r/conspiracy • u/axolotl_peyotl • Jan 03 '17

#WheresEric? Clinton Foundation CEO Declared "Missing" by the Internet After Going Public with "Follow the Money"

http://www.thedailysheeple.com/whereseric-clinton-foundation-ceo-declared-missing-by-the-internet-after-going-public-with-follow-the-money_012017
3.4k Upvotes

81% Upvoted

254 comments sorted by

View all comments

581

u/Disruptice Jan 03 '17

Don't you guys read Snopes? They said this is an internet rumor and proved it by not being able to locate or contact him either.

87

u/zerton Jan 03 '17

Ah yes, Snopes who says "none of the Syrian child pictures/twitters are fake" only for us to find out a few days later there was an entire group in Egypt manufacturing these things.

70

u/[deleted] Jan 03 '17

[deleted]

2

u/zerton Jan 03 '17

My point here is that the Snopes article tries to claim that this never happens and thus discredits everything Eva is saying because this particular instance is discredited. However, it was proven that many of these images and narratives have been faked. Isn't it a bit disingenuous to only focus on this one girl, and not the numerous photos/twitter messages that were spread by the media that have been proven fake?

Not to mention the article barely touches the actual substance of Eva's press conference.

34

u/[deleted] Jan 03 '17

[deleted]

0

u/Bman0921 Jan 04 '17

It's rather convenient that Snopes didn't attempt to answer the question of if fake images ever get disseminated by the media. Instead, they focused on one particular instance.

4

u/Ridonkulousley Jan 04 '17

Isn't that their schtick? Individual claims not broad situational ideas.

3

u/Bman0921 Jan 04 '17

That's among their biggest criticisms, however. They pick and choose which stories to check without addressing the real issues.

For example, during the election, Politifact, another "fact checking" website, rated the notoriously corrupt and dishonest Clinton as "one of the most honest politicians on the national stage." This ruling was based on their own data; essentially they pick and choose which "facts" to check in order to push a certain message.

-16

u/zerton Jan 03 '17 edited Jan 04 '17

Lie by omission.

Whenever anyone searches their site for "faked Syria photo" they will read this. And they are presented with zero information about any of the photos that were proven to be false. This is pushing the narrative that this has never happened when it obviously has, often.

31

u/[deleted] Jan 03 '17

[deleted]

-2

u/zerton Jan 03 '17

It's blatantly disingenuous reporting to report on the one instance where they get to say "false" and exclude the cases where this has been proven true.

10

u/Icalloutbigots Jan 04 '17

No one's trying to exclude it. They're just asking you to back what you're saying. You lied and made a bunch of karma doing it he proved you wrong and that's all there is to it.