- The American Conservative - http://www.theamericanconservative.com -

The Fake News Fake Story

“Fake stories” are in the news [1]. The narrative goes something like this: fabricated accounts that misrepresent “the truth” are proliferating on the internet, and once they appear on a social networking site, they are frequently spread far and wide, often doing serious damage along the way to whatever or whomever was the target of the initial posting. Reportedly, Google and Facebook are now alert to the problem and doing their best to monitor and eliminate [2] such material. How exactly that will work is not yet clear, as it would be blatant censorship, and the relative openness of the internet is a major part of its appeal.

And there is, of course, a political aspect to the fake stories. Allegedly, most recent tales were focused on denigrating the Democratic presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton, accusing her of a series of crimes both high and low, challenging her veracity on issues relating to her health, and claiming that she was seeking to “hand control of the nation to a shadowy cabal of global financiers.”

That the overwhelming majority of the media’s campaign coverage actually consisted of negative reporting on Donald Trump would appear to contradict that narrative. But because most of those currently promoting the “fake news story” theory can be comfortably described as Clinton supporters, it is perhaps not surprising that whatever benefit might be obtained from the political angle would tilt in her direction.

And there’s something even more nefarious that fits neatly into another storyline that was intensely pursued in the lead-up to the election. It has now been discovered by the assiduous researchers attached to several previously unknown and somewhat shady inside-the-Beltway think tanks that the Kremlin was behind it all, described in some detail by the Washington Post in an article entitled [3] “Russian propaganda effort helped spread ‘fake news’ during election, experts say.” The front-page Post piece, which was promptly replayed uncritically elsewhere in the mainstream media, concerned the alleged existence of “a sophisticated Russian propaganda campaign that created and spread misleading articles online with the goal of punishing Democrat Hillary Clinton, helping Republican Donald Trump and undermining faith in American democracy.”

With two coauthors, a fellow at one of the obscure think tanks cited by the Post, the Foreign Policy Research Institute, had released an article [4] called “Trolling for Trump: How Russia is Trying to Destroy Our Democracy” on November 6 through the War on the Rocks online magazine. It was, perhaps not coincidentally, just before the election, and the article shilled heavily for Clinton, asserting absurdly at one point that “A Trump victory could pave the way for Russian ascendance and American acquiescence.”  

A second group cited in the article, PropOrNot, revealed [5] on October 30 the keys to “Identifying and Combatting Russian Online Propaganda,” including a convenient table that names all the internet sites that are apparently “useful idiots” engaged in supporting the “active measures” produced by Russian President Vladimir Putin and his shadow warriors. PropOrNot alarmingly warns that unless something is done about Moscow’s propaganda, there might be in the “immediate aftermath of the upcoming election, Russian orchestrated political violence in the U.S.”

The research and analysis conducted by both the Foreign Policy Research Institute and PropOrNot is based on physical connections between sites featuring the “fake stories” as well as repetitive language and expressions, but that is precisely how information moves around on the internet in any event.  The completely respectable Consortium News, Antiwar.com, Unz.com, and Ron Paul Institute are four of the sites PropOrNot includes on its “peddlers of Russian propaganda” list, rather suggesting that discussing Moscow’s foreign policy objectively outside the comfort zone of the Washington establishment bubble is enough for inclusion.

The Post article accepts that Moscow was behind the hacking of Democratic National Committee files and other accounts to “embarrass Clinton,” even though actual Russian government culpability has never been unambiguously demonstrated and has been denied by both the Kremlin and WikiLeaks. And it might surprise the Washington Post, the Foreign Policy Research Institute, and PropOrNot to learn that Moscow was watching the U.S. presidential election very closely based on its own self-interest. On one hand, there was a major-party candidate who compared Putin to Hitler and who was advocating confronting Russia in the Baltics, Ukraine, and Syria, including expanding NATO and increasing direct lethal military assistance to Kiev while also intervening directly in Syria. That intervention would include creation of a “no-fly” zone, which would virtually guarantee an incident involving U.S. warplanes and the Russian aircraft supporting the regime of Bashar al-Assad.

