Showing posts with label rachel maddow. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rachel maddow. Show all posts

Friday, September 29, 2017

Glenn Greenwald: Yet Another "Major" Russia Story Falls Apart...

Authored by Mike Shedlock via MishTalk.com,


The biggest purveyors of “fake news” and irresponsible journalism are the news media outlets complaining most about it.


MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow is at the forefront of the latest fake news on Russia.


Maddow’s Rant






The story went viral of course.










Another Story Falls Apart


Today, Glen Greenwald reports Yet Another Major Russia Story Falls Apart. Is Skepticism Permissible Yet?



LAST FRIDAY, most major media outlets touted a major story about Russian attempts to hack into U.S. voting systems, based exclusively on claims made by the Department of Homeland Security. “Russians attempted to hack elections systems in 21 states in the run-up to last year’s presidential election, officials said Friday,” began the USA Today story, similar to how most other outlets presented this extraordinary claim.


 


MSNBC’s Paul Revere for all matters relating to the Kremlin take-over, Rachel Maddow, was indignant that this wasn’t told to us earlier and that we still aren’t getting all the details. “What we have now figured out,” Maddow gravely intoned as she showed the multi-colored maps she made, is that “Homeland Security knew at least by June that 21 states had been targeted by Russian hackers during the election. . .targeting their election infrastructure.”


 


So what was wrong with this story? Just one small thing: it was false. The story began to fall apart yesterday when the Associated Press reported that Wisconsin – one of the states included in the original report that, for obvious reasons, caused the most excitement – did not, in fact, have its election systems targeted by Russian hackers.


 



 


The spokesman for Homeland Security then tried to walk back that reversal, insisting that there was still evidence that some computer networks had been targeted, but could not say that they had anything to do with elections or voting.


 


Then the story collapsed completely last night. The Secretary of State for another one of the named states, California, issued a scathing statement repudiating the claimed report:


 



 


This has happened over and over and over again. Inflammatory claims about Russia get mindlessly hyped by media outlets, almost always based on nothing more than evidence-free claims from government officials, only to collapse under the slightest scrutiny, because they are entirely lacking in evidence.


 


The examples of such debacles when it comes to claims about Russia are too numerous to comprehensively chronicle. I wrote about this phenomenon many times and listed many of the examples, the last time in June when 3 CNN journalists “resigned” over a completely false story linking Trump adviser Anthony Scaramucci to investigations into a Russian investment fund which the network was forced to retract.


 


Remember that time the Washington Post claimed that Russia had hacked the U.S. electricity grid, causing politicians to denounce Putin for trying to deny heat to Americans in winter, only to have to issue multiple retractions because none of that ever happened?


 


Or the time that the Post had to publish a massive editor’s note after its reporters made claims about Russian infiltration of the internet and spreading of “Fake News” based on an anonymous group’s McCarthyite blacklist that counted sites like the Drudge Report and various left-wing outlets as Kremlin agents?


 


Or that time when Slate claimed that Trump had created a secret server with a Russian bank, all based on evidence that every other media outlet which looked at it were too embarrassed to get near?


 


Or the time the Guardian was forced to retract its report by Ben Jacobs – which went viral – that casually asserted that WikiLeaks has a long relationship with the Kremlin? Or the time that Fortune retracted suggestions that RT had hacked into and taken over C-SPAN’s network?


 


And then there’s the huge market that was created – led by leading Democrats – that blindly ingested every conspiratorial, unhinged claim about Russia churned out by an army of crazed conspiracists such as Louise Mensch and Claude “TrueFactsStated” Taylor?


 


And now we have the Russia-hacked-the-voting-systems-of-21-states to add to this trash heap.


 


Each time the stories go viral; each time they further shape the narrative; each time those who spread them say little to nothing when it is debunked.


 


Regardless of your views on Russia, Trump and the rest, nobody can possibly regard this climate as healthy. Just look at how many major, incredibly inflammatory stories, from major media outlets, have collapsed. Is it not clear that there is something very wrong with how we are discussing and reporting on relations between these two nuclear-armed powers?



Hello Rachel Maddow!


























My Quick Take










 









Saturday, July 8, 2017

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

She thought she had it.  The smoking gun that would prove someone in Trump"s campaign colluded with the Russians to steal the 2016 election.  But, when a forged NSA document sent to Rachel Maddow turned out to be just more bad information from more anonymous sources, it left the crusading MSNBC host feeling a bit "triggered."  As such, she opened her show last night with the following segment:





“Somebody, for some reason, appears to be shopping a fairly convincing fake NSA document that purports to directly implicate somebody from the Trump campaign in working with the Russians in their attack in the election."



“This is news, because: why is someone shopping a forged document of this kind to news organizations covering the Trump-Russia affair?”





Not surprisingly, Maddow uses the discovery to imply that someone within the Trump administration is intentionally planting fake information in an attempt to discredit her show.  She goes on to imply that similar efforts may have caused the recent firing of 3 "journalists" at CNN who simply couldn"t be bothered with verifying the anonymous tip they received.


Here are more details of Maddow"s show from the Daily Caller:





On June 7, an unidentified person sent documents to an online tip line for Maddow’s show, she said.



That was two days after The Intercept published legitimate NSA documents that were stolen by Reality Winner, a contractor for the agency.



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!




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.




So, what seems more likely to have happened here is that Maddow"s staff could easily tell the "NSA document" was a forgery from the start and simply ignored it at first. Afterall, she received the document on June 7th and is just now deciding to talk about it a month later?  Unlikely. 


