Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Someone Sent Rachel Maddow Fake NSA Documents Alleging Trump-Russia Collusion
35 views
Skip to first unread message
Ubiquitous
Jul 7, 2017, 1:33:21 PM7/7/17
to
MSNBC host Rachel Maddow gave a “heads up” to other news
organizations on Thursday after she was sent what she believes are
faked National Security Agency documents alleging collusion between
a member of the Trump campaign and Russian government.
“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,” Maddow said in a lengthy segment on
her show.
She suggested that the unidentified muckraker who sent her the fake
documents hopes to undermine news organizations in general and
deflate the Trump-Russia collusion investigation, which has been
going on for nearly a year.
“This is news, because: why is someone shopping a forged document of
this kind to news organizations covering the Trump-Russia affair?”
Maddow asked.
[Because idiots like you fall for that sort of thing every time.]
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.
Maddow said that the documents sent to her show appeared to have
used The Intercept’s published documents as a template. Secret ID
markings on The Intercept reports appeared on the documents passed
to Maddow.
https://youtu.be/a3NJ2GSZufg
She said that metadata from the set of documents sent to her show
preceded the publication of the documents published in The
Intercept. Maddow suggested that it was possible that whoever sent
her the forgeries had access to The Intercept documents. But she
also theorized that whoever sent her the fake documents could have
changed the metadata somehow.
The documents Maddow received appeared legitimate at first glance,
she said, but several clues suggested that they were forgeries.
Typos and spacing issues raised eyebrows, but it was secret markings
on the documents as well as their contents that convinced Maddow and
her staff that the records were fakes.
But Maddow said that that “the big red flag” for her and her team
was that the document she was given named an American citizen — a
specific person from the Trump campaign — who allegedly cooperated
with the Russians during the presidential campaign.
“We believe that a U.S. citizen’s name would not appear in a
document like this,” asserted Maddow, who said that her team
consulted national security experts on the matter.
“And so, heads up everybody,” Maddow warned.
The host pointed to two recent retractions — one at CNN and the
other at Vice News — and suggested that they were the result of a
similar scheme to undermine news outlets covering Trump.
In the case of CNN, three reporters were fired after the network
retracted an article alleging that Trump transition team official
Anthony Scaramucci was under investigation for ties to a Russian
investment fund.
CNN said that the three reporters were fired because of shortcomings
in their reporting process, but the network has been tight-lipped
about what those shortcomings were.
Vice retracted two articles about a Trump robot display at Disney
World.
“One way to stab in the heart aggressive American reporting on [the
subject of Trump-Russia collusion] is to lay traps for American
journalists who are reporting on it,” said Maddow.
“And then after the fact blow that reporting up. You then hurt the
credibility of that news organization. You also cast a shadow over
any similar reporting in the future…even if it’s true.”
Maddow did not provide details about who sent her team the faked NSA
documents.
But she concluded her segment saying, “We don’t know who’s doing it,
but we’re working on it.”
[ I wonder if she started having a Trumpgasm before the "legal"
staff told her to calm down?]
--
Dems & the media want Trump to be more like Obama, but then he'd
have to audit liberals & wire tap reporters' phones.
organizations on Thursday after she was sent what she believes are
faked National Security Agency documents alleging collusion between
a member of the Trump campaign and Russian government.
“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,” Maddow said in a lengthy segment on
her show.
She suggested that the unidentified muckraker who sent her the fake
documents hopes to undermine news organizations in general and
deflate the Trump-Russia collusion investigation, which has been
going on for nearly a year.
“This is news, because: why is someone shopping a forged document of
this kind to news organizations covering the Trump-Russia affair?”
Maddow asked.
[Because idiots like you fall for that sort of thing every time.]
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.
Maddow said that the documents sent to her show appeared to have
used The Intercept’s published documents as a template. Secret ID
markings on The Intercept reports appeared on the documents passed
to Maddow.
https://youtu.be/a3NJ2GSZufg
She said that metadata from the set of documents sent to her show
preceded the publication of the documents published in The
Intercept. Maddow suggested that it was possible that whoever sent
her the forgeries had access to The Intercept documents. But she
also theorized that whoever sent her the fake documents could have
changed the metadata somehow.
The documents Maddow received appeared legitimate at first glance,
she said, but several clues suggested that they were forgeries.
Typos and spacing issues raised eyebrows, but it was secret markings
on the documents as well as their contents that convinced Maddow and
her staff that the records were fakes.
But Maddow said that that “the big red flag” for her and her team
was that the document she was given named an American citizen — a
specific person from the Trump campaign — who allegedly cooperated
with the Russians during the presidential campaign.
“We believe that a U.S. citizen’s name would not appear in a
document like this,” asserted Maddow, who said that her team
consulted national security experts on the matter.
“And so, heads up everybody,” Maddow warned.
The host pointed to two recent retractions — one at CNN and the
other at Vice News — and suggested that they were the result of a
similar scheme to undermine news outlets covering Trump.
In the case of CNN, three reporters were fired after the network
retracted an article alleging that Trump transition team official
Anthony Scaramucci was under investigation for ties to a Russian
investment fund.
CNN said that the three reporters were fired because of shortcomings
in their reporting process, but the network has been tight-lipped
about what those shortcomings were.
Vice retracted two articles about a Trump robot display at Disney
World.
“One way to stab in the heart aggressive American reporting on [the
subject of Trump-Russia collusion] is to lay traps for American
journalists who are reporting on it,” said Maddow.
“And then after the fact blow that reporting up. You then hurt the
credibility of that news organization. You also cast a shadow over
any similar reporting in the future…even if it’s true.”
Maddow did not provide details about who sent her team the faked NSA
documents.
But she concluded her segment saying, “We don’t know who’s doing it,
but we’re working on it.”
[ I wonder if she started having a Trumpgasm before the "legal"
staff told her to calm down?]
--
Dems & the media want Trump to be more like Obama, but then he'd
have to audit liberals & wire tap reporters' phones.
David Johnston
Jul 7, 2017, 1:40:00 PM7/7/17
to
On Friday, July 7, 2017 at 11:33:21 AM UTC-6, Ubiquitous wrote:
> MSNBC host Rachel Maddow gave a “heads up” to other news
> organizations on Thursday after she was sent what she believes are
> faked National Security Agency documents alleging collusion between
> a member of the Trump campaign and Russian government.
>
> “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,” Maddow said in a lengthy segment on
> her show.
>
> She suggested that the unidentified muckraker who sent her the fake
> documents hopes to undermine news organizations in general and
> deflate the Trump-Russia collusion investigation, which has been
> going on for nearly a year.
>
> “This is news, because: why is someone shopping a forged document of
> this kind to news organizations covering the Trump-Russia affair?”
> Maddow asked.
>
> [Because idiots like you fall for that sort of thing every time.]
Did she?
> MSNBC host Rachel Maddow gave a “heads up” to other news
> organizations on Thursday after she was sent what she believes are
> faked National Security Agency documents alleging collusion between
> a member of the Trump campaign and Russian government.
>
> “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,” Maddow said in a lengthy segment on
> her show.
>
> She suggested that the unidentified muckraker who sent her the fake
> documents hopes to undermine news organizations in general and
> deflate the Trump-Russia collusion investigation, which has been
> going on for nearly a year.
>
> “This is news, because: why is someone shopping a forged document of
> this kind to news organizations covering the Trump-Russia affair?”
> Maddow asked.
>
> [Because idiots like you fall for that sort of thing every time.]
Obveeus
Jul 7, 2017, 1:57:40 PM7/7/17
to
Planting fake news in an effort to destroy the credibility of real news
is the next step in deceiving the public, I guess.