On the other hand, there was another major-party candidate advocating dialogue and détente with Russia, arguing that the current level of hostility with Moscow was unwarranted. He was also uninterested in increasing U.S. direct involvement in Syria.

There should be no mystery about whom Putin was going to favor. Yes, Moscow undeniably has a large bureaucracy that engages in media management in support of its own perceived interests, but the State Department does the same thing, as does the CIA overseas, and the Pentagon manages the news coming out of war zones through its embedment of journalists. The White House itself fed false information to journalists in the lead-up to the Iraq War.

Many other governments, including those of Israel and China, also engage in methodical global media manipulation to promote both their foreign and domestic policies. And one might also add that the U.S. mainstream media exercises considerable self-censorship over stories that would displease the corporate and political establishment. One must ask who is manipulating whom and whether it is fair to suggest that the American public is so gullible as to believe everything that appears on the internet, on television, or in print?

In addition, I would argue that there is a vast abyss between using a country’s global media resources to favor a certain political outcome in a foreign country and deliberately seeking to destroy that same nation’s political institutions, which is what the Post and its associated think tanks are attempting to link together. And it is not like posting false or misleading stories to obtain some political advantage is something new, having been something like the norm since the invention of mass journalism in the 19th century. It is not for nothing that “truth” has been described as the first casualty when nations engage in conflict and go public to explain their respective points of view.

The Post article wraps its allegations about Russia around the kernel of truth that there have been many false stories on the internet. In my own experience placing false or misleading articles overseas during the Cold War, the trick was not to use a sledgehammer but rather to base an account on a substantially and unimpeachably true story while inserting an element that would convey some additional information. Linking something that was false to something believed to be true would validate the former. Ironically, that is precisely what the Post article seeks to do when it tries to establish as solid its view that Russia was behind the fake news before it demurs, “There is no way to know whether the Russian campaign proved decisive in electing Trump.” The newspaper is planting the seed that Moscow’s role was decisive by including the reservation.

The Post article also describes the coverage of Hillary Clinton’s health issues and implies that the negative commentary was somehow linked to direction coming from Moscow, but the reality is that Clinton actually did stumble and almost fall on camera. That video was played repeatedly, unleashing a torrent of discussion worldwide, including on Clinton-friendly networks like CNN, without any need for Russia to do anything to popularize the story. Russian trolls might indeed have been onto the story quickly, as the article suggests, but they were not alone.

The mainstream media, which clearly is having some difficulty in explaining why anyone should pay attention to it, is eager to discover new reasons why the reporting in the lead-up to the elections was so awful. It is convenient to claim that the Russians planted false stories, and furthermore are attempting to destroy our democracy, which would be a good segue if only anyone would actually believe any of it. The fact is that the public does not trust the media because the reporting has been both intrinsically biased and selective, with Team Clinton being the beneficiary of the status quo far more often than not in the recent electoral campaign. The clearly perceived bias is precisely why the public seeks out alternative sources of information and latches on to fake stories—and while it may be true that a Russian government ministry is responsible for some of what is being produced, the allegation that there exists a plot to destroy American democracy is a bridge way too far. The Democratic and Republican parties are already doing that without any help from Moscow.

Philip Giraldi, a former CIA officer, is executive director of the Council for the National Interest.

33 Comments (Open | Close)

33 Comments To "The Fake News Fake Story"

#1 Comment By Fran Macadam On November 28, 2016 @ 12:05 am

In this post-truth society, truth itself seems to be perceived as whatever you can persuade people to believe what it is.

