Hyperbole? What's that?

Professionals in the fact checking business ought to know hyperbole when they hear it, or at least ought to consider it as an explanation for some statements that do not seem to add up when taken as literally true.

Regarding the fact checking professionals at PolitiFact, there stands considerable doubt.  This anecdote from a recent journalism symposium at Haverford College illustrates the point (bold emphasis added):

Amy Hollyfield, the government and politics editor for the St. Petersburg Times who runs the paper’s fact-checking website Politifact.com, detailed a recent national story that Politifact helped to break. During the recent budget debates, Senator John Kyl (R-Arizona) claimed on the floor of the Senate that “well over 90% of what Planned Parenthood does” is abortions. Politifact checked this figure with Planned Parenthood’s own records and found that, in fact, 3% of its services are abortion-related. When CNN sought comment from the Senator regarding Politifact’s fact-checking, a Kyl staffer responded that “his remark was not intended to be a factual statement.” Hollyfield laughed as she told the story, but said that stories like this one are why her organization exists. “That’s what our mission is,” she said, “to hold politicians accountable.”

Haverblog

Hollyfield, who ought to know better, is apparently among those who take "not intended to be a factual statement" as something akin to "not telling the truth."  As noted here at Sublime Bloviations, the explanation from Kyl's office is consistent with a statement employing hyperbole.

Why would PolitiFact totally ignore that explanation?