But, when 3 journalists from CNN lost their jobs for publishing fake news, Maddow saw an opportunity to launch a whole new narrative attacking the Trump administration by alleging that they"re planting fake intelligence reports with the media.  Never let a good crisis go to waste...as they say.


Edward Snowden summarized the situation the best in a series of tweets:





Maddow"s lawyerly defense of why her implication was wrong is disappointing. Such caution should come prior to raising alarm on national TV.



When the media"s credibility is under attack, rushing stories out before checking facts and contacting the subject is hard to comprehend.



That said, journalism is hard and mistakes happen. When they do, as in this Maddow case, apologies should be frank and unequivocal.



When we start getting economical with facts, we lose. This important story was mangled by needlessly injected an unsupportable conspiracy.



Each time the media gets a prominent story wrong right now, I wince. More than egg on a famous face, it risks a generation"s trust in news.



If our most famous journalists are so proud they can"t admit to what is now an obvious error, how can they hope to hold the public trust?



Most folks can"t read three different papers every day. If we don"t set the highest standard, many give up and say the truth is unknowable.



That is the twilight of an age.








Still, we do feel badly for the liberal "journalists" of the world...all the embarrassing fake news stories of late means that they may have to actually start doing their jobs rather than just blindly running stories from "anonymous sources."

Wednesday, March 15, 2017

Rachel Maddow’s release of Trump’s 2005 “client copy” tax return flops

President Donald Trump earned $153 million and paid $36.5 million in income taxes in 2005,” according to the Associated Press.The pages from Trump’s federal tax return show the real estate mogul also reported a business loss of $103 million that year, although the documents don’t provide detail. The forms show that Trump paid an effective tax rate of 24.5 percent, a figure well above the roughly 10 percent the average American taxpayer forks over each year, but below the 27.4 percent that taxpayers earning 1 million dollars a year average were paying at the time, according to data from the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation.

Thursday, December 29, 2016

Rachael Maddow’s newest anti-Trump conspiracy theory lacks teeth, derailed by Kellyanne Conway

(INTELLIHUB) — President-elect Donald J. Trump has “accountants and lawyers and protocol offices literally working around-the-clock to make sure that everything that needs to be done for a man who has been so brilliant and so successful in business […]. Trump is making sure that he “is sufficiently disentangled for him to take his job as president and focus on that one-hundred-and-ten percent,” Kellyanne Conway told MSNBC’s Rachael Maddow Thursday, after Maddow pushed the old ‘conflict of interest’ narrative against Trump for wanting to privatize big banks, also having an obvious ownership stake in his various hotels.


The bottom line is that the stock market has been “booming” and that a lot of the investors seem “to like the fact that Donald Trump will be the next president,” Conway said. ‘The stock market is up to 20,000, about twenty percent since the day he was elected.’


Soon after, Maddow, a self-proclaimed liberal who has also been touted as “the creme de la creme of leftist ideologues at MSNBC,” went on to attack the President-elect over her newly concocted conspiracy theory in which Maddow suggests that a foreign government “could rent out Trump hotel suites at the Trump Hotel in Washington,” which would essentially count as a payoff to Trump “who is the primary owner of the corporation.”


[…] it’s money for him, Maddow proclaimed.


Maddow went on to say, “Anybody who wants to, any foreign country, anyone, can now have the option to basically pay money to the American President by doing favors to this business that he owns.”


Maddow then aimlessly spewed, “corruption is corruption,” which Conway countered, calling Maddow’s statement “attenuated.”


“If you want to give money to the president, the American President, we have never had a way to do that before,” Maddow said.


“No foreign government has had a way to do that before. The American people, special-interests, haven’t had a way to funnel money to the American President […].”


Maddow then haphazardly stated that anyone who “effects” Trump’s “bottom line” is in fact “paying the president” in a roundabout way, despite the fact that Trump has been openly moving toward total transparency and the personal disentanglement of his businesses, which the general public and Trump supporters alike are very aware of.


To Trumps credit Conway put Maddow in her place by saying, “[…] please don’t leave people the impression that the money goes into Donald Trump’s pocket. He employs tens-of-thousands of people worldwide. […] He said he will do whatever is necessary to comply with the law [and] protocol.”


Conway then went on to rip Maddow a new one by demonstrating how former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton funneled money through the Clinton Foundation which likely trickled up to the current sitting president in some instances.


“The fact is that, Rachel, you just said that we’ve never had a president that could financially benefit — that a foreign country could funnel money — and I was like ding, ding, ding [verbal sound of alarm bells] we had a Secretary of State that did exactly that and Americans didn’t like it. She [Hillary Clinton] used the State Department as a concierge for foreign governments to dump money into the foundation. Her husband gets a million bucks over in Russia to give a speech at UNT” and he also gave up “twenty percent of our uranium rights.”


After her colossal defeat Maddow went on to whitewash the Clinton Foundation’s “pay-to-play” issues before ending the segment shortly after with her guest Conway.


Shepard Ambellas is an opinion journalist and the founder and editor-in-chief of Intellihub News & Politics (Intellihub.com). Shepard is also known for producing Shade: The Motion Picture (2013) and appearing on Travel Channel’s America Declassified (2013). Read more from Shep’s World. Get the Podcast. Follow Shep on Facebook and Twitter.









Threats of violence, foul language, bullying, etc. will not be tolerated and may be flagged.