Jump to content
  • Sign Up
Sign Up To Remove Ads! | Purchase An Ad Slot!

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies. Want this topic removed from the archive?

Talon

A Clinton Fan Manufactured Fake News That MSNBC Personalities Spread to Discredit WikiLeaks Docs Merged

Recommended Posts

The most damaging such claim came from MSNBC’s intelligence analyst Malcolm Nance. As I documented on October 11, he tweeted what he – for some bizarre reason – labeled an “Official Warning.” It decreed: “#PodestaEmails are already proving to be riddled with obvious forgeries & #blackpropaganda not even professionally done.” That tweet was re-tweeted by more than 4,000 people. It was vested with added credibility by Clinton-supporting journalists like Reid and Frum (“expert to take seriously”).

All of that, in turn, led to an article in something called “The Daily News Bin” with the headline: “MSNBC intelligence expert: WikiLeaks is releasing falsified emails not really from Hillary Clinton.” This classic fake news product – citing Nance and Reid among others – was shared more than 40,000 times on Facebook alone.

From the start, it was obvious that it was this accusation from Clinton supporters – not the WikiLeaks documents – that was a complete fraud, perpetrated on the public as deliberate disinformation. With regard to the claim about the Podesta emails, now we know exactly who created it in the first instance: a hard-core Clinton fanatic.

When Nance – MSNBC’s “intelligence analyst” – issued his “Official Warning,” he linked to a tweet that warned: “Please be skeptical of alleged #PodestaEmails. Trumpists are dirtying docs.” That tweet, in turn, linked to a tweet from an anonymous account calling itself “The Omnivore,” which had posted an obviously fake transcript purporting to be a Hillary Clinton speech to Goldman Sachs. Even though that fake document was never published by WikiLeaks, that was the entire basis for the MSNBC-inspired claim that some of the WikiLeaks documents were doctored.

But the person who created that forged Goldman Sachs transcript was not a “Trumpist” at all; he was a devoted supporter of Hillary Clinton. In the Daily Beast, the person behind the anonymous “The Omnivore” account unmasks himself as “Marco Chacon,” a self-professed creator of “viral fake news” whose targets were Sanders and Trump supporters (he specialized in blatantly fake anti-Clinton frauds with the goal of tricking her opponents into citing them, so that they would be discredited). When he wasn’t posting fabricated news accounts designed to make Clintons’ opponents look bad, his account looked like any other standard pro-Clinton account: numerous negative items about Sanders and then Trump, with links to many Clinton-defending articles.

https://theintercept.com/2016/12/09/a-clinton-fan-manufactured-fake-news-that-msnbc-personalities-spread-to-discredit-wikileaks-docs/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<snip>

Now we have an even more compelling example. Back in October, when WikiLeaks was releasing emails from the John Podesta archive, Clinton campaign officials and their media spokespeople adopted a strategy of outright lying to the public, claiming – with no basis whatsoever – that the emails were doctored or fabricated and thus should be ignored. That lie – and that is what it was: a claim made with knowledge of its falsity or reckless disregard for its truth – was most aggressively amplified by MSNBC personalities such as Joy Ann Reid and Malcolm Nance, The Atlantic’s David Frum, and Newsweek’s Kurt Eichenwald.

That the emails in the Wikileaks archive were doctored or faked – and thus should be disregarded – was classic Fake News, spread not by Macedonian teenagers or Kremlin operatives but by established news outlets such as MSNBC, the Atlantic and Newsweek. And, by design, this Fake News spread like wildfire all over the internet, hungrily clicked and shared by tens of thousands of people eager to believe it was true. As a result of this deliberate disinformation campaign, anyone reporting on the contents of the emails was instantly met with claims that the documents in the archive had been proven fake.

<snip>

http://www.blacklistednews.com/A_Clinton_Fan_Manufactured_Fake_News_That_MSNBC_Personalities_Spread_to_Discredit_WikiLeaks_Docs/55703/0/38/38/Y/M.html

Better pay close attention to this one.  They've basically made everyone mistrust wikileaks now and no one is even reading what they're putting out anymore. Mission accomplished? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Cinnamon said:

<snip>

Now we have an even more compelling example. Back in October, when WikiLeaks was releasing emails from the John Podesta archive, Clinton campaign officials and their media spokespeople adopted a strategy of outright lying to the public, claiming – with no basis whatsoever – that the emails were doctored or fabricated and thus should be ignored. That lie – and that is what it was: a claim made with knowledge of its falsity or reckless disregard for its truth – was most aggressively amplified by MSNBC personalities such as Joy Ann Reid and Malcolm Nance, The Atlantic’s David Frum, and Newsweek’s Kurt Eichenwald.

That the emails in the Wikileaks archive were doctored or faked – and thus should be disregarded – was classic Fake News, spread not by Macedonian teenagers or Kremlin operatives but by established news outlets such as MSNBC, the Atlantic and Newsweek. And, by design, this Fake News spread like wildfire all over the internet, hungrily clicked and shared by tens of thousands of people eager to believe it was true. As a result of this deliberate disinformation campaign, anyone reporting on the contents of the emails was instantly met with claims that the documents in the archive had been proven fake.

<snip>

http://www.blacklistednews.com/A_Clinton_Fan_Manufactured_Fake_News_That_MSNBC_Personalities_Spread_to_Discredit_WikiLeaks_Docs/55703/0/38/38/Y/M.html

Better pay close attention to this one.  They've basically made everyone mistrust wikileaks now and no one is even reading what they're putting out anymore. Mission accomplished? 

It's funny, me and some friends noticed that a lot of fake news sites popped up in the months prior to the election. We couldn't figure out why at the time. We asked each other why would somebody go to the trouble and expense of creating a real looking website with a table of contents, multiple pages and content just to write a bullshit story. We wrote it off as click bait until the Clinton/Lib machine started their "fake news" campaign. They had this planned for MONTHS. I remember one of the sites traced back to Soros when I researched it.

People also need to ask how many liberal sites are listed as fake news. ZERO. Amazing how it's only conservative or alt-right sites being listed. These people are EVIL incarnate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, EMC2 said:

It's funny, me and some friends noticed that a lot of fake news sites popped up in the months prior to the election. We couldn't figure out why at the time. We asked each other why would somebody go to the trouble and expense of creating a real looking website with a table of contents, multiple pages and content just to write a bullshit story. We wrote it off as click bait until the Clinton/Lib machine started their "fake news" campaign. They had this planned for MONTHS. I remember one of the sites traced back to Soros when I researched it.

People also need to ask how many liberal sites are listed as fake news. ZERO. Amazing how it's only conservative or alt-right sites being listed. These people are EVIL incarnate.

Not a single liberal site was listed that I can recall. They've gone after Assange on criminal charges, Clinton wanted to drone strike him and then there are the other issues with the screen caps of the dead man's switch not having been activated. 

Where is Assange?  The burning question.  I've ignored Wikileaks lately, but I think I'll take a trip into their site today and see what has been released as of late. I don't believe pizzagate is a farce.  Too much evidence to the contrary, reaching all the way back thousands of years. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm also amazed at the small amount of attention this thread received. I think it has answers to many questions in this article. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×