MSNBC pundit Rachel Maddow has fallen down the Fake-News rabbit hole and can’t get up.
Maddow is standing by a bogus narrative she pushed about the Trump-Putin summit in Helsinki even after it was debunked by the liberal Washington Post and other media.
“I love WaPo with the heat of 1,000 suns, but nothing here from WaPo disproves our report,’ Maddow tweeted. She blithely ignored evidence disproving her contention that the White House had intentionally edited out a question about whether Vladimir Putin wanted Donald Trump to win the 2016 election.
Your report asserts that the video was edited and implies that the incomplete transcript was posted intentionally. There's no evidence for the first point and my piece provides context to suggest that the second was unintentional.
— Philip Bump (@pbump) July 25, 2018
Philip Bump of the Washington Post debunked Maddow’s baseless claims in an article entitled “No, the White House didn’t intentionally edit a question to Putin out of a video.”
Bump also rebutted Maddow’s contention on Twitter: “Your report asserts that the video was edited and implies that the incomplete transcript was posted intentionally. There’s no evidence for the first point, and my piece provides context to suggest that the second was unintentional.”
The brouhaha erupted after Maddow dropped what she said was a bombshell claiming the White House had intentionally edited out a question.
Maddow breathlessly declared, “We can report tonight that the White House video of that exchange has also skillfully cut out that question from the Reuters reporter as if it didn’t happen.”
White House edits video to remove question about whether Putin wanted Trump to win. pic.twitter.com/ExlsHNlgF8
— Maddow Blog (@MaddowBlog) July 25, 2018
The Washington Post debunked Maddow’s accusations by explaining: “This is not a conspiracy from the White House…At some point in the middle of that question, there’s a switch between the feed from the reporters and the feed from the translator. In the White House version of the video, you can hear the question being asked very faintly under the woman who is translating saying “president.”
WaPo’s Philip Bump also posted a YouTube video (see above) explaining what happened.
Maddow later “updated the text” on her debunked report, but still stood behind her original false narrative. Twitter noted that her updated tweet got far less retweets than her original fake-news post.
This is something the anti-Trump media count on: Spreading a false narrative and then updating or correcting the fake news hours or days later, after the damage has been done.
They count on the fact that most people only remember the first (fake-news) headline and not the corrected post later.
….but they don't care.
They need to delete the original, do a massive segment fixing it and apologize. Or, she needs to be given a break by MSNBC. Ugh. https://t.co/xaFJ7tGkJ3
— Melissa Mackenzie (@MelissaTweets) July 25, 2018
Rachel Maddow’s self-destructive hatred of President Trump has decimated her credibility. This is not the first time that Maddow has embarrassed herself in her failed attempts to attack Trump.
As BizPac Review previously reported, Maddow scored the mother-of-all Nothing Burgers in March 2017 when she claimed she had landed a “big scoop” about President Trump’s tax returns.
The “scoop” turned out to be a big, fat Nothing Burger after Trump’s leaked 2005 tax returns showed that the billionaire paid $38 million in taxes on income of $153 million.
— Conservative News (@BIZPACReview) March 16, 2017
If anything, Trump’s tax returns allayed liberal concerns that he had paid no income taxes at all, as Hillary Clinton and the mainstream media repeatedly claimed.
Maddow inadvertently undermined a 2016 New York Times story claiming Trump had paid no income taxes between 1995 and 2013. Maddow’s “big scoop” also spotlighted that Trump had more in taxes than Democrats Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders.
Six months later, Maddow humiliated herself again after she erroneously blamed Trump’s proposed travel ban on Chad for the ambush attack in neighboring Niger that killed four American soldiers.
The leftist pundit got fact-checked hard for her inane conspiracy theory, which was denounced as “flimsy” and “crazy” by fellow liberals, including a writer at the Huffington Post and by Laura Seay, a liberal assistant professor at Colby College.
Experts noted that the Niger attack little to do with President Trump and everything to do with the militant Islamic terrorist group Boko Haram.
The other is that @maddow & her team are deliberately twisting facts to mislead viewers into believing something that isn't true.
— Laura Seay (@texasinafrica) October 21, 2017
This sums up the left’s Trump Derangement Syndrome in a nutshell.
It really must suck to hijack your party, steal a nomination, turn the DNC into a money laundromat, bury any evidence against you, finance a fake dossier, swipe debate questions, and promise free everything, yet still lose to someone you call incompetent.
— Ryan Fournier (@RyanAFournier) July 24, 2018
- DOJ attorney in charge of election-crimes unit quits after AG Barr opens investigation - November 10, 2020
- ‘Whoa, whoa, whoa’: Neil Cavuto slammed after he cuts off Kayleigh McEnany presser - November 10, 2020
- Same media that cheered Stacey Abrams, Al Gore for refusing to concede attack Trump for same move - November 8, 2020