HuffPo Yanks Article On Russiagate Hysteria By Award Winning Journalist Joe Lauria – So Here It Is

ZeroPointNow's picture

Award winning journalist and UN correspondent of 25 years, Joe Lauria, penned an outstanding article on the origins of “Russiagate” which he published to the liberal Huffington Post this week.

24 hours later, HuffPo yanked the article – leaving a dead link and a sad message in its place.

Perhaps the insights offered in the article didn’t quite conform to HuffPo’s approved narratives, or maybe it has something to do with Lauria’s new book “How I Lost By Hillary Clinton,” with a forward written by Julian Assange.

Considering Joe Lauria’s tenure as the Wall St. Journal’s UN correspondent of nearly seven years, as well as the Boston Globe’s for six – covering just about every major world crisis over the past quarter century, his unique perspective on the matter merits a read.

Reproduced below for your edification:

The Democratic Money Behind Russia-gate

As Russia-gate continues to buffet the Trump administration, we now know that the “scandal” started with Democrats funding the original dubious allegations of Russian interference, notes Joe Lauria.

By Joe Lauria

The two sources that originated the allegations claiming that Russia meddled in the 2016 election — without providing convincing evidence — were both paid for by the Democratic National Committee, and in one instance also by the Clinton campaign: the Steele dossier and the CrowdStrike analysis of the DNC servers. Think about that for a minute.

Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

We have long known that the DNC did not allow the FBI to examine its computer server for clues about who may have hacked it – or even if it was hacked – and instead turned to CrowdStrike, a private company co-founded by a virulently anti-Putin Russian. Within a day, CrowdStrike blamed Russia on dubious evidence.

And, it has now been disclosed that the Clinton campaign and the DNC paid for opposition research memos written by former British MI6 intelligence agent Christopher Steele using hearsay accusations from anonymous Russian sources to claim that the Russian government was blackmailing and bribing Donald Trump in a scheme that presupposed that Russian President Vladimir Putin foresaw Trump’s presidency years ago when no one else did.

Since then, the U.S. intelligence community has struggled to corroborate Steele’s allegations, but those suspicions still colored the thinking of President Obama’s intelligence chiefs who, according to Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, “hand-picked” the analysts who produced the Jan. 6 “assessment” claiming that Russia interfered in the U.S. election.

In other words, possibly all of the Russia-gate allegations, which have been taken on faith by Democratic partisans and members of the anti-Trump Resistance, trace back to claims paid for or generated by Democrats.

If for a moment one could remove the sometimes justified hatred that many people feel toward Trump, it would be impossible to avoid the impression that the scandal may have been cooked up by the DNC and the Clinton camp in league with Obama’s intelligence chiefs to serve political and geopolitical aims.

Absent new evidence based on forensic or documentary proof, we could be looking at a partisan concoction devised in the midst of a bitter general election campaign, a manufactured “scandal” that also has fueled a dangerous New Cold War against Russia; a case of a dirty political “oppo” serving American ruling interests in reestablishing the dominance over Russia that they enjoyed in the 1990s, as well as feeding the voracious budgetary appetite of the Military-Industrial Complex.

Though lacking independent evidence of the core Russia-gate allegations, the “scandal” continues to expand into wild exaggerations about the impact of a tiny number of social media pages suspected of having links to Russia but that apparently carried very few specific campaign messages. (Some pages reportedly were devoted to photos of puppies.)

‘Cash for Trash’

Based on what is now known, Wall Street buccaneer Paul Singer paid for GPS Fusion, a Washington-based research firm, to do opposition research on Trump during the Republican primaries, but dropped the effort in May 2016 when it became clear Trump would be the GOP nominee. GPS Fusion has strongly denied that it hired Steele for this work or that the research had anything to do with Russia.

Couple walking along the Kremlin, Dec. 7, 2016. (Photo by Robert Parry)

Then, in April 2016 the DNC and the Clinton campaign paid its Washington lawyer Marc Elias to hire Fusion GPS to unearth dirt connecting Trump to Russia. This was three months before the DNC blamed Russia for hacking its computers and supposedly giving its stolen emails to WikiLeaks to help Trump win the election.