Breezy Easton ... American Patriot
Jul 7, 2017, 2:15:01 PM7/7/17
to
A Friend
Jul 7, 2017, 3:39:48 PM7/7/17
to
In article <ojogdn$bg0$2...@dont-email.me>, Ubiquitous
Except that she didn't. That's the whole point here.
You should be asking why someone you support is resorting to forging
documents and planting "#fakenews" in a blatant attempt to denigrate
the credibility of newspeople and their organizations.
> [ I wonder if she started having a Trumpgasm before the "legal"
> staff told her to calm down?]
You should be wondering who did this, why they thought they needed to
do it, and what they expected to result from it.
Except that she didn't. That's the whole point here.
You should be asking why someone you support is resorting to forging
documents and planting "#fakenews" in a blatant attempt to denigrate
the credibility of newspeople and their organizations.
> [ I wonder if she started having a Trumpgasm before the "legal"
> staff told her to calm down?]
do it, and what they expected to result from it.
shawn
Jul 7, 2017, 4:34:16 PM7/7/17
to
more than a few organizations that could have done that. Seems unlike
the NSA would engage in this sort of action (unless you choose to
believe they are that far under President Trump's control) so that
really only leaves the organization that had the documents and
released them to the public as the likely source of the fake
documents.
A Friend
Jul 7, 2017, 5:19:13 PM7/7/17
to
In article <0urvlchrjbtbh9jvp...@4ax.com>, shawn
This isn't an "organization." This is somebody who's not very good at
faking documents.
Maddow established beyond doubt that these were altered copies of
known-good documents. You or I could do that sort of thing at home
without breaking a sweat, even if we lived in a big white home with
columns on the porch.
faking documents.
Maddow established beyond doubt that these were altered copies of
known-good documents. You or I could do that sort of thing at home
without breaking a sweat, even if we lived in a big white home with
columns on the porch.
shawn
Jul 7, 2017, 5:47:51 PM7/7/17
to
time line it seems that only someone from The Intercept could have
done that work and sent the fake to Maddow. Now, it's possible the
time line is wrong and other people could have had access to the
original document but we currently have no way of knowing that. I see
that The Intercept is saying anyone could have gotten the document
from their site but, as I understand, the document wasn't publically
available until after it had been sent to Maddow's site.
That's always the problem with this sort of analysis. It's almost
always impossible to be 100% sure of all the facts involved in any
investigation and hence there's room for people to claim it's fake
news. Doesn't matter if it's an individual, the press or the
CIA/FBI/NSA doing the investigation.
FPP
Jul 7, 2017, 5:50:49 PM7/7/17
to
On 7/7/17 1:33 PM, Ubiquitous wrote:
> MSNBC host Rachel Maddow gave a “heads up” to other news
> organizations on Thursday after she was sent what she believes are
> faked National Security Agency documents alleging collusion between
> a member of the Trump campaign and Russian government.
Maybe they should have sent it to Fox and Friends... but, then they
> MSNBC host Rachel Maddow gave a “heads up” to other news
> organizations on Thursday after she was sent what she believes are
> faked National Security Agency documents alleging collusion between
> a member of the Trump campaign and Russian government.
really didn't have to, if all they wanted to do was trick them into
spreading lies. They already spread them butter on toast. - or flies on
shit.
Thanks for letting everybody know that Maddow wouldn't fall for the
ploy, though.
It reaffirms what everybody who watches a real news network knows - they
vet their sources.
--
Remember, Remember the Eighth of November, the Trumpism, Treason and Rot;
I know of no Reason why Trumpism and Treason, should ever be Forgot!
FPP
Jul 7, 2017, 5:52:10 PM7/7/17
to
what appears to be a forgery.
It wasn't easy from what I saw.
#BeamMeUpScotty
Jul 7, 2017, 8:23:44 PM7/7/17
to
On 07/07/2017 05:52 AM, Ubiquitous wrote:
> MSNBC host Rachel Maddow gave a “heads up” to other news
> organizations on Thursday after she was sent what she believes are
> faked National Security Agency documents alleging collusion between
> a member of the Trump campaign and Russian government.
broadcasting?
