Sorry, Russia-Gaters: WikiLeaks Got the DNC Emails From Insider, Not Russia


The following is Ray McGovern’s commetary on this important article.

Thinking back, President Barack Obama dropped a huge hint two days before he left office, using his last press conference to point out that the “conclusions of the intelligence community” regarding how WikiLeaks received the DNC emails were “inconclusive.”  The nerve!  Daring to say that just 13 days after the U.S. intelligence Gang of Four briefed Obama up and down on their evidence-free “assessment” that WikiLeaks got the DNC emails via a Russian hack.

This was one time Obama summoned the courage to face down James (the-Russians-are-almost-genetically-driven-to-deceive) Clapper and other intelligence chiefs.  After all, Obama is a lawyer.  He “does evidence.”  In contrast, ex-CIA Director John Brennan, told Congress that he does not “do evidence.”

Back in the day, the intelligence community “did evidence.”  As soon as the evidence-impoverished “Intelligence Community Assessment” was published on January 6, 2017, members of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS) smelled a rat.  That same day, former NSA Technical Director William Binney and Ray published “The Dubious Case on Russian Hacking.”

Then came “The Gaping Holes of Russia-gate,” and in July 2017 VIPs published their key forensic-based study “Intel Vets Challenge ‘Russian Hack’ Evidence,” followed by “More Holes in the Russia-gate Narrative”, by Binney and Ray.

Even Michael Cohen admitted yesterday that he had no “direct evidence that Mr. Trump or his campaign colluded with Russia.” But, he added, “I have my suspicions.”  We intelligence analysts, back in the day, did not “do suspicions.”

There are 1,001 other reasons to impeach President Donald Trump, if Nancy Pelosi had the courage.  But politics, not the Constitution, reigns supreme in the people’s House to which Founders bestowed an orderly political process to get rid of such a president.  Shame on them all.

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, a publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. His 27-year career as a CIA analyst includes serving as Chief of the Soviet Foreign Policy Branch and preparer/briefer of the President’s Daily Brief. He is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

147 thoughts on “Sorry, Russia-Gaters: WikiLeaks Got the DNC Emails From Insider, Not Russia”

  1. Mr. McGovern, what is the strongest case for an insider rather than an outsider leak? Is the Seth Rich implication made by Julian Assange credible?

    1. I keep asking Sen. Sanders to never walk alone, another lone “robber” may not take anything but his life. Up is down. War is peace.

      1. Bernie’s safe. He’s made it clear to them that he’ll go along when it’s needed: support for Clinton after she stole the primary, support for the Russian hacking narrative, support for the current Venezuela narrative, etc.

        1. You must NOT be a vocal Sanders supporter. I get more grief from neoliberal Democrats, Reagan Democrats, third-way Democrats, establishment and DNC Democrats than Republicans.

          You may recall that in the last primary the establishment preferred to lose to tRump than win with Sanders… with all the cheating and then paying people to online attack (Correct the Record).

          In case you forgot, Sen. Sanders opposed the Iraq war voting against it and the Patriot Act nonsense. Now with Venezuela, he is working to stall their regime change with an election!

          It’s not easy being the only Senator on the left growing the Progressive Caucus into a powerful tool of the people. Sorry, Sanders is not perfect. Who you gonna vote for… tRump? Harris? Unicorns?

          1. ” Now with Venezuela, he is working to stall their regime change with an election!”

            They had one. The oppos boycotted cuz they couldn’t win. Maduro won fairly.

            No more elections are needed, despite what Seppostanis may think or want.

          2. I agree with the first two statements. As for the third comment, what are you going to say when the American MIC is marching thru Venezuela?

            The Venezuelan constitution allows snap elections… now would be the time to act. Elections beat invasions … every time.

          3. You’re not seriously suggesting that Venezuela should have a new election in order to appease a foreign governments attempt to stage a coup and install a “leader” who never ran for the office of president, are you?

            “President Maduro was re-elected on May 20, 2018, in response to the opposition demanding an early election. The legitimacy of the election of Maduro is so evident that it must be assumed those who say he is illegitimate are either intentionally false or ignorant. The election was scheduled consistent with the Venezuelan Constitution and in consultation with opposition parties. When it became evident that the opposition could not win the election, they decided, under pressure from the United States, to boycott the election in order to undermine its legitimacy. The facts are 9,389,056 people voted, 46% of eligible voters. Sixteen parties participated in the election with six candidates competing for the presidency.

            The electoral process was observed by more than 150 election observers. This included 14 electoral commissions from eight countries among them the Council of Electoral Experts of Latin America; two technical electoral missions; and 18 journalists from different parts of the world, among others. According to the international observers, “the elections were very transparent and complied with international parameters and national legislation.”

            Venezuela has one of the best electoral systems in the world. Voter fraud is not possible as identification and fingerprints are required for each voter. Voting machines are audited before and immediately after the election. Venezuela does something no other country in the world does — a public, citizen’s audit of a random sample of 53% of voting machines that is televised. All 18 parties signed the audits.

            Maduro won by a wide margin, obtaining 6,248,864 votes, 67.84%; followed by Henri Falcón with 1,927,958, 20.93%; Javier Bertucci with 1,015,895, 10.82%; and Reinaldo Quijada, who obtained 36,246 votes, 0.39% of the total.