“The Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee retained Fusion GPS to research any possible connections between Mr. Trump, his businesses, his campaign team and Russia, court filings revealed this week,” The New York Times reported on Friday night.

So, linking Trump to Moscow as a way to bring Russia into the election story was the Democrats’ aim from the start.

Fusion GPS then hired ex-MI6 intelligence agent Steele, it says for the first time, to dig up that dirt in Russia for the Democrats. Steele produced classic opposition research, not an intelligence assessment or conclusion, although it was written in a style and formatted to look like one.

It’s important to realize that Steele was no longer working for an official intelligence agency, which would have imposed strict standards on his work and possibly disciplined him for injecting false information into the government’s decision-making. Instead, he was working for a political party and a presidential candidate looking for dirt that would hurt their opponent, what the Clintons used to call “cash for trash” when they were the targets.

Had Steele been doing legitimate intelligence work for his government, he would have taken a far different approach. Intelligence professionals are not supposed to just give their bosses what their bosses want to hear. So, Steele would have verified his information. And it would have gone through a process of further verification by other intelligence analysts in his and perhaps other intelligence agencies. For instance, in the U.S., a National Intelligence Estimate requires vetting by all 17 intelligence agencies and incorporates dissenting opinions.

Instead Steele was producing a piece of purely political research and had different motivations. The first might well have been money, as he was being paid specifically for this project, not as part of his work on a government salary presumably serving all of society. Secondly, to continue being paid for each subsequent memo that he produced he would have been incentivized to please his clients or at least give them enough so they would come back for more.

Dubious Stuff

Opposition research is about getting dirt to be used in a mud-slinging political campaign, in which wild charges against candidates are the norm. This “oppo” is full of unvetted rumor and innuendo with enough facts mixed in to make it seem credible. There was so much dubious stuff in Steele’s memos that the FBI was unable to confirm its most salacious allegations and apparently refuted several key points.

Director of National Intelligence James Clapper (right) talks with President Barack Obama in the Oval Office, with John Brennan and other national security aides present. (Photo credit: Office of Director of National Intelligence)

Perhaps more significantly, the corporate news media, which was largely partial to Clinton, did not report the fantastic allegations after people close to the Clinton campaign began circulating the lurid stories before the election with the hope that the material would pop up in the news. To their credit, established media outlets recognized this as ammunition against a political opponent, not a serious document.

Despite this circumspection, the Steele dossier was shared with the FBI at some point in the summer of 2016 and apparently became the basis for the FBI to seek Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act warrants against members of Trump’s campaign. More alarmingly, it may have formed the basis for much of the Jan. 6 intelligence “assessment” by those “hand-picked” analysts from three U.S. intelligence agencies – the CIA, the FBI and the NSA – not all 17 agencies that Hillary Clinton continues to insist were involved. (Obama’s intelligence chiefs, DNI Clapper and CIA Director John Brennan, publicly admitted that only three agencies took part and The New York Times printed a correction saying so.)

If in fact the Steele memos were a primary basis for the Russia collusion allegations against Trump, then there may be no credible evidence at all. It could be that because the three agencies knew the dossier was dodgy that there was no substantive proof in the Jan. 6 “assessment.” Even so, a summary of the Steele allegations were included in a secret appendix that then-FBI Director James Comey described to then-President-elect Trump just two weeks before his inauguration.

Five days later, after the fact of Comey’s briefing was leaked to the press, the Steele dossier was published in fullby the sensationalist website BuzzFeed behind the excuse that the allegations’ inclusion in the classified annex of a U.S. intelligence report justified the dossier’s publication regardless of doubts about its accuracy.

Russian Fingerprints

The other source of blame about Russian meddling came from the private company CrowdStrike because the DNC blocked the FBI from examining its server after a suspected hack. Within a day, CrowdStrike claimed to find Russian “fingerprints” in the metadata of a DNC opposition research document, which had been revealed by an Internet site called DCLeaks, showing Cyrillic letters and the name of the first Soviet intelligence chief. That supposedly implicated Russia.