--
That's Karma
Obveeus
Jul 7, 2017, 9:04:26 PM7/7/17
to
FPP
Jul 7, 2017, 10:27:14 PM7/7/17
to
2) Ears.
3) Brain.
Feel free to use any, or all of them once in a while. You appear to
have 2 out of 3 anyway.
Mike Moore
Jul 8, 2017, 7:16:21 AM7/8/17
to
In article <93bc8cce-6574-41f0-b085-
bb552f...@googlegroups.com>
Looks to me like she's a born sucker.
She fell for the fake tax returns.
She invented missing inauguration funds.
She lied about riots in Venezuela by starving people.
People have been fired for less.
bb552f...@googlegroups.com>
She fell for the fake tax returns.
She invented missing inauguration funds.
She lied about riots in Venezuela by starving people.
People have been fired for less.
bruce2...@gmail.com
Jul 8, 2017, 10:12:08 AM7/8/17
to
> On Fri, 07 Jul 2017 15:39:39 -0400, A Friend <no...@noway.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <ojogdn$bg0$2...@dont-email.me>, Ubiquitous
> ><web...@polaris.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> [Because idiots like you fall for that sort of thing every time.]
> >
> >
> >Except that she didn't. That's the whole point here.
> >
> >You should be asking why someone you support is resorting to forging
> >documents and planting "#fakenews" in a blatant attempt to denigrate
> >the credibility of newspeople and their organizations.
> >
> >
> >> [ I wonder if she started having a Trumpgasm before the "legal"
> >> staff told her to calm down?]
> >
> >
> >You should be wondering who did this, why they thought they needed to
> >do it, and what they expected to result from it.
>
> Given when the documents were supposedly sent there really weren't
> more than a few organizations that could have done that. Seems unlike
> the NSA would engage in this sort of action (unless you choose to
> believe they are that far under President Trump's control)
I imagine that it comes down to a choice by the individual working there and group think couldn't apply.
>
> >In article <ojogdn$bg0$2...@dont-email.me>, Ubiquitous
> ><web...@polaris.net> wrote:
> >
> >
> >> [Because idiots like you fall for that sort of thing every time.]
> >
> >
> >Except that she didn't. That's the whole point here.
> >
> >You should be asking why someone you support is resorting to forging
> >documents and planting "#fakenews" in a blatant attempt to denigrate
> >the credibility of newspeople and their organizations.
> >
> >
> >> [ I wonder if she started having a Trumpgasm before the "legal"
> >> staff told her to calm down?]
> >
> >
> >You should be wondering who did this, why they thought they needed to
> >do it, and what they expected to result from it.
>
> Given when the documents were supposedly sent there really weren't
> more than a few organizations that could have done that. Seems unlike
> the NSA would engage in this sort of action (unless you choose to
> believe they are that far under President Trump's control)
zntiguy
Jul 11, 2017, 8:46:55 PM7/11/17
to
In article <n00q8o$u4n$8...@dont-email.me>, web...@polaris.net wrote:
>MSNBC host Rachel Maddow gave a “heads up” to other news
>organizations on Thursday after she was sent what she believes are
>faked National Security Agency documents alleging collusion between
>a member of the Trump campaign and Russian government.
>
>“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,” Maddow said in a lengthy segment on
>her show.
>
>She suggested that the unidentified muckraker who sent her the fake
>documents hopes to undermine news organizations in general and
>deflate the Trump-Russia collusion investigation, which has been
>going on for nearly a year.
>
>“This is news, because: why is someone shopping a forged document of
>this kind to news organizations covering the Trump-Russia affair?”
>Maddow asked.
>
>MSNBC host Rachel Maddow gave a “heads up” to other news
>organizations on Thursday after she was sent what she believes are
>faked National Security Agency documents alleging collusion between
>a member of the Trump campaign and Russian government.
