Snopes Co-Founder Embezzles $98,000, Drops Weight, Leaves Fat Wife And Marries Actual Whore
Turns out, this is a true story, fully backed by Daily Mail. But first, let's step back a little.
We've had a few spates with Snopes in the past. It was all fun and games when Snopes co-founder David Mikkelson first debunked our story about Rosie O'Donnell getting a tramp stamp with ISIS flag to support Islamic 'freedom fighters'. But with time their debunking became lame and simply unprofessional. Eventually Mikkelson himself began to spread fake news about us, with an entirely slanderous claim that the People's Cube was "a clickbait fake news site known for spreading malware."
We felt it was time to spoof Snopes and its founders directly.
Our 2015 spoof report, Snopes.com CEO arrested on charges of fraud and corruption, became viral and received over 115,000 shares and 302,000 page views on this site alone. It was then debunked by several "fact-checkers" including TruthOrFiction.org and Hoax-Alert.LeadStories.com.
A torrent of hate messages followed, of which this one is our favorite (spelling and punctuation preserved):
Just found out that your hit piece on Snopes was satire. I ,like many people, fell for it discrediting a very reliable source of information. Just because you don't like the answers on Snopes doesn't mean they are not true. You are an anti American traitor and as unpatriotic as it gets. If you are not actually a citizen then fuck off. Your Putin Puppet boy trump will not win and your conservative buddies will eventually all die off to the great relief of the majority of this country.
Our other Snopes-related posts included:
Snopes Verifies Snopes is a Hoax: Urban legends website determines its own existence is fabricated
Snopes denies visiting White House during White House visit
Snopes debunking of The People's Cube needs more debunking
When Facebook decided to use Snopes as official fact-checkers to filter "fake stories" out of their news feed, we were mulling over yet another spoof. Now we don't have to, as life has surpassed our wildest satirical fantasies. Consider this paragraph from Zerohedge:
According to divorce papers, Snopes co-founder David Mikkelson started taking all sorts of trips around the world to bang whores after that sweet liberal shill money started rolling in. While engaging in this debauchery, Mikkelson wrote off just about everything as a business expense, embezzling a reported $98,000. The Snopes co-founder has since settled down and married a [NSFW] part time porn actress, Snopes.com administrator (spicy!), and sex worker. As in, she has a website devoted to being a whore. Apparently she's a pretty good one despite being "past her time as an adult model." In the same divorce papers, David Mikkelson fires back, claiming his hog of an ex-wife took millions from their joint account and bought property in Las Vegas. No word on who got their obese cat, or if it's still alive.
Then there's this absurdly nightmarish Daily Mail headline:
EXCLUSIVE: Facebook 'fact checker' who will arbitrate on 'fake news' is accused of defrauding website to pay for prostitutes - and its staff includes an escort-porn star and 'Vice Vixen domme'
Is Mikkelson's midlife crisis a metaphor for the collapse of the depraved prog-media conglomerate, showing how quickly things can disintegrate with a little bit of scrutiny by independent journalists? We hope so. Here's to the new era of honest and reliable media, if such a thing is even possible.
Our stories Snopes has debunked :
Rumor: Television personality Rosie O'Donnell got an ISIS tattoo in support of the Islamic State's 'struggle against Western imperialism.' (by David Mikkelson)
Rumor: A portrait of Abraham Lincoln was removed from the White House to make way for a picture of the Obamas' pet dogs. (by David Mikkelson)
Fake news reports Miley Cyrus burned a Bible during a concert in order to promote tolerance. (by Dan Evon)
Fake news reports that CNN host Fareed Zakaria posted a blog entry calling for white women to be raped by Islamic minority groups. (by Staff)
A fake news site claimed Dearborn banned alcohol because of a Muslim majority in the city's council. (by Kim LaCapria)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein did not say she is unsympathetic to veterans who experience symptoms of PTSD because they "deserve" it. (by Kim LaCapria)
Please notice the name Kim LaCapria in the last two "debunkings." This Snopes main "fact checker" who never failed to repeat Mikkelson's description of us as "a clickbait fake news site known for spreading malware," turned out to be a... help me out with word choice if you think that "whore" is entirely out of place.