Dmitri Alperovitch, the Co-Founder and Chief Technology Officer of CrowdStrike Inc., leading its Intelligence, Technology and CrowdStrike Labs teams.

CrowdStrike also claimed that the alleged Russian intelligence operation was extremely sophisticated and skilled in concealing its external penetration of the server. But CrowdStrike’s conclusion about Russian “fingerprints” resulted from clues that would have been left behind by extremely sloppy hackers or inserted intentionally to implicate the Russians.

CrowdStrike’s credibility was further undermined when Voice of America reported on March 23, 2017, that the same software the company says it used to blame Russia for the hack wrongly concluded that Moscow also had hacked Ukrainian government howitzers on the battlefield in eastern Ukraine.

“An influential British think tank and Ukraine’s military are disputing a report that the U.S. cyber-security firm CrowdStrike has used to buttress its claims of Russian hacking in the presidential election,” VOA reported. Dimitri Alperovitch, a CrowdStrike co-founder, is also a senior fellow at the anti-Russian Atlantic Council think tank in Washington.

More speculation about the alleged election hack was raised with WikiLeaks’ Vault 7 release, which revealed that the CIA is not beyond covering up its own hacks by leaving clues implicating others. Plus, there’s the fact that WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange has declared again and again that WikiLeaks did not get the Democratic emails from the Russians. Buttressing Assange’s denials of a Russian role, WikiLeaks associate Craig Murray, a former British ambassador to Uzbekistan, said he met a person connected to the leak during a trip to Washington last year.

And, William Binney, maybe the best mathematician to ever work at the National Security Agency, and former CIA analyst Ray McGovern have published a technical analysis of one set of Democratic email metadata showing that a transatlantic “hack” would have been impossible and that the evidence points to a likely leak by a disgruntled Democratic insider. Binney has further stated that if it were a “hack,” the NSA would have been able to detect it and make the evidence known.

Fueling Neo-McCarthyism

Despite these doubts, which the U.S. mainstream media has largely ignored, Russia-gate has grown into something much more than an election story. It has unleashed a neo-McCarthyite attack on Americans who are accused of being dupes of Russia if they dare question the evidence of the Kremlin’s guilt.

The Washington Post building in downtown Washington, D.C. (Photo credit: Washington Post)

Just weeks after last November’s election, The Washington Post published a front-page story touting a blacklist from an anonymous group, called PropOrNot, that alleged that 200 news sites, including and other leading independent news sources, were either willful Russian propagandists or “useful idiots.”

Last week, a new list emerged with the names of over 2,000 people, mostly Westerners, who have appeared on RT, the Russian government-financed English-language news channel. The list was part of a report entitled, “The Kremlin’s Platform for ‘Useful Idiots’ in the West,” put out by an outfit called European Values, with a long list of European funders.

Included on the list of “useful idiots” absurdly are CIA-friendly Washington Post columnist David Ignatius; David Brock, Hillary Clinton’s opposition research chief; and U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres.

The report stated: “Many people in Europe and the US, including politicians and other persons of influence, continue to exhibit troubling naïveté about RT’s political agenda, buying into the network’s marketing ploy that it is simply an outlet for independent voices marginalised by the mainstream Western press. These ‘useful idiots’ remain oblivious to RT’s intentions and boost its legitimacy by granting interviews on its shows and newscasts.”

The intent of these lists is clear: to shut down dissenting voices who question Western foreign policy and who are usually excluded from Western corporate media. RT is often willing to provide a platform for a wider range of viewpoints, both from the left and right. American ruling interests fend off critical viewpoints by first suppressing them in corporate media and now condemning them as propaganda when they emerge on RT.

Geopolitical Risks

More ominously, the anti-Russia mania has increased chances of direct conflict between the two nuclear superpowers. The Russia-bashing rhetoric not only served the Clinton campaign, though ultimately to ill effect, but it has pushed a longstanding U.S.-led geopolitical agenda to regain control over Russia, an advantage that the U.S. enjoyed during the Yeltsin years in the 1990s.

