true, and logically correct, whether or not the statements in my statement are true or not.
If you go around saying that my statement is false, then who is the propagandist?

The original quote stated that Moore's statement is false, while it is true. Then who is the propagandist?

I don't take just anything as a fact, but in this case a fact is a fact: the Washington Post did publicize that article. Email Mike Allen (the author of the article) if you don't want to take that as a fact.