...
According to Daily Mail, Kim LaCapria runs a sex-and-fetish blog called ViceVixen "with a specific focus on naughtiness, sin, carnal pursuits, and general hedonism and bonne vivante-ery," where she claims she is in touch with her "domme side," is addicted to smutty Harry Potter fan fiction, provides intimate advice and reviews of sex toys (including a vibrating wand that "drives boys mad"), and also recommends pot-smoking paraphernalia.
This reportedly "principal fact checker" has also admitted she smoked pot while posting to Snopes. It must have been during one of those paranoid and delusional moments of cannabis-induced psychosis that she and David Mikkelson imagined The People's Cube to be "a clickbait fake news site known for spreading malware." Mystery solved: check.
Her playful bio at Snopes says this:
Kim LaCapria is a New York-based content manager and longtime snopes.com message board participant. Although she was investigated and found to be "probably false" by snopes.com in early 2002, Kim later began writing for the site due to an executive order unilaterally passed by President Obama during a secret, late-night session (without the approval of Congress). Click like and share if you think this is an egregious example of legislative overreach.
In light of recent findings, her fantasy about a "secret, late-night session" with President Obama reads like a Freudian slip, encapsulating the shameless political whoring of the entire Snopes organization.
Grab a hot cup of the beverage of your choice, dear Reader, and settle down for a long and worthwhile read. Herewith the first part of the overview:
Even with the rapid growth of religion inspired violence since the 1980s the end of the Cold War in 1991 led to a sharp (by over 20 percent so far) drop in violence worldwide. That decline was not news but the increasing activity of Islamic terrorists was. While the terror attacks themselves were news the current and historical causes of the Islamic terrorism was not.
The post-Cold War trend towards less violence is stalled because of the continued unrest in Moslem nations or areas with a significant Moslem minority. This began in 2014 when over a decade of declining violence was reversed because terrorism deaths were up by about 20 percent that year and nearly as high in 2015. This was mainly because of ISIL (Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant) in Syria and Iraq and Boko Haram in Nigeria. ISIL sees itself as the new leaders of the Islamic world and employs extreme violence in pursuit of that goal. As a result one thing Saudi led Sunnis, Iran led Shia, the West and even al Qaeda can agree on is that ISIL is evil and a threat to all that must be destroyed. Meanwhile Boko Haram actually caused more deaths in 2014 than ISIL but ISIL was much better at publicizing its murderous activities. In 2015 the Islamic terrorist related deaths declined in large part because Moslem nations have finally become less tolerant of the Islamic radicalism, especially when it is practiced on them instead of non-Moslems. The decline in terrorism related deaths is welcome, because they get the most publicity. Keep in mind that most war deaths are not caused by terrorists and even in 2014 terrorism related deaths (mostly Islamic terrorism) accounted for 20 percent of all war related deaths. Islamic terrorism gets the most publicity but less glamorous disputes do most of the killing.
What gets the most media attention are the fearsome catastrophes headline writers can conjure up. All media thrives on FUD (Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt) and the scary headlines in 2017 will feature China (and the possible collapse of the economy there and the worldwide impact), South Asia (the threat of nuclear war between Pakistan and India) and East Asia (the crumbling North Korean dictator may have usable nukes in 2017 and might use them). Meanwhile the threat of Islamic terrorism activity in the West will remain a headline staple. Not many people in the West get killed by Islamic terrorists, especially compared to Moslem countries. But the Internet changed all that. By making it possible for anyone to hustle FUD video and audio round the clock at no cost and little personal risk, Islamic terrorists finally had the promotional tool they always needed but never realized was possible until suddenly, in the 1990s, there it was. The rise of 24 hour global TV news operations in the 1980s helped the Islamic terrorists but they could not control their message. With the Internet then could and soon learned how to do so for maximum impact on potential victims, donors and recruits.
Sending the anthropologists deep in the jungle to explore the culture of a long lost native tribe...