Time magazine cover recounting how the U.S. enabled Boris Yeltsin’s reelection as Russian president in 1996.

After the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, Wall Street rushed in behind Boris Yeltsin and Russian oligarchs to asset strip virtually the entire country, impoverishing the population. Amid widespread accounts of this grotesque corruption, Washington intervened in Russian politics to help get Yeltsin re-elected in 1996. The political rise of Vladimir Putin after Yeltsin resigned on New Year’s Eve 1999 reversed this course, restoring Russian sovereignty over its economy and politics.

That inflamed Hillary Clinton and other American hawks whose desire was to install another Yeltsin-like figure and resume U.S. exploitation of Russia’s vast natural and financial resources. To advance that cause, U.S. presidents have supported the eastward expansion of NATO and have deployed 30,000 troops on Russia’s border.

In 2014, the Obama administration helped orchestrate a coup that toppled the elected government of Ukraine and installed a fiercely anti-Russian regime. The U.S. also undertook the risky policy of aiding jihadists to overthrow a secular Russian ally in Syria. The consequences have brought the world closer to nuclear annihilation than at any time since the Cuban missile crisis in 1962.

In this context, the Democratic Party-led Russia-gate offensive was intended not only to explain away Clinton’s defeat but to stop Trump — possibly via impeachment or by inflicting severe political damage — because he had talked, insincerely it is turning out, about detente with Russia. That did not fit in well with the plan at all.

Joe Lauria is a veteran foreign-affairs journalist. He has written for the Boston Globe, the Sunday Times of London and the Wall Street Journal among other newspapers. He is the author of How I Lost By Hillary Clinton published by OR Books in June 2017. He can be reached at and followed on Twitter at @unjoe.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
SummerSausage's picture

Everything this guy writes about was revealed weeks ago on ZeroHedge and websites that are not under the thumb of the leftwing zelots.

That Huffpo even now does not want this information known to the leftwing useful idiots tells you all you need to know about the forces trying to maintain their corrupt control of our country.

Dickweed Wang's picture

I couldn't find fault with anything the guy says in this piece.  The fact that a liberal/establishment web site pulled the thing down almost instantly should tell everyone everything they need to know about its veracity.

MrSteve's picture

The real collusion is the LEFT media with the DNC/Clinton Mafia trying to throw the Presidential election to Clinton. The press is hiding behind the First Amendment (patriotism being the last refuge of a scoundrel) while claiming to be Champions of Liberty. If only some US prosecutor or states attorney general would step up to a Profile in Courage and indict a newspaper for misdemeanor election fraud- undeclared support of an in-kind donation- we might see some genuine daylight. Any one with the authority to bring charges interested? A citizen's arrest isn't making it.

JBPeebles's picture

"This was three months before the DNC blamed Russia for hacking its computers and supposedly giving its stolen emails to WikiLeaks to help Trump win the election."

Timing is everything. The article misses some key dates. An allegation of Russian ties to Trump was made by Hillary Clinton in her debate speech in mid-October. Nothing was made about Trump/Russia until that time, at least publicly.

The article confuses Russian hacking (criminals operating independently) with Russian government hacking. The uproar about Russian hacking came after the election not before it. [Note : Look at articles under the headline "Russian hacking." It's presumed Russian hacking means Russian government hacking but this isn't the case. Russian hacking means hackers who exist in Russia, acting independently of the government yet the presumption is that all Russia-based hacking is governmental.]

A lot of us were watching Obama in the aftermath of the election and weren't surprised at all by the use of anti-Trump propaganda after Trump's victory. It was after all Obama's legacy to spike the incoming Trump administration with leakers subsequent to Obama's last act to open access to NSA spying data to 17 intelligence agencies--a move that allowed Obama loyalists access to all communications of all Americans.

The peak of distrust hit when the Alt Media wondered if Trump tower had been spied upon and just how much support there'd been from the Obama administration during the campaign. These allegations--of Trump tower recording were largely disproved, though it's possible there hadn't been enough to get Trump even if spying had occured.