#2 Comment By Greg On November 28, 2016 @ 1:03 am

There’s a lot to agree and disagree with here in the particulars, but I’m not going to get into the weeds, as they say now, but I do believe that the major thrust of the article is overstated. There are credible examples of stories made up from whole cloth, not simply slanted. There was an NPR piece on a guy who runs one of these sites. He seems to regard the “Trumpists” and other conservatives as “marks” who will pass on his stories and cause the sites where his totally fictitious stories reside to get hits, for which he gets money from advertisers. Others might think that they actually serve the purposes of those to whom they’re aimed. Beyond these blatantly false news sites there are so many many many sites that purport to be news but simply slant the news. Many of them see their raison d’etre to be to point out the “mainstream media bias” which is rather amusing when you think about it. I serve up Breitbart News as but one example. Forget arguing whether it’s racist or not, but rather is this someplace where the free exchange of informed opinion occurs, or the dissemination of propaganda? This is to say nothing of the Talk Radio world that claims to bring “news and commentary” but where everything is brought to you through a jaundiced lens. I will comment specifically on one thing the author cites – Hillary’s health. It is well documented that this began as piece of intentional hearsay and then got traction when she nearly fainted at the 9-11 memorial ceremony. There is not a shred of evidence that the two are in any way related. It was pure and purposeful rumor and due to a happy (or unhappy) coincidence it worked. Rather than overstated, I think the reporting of “fake news” is severely underreported.

#3 Comment By ADL On November 28, 2016 @ 9:43 am

This “fake news” propaganda is part of the Democrats’ multi-pronged attack to delegitimize Trump’s presidency. The other is the voter recount in multiple states that produced close results.

The voting has stopped by the election is not over. If the Dems get their wish Trump may end up being elected by the House and will spend his term governing from the bunker.

[6]

#4 Comment By rhinegold cowboy On November 28, 2016 @ 9:56 am

I get most of my news from Unz and Naked Capitalism, both on the Black List, and I wouldn’t have it any other way.

#5 Comment By michael On November 28, 2016 @ 10:35 am

Read Glen Greenwald if you want to understand just how bad this “journalism” by the WAPO is. Breitbart couldn’t do as much damage to the dwindling MSM’s reputations if it tried.

#6 Comment By Paul On November 28, 2016 @ 10:47 am

Here’s the money quote from Philip Giraldi’s fine essay: “The mainstream media, which clearly is having some difficulty in explaining why anyone should pay attention to it … ”

Bingo.

#7 Comment By Chris Chuba On November 28, 2016 @ 11:02 am

Please read Glenn Greenwald’s dissection of ‘PropOrNot’
[7]

1. WaPo calls them experts but this group is totally anonymous while blacklisting websites where the targets clearly identify themselves. Many of the websites I am familiar with consist of accredited journalist and former CIA analysts.

2. The WaPo article in question specifically cites the ‘Hillary Clinton is ill’ stories as an example of a story planted by the Russians. Well, it’s funny that websites like Breitbart escaped the blacklist.

The websites that I recognized are excellent sources of information, I would not recommend avoiding any on this dubious groups rantings. They offer a feature where you can get a browser extension that will warn you if you stray onto one of them by mistake. If you need thought police, help yourselves. Oh, they even offer a link where you can turn in the commies.

#8 Comment By cdugga On November 28, 2016 @ 11:50 am

All in all, I would say that saying fake news is fake news is more fake news than factual. Having the don elected as president, not because he was able to fool people with lies, but because he could say anything and have done anything and still have almost half the people still vote for him. The real news is false equivalency, and the decline of facts we have to take responsibility for, and the rise of fiction that makes us feel good.

#9 Comment By James Buerer On November 28, 2016 @ 12:16 pm

In spite of the author’s attempts to change the subject, fake news is a problem.

#10 Comment By Viriato On November 28, 2016 @ 12:29 pm

@Greg: “Forget arguing whether it’s racist or not, but rather is this someplace where the free exchange of informed opinion occurs, or the dissemination of propaganda?”