            This same voting system has been used in elections that Maduro’s party has lost in governor’s and legislative elections. Venezuela is a real democracy with transparent elections. The United States could learn a good deal about real democracy from Venezuela.”


          4. A Venezuelan election would appease the voters in Venezuela. Do you ignore one-third of Venezuelans who claim voter fraud? Maduro should prove them wrong and help himself in the process.

            I agree with you that they should NOT have to have a new election. But the USA has a repugnant history of war, War and WAR for regime-change. A new election will be MUCH more of a humanitarian move than the endless war of American regime-change. Right?

            Pop-up elections are part of the Venezuelan constitution. Maduro would win yet again… according to every poll.

            Don’t you WANT democracy and peace? Or do you prefer American imperialism because it gives you an anti-American platform?

            Peace at all costs… even if it’s for democratic elections!

          5. Venezuela already has democracy, unfortunately true democracy is difficult to control so the US is attempting yet another coup…thereby disrupting the peace. How did the “peace” work out for Chile under Pinochet?

            Never thought I’d see the day when you would advocate for the CIA and the theft of a foreign country’s natural resources. Not to mention yet another egregious provocation towards China and Russia who have above-board financial interests in the country. Allowing the US to overthrow a government in the name of “peace” could well be the most ridiculous argument I’ve ever heard.

            Who are you, and what have you done with ronbo?

          6. Simmer down and lose the nonsense. Calling for an election is NOT “yet another coup”.

            How is being strategic in preventing another regime change an “advocate for the CIA and the theft of a foreign country’s natural resources”?

            Your hysterics are preventing you from critical thinking.

          7. The notion that a foreign government has the right to control the election process of unwilling sovereign nation is the very definition of a coup.
            You’re calling for Venezuelans to smile, bend over, and take it up the keister in order to prevent a rape. There’s nothing hysterical about my position. It is based on decades of historical fact.

          8. The notion that the USA will stop their regime change process voluntarily is just crazy. The best solution is to triangulate the argument to prevent invasion.

            In this case, the hypocrisy of invading after a valid election is about all that we have. What would you suggest to prevent war?

          9. Methinks your heart is in the right place, but your critical thinking skill has gone awry. You are calling for the victim to acquiesce to the bully, in the hopes that the bully’s aggressive behavior will stop. Your mistake lies in thinking that the US has humanitarian motives, or is concerned about the fairness of Venezuelan elections. The ONLY thing the US wants is to install a puppet dictator and make them bend to the will of Bolton and his ilk. They won’t stop until they get what they want. Any reelection process that has Maduro as the winner will be served up to the US and the world as proof-positive that Maduro is a dictator who rigged an election. The US does NOT have enough support from nations throughout the world to pull off a war in Venezuela. Venezuela is well aware of what happened in Libya will not go willingly.

            Your idea would be swell if it had any chance of producing the outcome for which you hope, but you are completely underestimating the malevolence of the US lust for power and control.

          10. figure his heart is in the right place as much as a serial rapists heart is in the right place.

          11. So you DON’T want to stop the rape? Are you the pervert who watches the rape to get pleasure? Why are you supporting the regime change? I don’t see your plans to stop regime change… telling!

          12. Neither zonmoy or I are promoting regime change. The opposite is true. There is nothing and no one anywhere promoting your plan, not by those who want regime change or by those who want to prevent it. We disagree that your idea has merit. Don’t take it personally, and don’t attribute motives to those who are basically on your side.

            You seem to feel that war is inevitable unless the duly elected government of Venezuela bends over backwards to appease a belligerent foreign country. I do not. Therefore, I am of the opinion that it would be foolish to capitulate to the US not only on principle; but to avoid the appearance and potential legal quagmire that might arise from conceding that the US has any rights whatsoever in the matters of a peaceful sovereign nation

          13. You forget that the front-runner candidate in the Democratic party is in support of defusing the situation with elections. Remember his support of medicare-for-all, a living wage, expanded public education, organizing the progressive caucus, etc? He knows a thing or two about triangulating past the DNC/RNC.

            By doing noting, you seem to have joined the do-nothing Democrats. The Venezuelan Constitutions allows for snap elections and a third of their populace is calling for their elections.

            We can lead a horse to water; but, we can’t make him drink. Encourage positive actions. Why oppose them?

          14. What does a “front-runner candidate in the Democratic party” have to do with the situation happening now? Are you speaking about Sanders?


            Another point, why are you accusing me personally of doing nothing. You have no idea what I do or don’t do. WTF is wrong with you?

            Lastly, I disagree with your plan with your plan for Venezuela to surrender to the US in any manner shape of form. I defy you to produce anyone other than you that thinks it’s a “positive action.”

          15. I replied to your comment, “There is nothing and no one anywhere promoting your plan, not by those who want regime change or by those who want to prevent it.” hence the front runner comment.

            I had no idea that you are pro-war/regime change with the do-nothing Democrats and Republicans. You now even self-identify with them!?!

            How is encouraging Maduro and counseling him to have an election that may preempt US regime-change, the same as your nutty, “plan for Venezuela to surrender to the US in any manner shape of form,”? I’m certain that you understand that all elections at this point would require international observation and confirmation… listen to Mod Knapp.

            Working to prevent war and regime change NOW is more important than ever… even if the chances are small.

          16. I am not pro-war, and your accusation that I am is completely unhinged. As ridiculous as I think your idea is; I do not and will not attack you unjustly. I’ve already explained my position to you, but you refuse to acknowledge my point and repeat the same questions. Perhaps you don’t realize that Venezuelan elections are amongst the most democratic and transparent in the world.


            How did initial capitulation to the US to prevent a US invasion of their countries work out for Iraq and Libya? Your theory of an unnecessary election would make an invasion more likely.


          17. I have met the extremist left-wing… and when one nearly third of the Venezuelan populace are calling for elections the extremists claim that counseling Venezuela to have elections is “raping” them!?!


            Your medium link is about “military interventionism… not elections.

            The Pilger link is about the imperialistic rush to war… not elections!

            Respond to MY words, not the people/actions that I oppose.

          18. Bernie, he supports our empires raping of other nations and even worse crimes of our empire. he is just as bad as any other democrip or rebloodican far as I am concerned.

          19. Advocating for elections and voting is now… “raping”?

            I’ll get the smelling salts for your fainting couch!

          20. pushing selections to install our puppet king with rigged selections by our empire is definitely raping a nation that our empire is doing that too.

          21. I’m the one against USA regime change. I support Venezuela’s elections and keeping them 100% Venezuelan.

            Doing nothing is exactly what neocons want you to do. It allows them to keep inching the weapons closer.

          22. ronbo, we are against the raping of Venezuela and every other nation our empire invades and rapes.

          23. Suggesting elections is “raping”!?!

            Do calls of new elections from one out of every three Venezuelans mean they are raping themselves?

            Zonmoy’s emotional liability is obvious. “Raping” is an election! Elections are rape! Call the newspapers, I’m raped about 2 times a year! Help?

          24. Overthrowing elections and installing a puppet dictator is “raping.” That is what you are advocating.

          25. Another election is not “Overthrowing”. Here in the USA, we have elections about twice a year.

            Your plan? Do-nothing, allow USA neocon regime change?

            Your plan seem to play into the neocons hands; they want a rape.

            Let’s work to prevent it. Don’t go-along encouraging regime change.

          26. Repeating more regime-change propaganda?

            We have no right to change their elections. But they do have the right to elections.

          27. forcing our empires pick of their leader including of course our thugs there that will be raping and brutalizing the people to enforce our empires pick will be raping said nation. our empire will either make sure that that selection will be rigged to pick our empires choices or if failing that our empire will invade or arm our thugs to install them in power over the people. and yes forcing our rulers on another peoples nation is the equivilent of raping said nation.

          28. Come up for air. Are you talking to me?

            I’m the one in opposition to USA Regime Change.

          29. Is there a bell in your bell tower?

            I’m against regime change. The Venezuelan elections should be 100% Venezuelan.

          30. funny, your supporting our empire forcing venezuala to have another election while obviously knowing that our empire will do everything to rig those elections to cause regime change to our puppets and you claim to be against regime change.

          31. Bullshit. Can you even understand the difference between “forcing one to have an election” and encouraging one to have an election? Nuance.

            My position: the peacemakers should encourage Maduro to demonstrate his leadership and authority with another pop election. (Remember the last one in 2018? No doubt Maduro would win re-election per the polls.) Why another? A second decisive election would nail the Regime Change coffin shut.

            That is the opposite of your nonsense “our empire forcing venezuala to have another election”,

            If you continue having difficulty understanding nuance, I can make suggestions.

          32. I like the link!

            What you are missing is that the solution is to strategically triangulate the situation: delay, delay, delay. We KNOW the RC operation is under way… right?
            Maduro would win ANY election (per polling)… right?
            Elections/campaigns/processes could delay … right?
            RC ops PRIOR to elections = bad optics … right?
            International observers = delay … right?
            Why delay? Change of administration. Monkey wrench their plan. Social Rust. Take your pick.

            Your solution of “do nothing” is what the establishment wants. In six months, the operation will be coming to a head and RC complete. Fiddle while Rome burns.

          33. and your solution of holding an election for the cia to rig to get in their minions into the leadership of venezuala is also what the establishment wants, there is no reason that a known criminal organization such as the cia and the US empire that runs the cia will not find every possible way to rig said elections to get our imperial control of their oil. problem is that we are dealing with a criminal enterprise that is known for rigging elections in every nation that it has control over or even influence in, including its own election as exposed in 2016 in the democrip primaries. no election that has anything to do with said criminal organization is in any way trustworthy unless said election goes against said criminal organization. there is no reason to believe that said criminal organization will not rig the venezuala elections or at least make every attempt to do so including corrupting or demanding the removal of all impediments to their rigging said election. that is why I see calling another election as a very bad idea.

          34. You operate under false assumptions.

            You intentionally operate under false assumptions. Only a small child think that the monsters disappear when you close your eyes and do nothing.

            Do-nothing nonsense allows organizations like the CIA to maintain their control.

          35. so far what I have seen is you pushing regime change by fraudulent elections run most likely by our cia.

          36. There’s no doubt the nuance escapes you.

            “encouraging” is not “forcing” Nuanced enough?

            No wonder the cops were called … your first time.

          37. How would you prevent the US from regime change?

            An election over seen by international inspectors would meet the calls by Venezuelans – of which there are many Venezuelans calling for elections. (Understand “international” as many could include or allies with cameras?) Pop elections are acceptable under their Constitution… international inspectors are available… Venezuelans support voting… Venezuelans have called for elections.

            The least would be a delay of regime change… which might be enough time for players in Washington to change.

            tRump is known to back down, given the proper ego strokes. Isn’t peace worth trying?


          38. Resisting regime change is how to prevent regime change. Your advocacy for outright “preventative” capitulation is, quite frankly, stupid.

          39. Then talk to tRump, the neoliberals and the neocons – they are with you in objecting to elections.

            An election, as called for under the Venezuelan constitution, is the BEST way to demonstrate democracy and prevent meddling.

            As we have seen in the past, doing nothing results in regime change.Why do you object to Maduro demonstrating his rightful place?

            You’re demonstrating passive support, which encourages the deep state process of regime change. Is that your objective… or just your acceptance of it?

          40. plus any new elections will no doubt be made fraudulent by cia and us government interference.

          41. Tulsi Gubbard is better than Sanders. I never voted for Trump, though I did contribute to Sanders last time around. I’d rather vote third party for a candidate I can support than a compromise candidate that buys into the establishment pro-war narratives.

          42. I’d vote tulsi. Let’s hope she catches the nomination.

            Read more on Sen. Sanders; don’t trust fake news and establishment propaganda against the movement left.

          43. IMO, Tulsi Gabbard is the only truly anti-war, anti-regime change candidate currently running for the democratic presidential nomination; and the only one that doesn’t capitulate to the third way neoliberals currently in charge of the democratic party. Therefore, she is the candidate that I will support. Sanders former progressive glory does not make up for his status today as someone promoting russiagate and “humanitarian aid” to Venezuela. Sorry, ronbo. I’ve got to disagree with you on this one.


          44. I would be happy with either. Although…

            However, I wish you’d investigate how it was Sen. Sanders who established and led the Progressive Caucus. A history of organizing and leadership is more important that having your words and positions twisted and manipulated by the for-profit media.

            You gotta watch “the Creepy Line”, Paul. It has some ideas that I’m certain you would (if you don’t already) understand and appreciate.

          45. Sorry to disappoint, ronbo; but Sanders lost my support when he started spreading russiagate hysteria and advocating for CIA-style tactics in Venezuela.

          46. So you don’t acknowledge or even KNOW that Sen. Sanders founded and led the Progressive Caucus?

            Odd, Sen. Sander is working to prevent regime change in Venezuela… with an election! An election beats an invasion every day… in my book

            Who do you support in the Democratic primary that has NOT spoken out against rumored Russian interference?

            Your unicorn awaits you….

          47. “Odd, Sen. Sander is working to prevent regime change in Venezuela… with an election! An election beats an invasion every day… in my book”

            The opposition (and US) case for new elections is that the last election was void.

            Maduro’s supporters say that it wasn’t.

            So Senator Sanders wants a new election.

            How is Maduro supposed to respond to that?

            If Senator Sanders is elected president in 2020 and the Communist Party USA, supported by Xi Jinping and prominent members of China’s National People’s Congress say “nope, not the result we wanted, vote again,” how do you think President Sanders will respond?

          48. Are you aware that a second election in North Carolina (that’s in the USA), was ordered because of suspected election fraud? Are you wetting your pants over that?

            Think strategically, Tom. Don’t you want Venezuela to show the world that the election in question was accurate and represents the people?

            The prior election was called into question and the one thing that can prevent regime change is an election – shown to be free and fair… both in NC and Venezuela.

          49. “Are you aware that a second election in North Carolina (that’s in the USA), was ordered because of suspected election fraud?”

            Yes, I am. I’m also aware that that new election was ordered by North Carolina’s own election authority, not by Raul Castro, Kim Jong Un, and Vladimir Putin, and aware of what the response would have been if North Carolina if they had received such an order from those particular people.

            “Don’t you want Venezuela to show the world that the election in question was accurate and represents the people?”

            No, not particularly. Unlike, say, you or Marco Rubio, I understand that what the Venezuelans decide to do in Venezuela isn’t any of my fucking business.

          50. Good points! Now get the deep state to say that.
            Preventing a war is better than experiencing a war. Blessed are the peacemakers.

          51. How would Maduro holding another election “prevent a war?” If the election came out in a way the usual suspects didn’t approve of, they’d just demand a third election, again under threat of war.

            The US “deep state” goal is not democracy in Venezuela, it’s regime change in Venezuela. And not just any regime change, regime change of exactly the type, featuring exactly the people, that they demand.

            Was the previous election void? In my opinion, probably yes.

            Maduro is (and Chavez before him was) a standard-issue strongman. When the “democratic” going is good for them, they’re all for “democracy.” If it starts to turn against them, they start rigging it while still proclaiming their devotion to it. If it reaches the point where it can’t be rigged, they take the gloves off, suppress their opposition, and blame “outside agitators” for their unpopularity.

            Would Guaido be any better? Almost certainly not.

            But those are Venezuelans’ problems to solve — US out of South America (and for that matter, NORTH America)!

          52. How so? I provided a link that offered some rationale for my opinion. It would be nice if you would reciprocate.

          53. except that Paul showed proof about his claims, you got nothing but the official US imperial propaganda.

          54. Yes, a John Oliver comedy segment is “proof.”

            The next time I spout official US imperial propaganda here will be the first time.

            You’re looking for good guys in a situation where there aren’t any.

          55. actually it was a debunking of said comedy segment by someone on the empire files that is knowledgeable about what is going on. meaning media that is not a CIA propaganda front. there is a small amount of media that is not corporate or CIA controlled still. here I will even give you a list of six of them, antimedia the one posting this list is of course the seventh one.

          56. One third of Venezuelans claimed “voter fraud”. Not me; I wasn’t there. Were you? Let’s work to ensure that elections are fair and free.

            If in that process, we prove the MIC/DNC/RNC wrong, let’s CELEBRATE and stop their corruption.

          57. and if the election came out any other way than the current way we would be all but certain that there was cia election fraud behind it.

          58. Yes, it’s kind of a heads the US wins, tails Maduro loses proposition. That’s the only “nuance” involved.

            Maduro claims the previous election was legitimate. If he gives in to foreign demands for a new election, that will be painted as essentially ceding the US claim that it wasn’t — as will be declining the demand. Further, if he holds a new election and wins, the US will just denounce THAT election as fraudulent too.

            The only acceptable outcome to the US regime is that Maduro goes, whether most Venezuelans want him to or not.

            Whether or not, and if so when, Venezuela holds its next election is none of the US’s business. If Maduro demanded that the US regime hold a presidential election right now because he didn’t like the outcome of the last one, the US regime would tell him to go f–k himself too.

          59. “encouraging” is not “forcing” I wonder if all your dates must be supervised!

            By YOUR insisting that we do nothing while YOU also insist that the deep state is working on Regime Change, tells us that you support said Regime Change. Simple logic.

            We must encourage actions that prevents the USA from Regime Change.

          60. “‘encouraging’ is not ‘forcing’


            But “nice country ya got there, be a shame if anything happened to it” isn’t “encouragement,” it’s a threat of force.

          61. True. Has anyone introduced you to “harm reduction” theory?

            Prevention measures certainly beat doing nothing and accepting the establishment’s push for Regime Change. Encouraging triangulation around the situation (like an election) is a preventive measures that saves lives.

            Or do you shun all preventive measures? Seat belts, condoms, education, elections, etc…. Vaccines do have a risk, one in ten million may result in a violent reaction!

            Encouraging vaccines saves lives.
            Encouraging elections save lives.

          62. In the case of Venezuela, “harm reduction” would consist of the US standing down, butting out, and wishing Venezuela well.

            The US regime has already demanded “regime change,” recognized a different government, etc. Having gone to that point, further “encouraging” anything is just pushing the Venezuelans around and increasing, not decreasing, the likelihood of widespread violence even absent direct military intervention which the US regime still says is “on the table.

          63. Yes! Were ifs and buts candy and nuts we’d all have a wonderful Christmas. But unlike you, I can’t forget history. I can’t follow orders from Bolton.

            If you don’t understand what triangulating away from Regime Change is… just ask.

            PS – It includes showing and DEMONSTRATING that our corrupt establishment is wrong about Venezuelan elections.

          64. the only prevention measure that can work is to cause the collapse of the US empire.

          65. Then give up. Unlike persuasion, you’d be good at that.

            Aren’t you that fella who can’t distinguish between “encouraging” and “forcing”? And now you are calling for “collapse of the US empire”? How? By following orders from John Bolton and joining the do-nothing crowd?

          66. so far I have pointed out how your not even half baked plan will fail, as for the difference between forcing and encouraging, well our empire has no real difference between those when it comes to their plans to install our puppets to destroy and loot other nations for us. you need to come up with a far better plan that takes into account how our empire actually works.

          67. Well, the first step would be opposing corrupt regime change instead of supporting corrupt regime change.

            The US demand that Venezuela hold new elections because the US didn’t like the way the last ones came out is a corrupt regime change demand.

          68. Check. Point one complete.

            On point two, you seem Zonmoy’s little rapist – or his mindset. (“encouraging” is “forcing” and “raping”!?!)

            Encouraging Maduro to demonstrate his popular election (especially now that a positive election result would show Venezuelan power), is not Regime Change. Duh. It would demonstrate Democracy over US imperialism. Get that? Think about that.

            You characterize elections as “CORRUPT REGIME CHANGE” and I characterize elections as Venezuelan empowerment. Let Venezuelan’s choose, because as we know, doing nothing keeps the CIA/NSA plan in operation.

          69. No, I don’t characterize elections as corrupt regime change.

            I characterize demands by Government A that B hold elections over and over until Government A likes the result, on pain of invasion, as corrupt regime change.

            There’s a difference.

            The US government has already clearly and unambiguously taken a side and essentially threatened war unless it gets its way. It has no standing to “encourage” anything as if it’s a neutral arbiter or honest broker.

          70. NO ONE IN THE US GOVERNMENT HAS THREATENED VENEZUELA WITH AN ELECTION. (I can’t even find anyone – other than Sen. Sanders – who even supports an election.) Sorry to all cap that; but, you don’t seem to acknowledge reality. Are you intentionally trying to equate “demand” with “encourage”? There is a difference.

            Does it concern you that neither the DNC-establishment + media nor the RNC establishment + media have suggested an election? Only Sanders.

            Search for it and then get back with me. Then we can talk further. OK? I’ve searched. And yes, the establishment is intent upon converting a socialist country to for-profit (not for-people).

          71. o rly – It’s a draft – an un-advanced UNENDORSED draft that has never been advanced nor voted upon… never seen the light of day … not even a policy position! “…no date has yet been set for a vote on the American draft” … it’s not even a presentation … not a request … not a guideline… not even a citation… not a policy. Read your own link!

            rusure – Pompeo twits about Regime Change, not an election! “Now it is time for every other nation to pick a side. No more delays, no more games. Either you stand with the forces of freedom, or you’re in league with Maduro and his mayhem.”

            You should read your own links! Faked proof show the lack of proof! Your attempt to deceive is exposed.


            Please name a single person who has encouraged an election.

          72. I just named an entire government that has “encouraged” an election.

            The UN Security Council resolution never came to a vote because Russia and China announced they’d veto, just as the US announced it would veto their resolution. Pompeo was speaking to the resolution in the cited story.

            Apparently your superpower is Humpty-Dumptyism — you can make words magically mean whatever you want them to mean instead of what they clearly mean.

          73. An unannounced unadorned draft. One.

            Oh my! The weight of one unprocessed email is your “entire” proof that the US is pushing elections?

          74. In some alternate universe, perhaps.

            In THIS universe, the “draft” was LOUDLY announced by the White House, covered in all major media, proffered to the UN Security Council, and only withdrawn when Russia and China made it clear that they would veto it if it was brought to a vote.

          75. Yes, “loudly.” As in announced by the US State Department, covered in the New York Times, Washington Post, television media, etc.

            Presumably the draft would have been signed by the acting US ambassador to the UN, Jonathan Cohen.

          76. A DRAFT was written but not put forward to a vote… never having been actually submitted to the UN for a vote.

            Oprah could also have submitted documents and been elected president; but, she didn’t. Oprah must be president then… Presumably!

            Circular reasoning is just a non sequitur.

          77. Your own links show that the USA did NOT present nor pass a UN resolution or draft encouraging an election.

            That’s what YOUR links show.

            Did they present the draft? No.
            Did they pass the draft? No.

            Circular Reasoning: They could have; but, they didn’t….
            Which proves what… that they did or that they didn’t?

          78. No, they didn’t.

            Your contention was not that the US did not “present or pass a UN resolution.”

            Your contention was that no one in the US government has “threatened an election.” In fact, that is the official position of the US government and it has been publicly conveyed by the president of the United States, the Secretary of State of the United States, the ambassador of the United States to the United Nations, several US Senators and numerous other US government functionaries.

            Those are facts.

            You don’t have to like them.

            They’re facts whether you like them or not.

          79. Thank you for “No, they didn’t”.

            Since the answer is “no” then it was NOT ” the official position of the US government”. Search “trump calls for Venezuelan elections”. Search “pompeo calls for Venezuelan elections”. I KNOW that you are smart enough to realize when you have been “played” by a propaganda stunt.

            Just because someone has a draft of a cure for cancer, doesn’t mean cancer has been cured… circular reasoning.

          80. Instead of continuing to refer to your own circular reasoning — if it can be called “reasoning” at all — you might consider abandoning it.

            When you’ve dug yourself into a credibility hole and want to get out, the first step is to stop digging.

          81. “The United States supports President Guaido as he establishes a transitional government, and leads Venezuela, as the country prepares for free and fair elections. We urge all Venezuelans to support peacefully this democratic process, as granted in the 1999 Constitution.” — US State Department, “Recognition of Juan Guaido as Venezuela’s Interim President,” 01/23/19

            “The Vice President firmly emphasized that the long-standing goal of the United States and all freedom-loving nations is to restore democracy to Venezuela through free and fair elections …” — White House, “Readout of Vice President Mike Pence’s Call with Juan Guaido, the President of the National Assembly of Venezuela,” 01/15/19

          82. Apparently you did the search, found no articles on “trump calls for Venezuelan elections” OR “pompeo calls for Venezuelan elections” and default back to attack me since the searches came up craps.

            Yes they claim that there was a draft… an unendorsed draft which was not presented. And that is your evidence… circular logic.

            Don’t be suckered by the shadows upon the wall.

          83. My evidence is official statements from the White House and the State Department. They don’t refer to any “draft” — although in fact the draft WAS “presented,” and then withdrawn once it was clear it would be vetoed.

            “Encouraging” elections with the threat of force behind the encouragement is the official policy of the United States, promulgated multiple times in official statements. That’s a fact, and your attempts to torture the English language into calling it anything other than a fact aren’t going to magically start working no matter how many such attempts you make.

          84. Read YOUR own link! Dear God, you can’t have your cake and eat it too.

            “Official policy of the United States”? Come back to earth dear friend, it’s the “un-official policy”. And THAT is what I wan’t to crush and destroy!

            By doing nothing, you allow it to crush and destroy. You don’t achieve your goals by doing EXACTLY what they demand.

          85. When the White House and the State Department publish official declarations of policy, it’s by definition “official policy,” not “unofficial policy.”

            You’re advocating that some undefined “we” do exactly what “they” demand. And then trying to pretend that I’m the one doing what you’re doing.

            Hey, if you want to live in a fantasy world instead of in reality, that’s fine. But that doesn’t mean everyone else is going to join you.

          86. Read your own link, Tom.

            You can’t spin a single staged event into the truth. It was a draft of, by and for propaganda, not their intention at all. Not even submitted!

            How do I know this(?), you’ve searched “trump calls for Venezuelan elections” and “pompeo calls for Venezuelan elections”.

            What did you find?


          87. Read your own link, Tom.

            If I tell you that I have a “cure for cancer” but don’t present the draft or even say it a second time… do I really have a cure for cancer?

            Don’t be a sucker for obvious deceit from a corrupt organization. You are smart enough to understand propaganda, deception and mis-direction.

            When you searched “trump calls for Venezuelan elections” and “pompeo calls for Venezuelan elections” what did you find?


          88. I didn’t search for “Trump calls for Venezuelan elections” and “Pompeo calls for Venezuelan elections.”

            I searched and for the US government’s official positions on Venezuela, and I searched the news for stories on the UN Security Council resolution — which was in fact presented then withdrawn when Russia and China announced they would use their veto power to stop it.

            You can continue being wrong if you want to continue being wrong, but you are absolutely, beyond a shadow of a doubt, wrong as to what the official position of the US government on elections in Venezuela is. In the real world, anyway. In your fantasy world, I guess reality is just whatever you want it to be.

          89. Then you probably also learned that the USA has policies in place against regime change… so the USA doesn’t engage in regime change. s/

            “The United States is going to abandon its decades of policies promoting regime change in countries around the world, President-elect Donald Trump told a rally in Fayetteville in the US state of North Carolina.”

            So there you have it… USA doesn’t do regime change. Trump is the president, you know. That makes the policy official.


            One should build their knowledge on reality not propaganda and misinformation and misdirection.

          90. No, anything that Trump happens to babble at any given moment is not “official US government policy.”

            That’s why I went to the actual repositories of the actual policies to find out what the policy was, instead of running my fantasies up the flagpole and hoping people salute like you do.

          91. problem is that your action will do nothing to help and will make sure that our empire gets to claim that any election that maduro wins is illegitimate. you do see the trap don’t you, if he submits to the US empire then our empire can declare his nations elections illegitimate until our empire gets the ruler they want to steal their resources and invade or overthrow on that pretense but if he doesn’t then they do it anyways. now I have explained how your idea is bad and that there may be no real solutions to this problem.

          92. Nothing good in your world where “encouraging” is the same as “forcing”.

            Another do-nothing victim! You are doing as the establishment orders!

            Question authority…
            Challenge authority…

            Don’t be just another victim lying on your back like a turtle yelling “rape, rape” when good people try to turn you upright

          93. problem is that I do challenge authority, I also understand the scheme that is going on. your working to discredit the election in Venezuela as it happened, your actually working for the authority you think you are challenging. what do you think the US authorities will do if somehow the US does not rig the Venezuelan election like it does its own selections. do you think that the US authorities will accept the decision of the people of Venezuela or will they just claim that Maduro cheated again. you think that a new election will prevent the overthrow of Venezuela but one way or another it will insure it as is the plan of the very authorities that you claim to be against but you are unknowingly working for.

          94. You challenge authority! What? By being a go-along and challenging the establishment to do nothing and stay-the-course of regime change?

            Ohhhhh… such an unexpected move! It’s what your masters tell you to do. And you do nothing quite well… even working to dissuade other from encouraging elections… just as Bolton orders.


          95. your accusing me of what your doing, your plan is badly thought through and might as well be the plan given to you by bolton or some other of the imperial authorities to help destabalize venezuala.

          96. sorry, no, it is pointing out that you have no argument. that your plan is to just give the empire what it wants in delegitimizing the election of Maduro.

          97. You see the neocon RC plan in place. You complain about it. You castigate those who want to change it.

            You do as John Bolton insists: nothing.

            What was your plan again? Your idea? Your solution to corrupt US regime change?


            You seem a go-along, get-along.

          98. You object to counseling Maduro to triangulate away from US Regime Change. Yet you support “collapse of the US Empire”.

            I’m hoping to learn multiple thoughts, angles and ideas and all I get from you is nonsense and negativity.

            John Bolton has you just where he wants you… talkin’ crazy JUST LIKE HIM.

          99. I am pointing out that your plan is useless, two of us have pointed out that if he does as you say it will justify the US imperial claims that his election was fraudulent and even if he wins again the US empire will still claim the right to overthrow him as they will just claim the second election is as fraudulent as the first. we understand how the empire works to discredit leaders they wish to overthrow which you do not understand. The best your plan will do is buy a little bit of time at most for the freedom of venezuala from our imperial control. the only real solution is to find a way to hasten the inevitable imperial collapse.

          100. well you are stubborn I give you that, I rather hope you get what you want from him only to have the US empire use that to claim that his election was illegitimate because he allowed another election to invade and remove him when he wins.

          101. Miss Cleo can’t predict the future nor can you.

            But you do call for surrender so very beautifully. It’s as if you take your orders from John Bolton.

    2. Seth Rich was taken out by Deep State operatives. Does anyone really belive in a thief who shoots his victim dead but doesn’t then grab his watch, wallet and phone?????

      1. The fact that his stuff wasn’t taken does open up the possibility that it was something other than a robbery (although it could have been an interrupted robbery).

        The fact that his stuff was not taken does not, however, lead inexorably to the conclusion that he was “taken out by Deep State operatives.”

        Maybe he was. Maybe he wasn’t. “Unsolved” /= “whatever I want to have happened.”

        1. Exactly.

          Assange made clear that they do not identify their sources, and that WikiLeaks was offering a reward for information on Rich’s murder because OTHERS might have believed he was the source and/or murdered him because they believed he was the source.

          1. I do not believe that it is coincidence the anchor asked why Assange mentioned Seth Rich in the same breadth as the fact that his sources take considerable risks. Assange also stated that the information was a leak, not a hack, further suggesting someone from inside the DNC or someone who had access to DNC records leaked. Seth Rich had access given his job in data management at the DNC. He may have had motive as he was a Bernie Sanders supporter since Sanders was cheated on numerous occasions by the DNC (i.e., debate questions provided to Clinton by Brazile, head of the DNC; Shultz’s behind-the-scenes attacks on Sanders; etc.). Opportunity, motive, and his sudden death by a mugger who took nothing are suspicious, but not conclusive. As to your point, your interpretation is also possible. Unfortunately, the dead do not speak.

          2. I’m not at all denying that Seth Rich might have been the source. He certainly might have been.

            But here’s the context: Seth Rich is murdered. Rumors start going around that he was the source and that that’s why he was killed.

            Assange/WikiLeaks position is this:

            1) We don’t name our sources, BUT

            2) We have an interest in supporting investigation of killings of people who MIGHT have been killed because someone thought they MIGHT be a WikiLeaks source, whether they were ACTUALLY a WikiLeaks source or not.

            Look at it like a government would respond.

            Suppose that 10 people were killed in Europe, and rumors started going around that they were killed because they were Russian spies. If you were the Russian government, wouldn’t you want to get to the bottom of that whether the victims were actually your spies or not? For one thing, it would signal to your actual and potential future spies that you have their back. For another, it would help expose who might be trying to kill your spies.

          3. Like I said, your narrative is totally plausible. However, if somebody asked me my opinion on the facts, I would say that foul play is likelier than not in the case of Seth Rich. Yet, I would not assign a high percentage to that view due to other plausible narratives such as the one you provided.

          4. I would say foul play is 100% certain in the case of Seth Rich. I mean, he was shot by as-yet-unidentified assailants, which is pretty much the definition of foul play.

            As to the motive of that foul play, who knows? He does not seem to have been robbed. That could mean that the killers planned to rob him but were interrupted by something. Or it could mean that the motive was something else, and the most obvious something else would be something related to his work at DNC.

            I definitely have an open mind on that subject. All I’m saying is that Assange went out of his way to NOT imply that Rich was the supplier of the DNC emails to WikiLeaks and to offer an alternative reason for WikiLeaks offering a reward for information concerning his murder.

  2. Shame on all of us for being naive enough to believe we actually live in constitutional republic with democratic elections. Wolin got it right, this is an inverted totalitarianism ran by plutocrats and covered up with a controlled democracy and a plutocrat owned press core.

    There’s no “people’s house” left to change anything in any way. Even if you did, Trump would get replaced with yet another billionaire backed puppet. Why would the plutocrats allow us enough power to change their plan ??

    1. Bingo, but the sheep refuse to see it. They will go on eating the grass and following blindly as they are led into the shed and given a steel bolt right between the eyes.

      I’m glad I chose the RED pill. Thanks Morpheus, I owe you….

  3. What’s the use?.. This is no sudden revelation. There is no evidence supporting a Russian hack and forensic evidence that the docs were leaked, yet the press, the security services, and even the great swathes of the public chooses to believe otherwise. Are we really THAT dumb?

  4. Just make some nonsense up. Of course the author knows more than Mueller’s Investigation. It is really sad that the nut case even use to work for the CIA.

    1. Has Mueller’s investigation weighed in on where WikiLeaks got the DNC emails?

      Prior to Mueller’s investigation, the “US intelligence community” released the “evidence” they had amassed for a Russian government hack of DNC. That evidence was a claim that “methods consistent with Russian state hackers” (and every other kind of hacker) were used, and a claim that IP addresses “associated with Russian state hacking” (and every other kind of hacking) were used.

      Or, in other words, the “US intelligence community” case boiled down to “there were fingerprints — it must have been him, even though the fingerprints were smudged and could have been anyone’s!”

      1. ..even though the NSA is well practised in leaving breadcrumbs behind to lay false trails. Oh look, some code left behind has a Russian name in it… It must be the GRU… /facepalm

        1. didn’t Wikileaks expose how the CIA can make false trails like that to blame Russia or anybody for any computer crime they want.

          1. Yes, and thats exactly my point. The NSA hacker leaves a message “Greetings from Vlad” and the idiot MSM goes full retard and says the Kremlin is to blame. Its pathetic how easily the Murican sheeple can be herded.

    2. Ah yes, Mueller, the same Bush and Cheney toady who lied to congress assuring us that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction and needed to be disarmed. People really are incapable of learning anything from history.

Comments are closed.