Wikipedia Still has its Spygate Article labeled as a Conspiracy Theory.

September 11, 2018

To my surprise, when I typed SPYGATE into Google search, the first result is:

"SPYGATE (Conspiracy Theory) - Wikipedia"

The entire article reads like everything has been made up, and that President Trump is off his rocker.

Some excerpts:

Spygate is a conspiracy theory developed and popularized by the United States president Donald Trump. With no actual supporting evidence produced, the May 2018 allegations have been widely described as blatantly false.

On May 22 - May 23, 2018, Trump announced and elaborated, without providing evidence, on the existence of this conspiracy via his Twitter account, stating his belief that the previous administration under Barack Obama paid to plant a spy inside Trump's 2016 presidential campaign.

Democratic (Adam Schiff) and Republican (Paul Ryan, Trey Gowdy, Tom Rooney, Richard Burr, Jeff Flake and Marco Rubio) Congressmen have dismissed Trump's May 2018 allegations as lacking evidence, and maintained that the FBI did not do anything improper.

In June 2018, Trump again alleged, without providing any evidence, that there was a counter-intelligence operation into the Trump campaign starting from December 2015.

The New York magazine addressed the June 2018 allegations by stating: "It’s not surprising or scandalous that FBI agents would be using espionage tradecraft. Gateway Pundit seems to have invented the crucial factual element of the conspiracy out of thin air" while "Trump is citing right-wing conspiracy theorists who operate at a full level further removed from reality than the right-wing conspiracy theorists he customarily cites."

Zack Beauchamp of Vox wrote about the situation which was "entirely unfounded in the actual evidence" is that "Fox picks up on some random internet rumor, the president picks it up from Fox, and then Fox and other right-wing outlets leap to defend what the president tweeted, which only reinforces Trump’s sense that he’s right."

SOURCE: en.wikipedia.org...(conspiracy_theory)

1. Is Wikipedia owned by a left-wing organization? Usually, the articles seem to be based on fact, but this one reads like Obama's DOJ/FBI worked with CNN and MSNBC to write it as anti-Trump as possible.

2. What evidence would have to be made public, and by whom, in order for Wikipedia to remove the "Conspiracy Theory" label from SPYGATE?

3. It's OBVIOUS that Google wants everyone doing a "Spygate" search, to believe that it's nothing more than a silly conspiracy theory.

It's like GOOGLE COLLUDED with the authors to have this put as their top search result. BING and DuckDuckGo have NewEngland Patriots 2007 Spygate as their top results. The first DOJ/Trump result is several entries down.

-CareWeMust

a reply to: carewemust

You should judt go edit it out and write your own WIKI on what it is to replace it.

originally posted by: notsure1
a reply to: carewemust

You should judt go edit it out and write your own WIKI on what it is to replace it.

Wiki isn’t as democratic as they’d like you to believe especially as of late IMO.

originally posted by: notsure1
a reply to: carewemust

You should judt go edit it out and write your own WIKI on what it is to replace it.

I was thinking that Wikipedia was owned by some entity, like Wikileaks is.

Wikipedia is a Left Wing propaganda site. You can’t trust the information there...especially in regards to conspiracies. It is a lot like Snopes. A supposed authority without any real credibility.

originally posted by: Metallicus
Wikipedia is a Left Wing propaganda site. You can’t trust the information there...especially in regards to conspiracies. It is a lot like Snopes. A supposed authority without any real credibility.

How dare you imply that the corner stones of the sane side of the internet might just have an agenda to push....

originally posted by: Metallicus
Wikipedia is a Left Wing propaganda site. You can’t trust the information there...especially in regards to conspiracies. It is a lot like Snopes. A supposed authority without any real credibility.

I didn't know that! Since it's one of the default FIREFOX search engines, I (wrongly) assumed that Wikipedia was a reference source with integrity. Thank-you for teaching me something tonight, Metallicus.

a reply to: carewemust

The reason that is, is because no irrefutable proof has been made public to suggest otherwise. It is literally a conspiracy theory. At least for now anyways. If you can without a doubt prove otherwise and present your findings then I am sure the label will be changed.

originally posted by: notsure1
a reply to: carewemust

You should judt go edit it out and write your own WIKI on what it is to replace it.

I tried to make quite small corrections to a page which was in effect terrorist propaganda but that was being portrayed as truth. I had my corrections overturned by a 17 year old waif who on his profile said his proudest moment was making sure the Charlotsville page was kept accurate. Despite me really only wanting to improve the grammar this child wouldn't allow any changes as he had decided the terroist view point was the true view point and any changes were a distortion of truth as he viewed it. Now think of the whole of Wikipedia having uneducated sjw gatekeepers like him.

a reply to: Allaroundyou


Thanks for confirming that Wikipedia DOES adjust titles/labels, if new information warrants it. It will be interesting to see how MUCH new information has to be public-knowledge before that adjustment occurs.

a reply to: carewemust

Its obvious everyone stopped contributing to it so just change the page.

a reply to: carewemust

If and when you do find the proof needed that will be a great day. Hell you may even get thrown on a news broadcast panel.

Have fun with that!

originally posted by: carewemust

originally posted by: Metallicus
Wikipedia is a Left Wing propaganda site. You can’t trust the information there...especially in regards to conspiracies. It is a lot like Snopes. A supposed authority without any real credibility.

I didn't know that! Since it's one of the default FIREFOX search engines, I (wrongly) assumed that Wikipedia was a reference source with integrity. Thank-you for teaching me something tonight, Metallicus.

Wikipedia is technically, for the most part, open to being edited by anybody. But over the years a core group of moderators and maintainers have basically taken over the site and allow only what they see fit to stay.

originally posted by: carewemust
1. Is Wikipedia owned by a left-wing organization? Usually, the articles seem to be based on fact, but this one reads like Obama's DOJ/FBI worked with CNN and MSNBC to write it as anti-Trump as possible.

So Wiki is OK unless they post something you don't care for? Then they are a "left wing org?"

originally posted by: intrepid

originally posted by: carewemust
1. Is Wikipedia owned by a left-wing organization? Usually, the articles seem to be based on fact, but this one reads like Obama's DOJ/FBI worked with CNN and MSNBC to write it as anti-Trump as possible.

So Wiki is OK unless they post something you don't care for? Then they are a "left wing org?"

Where did you get that from? I didn't read that out of the message but maybe I'm missing something, and no site is a one stop shot that is reliable for everything, Wiki is handy for somethings but others it's garbage, like many other sites.....

a reply to: carewemust

What surprises you? That the real world does not embrace trumps crazy conspiracy theories ?

Its like smart people colluded to bring real information to the world.
OH NO MR BILL !

a reply to: BigDave-AR

Right....👀

a reply to: carewemust

Like unicorns and flying pigs?