Every media outlet, every writer, every talking head has an agenda. Some entities express their agenda and biases more blatantly than others. But I have never seen news that’s not slanted in one way or another. The task of a discerning consumer of information is to get news and commentary from a wide variety of perspectives and then make up one’s own mind.

The idea of “unbiased news” is a chimera. “Unbiased” news never was and never will be.

To label certain media outlers as purveyors of “fake news” just because their worldview differs from that of the US government is Orwellian.

#11 Comment By Jon S On November 28, 2016 @ 12:33 pm

Fake news was out there by the truck loads. I have elderly relatives who recited absolute garbage they received either in their email or in Facebook. Their ideas were already set in stone however, and said fake news was just a reinforcement.

What isn’t said is that the hacking of the DNC was releasing “true” news. And if our Russian friends are responsible, then they should be thanked. If releasing what democrats are saying in emails to each other is going to bring down American democracy, then the problem is with the democrats, not the Russians.

#12 Comment By Gaius Gracchus On November 28, 2016 @ 2:20 pm

The establishment media straight out openly took a side in the election, pushed friendly stories and quashed unfriendly ones for the last 3 presidents, and yet they want to call anyone publishing news outside of their control fake? Hillarious.

The NYT has been pushing fake news since at least the 30s. The Washington Post for decades as well. The networks push fake stories regularly. And the government has been pushing propaganda since at least Wilson.

The think tank involved here is an old Cold War propaganda machine pushing the neocon line. They hate they are losing power. And that they can no longer control the narrative……

#13 Comment By sglover On November 28, 2016 @ 2:38 pm

This “fake news” propaganda is part of the Democrats’ multi-pronged attack to delegitimize Trump’s presidency.

Speaking as a Sanders supporter, my sense is that it’s not so much about tarnishing Trump — he’ll do a good enough job of that on his own — as it is another blame-shifting tactic. Clintonites are really desperate for something, anything, that might explain away their (predictable, and predicted) failure. Check out Krugman’s recent ongoing hysteria about the wily Russians. The guy’s embarrassing himself, but he seems incapable of controlling self control.

For instance, alongside his fever sweats about wily Putin and treacherous Comey, Krugman was blaming Clinton’s loss in Florida on the Greens — when anybody could see that the Trump-Clinton vote difference was twice the Green tally! Evidently our “Nobel Prize” (pseudo division) economists have difficulty deciding when one number is larger than another. This might actually explain a lot!

Anyway, the “fake news” hysteria is really a reflection of power struggles among the remnants of the Democratic Party. There’s lots of cognitive dissonance there now. Not to mention lots of consultants and hangers-on facing the unpleasant fact that they bet the mortgage on the wrong horse.

#14 Comment By David Aubke On November 28, 2016 @ 2:50 pm

The media’s overwhelming negative stories about Trump were of his own doing and were easily verifiable. It makes no sense to compare that to the fake stories disseminated by his supporters.

#15 Comment By Fran Macadam On November 28, 2016 @ 3:00 pm

There are all those Wapo fake news stories including about Trump’s secret communications link to Moscow, by which he receives orders from Putin. A lie’s a lie and a fabrication a fabrication whether it comes from an individual with a grudge on a Twitter feed or one of the major media corporations such as Wapo or NYT.

Glenn Greenwald has called this Wapo story that’s being repeated about fake news sites as the most egregious instance of fake news in itself.

Check out his own Twitter feed:

[8]

By the way, you can bypass the “too many free articles without subscribing” on both those mainline sites, by hitting the browser stop loading button as soon as the headline appears, and then scroll down to read the whole story – if you don’t mind being bombarded with a lot of fake news.

#16 Comment By JonF On November 28, 2016 @ 4:31 pm

Facebook and Google are proprietary sites. They determine the rules of use for their participants. There is no unfettered “right to free speech” when participating on these sites. That right only prohibits agents of government from banning or penalizing speech.