>
>“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,” Maddow said in a lengthy segment on
>her show.
>
>She suggested that the unidentified muckraker who sent her the fake
>documents hopes to undermine news organizations in general and
>deflate the Trump-Russia collusion investigation, which has been
>going on for nearly a year.
>
>“This is news, because: why is someone shopping a forged document of
>this kind to news organizations covering the Trump-Russia affair?”
>Maddow asked.
>
>[Because idiots like you fall for that sort of thing every time.]
>
>
>[ I wonder if she started having a Trumpgasm before the "legal"
>staff told her to calm down?]
Someone sent a fake female at a fake news media a fake document and it
>staff told her to calm down?]
made news?
Must be "fake news"
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
FPP
Jul 11, 2017, 9:04:09 PM7/11/17
to
We have all the evidence we need to prove that the Trumps colluded with
a hostile foreign government to subvert the democratic electoral
process, now don't we?
Or should I call it "the very sacred election process", like President
Whack Job termed it?
> Donald J. TrumpVerified account @realDonaldTrump
>
> How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!
You can't make this shit up!
--
"Fox News is droppings its 'fair and balanced' slogan... I assume
because they finally watched themselves." -Stephen Colbert
trotsky
Jul 12, 2017, 6:25:32 AM7/12/17
to
to DT Jr.? It's like they're all hypocrites or something.
#BeamMeUpScotty
Jul 12, 2017, 10:41:04 AM7/12/17
to
Classified content in them and get lawyers to do it after he was caught
and then the FBI suggest that there was no "intent". When Comey decide
there was NO intent they must NOT have noticed that Hillary was trying
to hide and destroy evidence and that in and of it's self is a show of
intent. Hillary knew she had done illegal things and was hiding them.
Otherwise deleting evidence wouldn't be necessary if she was accepting
responsibility for just making mistakes, when you do that you accept
responsibility and you don't hide and destroy evidence.
This attack on the TRUMPS is a typical Hillary attempt to hide from the
truth and to attack the prosecutors and people that are charging her
with crimes. She used this same Alinsky tactic when Bill Clinton was
accused of sexual crimes and Hillary accused the RIGHT WING CABAL of
targeting them... and then relentlessly attacked Ken Star in the press
personally to try to destroy him.
--
That's Karma
trotsky
Jul 12, 2017, 11:44:08 AM7/12/17
to
On 7/12/2017 9:40 AM, #BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
> On 07/12/2017 06:25 AM, trotsky wrote:
>> On 7/11/2017 8:04 PM, FPP wrote:
>>> On 7/10/17 9:20 AM, zntiguy wrote:
>>
>>> Guess we don't need any "fake" documents any more, now do we?
>>>
>>> We have all the evidence we need to prove that the Trumps colluded
>>> with a hostile foreign government to subvert the democratic electoral
>>> process, now don't we?
>>>
>>> Or should I call it "the very sacred election process", like President
>>> Whack Job termed it?
>>>
>>>> Donald J. TrumpVerified account @realDonaldTrump
>>>>
>>>> How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very
>>>> sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!
>>>
>>> You can't make this shit up!
>>
>>
>> Why aren't the right wing assholes chanting "Lock him up!" with respect
>> to DT Jr.? It's like they're all hypocrites or something.
>
> Did DT Jr. delete and Bleachbit destroy thousands of e-mails
No, does this mean you're too afraid to comment coherently on what he
> On 07/12/2017 06:25 AM, trotsky wrote:
>> On 7/11/2017 8:04 PM, FPP wrote:
>>> On 7/10/17 9:20 AM, zntiguy wrote:
>>
>>> Guess we don't need any "fake" documents any more, now do we?
>>>
>>> We have all the evidence we need to prove that the Trumps colluded
>>> with a hostile foreign government to subvert the democratic electoral
>>> process, now don't we?
