• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

*Someone* pushing fake news bait...

Elixir

Made in America
Joined
Sep 23, 2012
Messages
28,366
Location
Mountains
Basic Beliefs
English is complicated
Rachel Maddow warned other media outlets on Thursday that she believes she was provided forged National Security Agency documents alleging collusion between a Trump campaign official and Russia's efforts to influence last year's presidential election.

She closed the segment saying "we don't know who sent it, but we're working on it."

Gee... who would do that? Someone who had access to the document that Reality Winner leaked, BEFORE it was published.
If it turns out to be a Trump operative, what kind of consequences (if any) should we expect?
 
If she was eager enough to hype up the Trump tax return (that showed little useful info) they thought maybe she would do this.
 
The tax return was at least legit, if not very exciting. And we are pretty certain Trump leaked that. The question is, who tried to fool MSNBC into reporting a forged document... in order to discredit MSNBC? Makes one wonder if CNN fell for it, but MSNBC didn't.
 
One of the first rules we learned in COMMSEC is, "Don't let the other guy know what you know".

MSNBC should have sat on this

Later,
ElectEngr

That was my thought too. Not only did she tell them that their fraud had been caught, she told them HOW it was caught. Mistake!
 
One of the first rules we learned in COMMSEC is, "Don't let the other guy know what you know".

MSNBC should have sat on this
Against a competent opponent, sure.
On the other hand, maybe they already know who did this and this is a tease.
 
One of the first rules we learned in COMMSEC is, "Don't let the other guy know what you know".

MSNBC should have sat on this
Against a competent opponent, sure.
On the other hand, maybe they already know who did this and this is a tease.

Next time they might pay attention to the crease on the copy they used for the forgery, and the printer identification pattern. That will increase the odds that the hated news outlets might run with their phony stories...
 
Against a competent opponent, sure.
On the other hand, maybe they already know who did this and this is a tease.

Next time they might pay attention to the crease on the copy they used for the forgery, and the printer identification pattern. That will increase the odds that the hated news outlets might run with their phony stories...
Or, anyone receiving an actually-anonymous tip will, after this, seek confirmation anyway.
 
Next time they might pay attention to the crease on the copy they used for the forgery, and the printer identification pattern. That will increase the odds that the hated news outlets might run with their phony stories...
Or, anyone receiving an actually-anonymous tip will, after this, seek confirmation anyway.

Heh... MSM maybe.
We should start a contest here though; send some fake news to breitbart, faux news and the enquirer, and see who can get published first. You don't really think that outfits that publish headlines like "PRESIDENT CLINTON RIDES IN UFO!" and "UFO ALIEN BACKS OBAMA!" try real hard to vet their sources, do you?

This is what Cheato calls a respectable news outlet
 
Or, anyone receiving an actually-anonymous tip will, after this, seek confirmation anyway.

Heh... MSM maybe.
We should start a contest here though; send some fake news to breitbart, faux news and the enquirer, and see who can get published first. You don't really think that outfits that publish headlines like "PRESIDENT CLINTON RIDES IN UFO!" and "UFO ALIEN BACKS OBAMA!" try real hard to vet their sources, do you?

This is what Cheato calls a respectable news outlet

Your quoting media which prides itself in the fact that its readers know this is fake news.
For fake news go to mainstream media.
 
Heh... MSM maybe.
We should start a contest here though; send some fake news to breitbart, faux news and the enquirer, and see who can get published first. You don't really think that outfits that publish headlines like "PRESIDENT CLINTON RIDES IN UFO!" and "UFO ALIEN BACKS OBAMA!" try real hard to vet their sources, do you?

This is what Cheato calls a respectable news outlet

Your quoting media which prides itself in the fact that its readers know this is fake news.
For fake news go to mainstream media.

Just not the one that matters (Trump)

Also that's a weak ass justification and deflection if I ever read one. FFS man, where's your A-game?
 
Your quoting media which prides itself in the fact that its readers know this is fake news.
For fake news go to mainstream media.

Just not the one that matters (Trump)

Also that's a weak ass justification and deflection if I ever read one. FFS man, where's your A-game?

Yes, but it's a true-ass one.
 
Heh... MSM maybe.
We should start a contest here though; send some fake news to breitbart, faux news and the enquirer, and see who can get published first. You don't really think that outfits that publish headlines like "PRESIDENT CLINTON RIDES IN UFO!" and "UFO ALIEN BACKS OBAMA!" try real hard to vet their sources, do you?

This is what Cheato calls a respectable news outlet

For fake news go to mainstream media.

We already know you believe in aliens so it's not surprising that you accept the National Enquirer over say, CNN.

"Real News" according to our MSM basher:
3fdce42c0f3820a417a8b49e1d989b6d.jpg
 
It seems Rachel Maddow is the one pushing fake news.

Rachel Maddow Caught In Latest Fake News Scandal; Proof Her "Forged NSA Document" Segment Was A Hoax


And that's where Maddow's faux-outrage breaks down.

You see, if it's clear that Maddow received her forgery after the intercept published their documents then there's really no 'there' there. Pretty much anyone with an internet connection could have simply taken the Reality Winner documents from The Intercept website and used them create a forgery to send to Maddow.

Of course, Maddow knew that her whole story was bullshit unless she could convince her viewers that the forgery she received was created before The Intercept published it for the world to see. If she could prove that, then she could insist the forged document must have come from someone on the 'inside.'