Cynicism in regard to the media narrative is a healthy thing. Only the corporate media would be surprised to mention that Trump-Russian ties were unsubstantiated all along.

My theory is that the media buy people in New York who advised HRC to bring Russia up late in the campaign were terrified, as Brazille says she was too, by the murder of Seth Rich. Once it was clear that Russia has failed, they persisted in the Russia-Trump link myth-making regardless of the facts. So of course the corporate media were scared to expose that the whole Russian thing had been made up, so they persisted with it. A second Cold War is the result. Now maybe if Americans would  use their ability to think critically and distrust false narratives in the MSM based on anti-Trump bias, then we might avoid war with Iran.

ChaoKrungThep's picture

Small clarification: Hacking is the modification of computer code (hopefully to improve it). Cracking is breaking into computer systems, usually for nefarious purposes. The disntinction between civilian or govt Russian crackers is irrelevant, since the CIA & NSA can easily cover their tracks completely, ie no trace of anything, or plant false clues pointing to other players. A "good" crack - data copied or inserted, log contents and time stamps altered - is invisible and the Russians certainly are capable of that, so to find their "fingerprints" inside a DNC server in ludicrous. The "discovery" of anything is a sloppy frame up, akin to the "expert" safe cracker leaving behind his business card. 

MrSteve's picture

The murder of Seth Rich and this case are linked....

AN investigative journalist from Malta who exposed her island nation’s links to offshore tax havens through the leaked Panama Papers has died after a powerful bomb explosion.

Daphne Caruana Galizia, Malta’s best-known investigative journalist, was killed when a bomb blew up her car on the small Mediterranean island.

Caruana Galizia, 53, ran a hugely popular blog in which she relentlessly highlighted cases of alleged high-level corruption targeting politicians from across party lines.

“There are crooks everywhere you look now. The situation is desperate,” she wrote in a blog published on her site just half an hour before an explosion tore into her car on Monday.

Locals said Caruana Galizia had just left her house and was on a road near the village of Bidnija in northern Malta when the bomb detonated, sending her car flying into an adjacent field.

ChaoKrungThep's picture

Sorry, but she knew the situation and didn't take precautions? Random routes, different cars, different homes? Fatal mistake.

Anunnaki's picture

I read Lauria's book. It quotes from the DNC and Wikileaks emails. All the private promises public bullshit of Hellary's abortion of a campaign. Good read. I love when elitists don't get their way. But that makes me a Putin Lover

theprofromdover's picture

I don't know why Trump people don't just buy the front page of all these print and paper outlets, and use a full page ad as the expose.

These people have no honor or morals, of course they'll take the money.

ErostheDog's picture

this all underscores my realization that the whole republican/democrat thing is just a charade. They are all the same with different titles working for the same establishment. There is no 2 party system, no Red v. Blue. There is only them v. us and we better wake up to that fact soon. 

ChaoKrungThep's picture

How old are you? Five or six? US politics has been this way this the beginning. Where have you been?

SummerSausage's picture

We did. That's why we voted for Trump.

ironmace's picture

Great stuff, but here he is preaching to the choir.

This needs to get out to Johnny Punchclock and Sally Housecoat.


Anunnaki's picture

Is Dimitry Alperovitch a Joo?

alexcojones's picture

Brilliant ZPN - Thanks Joe Lauria.

Fuck You Huff Puff Compost

gdpetti's picture

Dems setting up a fake front to blame others for their actions??? Who does that sound like? Who are some of their biggest supporters??? There is one group that does this all the time. See if you recognize the parallels in this article:

Towards the end of my most recent book,  Being in Time - a Post Political Manifesto, I elaborate on Jewish controlled opposition strategies.  I contend that when Jews detect that that something associated with them has become problematic they quickly form satellite dissent movements: they are first to oppose themselves. When Capitalism was identified as a Jewish problem, Marx was first to offer a coherent alternative. Once Palestine emerged as an acknowledged Jewish problem, a Jewish solidarity industry (JVP, IJAN,  Mondoweiss, IJV) formed to dominate the opposition discourse on Israel. The intellectual debate on Zio-con immoral interventionist wars has been reduced into an internal Jewish debate between Sam Harris and Noam Chomsky. I expect soon we’ll see Jews leading the fight against sexual predatory behaviour in Hollywood and beyond. None of this is necessarily conspiratorial. It is normal for people to be embarrassed by members of their tribe who are associated with bad and criminal behaviour.

chondram's picture


With the cozy Uranium One deal Clinton (all) made with Russia and were paid $145 million, why did Obama/Clinton (all) turn on Russia? 

What happened? 

Why bite the hand that feeds you? Did Putin turn on them first? When and Why?

ZeroPointNow's picture

I think the 2014 (?) sanctions over Crimea were kabuki theater to show the EU that the Obama admin was on their side. In reality, they were playing both sides. 

If you look at the supposed "Russian troll farm" ads during the 2016 election, most of them were for liberal activist causes (BLM and whatnot) which would have helped Hillary. The stupid Pokemon Go thing sent people to sites of police brutality and encouraged people to name their Pokemon after dead black kids killed by cops. 

Russia also helped with the Fusion GPS dossier Clinton paid for, at the highest levels. 

I think Russia was very excited about a Hillary win. 

Anunnaki's picture

Is it true that nearly half of the $100k Farcebook political ads were pro Hillary taken out by Liberal Russian oligarchs?

humptyhump's picture

"Intelligence professionals are not supposed to just give their bosses what their bosses want to hear."


Nonsense. That is exactly what they are supposed to do.

ChaoKrungThep's picture

Did you miss the word "professionals"? Sycophants tell the boss what he wants to hear. A Pro tells what he has. Or else it's useless.

Mike Masr's picture

The ZeroHedge site is freezing. Are hackers attacking this site?

Other sites are working fine.

Mike Masr's picture

Excellent story. Blows the lid off all this Russia did it bullshit!

trailer park boys's picture

I printed this article by Joe Lauria as it's the best summation of the main events up to now. It's not surprising that HuffPo would bury the story - a big part of the establishment mainstream press (and HuffPo is the online version of M$M) is to simply omit stories that question the accepted narrative. It's interesting that Lauria's article was published on Huffington Post. Was it published anywhere else? Any newspaper - the New York Times? USA Today? Even his old employers, the Boston Globe and Wall Street Journal? Was it 'Breaking News' on the ABC, CBS, NBC or PBS evening news? 60 Minutes? The Sunday morning news shows? Had it not been picked up by Zerohedge after being buried by HuffPo, how many people would be aware of this story? And now, Facebook, Twitter and Google - internet providers - at the prodding of the US government, want to 'clean up' the 'fake news' - the RTs, Zerohedges, Breitbarts and Consortiumnews of the World Wide Web - to censor it - so they can't meddle with the establishment media outlets' official narrative anymore. It's proven dangerous allowing the Deplorables access to anything that may make them question our daily dose of mainstream propaganda.'s picture

The left will have a lot to answer for. The media won't be the causative factor, but the ballot box will.

Honest Sam's picture

What we think we know, what is, and what will be, or what was, is not. 

What we think we do not know is as a flea fart in a high wind is to a Cat 10 hurricane.

Our rulers live in a different world than those of us they purport to govern.  They have likely descended from aliens, extraterroristrials. 


DjangoCat's picture

You give them too much credit.  These are criminal slime balls out ensure mega bucks for themselves and debt slavery for the rest of us. Criminal purveyors of addictive drugs and murderous weapons.  We need to expose them and get them off our backs.  Outin has made excellent progress in Russia.  We need to understand the depth of their depravity.