>>>
>>> Or should I call it "the very sacred election process", like President
>>> Whack Job termed it?
>>>
>>>> Donald J. TrumpVerified account @realDonaldTrump
>>>>
>>>> How low has President Obama gone to tapp my phones during the very
>>>> sacred election process. This is Nixon/Watergate. Bad (or sick) guy!
>>>
>>> You can't make this shit up!
>>
>>
>> Why aren't the right wing assholes chanting "Lock him up!" with respect
>> to DT Jr.? It's like they're all hypocrites or something.
>
> Did DT Jr. delete and Bleachbit destroy thousands of e-mails
actually did?
FPP
Jul 12, 2017, 8:49:10 PM7/12/17
to
On 7/12/17 10:40 AM, #BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
> Did DT Jr. delete and Bleachbit destroy thousands of e-mails with
> Classified content in them and get lawyers to do it after he was caught
> and then the FBI suggest that there was no "intent".
Seeing things again, Scotty?
> Did DT Jr. delete and Bleachbit destroy thousands of e-mails with
> Classified content in them and get lawyers to do it after he was caught
> and then the FBI suggest that there was no "intent".
FPP
Jul 12, 2017, 8:51:13 PM7/12/17
to
On 7/12/17 10:40 AM, #BeamMeUpScotty wrote:
Don't blame Hiillary, moron. Donnie Jr. may not be a genius, but he CAN
read English. He knew he was talking to an agent of the Russian
government, with the express purpose to affect the election in his dad's
favor.
It's right there in black and white, for fuck's sake!
trotsky
Jul 13, 2017, 6:17:06 AM7/13/17
to
"Hillary!!!!!!!!!"
#BeamMeUpScotty
Jul 13, 2017, 11:54:32 AM7/13/17
to
from the British agents....?
He then unmasked TRUMP team names and leaked the names to the press to
damage Trump, not just during the election but while Trump was a sitting
President and that all tracks back to Obama as the BUCK STOPS with him.
--
That's Karma
FPP
Jul 13, 2017, 6:40:32 PM7/13/17
to
All you ever do is repeat what you've seen. You never offer a shred of
proof.
Unmasking is normal... you, on the other hand, are not.
#BeamMeUpScotty
Jul 15, 2017, 11:42:01 AM7/15/17
to
--
That's Karma
FPP
Jul 15, 2017, 5:01:04 PM7/15/17
to
You must meet with a security official, one on one, make a formal
request, and then go into a secure location with that officer - where
the name is then revealed.
It is only unmasked to the one person who requested it. That's it.
Nothing illegal, nothing gets leaked, and nobody except the two people
involved knows the individual's name.
> However, experts in intelligence collection and classified information told us it’s normal for someone in such a high-up national security role to make unmasking requests, and it would be hard, though not impossible, to abuse the practice for political purposes.
>
> "It’s not unusual at all," said Joshua Rovner, chair of international politics and national security at Southern Methodist University and author of Fixing the Facts: National Security and the Politics of Intelligence.
>
> We couldn’t find a way to quantify how often national security advisers or other White House officials make unmasking requests, but experts said it’s a routine, legitimate occurrence.
>
> But experts said abusing the unmasking process would be difficult, in large part because the agency does the actual unmasking, not the requester.
>
> Only a select group of high-up officials in the intelligence and national security communities have the authority to make or approve unmasking requests, and they have to do so while complying with an elaborate set of minimization guidelines, compliance procedures and documentation, said Susan Hennessey, a national security fellow at the Brookings Institution and a former NSA lawyer.
This is normal.
Nobody leaked anything. Period. And you can't prove anyone did, can you?
It's a figment of your imagination.
Try reading something that's not from right wing whack jobs once in a while.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/apr/06/tom-cotton/tom-cotton-its-unusual-white-house-officials-susan/
--
"Fox News is dropping its 'fair and balanced' slogan... I assume because
0 new messages