[NYT] COVINGTON, La. -- "Sour grapes," explained Bob Marino, 79, weighing in on the recent spycraft bombshell from the corner table of a local McDonald’s.
"Sour grapes," agreed Roger Noel, 65, sitting next to him.
"Bunch of crybabies," Reed Guidry, 64, offered from across the table.
The subject of conversation was the report released by United States intelligence chiefs on Friday informing President-elect Donald J. Trump of their unanimous conclusion that President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia ordered an extensive, but covert, cyberoperation to help Mr. Trump win the election. The Russians had hacked and leaked emails, unleashed "trolls" on social media and used their "state-run propaganda machine" to spread stories harmful to Hillary Clinton.
In Washington, the report was viewed as extraordinary, both for its timing, raising sharp questions about the president-elect’s legitimacy on the verge of his taking office, and for its assertions, describing the operation as Russia’s boldest effort yet to meddle with American elections, to spread discontent and to "undermine the U.S.-led democratic order."
But interviews with Trump supporters here in Louisiana, a state the president-elect won by 20 points, and in Indiana, a state he won by nearly the same margin, found opinions about the report that ranged from general indifference to outright derision.
"From the parts of the report I’ve seen," said Rob Maness, a retired Air Force colonel who twice ran for Senate here as Tea Party favorite, "it seems silly."
There are genuine concerns about Russia’s cyberoperations, he said, but the notion that they changed the outcome of the election was absurd. (The report made no determination on how they affected the election.)
Of the comments he had seen from fellow Trump supporters on Facebook and in emails, he added, "90 percent of them are like, ’What’s the big deal?’"
The Russians may have very well gotten involved, several people said. They added that kind of interference should be combated. But many assumed that foreign actors had long tried to play favorites in American elections, and that the United States had done the same in other countries’ elections. Even if the Russians did do it -- which some were more willing to concede than others -- what difference did it make? People did not need the Russians to make up their minds about Mrs. Clinton, Mr. Trump’s election opponent. Blaming her loss on the Russians was, as one Trump supporter here said, "just being sore losers."
#1
The one fact that makes me think the Russians were behind the DNC hack (a public servce, regardless of motive) is that Assange says they weren't. Michael Ramirez says it best:
http://michaelpramirez.com/assange.html
Posted by: Steve White ||
01/08/2017 00:00 ||
Comments ||
Link ||
[2 views]
Top|| File under:
#1
Please point me to a Youtube video of school children lead in chorus singing the praises of Dear Leader Mr. Trump. Always with the Freudian Projection. The words Fascist, Nazi, and now Racist are just another form of the 'N' word hurled as a vile pejorative for others who don't conform to one's religion personal belief and agenda.
#3
Pardon me if I mount, yet again, my favorite hobby-horse.
THE DOCTRINE OF FASCISM-
BENITO MUSSOLINI (1932)
Anti-individualistic, the Fascist conception of life stresses the importance of the State and accepts the individual only in so far as his interests coincide with those of the State
Now of all the players in American politics today, which group does this best describe?
G*D DAMN IT, the Dems / Progs and all their minions and financiers are the F***ING FASCISTS!!
#4
What the heck happened to my quote that I put in italics?
Let me try that again:
"Anti-individualistic, the Fascist conception of life stresses the importance of the State and accepts the individual only in so far as his interests coincide with those of the State"
If this is a subject that interests you, dear Reader, this useful blog post lays out the arguments without appeals to emotion in non-legalistic language. Herewith his opening sally:
[IsraelTimes] Critics of Israel’s policy to allow its citizens to live in the regions of Judea and Samaria have two separate arguments for why the settlements are illegitimate. One is a legal argument, the other is political. In this article, I will explain why Israeli homes in the area are in fact legal under international law. In my next installment, I will address the political argument.
Recently there was a big noise made over a U.N. Security Council resolution that declared Israeli homes, built in the region of Judea and Samaria, a "flagrant violation of international law." The resolution does not break any new ground, as far as the international community is concerned, because President Jimmy Carter ... the worst president ever. Maybe the second worst. The votes aren't all in yet... allowed the Security Council to pass a resolution that stated Israeli homes built in Judea/Samaria have "no legal validity."
