Image 01 Image 03

Why Isn’t Rachel Maddow Treated Like Other Crazy Conspiracy Theorists?

Why Isn’t Rachel Maddow Treated Like Other Crazy Conspiracy Theorists?

Maddow’s performance on Trump-Russia collusion has been as pernicious and false as Alex Jones’ conspiracy theories, yet Jones is deplatformed while Maddow has a primetime show on MSNBC.

MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow has spent over two years pushing a conspiracy theory, yet she is celebrated by many people on the left in politics and media. Why is she treated any differently than say, Alex Jones?

You don’t have to be a fan of Alex Jones (and I’m not) to be disturbed by the fact that he was virtually erased from social media, banned at every level, while Rachel Maddow is free to advance all the crazy ideas she can dream up.

This weekend, Maddow actually made fun of Alex Jones in a tweet. I wrote a thread about this on Twitter that got some notice:

Some people may be catching on. Willa Paskin writes at the left leaning Slate:

Rachel Maddow’s Conspiracy Brain

On Monday night, the first night that MSNBC’s Rachel Maddow Show aired after Attorney General William Barr released his four-page memo on the Mueller report, Rachel Maddow was skeptical. Like, extremely, extremely skeptical. In fact, she had 15 questions worth of skepticism about the “the Barr Report,” which she displayed in remarkably tiny font behind her head.

The questions started with the basics—Had Robert Mueller expected the attorney general to jump in and make a no prosecution, no collusion announcement? Was it appropriate for the attorney general to make that kind of determination at this point in the process?—before taking sudden swerves into the conspiratorial. Robert Mueller had chosen not to make a traditional prosecutorial judgment in his report.

“Well,” Maddow wondered, “why did Mueller make that determination and was it, in fact, a choice?” Was it possible that the special prosecutor had not explicitly described the president’s behavior as a crime in his report because there were plans to indict him as soon as he left office?

This has to be seen to be believed:

Alex Jones is deplatformed and Maddow is celebrated as an intelligent commentator.

Other than that, what is the difference between them?

Featured image via YouTube.


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


She’s a lefty to the bone and lefties are never wrong. It’s no more complicated than that.

She aligns with the narrative. She is a soldier not a crazy conspiracy theorist. She has her role to play. The soldier does not win the war but his/her supports the larger effort.

It is the process not the substance that counts. Substance
a) distracts conservatives (thinkers); and,
b) feeds the useful idiots (MSNBC audience).

Her mission is accomplished. She makes sense if you look at the process. She makes no sense if you look at the substance (which is where she wants you to look).

All the lefty conspiracy theorists adore her.

And BTW when I use the word conspiracy I use it in the legal sense as when two or more people conspire to violate a law.

Yes, others use it to mean that space aliens flew over New Mexico.


1. White privilege.
2. Toxic masculinity.
3. Ratings (that is changing)
4. She is paid to be a whack-job liberal conspiracy theorist.

I think one major contributing factor was that Alex Jones is Alt-Tech, thus a major competitor to network news. There are a lot of political commentary YouTubers whose numbers match up well with CNN and MSNBC.

A YouTuber who gets 100,000 views for a twenty minute video hurts the networks.

    Where Maddow’s “conspiracy theories” have been 100% wrong, Alex Jones’ have had some success: he accurately predicted that mass media was colluding with political parties and Government officials to affect the election, and that crazy prediction was certainly proven correct!

    He also said that Obama was funding ISIS, and he was right again; there are probably many more. As far as I can tell, he’s been de-personed & de-platformed because he was too accurate, which reflects badly on the #FakeNewsMedia like MSNBC!

4th armored div | April 1, 2019 at 11:01 am

i do not pay attention to her –
BUT every time i hear that name i think about –
The Basics of Mad Cow Disease

Speaking of conspiracy theories, Yediot and the NYT published an “expose” of a supposed network of facebook and twitter bots working for Netanyahu. But most of the named “fake” accounts have come forward and said they don’t feel like bots. Oops.

    Arminius in reply to Milhouse. | April 1, 2019 at 4:56 pm

    Who have thunk?

    Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | April 2, 2019 at 9:35 am

    Commentary by Dror Eydar:

    The basic assumption underlying the big lie reported on Monday as “investigative journalism” is that no reasonable person could possibly vote for Likud or the Right. For some parts of the Israeli Left, the other side doesn’t have people with independent, well-thought-out worldviews, but rather slaves, or in the words of the report: “bots.” In other words, robots operated by others.

    In 1988, the Likud under Yitzhak Shamir won the election. The next day, Shelly Yachimovich, then a broadcaster for Israel Radio, interviewed a mayor from one of the towns in southern Israel. The (Labor) Alignment, she said, invested so much money in them – why had they voted for the Likud? There was a long silence, after which the interviewee spat out, “Ma’am, we have a worldview of our own.” Tell that to the bots.

    Read the rest

Comanche Voter | April 1, 2019 at 12:03 pm

Her salary at MSNBC is $7 million a year–and her current net worth is supposedly $20 million. Getting paid $7MM a year for driving a manure wagon delivering a load of BS is a great gig. And in just two year’s time, she’s tripled her net worth.

Don’t think that pile of cash will continue to grow at that rate, since the market for her “load” should diminish.

Is it possible that some (the majority?) just tune in to her show for the sheer amusement of watching her semi-sane antics? I have seen some clips and frankly it does seem rather humorous.

inspectorudy | April 1, 2019 at 12:21 pm

What the survival of people like Maddow shows us is that, like religious faith, you can be told things that you WANT to believe and nothing will deter you from that belief. Most of her audience are Trump haters and they want him gone no matter the facts. Her nightly diatribe against him is like a sermon to the congregation reinforcing their already held beliefs. In their minds, they will always give the benefit of the doubt to the accusers rather than to the facts.

The best thing that could happen to Maddow is for no one to ever pay attention to or talk about her ever again. Coincidentally, that’s also good for all thinking, rational adults with IQs north of room temperature.

SeekingRationalThought | April 1, 2019 at 8:50 pm

They are identical and I, for one, treat them identically. I laugh at them.

If Barr HAD made it up, then mueller and his cohorts would have been screaming to high heaven about the lies and deceit of Barr in his summary.
Instead he’s helping Barr put together the report for the idiots in Congress. But the left is toooooo stoopid to see it. Are you really surprised? These same folks also think she guevara is intelligent. Never should have closed down the asylums, now they’re running loose and some even have prime time cable shows.

She feeds the flying space monkeys of the left with democrat psychopablum. She is one of the zookeepers.

notamemberofanyorganizedpolicital | April 3, 2019 at 6:54 pm

Following Collusion Faceplant, Cryin’ Rachel Maddow’s Ratings Fall to Lowest Weekly Tally In a Year
—Ace of Spades