I think you're stretching for bias on this one Peter, though I can see how you might think it is if you look at it in some peculiar way. MSNBC basically is saying that an informant knowingly provided false information. So, you could call that a 'hoax' or a 'deception' or whatever you like. It does not imply, however, that somehow the government is culpable in that hoax. It was, once again I might add, merely duped by an informant it wanted to believe. They had nothing to do with any 'hoax', however. Is it more correct to say, 'unsubstantiated'? Probably. Personally, I think you're just desperately looking for something that isn't there.