Both of these resolutions, although they make a bold and stark statement about the legality of the so called "settlements", are merely political statements. As I explained at the bottom of a previous article, these resolutions are non-binding under international law. Furthermore, these resolutions are not consistent with objective legal analysis of the subject by world experts on international law.
In order to find Israel’s settlements to be a violation of international law, first, Israel must be considered an occupier of foreign territory. Yet, Israel’s legal claim to the territory in question was recognized by the international community on several occasions. First, the land on both sides of the river Jordan were recognized as part of the Jewish National Home by the 1920 San Remo Conference. This was endorsed by the League of Nations (predecessor to the United Nations ...boodling on the grand scale... ) in the 1922 League of Nations Mandate to Britannia, and affirmed by article 80 of the United Nations charter in 1945. When Israel’s leaders declared illusory sovereignty in all territory relinquished by England on May 15, 1948 (including the territory that anti-Israel people call the "West Bank") it was recognized to be the State of Israel by both the General Assembly and Security Council in November 1948.
Jordan invaded (along with four other Arab states) and conquered this specific territory in 1949, annexed it in 1950, and gave it a new name: "West Bank" (of the river Jordan). Only two countries in the entire world recognized Jordan’s annexation (England and Pakistain) and not a single Arab country recognized this annexation.
Furthermore, article 2 of the UN charter forbids the acquisition of territory through war. Thus, Jordan’s acquisition and annexation of the territory was illegal under international law.
In 1967, Jordan again initiated war against Israel (along with two other Arab states) but Jordan was pushed out of the territory (back to Jordan’s recognized boundaries on the east bank of the Jordan river) by Israel. This re-acquisition of the territory by Israel was legal because article 51 of the U.N. charter permits a nation to defend itself from attack. It is understood that national self-defense often necessitates control of any territory from which the initial aggression was launched.
#1
There is really no such thing as international law. There are just treaties sovereign states signup to or not.
The only body claiming jurisdiction over states is the UN Security Council and that isn't a recognisable court, nor is there much, if any, law involved.
[IsraelTimes] Israel’s INSS think tank charts 469 attacks, carried out by 800 perpetrators in 28 countries, killing 5,650 people, and warns that terror groups are redoubling their efforts.
Herewith the overview. Useful bar graphs and discussion of the data can be seen at the link.
The year 2016 was the deadliest in the history of suicide terrorism, an Israeli think tank said, with 469 suicide kabooms carried out by 800 perpetrators in 28 countries, causing the deaths of about 5,650 people.
Islamic State ...formerly ISIS or ISIL, depending on your preference. Before that al-Qaeda in Iraq, as shaped by Abu Musab Zarqawi. They're very devout, committing every atrocity they can find in the Koran and inventing a few more. They fling Allah around with every other sentence, but to hear the pols talk they're not really Moslems.... was the leading perpetrator of suicide kabooms worldwide, being directly or indirectly responsible for approximately 70 percent (322) of the attacks, according to statistics compiled by the Terrorism and Low Intensity Conflict Research Program at Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Security Studies (INSS).
As the terror group loses territory, "it appears that suicide terrorism will be a key tool for the Islamic State in consolidating its image as invincible, creating deterrence against its enemies, and taking Dire Revenge for the international activity against it," the think tank said Thursday.
"The Islamic State’s partners and other terrorist groups will also likely redouble their efforts to carry out mass casualty large-scale terrorist attacks."
Yoram Schweitzer, the senior research fellow who headed the study, said the rise in suicide kabooms underlined the growing intensity of terrorism worldwide. "They are the litmus test when it comes to assessing terrorism," he told The Times of Israel, "because of their devastating effect and the sense of threat they create."
Suicide bombings have become a main weapon of deterrence and one of the most effective tools for promoting the political goals of terrorist organizations since its use began in the early 1980s, the report said. The use of such bombings in 2016 was unprecedented in several respects, the INSS study found.
The 469 attacks by 800 bombers worldwide marked a small rise on 2015, when 452 suicide kabooms were carried out by 735 perpetrators.