Karl Marxist's picture

The bought and paid for media has done a great job burying this but the fact Trump himself and an agent of Israel. The events in Saudi Arabia, the vast military drills in the mid east by several countries including Egypt, Israel, Turkey and the fact Trump, first days in office, sold a few billion in arms to Saudi Arabia and will again or already has into the billions. Israel wants war with Iran, so Trump wants war with Iran. Abdolutely no US citizen should sign up for this treasonous act. So the Dems did their Russia BS. Now it's used to bury the real story -- Agent Trump will go to war with Iran.

shovelhead's picture


That arms deal was Obama.

Solio's picture

If 9/11 was a neutron bomb or a directed energy weapon what in the world did some of the 200 jumpers witness that their coworkers esperienced as they drew their last breath. Did they see them turn to dust, like the falling beams, in front of them, or end up like the tree burning in Santa Rosa?

Grandad Grumps's picture

Wasn't this all about getting the US into a shooting war with Russia? Hillary and all of her doubles have been pushing it. (Is the original Hillary still alive and where is she? He has to be a fat, old, wrinkled and smelly (she supposedly doesn't bathe) hag by now. None of the doubles really look like her.

moneybots's picture

Huffington Post dropped the story as it doesn't want to be caught telling the truth.

JoseyWalesTheOutlaw's picture

If in fact the bank records show that the MSM was paid to spin the Russia Deal then how will they recover from that. I will wait until a I see a Judge give them them approval to share those names that were paid. The possible financial fallout from ever anchor being esposed as being paid to come out each night and bash Trump would be great. Then again we're talking about a country that fuking elected Obama twice. 

DjangoCat's picture

If the MSM are shown to have been paid, how will anyone know?  They will certainly not report that inconvient truth, just like this story.

What amazes me is the incompetence being shown.  How did the Joe Lauria story get past the Hffpo editor and out into the world?  Inside job, perhaps.


Karl Marxist's picture

We don't know if Obama was actually elected for a second term. Media never delved into voter fraud since God knows when.

DjangoCat's picture

Read Votescam.  Gross election fraud going back to the late 60's.


chestergimli's picture

Pressure from above and pressure from below. This Russiagate fiasco may have upset a few US citizens at first. But I don’t think the majority of them believe it. The Jews in charge at the top spin their news for the Jews at the bottom and together they make a scene. The majority of US citizens in the middle after viewing all of the silly hysteria just shrug it off. The Khazarian Talmudist crypto Jews among us hype the Russiagate up but I think that US citizens are getting wise.

Chupacabra-322's picture

"The receptivity of the masses is very limited, their intelligence is small, but their power of forgetting is enormous. In consequence of these facts, all effective propaganda must be limited to a very few points and must harp on these in slogans until the last member of the public understands what you want him to understand by your slogan.”
? Adolf Hitler

shovelhead's picture

 Why I hate slogans.

Reducing complex issues into spoon fed pablum substituted for thought.

Cuz thinkin iz hard. It's bumpy and messy and never really comes out nicely wrapped up with pretty little bows on top.

In general, it's a real pain in the ass.

spanish inquisition's picture

The story is getting traction and the those behind the curtain are getting nervous. Time to step up rhetoric against NK or Iran, right out of the Brookings playbook. Edit: Or clean house with weights, nail guns etc.

libertyanyday's picture

shit has gone sideways.............who do you trust, beieve, listen to??  I wish shtf tomorrow

RubyPetunia's picture

Thank God for ZeroHedge.

MasterPo's picture

Suggestion :

Huffington Post should change its name to Huffington Compost, to reflect their editorial policy of only publishing steaming piles of crap...

(Which is why this excellent article didn't make the cut.) 

Anunnaki's picture

I call it Kardashian Post b/c there is usally one of that idiot crew taking off their tops on the sidebar NSFW stories

messystateofaffairs's picture

I'm bored with Russiagate now, time for aliengate and/or yellowstoneearthquakegate to keep my little goyish mind ticking over.

GoyimUprising's picture

They can't even pull off low budget productions how you think they gonna fake aliens or earthquakes?

Eyes Opened's picture

Well... Kimmy did the earthquake thingy...  :-)

FIAT CON's picture

A great piece!


OutaTime43's picture

Bring back the fairness doctrine and apply it to online journalists.