Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Wilms

(26,795 posts)
4. I'd be slow to roll with NewsBin or Nance.
Tue Oct 11, 2016, 08:32 PM
Oct 2016

Except the only fraud here was Nance’s claim, not any of the documents published by WikiLeaks. Those were all real. Indeed, at Sunday night’s debate, when asked directly about the excerpts of her Wall Street speeches found in the release, Clinton herself confirmed their authenticity. And news outlets such as the New York Times and AP reported — and continue to report — on their contents without any caveat that they may be frauds. No real print journalists or actual newsrooms (as opposed to campaign operatives masquerading as journalists) fell for this scam, so this tactic did not prevent reporting from being done.

But it did signal to Clinton’s most devoted followers to simply ignore the contents of the release. Anyone writing articles about what these documents revealed was instantly barraged with claims from Democrats that they were fakes, by people often pointing to “articles” like this one.


https://theintercept.com/2016/10/11/in-the-democratic-echo-chamber-inconvenient-truths-are-recast-as-putin-plots/
I think I've found the culprit underpants Oct 2016 #1
Bwwwaaaahhhhaa!! misterhighwasted Oct 2016 #3
LOL red dog 1 Oct 2016 #19
Lame ass hackers. "they’re not even professionally done" misterhighwasted Oct 2016 #2
I'd be slow to roll with NewsBin or Nance. Wilms Oct 2016 #4
Speaking of crap sources...Glenn Greenwald can go to hell. nt SunSeeker Oct 2016 #6
Not sure why you'd regard him as a "crap source". Wilms Oct 2016 #8
Ah, so quick with the personal insult. SunSeeker Oct 2016 #10
I meant no insult. Wilms Oct 2016 #11
Yes you did. SunSeeker Oct 2016 #12
What is it you disapprove of him? n/t Wilms Oct 2016 #13
Glenn Greenwald is a pompous bully utterly bereft of integrity. SunSeeker Oct 2016 #15
OK. Now that we got that out of the way... Wilms Oct 2016 #16
Yes, the documents hacked and falsified by Putin and distributed by Trump & Wikileaks. nt. SunSeeker Oct 2016 #17
You'll notice my link above calls in to question those assertion. Wilms Oct 2016 #22
You mean Greenwald called it into question. That is your "link above." SunSeeker Oct 2016 #23
"Clinton herself confirmed their authenticity..." Wilms Oct 2016 #25
No she didn't. That is Greenwald's false characterization. nt SunSeeker Oct 2016 #26
WaPo Wilms Oct 2016 #27
That is very different from the assertion that scumbag Greenwald made. SunSeeker Oct 2016 #28
Well, Greenwald didn't say all of the emails were legit. Wilms Oct 2016 #29
Yes he did. "Confirmed their authenticity" is a lie. Words matter. nt SunSeeker Oct 2016 #30
So, in the context of her clarifying the statements... Wilms Oct 2016 #31
No one confirmed the authenticity of that email, let alone all the rest of the emails. SunSeeker Oct 2016 #36
Thanks for your relevant remarks. Wilms Oct 2016 #37
Sept 23 letter from the Office of the Dir of Natnl Intel talks of Russian disinformation campaign Bill USA Oct 2016 #32
Even if true, in the context of her clarifying the statements... Wilms Oct 2016 #33
going by the WaPo article, it "appears" clinton confirmed that the excerpts were from a speech she Bill USA Oct 2016 #34
Ohhh Kay! Wilms Oct 2016 #35
Thanks for that link & info red dog 1 Oct 2016 #20
Future Crimes polynomial Oct 2016 #5
input, which is something you put in Retired George Oct 2016 #7
It's a bit of a game of 'telephone'; other actors have been inserting non-Wikileaks stuff muriel_volestrangler Oct 2016 #9
This should be on Page One Retired George Oct 2016 #38
Dec 1969 #
Dec 1969 #
Dec 1969 #
Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Editorials & Other Articles»MSNBC intelligence expert...»Reply #4