In 2016, however, the number of fatalities rose sharply (approximately 5,650 in 2016, compared with 4,330 in 2015), as did the number of those injured (from 8,800 in 2015 to 9,480 in 2016), according to the report. In addition, the number of countries in which suicide kabooms occurred reached a new height (28 in 2016, compared with 22 in 2015).
The study’s authors noted, furthermore, that Islamic State claimed to have carried out hundreds of suicide kabooms in addition to those documented in the report, "but many of these bombings were neither reported in detail in the media nor supported by independent sources or evidence from the field, and were therefore not included."
Still, the study found, "there was a slight decline in the frequency of suicide terrorist bombings in southern Asia, and a substantial drop in their frequency in Africa." On the other hand, Islamic State and the various other groups inspired by or affiliated with it "stepped up their efforts to export suicide terrorism to Europe."
[Hot Air] I’m old enough to remember when Democrats and their media supporters were complaining that Trump’s nominations were coming too slowly. I was assured by reliable sources that this represented a lack of organization on the part of the Trump transition team. But now that most of the top spots have nominees in place, the head of the Office of Government Ethics is complaining that confirmation hearings are starting too soon and they can’t possibly process them all in regular order. (Washington Post)
A top ethics official warned Saturday that plans to confirm Donald Trump’s top Cabinet choices before background examinations are complete are unprecedented and have overwhelmed government investigators responsible for the reviews.
The concerns came on the eve of the Trump administration-in-waiting’s first big test, with as many as seven nominees for Cabinet positions -- many of them already the subject of questions about their qualifications -- scheduled to visit Capitol Hill in the coming days for confirmation hearings...
Whether the schedule holds in the coming days is unclear. McConnell’s office declined on Saturday to respond to warnings by Walter M. Shaub Jr., director of the Office of Government Ethics, who said the current confirmation calendar is "of great concern to me" because nominees have not completed a required ethics review before their hearings.
[Free Beacon] What does the Democratic Party stand for in 2017? The bottom lines of insurance companies? The unfettered operation of our intelligence services? Neo-McCarthyism? Let’s ask the governor of Virginia:
Virginia Gov. Terry McAuliffe is promising to veto legislation banning abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy, saying such a "socially divisive" proposal hurts the state’s image....
McAuliffe, a Democrat, told The Associated Press on Tuesday that he wants to send a clear message to the Republican-controlled General Assembly not to "waste time" trying to be part of that effort.
The General Assembly’s 2017 legislative session starts next week and McAuliffe does not typically comment on proposed legislation until after it passes both chambers. But the governor said he needed to make clear to companies looking to invest in Virginia that the legislation had no hope of passage.
"I can’t sit back and have that sitting out the same time I am traveling the globe recruiting businesses to Virginia," McAuliffe said, adding that he is going on an important recruiting trip this weekend. "If there’s something that would be damaging toward business, and to our image around the country and the globe, I’ll veto it, you bet I will."
McAuliffe has a special genius for doing the wrong thing for the worst possible reason. Your average abortion enthusiast will employ the language of rights and make gestures in the direction of human dignity, which they deny to infants, of course. But Terry doesn’t care about rights. He cares about money.
A multi-volume chronology and reference guide set detailing three years of the Mexican Drug War between 2010 and 2012.
Rantburg.com and borderlandbeat.com correspondent and author Chris Covert presents his first non-fiction work detailing
the drug and gang related violence in Mexico.
Chris gives us Mexican press dispatches of drug and gang war violence
over three years, presented in a multi volume set intended to chronicle the death, violence and mayhem which has
dominated Mexico for six years.
Rantburg was assembled from recycled algorithms in the United States of America. No
trees were destroyed in the production of this weblog. We did hurt some, though. Sorry.
Jimmy Carter
Check the box labeled 'Compelling Need' and get busy ! 
[Free Beacon] What does the Democratic Party stand for in 2017? The bottom lines of insurance companies? The unfettered operation of our intelligence services? Neo-McCarthyism? Let’s ask the governor of Virginia:
