Yes, I've been amazed at how so many people have been falling for this kind of crap over the past few days.
There was one flying around a few days ago saying that Clinton had used a American pejorative for blacks in reference to Muslims, and many were bereft of any critical thinking skills.
The "proof" was a screenshot of the message, carefully positioned so you couldn't see the context of the message: it was an editorial forwarded to Clinton, and she simply asked a staffer to print it. There have been a lot of these -- I guess she prefers to read long messages on paper.
I found the original message on Wikileaks. As I dug into it, I found that it was originally written in Hebrew for publication in Israel, and was voluntarily translated by someone in Australia. It made me wonder: why would an Australian choose that word?
Google Translate to the rescue! I found the original article online and translated it. The word in question literally translates to "Arab rat". It's apparently a Hebrew pejorative, but I don't know how offensive it may be considered to be.
Yesterday, there were alleged screenshots of John Podesta's Outlook account floating around. But, no one bothered to follow the trail back to the origin (8ch), where the originator admitted that he fabricated them with MS Paint.
The moral of this story: don't believe everything you read.
And, if you don't know how to validate the origin of something, then don't post it. Instead, ask for help.
There is one in breaking news that only contains a carefully cut image and it claims an email says that Hillary was funding Isis. Yet even the cut begs to be investigated as misleading. If you read the whole email then it says no such thing. Yet it still sits in breaking news. The email does contain valuable information. But someone made it up to be something it was not. I am in full skeptic mode now.