So, she decided to get 'technical' and take a look at the "metadata" on the document she received. As it turns out, the "creation date" on the document she received was roughly 3.5 hours before The Intercept published their Reality Winner story. See, it's all laid out right here on this lovely timeline graphic. Checkmate, Mr. Trump!

2017.07.06 - Maddow 1.JPG

Except, not. Ironically, by stretching the truth in an attempt to prove that her story was in any way relevant, Maddow unwittingly proved exactly the opposite.

As The Intercept has subsequently pointed out, the "creation date" on the document received by Maddow (see the timeline above) perfectly matches, to the exact second, the "creation date" on The Intercept's Reality Winner document.

Why? Because that is the exact time in which The Intercept created their document and published it to their cloud server.

All of which simply proves that Maddow's source didn't have a sneak peak at the Reality Winner documents...they actually used The Intercept document as their source for creating their forgery.

Now, we could be wrong here...but, if the Trump administration wanted to dupe Rachel Maddow we suspect they could have gotten their hands on clean copies of the Reality Winner docs without having to lift them from The Intercept's website.

Seriously, Rachel Maddow is an idiot. I don't know why people here are such big fans. :rolleyes:
 
It seems Rachel Maddow is the one pushing fake news.

Rachel Maddow Caught In Latest Fake News Scandal; Proof Her "Forged NSA Document" Segment Was A Hoax


And that's where Maddow's faux-outrage breaks down.

You see, if it's clear that Maddow received her forgery after the intercept published their documents then there's really no 'there' there. Pretty much anyone with an internet connection could have simply taken the Reality Winner documents from The Intercept website and used them create a forgery to send to Maddow.

Of course, Maddow knew that her whole story was bullshit unless she could convince her viewers that the forgery she received was created before The Intercept published it for the world to see. If she could prove that, then she could insist the forged document must have come from someone on the 'inside.'

So, she decided to get 'technical' and take a look at the "metadata" on the document she received. As it turns out, the "creation date" on the document she received was roughly 3.5 hours before The Intercept published their Reality Winner story. See, it's all laid out right here on this lovely timeline graphic. Checkmate, Mr. Trump!

View attachment 11817

Except, not. Ironically, by stretching the truth in an attempt to prove that her story was in any way relevant, Maddow unwittingly proved exactly the opposite.

As The Intercept has subsequently pointed out, the "creation date" on the document received by Maddow (see the timeline above) perfectly matches, to the exact second, the "creation date" on The Intercept's Reality Winner document.

Why? Because that is the exact time in which The Intercept created their document and published it to their cloud server.

All of which simply proves that Maddow's source didn't have a sneak peak at the Reality Winner documents...they actually used The Intercept document as their source for creating their forgery.

Now, we could be wrong here...but, if the Trump administration wanted to dupe Rachel Maddow we suspect they could have gotten their hands on clean copies of the Reality Winner docs without having to lift them from The Intercept's website.

Seriously, Rachel Maddow is an idiot. I don't know why people here are such big fans. :rolleyes:

She's a great entertainer. The 'leaking' of an old tax return was a classic. She hasn't provided any concrete evidence to conclude anything but is good at implying it. She should run for office in the Senate or Congress.
 
It seems Rachel Maddow is the one pushing fake news.

Rachel Maddow Caught In Latest Fake News Scandal; Proof Her "Forged NSA Document" Segment Was A Hoax


And that's where Maddow's faux-outrage breaks down.

You see, if it's clear that Maddow received her forgery after the intercept published their documents then there's really no 'there' there. Pretty much anyone with an internet connection could have simply taken the Reality Winner documents from The Intercept website and used them create a forgery to send to Maddow.

Of course, Maddow knew that her whole story was bullshit unless she could convince her viewers that the forgery she received was created before The Intercept published it for the world to see. If she could prove that, then she could insist the forged document must have come from someone on the 'inside.'

So, she decided to get 'technical' and take a look at the "metadata" on the document she received. As it turns out, the "creation date" on the document she received was roughly 3.5 hours before The Intercept published their Reality Winner story. See, it's all laid out right here on this lovely timeline graphic. Checkmate, Mr. Trump!

View attachment 11817

Except, not. Ironically, by stretching the truth in an attempt to prove that her story was in any way relevant, Maddow unwittingly proved exactly the opposite.

As The Intercept has subsequently pointed out, the "creation date" on the document received by Maddow (see the timeline above) perfectly matches, to the exact second, the "creation date" on The Intercept's Reality Winner document.

Why? Because that is the exact time in which The Intercept created their document and published it to their cloud server.

All of which simply proves that Maddow's source didn't have a sneak peak at the Reality Winner documents...they actually used The Intercept document as their source for creating their forgery.

Now, we could be wrong here...but, if the Trump administration wanted to dupe Rachel Maddow we suspect they could have gotten their hands on clean copies of the Reality Winner docs without having to lift them from The Intercept's website.

Seriously, Rachel Maddow is an idiot. I don't know why people here are such big fans. :rolleyes:

This is a serious problem. Trump has dulled your skepticism. Zerohedge? Really? I'll put stock in Maddow any day over an washed up Bulgarian hedge fund manager convicted of insider trading, that signs all his "news articles" as "Tyler Durden," a character in the movie Fight Club. Go on, tell us all more about fake news!

What is it about Russia and Trump that dulls skepticism in so many people?
 
hmm, even if the facts in this Zerohedge article are true it is a crappy website in general. I would not disbelieve something just because it was on it, however.

-----------------------------

I would love to have Maddow go off on Net Neutrality for a whole show and defend it against Trump. Not being sarcastic.
 
Back
Top Bottom