#17 Comment By Elizabeth Burton On November 28, 2016 @ 7:12 pm

When more and more people are growing aware of the false and adulterated “news” propagated by the corporate media, is it any surprise the MSM would attack the trustworthy alternatives and attempt to paint them as being no better than the actual fake-news sites (of which there are more than a few)?

The sad (or maybe frightening is a better word) thing is there are people who reject those independent sources now, based on that PropOrNot list, proudly announcing they get all their information from RELIABLE sources, like the New York Times and NPR.

#18 Comment By Joe the Plutocrat On November 29, 2016 @ 12:02 am

Trump made his bones in a fake sport (pro wrestling, he’s in the Hall of Fame), and fake TV (‘reality TV’). Many believe he is the ‘king’ of fake wealth (debt); a proverbial fake billionaire. The popularity of FB memes and ‘fake news’ which was ironically a tag for Comedy Central’s “The Daily Show” and “Colbert Report”, which in ‘reality’ were very real satire and social commentary. In the end, as Shakespeare observed, what is in a name? News is news, and fake or real is determined more by the consumer than the purveyor.

#19 Comment By Michael Kenny On November 29, 2016 @ 9:41 am

Anyone who visits American news outlets, and most of all, the internet will have realised long ago that most of the news was fake and promotion of Vladimir Putin is a large part of that. So why are authors making such a big fuss about somebody saying out loud what everybody has known for ages? Did they think we, their readers, were too stupid to see through the scam?

#20 Comment By Bianca On November 29, 2016 @ 11:52 pm

When MSM stops lying, suppresing facts, inventing facts, using information from known phoney sources –in short, starts practicing professional journalism, respectability and trust will in time return. If they insist on selling lies as truth — other sources world wide will provide sufficient information for a carefull reader to understand facts. MSM having been caught completely off guard — still is not accepting the fact that it is no longer the Ministry of Truth that controls the global narrative. And they have fallen the most basic test — test of credibility in presidential elections.

There have always been and will be media outlets that go for sensational — and make money in the process. However, by attempting to distract audience by tin foil hat stories of Russian interference in tandem with fake news theory. This is yelllow jouralism. at its worst. MSM lies have caused more damage to US then a few sensational sites can ever do. By listing Antiwar.com as “suspicious” site –Washington Post has revealed its intentions. By attacking a reputable site that has the audacity to ignore the limits of official narrative things are at least made clear. It is not the fake news they are unhappy with. It is the global competition for REAL news that is destroying their narrative. And once the trust is liost domestically — it will be harder for MSM to convince that the rest of the world is lying.

#21 Comment By news of the world On November 30, 2016 @ 11:34 am

“In spite of the author’s attempts to change the subject, fake news is a problem.”

It is indeed. It has been a problem for a long time. I grew up knowing that Goebbels had overseen Hitler’s fake news service. I heard obviously fake news “live” for the first time on the old shortwave broadcasts of Radio Moscow and Radio Peking. I encountered fake news again the first time I laid eyes on Rupert Murdoch’s New York Post. And it really hit home when I realized that the New York Times, the Washington Post, and the Wall Street Journal, and most of the MSM did it too.

In other words, fake news is old news. Just as we learn to distrust advertising from a very young age, we are also learning to distrust the more sophisticated efforts of the news we get from what used to be “trusted sources” and (above all) the Internet.

#22 Comment By bigogger On December 1, 2016 @ 1:16 am

Can somebody please cite examples of fake stories?

What was fake about Hillary’s emailgate, Benghazi, pay for play at Clinton foundation, her inside job with DNC to burn Bernie,….
On Trump’ side his p*ssy-gate?

I found all the lapdog media to be real fakers!
Until election night they had Hillary winning, didn’t they?

