A Small Investigation into "Fake News" and "Alternative Facts."

a reply to: RAY1990

Exactly right. That was the point I was making.

a reply to: darkbake

There are quite a few examples of various media outlets buying a hoax and reporting it. There are acknowledgments that the tactic exists to print knowingly shady information just because no one pays attention to the retractions. And the bias you point out is wholly palpable.

Not to mention the extensive proof of embellishment and fakery with locations and crowd sizes. Im not talking about the inauguration. Just mundane crap like weather reports or protests.

Sometimes I wonder if "free speech zones" weren't a media creation to concentrate protesters for optic effect.

originally posted by: spirit_horse
There was a study done by a University on one of Obama's elections and I think some 800,000 non-citizens voted in that election. So, after Obama stated in an interview that could be construed as illegals can vote without repercussions to them it is possible that 3 million + cast votes in 2016. If the non-citizens didn't speak English well they may have thought that is what Obama said.

I guess we will see after the investigation. CNN said the is NO evidence. Well, that is fake news after the previous study said 800,000 voted in Obama's election. There are no absolutes that can be said until that is looked into.

There has never been such a study from a real agency..


People often take voter REGISTRATION fraud (where people paid to register voters on a per registration basis, make up fake applications that never actually vote, because they don't exist...) numbers.

Then pretend like messy registration rolls is proof of massive fraud.


It's propaganda 101.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Thanks for the heads up.