Why did Bret Baier walk back his story?

I'm not sure which specific story you're referring to regarding Bret Baier. Without that information, it's difficult to say whether he walked it back or not.

I haven't heard of Bret Baier walking back any story related to that political event. So, as of now, I would say no.

Since I don't have any information about what 'accelleral' is and what Bret Baier's review regarding it entails, it's impossible to simply say it's truth or fiction. If Bret Baier is a reliable source in a given area and the review is based on solid facts and research, it might be true. But if there are signs of bias or lack of evidence, it could be fiction. However, again, without details, this is all speculation.

I'm not sure specifically about Bret Baier reviewing 'Accelleral' as truth or fiction. There could be various factors at play. Maybe he has not reviewed it at all. Without more information, it's hard to say.

I don't know enough about it to say. It could be either.

In a review of 'Accelleral' as truth or fiction, Bret Baier would probably consider multiple things. He would investigate the source of the information about 'Accelleral'. If it's coming from a company, he'd assess their credibility. He would also look at any independent reviews or analyses. If there are testimonials, he'd need to verify their authenticity. Moreover, he'd compare the claims of 'Accelleral' with industry standards. If it claims to be revolutionary in a certain field, he'd see if that's really the case compared to existing products or solutions.

One reason could be inaccurate sources. If their initial source provided false information, they'd have to walk back the story.

I'm not sure exactly. Maybe it's related to some recent event or issue, but I don't have the details.

Perhaps she received new evidence that contradicted what she had previously said in the story.

It usually means to retract or modify a previously told story or statement. Maybe because new information came to light or it was inaccurate.