Though it pretends to be an unbiased source of factual information maintained by “the people,” Wikipedia has once again been exposed as a Leftist propaganda outlet for pushing fake news about the revelations contained in Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into alleged Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election.
Dispelling all doubts that the site only spreads lies and misinformation about natural medicine, Wikipedia was recently caught pushing the myth that the Mueller report did “not exonerat[e]” President Donald Trump on the issue of obstruction of justice, even though Attorney General William Barr and deputy AG Rod Rosenstein both agreed that the report did, in fact, exonerate the Commander-in-Chief.
As revealed by Breitbart News, some Wikipedia editors on the Trump-Russia entry page actually referred to the bogus Steele Dossier as “evidence” of Russian collusion, even though that conspiracy theory has long been debunked as Leftist-contrived fake news.
According to reports, it was Newsbusters, a project of the Media Research Center, that first identified these problem on the Jimmy Wales-owned website, noting that many pages related to Trump and the investigation “had not been updated with the result or didn’t place it more prominently,” to quote Breitbart News‘s T.D. Adler.
“While many articles were eventually updated to include the results or place them more prominently in the article, they also criticized an effort to downplay or misrepresent Barr’s letter announcing the results,” Adler adds.
On the Wikipedia entry for Robert Mueller, editors apparently left up blatant misinformation stating that the Mueller report had not exonerated President Trump, even after it was publicly stated by Barr and Rosenstein that there was no collusion, and even after Mueller himself indicated that there was insufficient evidence to make a recommendation for charges based on such allegations.
In another Wikipedia entry about President Trump, editors made sure to omit important details about Barr and Rosenstein’s conclusions. They also cast doubt on the Mueller report exonerating Trump at all, insinuating that this declaration by Barr was a partisan falsehood because Barr was appointed by Trump.
Still other Wikipedia entries denied the Mueller report’s suggestion of no collusion, continuing to push the unfounded conspiracy theory that the Trump campaign colluded with Russia to “steal” the 2016 presidential election.
“Editor Volunteer Marek attempted to add to the intro of the article on Trump’s presidency that Trump had advance notice of the DNC leaks citing his former lawyer Michael Cohen, failing to note this referred to Roger Stone’s dubious claims to have insider information at Wikileaks rather than a Russian connection,” Adler explains.
“Another editor, BullRangifer, repeatedly argued over several discussions that Steele’s dossier had not been debunked by the investigation yet also sought to minimize its role in the investigation.”
As for the “Spygate” scandal alleging that the Obama regime illegally spied on the Trump campaign, Wikipedia’s anti-Trump editors have done everything in their power to prevent evidence about Spygate from being public.
Wikipedia actually locked down the Spygate Wikipedia page entirely, effectively blocking any outside editors from adding information to it that might implicate 44 for committing treasonous crimes as part of an assault against the democratic process.
“Coverage of the investigation and criticisms of it on Wikipedia have largely fallen in line with the predominant mainstream media narratives, which have overwhelmingly treated allegations of treasonous collusion with Russia as credible and allegations of investigatory misconduct as baseless conspiracy theories,” Adler writes.
Sources for this article include: