Project Veritas has broken laws on several occasions, and also seems to attempt to entrap people. They tried to sell a Washington Post reporter a story about sexual impropriety from Roy Moore and then planned on outing the WaPo story as a hoax. I'd question literally anything from them as they go out of their way to entrap and falsify things up to and including breaking laws. Instead, WaPo taped the interview and did a series of stories on Project Veritas, and the things they're doing to try to smear the left.
"Project Veritas’ YouTube sting was deeply misleading — and successful
James O’Keefe’s stunt playbook keeps giving conservative lawmakers ammunition, even if the evidence is all phony"
Google is an evil corporation that invades your privacy, monopolized internet and meddles in the democratic process. You can down vote me, but all these statements are true.
Exactly, very creepy that this keeps getting flagged. Super interesting news about a company we wall work with. These are google employees and I want to hear what they have to say, and talk about it with all of you, my unbiased HN friends.
Here's a start, it is from Project Veritas, a known bad actor. The Google employee in specific has a history of Q conspiracy theories and anti-semitism. Neither of them seem very trustworthy. If it isn't very trustworthy, is it really news?
Firstly, you can go look at the docs. They're clearly real. In fact everything from Veritas that I've seen leaked has been real.
Secondly, such a major leak from a formerly leak-proof ship is itself news.
Thirdly, the fact that this thread is filled with attempts (probably mostly by Googlers) to smear Veritas and this guy is itself frankly very interesting. Lots of messenger shooting going on here.
It reminds me a lot of WikiLeaks: you can't stop people viewing the leaks so desperately claim Assange is a rapist who probably works for Putin, WikiLeaks is a "known bad actor", Snowden is a traitor who ran to Moscow etc. I feel like I've seen all this before.
I'm not a googler, have never been, and never plan to be. I still don't trust Project Veritas, who have proven to not be legitimate or trustworthy on multiple well documented occasions. The docs might be real, but what if they've been altered (as some of the wikileaks dumps have been) or are missing critical parts? They've proven time and again they're not impartial, so I take everything they say with a very strong lens that they're full of it or have skewed reality to fit their ultra-conservative (dare I almost say alt-right) supporting agenda.
> the fact that this thread is filled with attempts (probably mostly by Googlers) to smear Veritas
I'm not and never have been affiliated with Google. These claims about Project Veritas's reliability aren't smears. PV were literally caught on tape trying to plant false stories in the Washington Post.[1] That's not a matter of interpretation. They hired a woman to pretend to be someone else and make false sexual assault allegations against a Senate candidate. Nothing associated with them has credibility.
You do know that journalists do stings quite frequently, yes? It's a very common tactic and frequently deployed against politicians, business people etc. So Veritas tried to do a sting on the WP and failed, so what? You're acting like it's immoral or implies untrustworthyness but it doesn't. I've never seen that be argued before. Perhaps journalists don't like the taste of their own medicine?
Veritas doesn't just try to do stings, it actively misleadingly presents the evidence it gathers in them to push a pre-conceived political narrative.
And before you pull out “but other people do that” argument again, yes, Veritas isn't alone in being a dishonest propaganda outfit, but other self-styled journalists, even those with established journalistic records, who are caught doing even much lesser versions of that get called out and drummed out of any even slightly reputable outlet in the industry in disgrace when that happens. That it's Veritas’ whole raison-d’être shows that Veritas Isn't a journalistic outfit, but simply a propaganda operation.
I understand that, but these are Google employees. I am literally watching them tell me something. If you were Project Veritas, you would turn away a Google employee giving you inside info?
You say it's creepy that it's being flagged, but also that you understand that the source is "not reliable or trustworthy". Can you clarify your concern?
Its becoming pretty clear that this Google employee is also untrustworthy from his twitter, which includes birtherism, qanon conspiracies, 9/11 trutherism, pizzagate conspiracies, and piles of antisemitism.
It will take a while to work through everything, but what do you think the odds are that there are w bunch of docs here that are missing context and therefore are misleading?
Especially given PV's BS surrounding google in just the past few weeks.
Veritas has proven time and again they intentionally manipulate what they release to support their side and can't be trusted. Even if these are real they're likely doctored or taken out of context.
What do you mean? That either the entire thing must have been fabricated out of whole cloth, or that we should assume it's entirely true and discuss the implications as though it were? Wouldn't the simpler explanation be that people believe that, given the source, there is a high chance that it's somewhere in the middle - i.e. skewed, misleading, spun, taken out of context, biased - and is therefore reasonable to not take as useful information until more context can be provided?
I evaluate things independently. If you want to lump them together, that's your decision. He handed it to the DOJ, so odds are, we will not see google claiming anything is fake.
The complaints here about "the source" remind me of all the nonexistent complaints about cops not choosing upstanding citizens as their confidential informants.
spoiler: this was extremely boring and stupid. Reading this, downloading the files and looking at them was a complete waste of time, this is a nothing burger.
Exactly. An example of this, covfefe being translated to " ̄\_(ツ)_/ ̄ in Google Translate as an Easter egg. This compromises the entire contents of the root folder named "Election Tampering"
49 comments
[ 251 ms ] story [ 1863 ms ] threadhttps://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/a-woman-approa...
Bloomberg has published false and unretracted pieces, but we don’t flag them into oblivion - we evaluate each piece.
"Project Veritas’ YouTube sting was deeply misleading — and successful James O’Keefe’s stunt playbook keeps giving conservative lawmakers ammunition, even if the evidence is all phony"
https://www.theverge.com/interface/2019/6/27/18760463/projec...
Edit: I really want these documents to be false, I do.
Firstly, you can go look at the docs. They're clearly real. In fact everything from Veritas that I've seen leaked has been real.
Secondly, such a major leak from a formerly leak-proof ship is itself news.
Thirdly, the fact that this thread is filled with attempts (probably mostly by Googlers) to smear Veritas and this guy is itself frankly very interesting. Lots of messenger shooting going on here.
It reminds me a lot of WikiLeaks: you can't stop people viewing the leaks so desperately claim Assange is a rapist who probably works for Putin, WikiLeaks is a "known bad actor", Snowden is a traitor who ran to Moscow etc. I feel like I've seen all this before.
I'm not and never have been affiliated with Google. These claims about Project Veritas's reliability aren't smears. PV were literally caught on tape trying to plant false stories in the Washington Post.[1] That's not a matter of interpretation. They hired a woman to pretend to be someone else and make false sexual assault allegations against a Senate candidate. Nothing associated with them has credibility.
[1] https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/a-woman-approa...
And before you pull out “but other people do that” argument again, yes, Veritas isn't alone in being a dishonest propaganda outfit, but other self-styled journalists, even those with established journalistic records, who are caught doing even much lesser versions of that get called out and drummed out of any even slightly reputable outlet in the industry in disgrace when that happens. That it's Veritas’ whole raison-d’être shows that Veritas Isn't a journalistic outfit, but simply a propaganda operation.
Yes. Yes I would turn it away
It will take a while to work through everything, but what do you think the odds are that there are w bunch of docs here that are missing context and therefore are misleading?
Especially given PV's BS surrounding google in just the past few weeks.
It's not valuable if it's not truthful.
Veritas has proven time and again they intentionally manipulate what they release to support their side and can't be trusted. Even if these are real they're likely doctored or taken out of context.
My question is - Are these documents genuine? Isn’t that that what matters?
Just a regular file download, no funky extra downloader apps necessary.
This is silly stuff