#23 Comment By Bob On December 1, 2016 @ 2:47 am

What a joke. The whole fake news meme is a ploy by the Dems and the media (I know, same thing) to use as an excuse to discredit and remove ever increasingly influential voices from the discussion. Drudge, Breitbart, ZeroHedge and others are now where conservatives go to see both sides of the news and the mainstream liars are and corporate censors like Facebook, Twitter and Google are just using this as an excuse to further suppress alternate points of view.

#24 Comment By Not Here On December 1, 2016 @ 7:42 am

CNN was just busted tying Police Tape to their lights to make it look like they were at the crime scene. The people pushing this fake-news narrative are the biggest “fakes” out there. This is nothing more than a way to stifle opposing opinions, because the peasants shouldn’t be allowed to think for themselves, and must drink the propaganda flavored kool-aid given to them by their masters.

#25 Comment By SandMan00 On December 1, 2016 @ 8:10 am

You don’t have to go to Moscow to find fake news stories. The legacy U.S. media engages in it daily. What was Journolist, after all, but a coordinated attempt to sell a narrative that would not have risen to the level of reportable “news” but for the conspiratorial effort to make it appear as if it had?

#26 Comment By Larry Thomason On December 1, 2016 @ 8:13 am

I read an article about fake news on the Washington Post and, really, it is a concern to me though I am clueless how to stop it without straying into censorship. The funny thing about it was that at the bottom of the article was a series of ‘Promoted Articles.’ That is, of course, a euphemism for paid advertising written to look like they are news articles (they do it on all their online material). Now they weren’t exactly ‘Hillary fathers Kim Jong Un’s baby’ but maybe we’d take the media’s protestations more seriously if they managed their own house better.

#27 Comment By David Lewis On December 1, 2016 @ 12:29 pm

Hillary Clinton would have been Putin’s dream president. She was extremely vulnerable to blackmail, the traditional and tested method by which Russia has recruited highly placed foreign agents. She was probably already engaged somehow by Russian intelligence, given the low hanging fruit for the suborning of espionage offered by the Clinton Foundation and her obvious mishandling of classified intelligence. If Russia did do the hacking it is rumored to have done, and it is surely an expert at it, the reason virtually no Hillary Clinton emails were publicized was because Russia was holding them over her head until the time when she was president. Thank God that did not happen.

#28 Comment By Chris Campbell On December 1, 2016 @ 1:57 pm

The whole meme of ‘fake news’ is very likely to backlash against the MSM, who has been the biggest offender in reporting false narratives.

Once again, liberals are ignorant of the effects of their own actions. Should be fun to watch.

#29 Comment By David Simon On December 1, 2016 @ 3:44 pm

I don’t know anything about the alleged Russian connection that the author spends most of this article discussing.

But as a news junkie, and one trained in the art of doing research, I am here to tell you: Fake news IS a problem. A real problem. It exists on both the left and the right, and to attempt to dismiss it as nothing but partisanship is only to increase it’s power on our truth-averse society.

But truth exists regardless of which “side” it helps. And THAT is the real problem in the USA today: If a story reflects poorly on (say) a Republican, then almost instantly all the Republicans begin to WHINE about how the media is biased against them. And the discussion devolves into one of bias, rather than regarding the facts underlying the story in the first place!

Both sides are guilty of this, but one side has demonstrated, time and time again, a superior ability to USE this phenomenon to their advantage. Remember: Most Americans STILL BELIEVE that Al Gore claimed to have invented the internet. (Hint: He did not make that claim. The thing that he DID claim in that regard, by chance, happened to be completely true!)

A LIE, as has been observed before, can travel halfway around the world while the Truth is still putting on its shoes! And stories are still judged by their EFFECTS rather than their accuracy. For THAT, I do blame the media.

#30 Comment By Nelson On December 1, 2016 @ 4:34 pm

Can somebody please cite examples of fake stories?
“Pope Francis endorses Donald Trump for president of the US”

I remember that one because one of my Facebook friends posted it and praised the pope for doing so. He got angry with me for pointing out that the story was fake and the pope doesn’t endorse politicians.

#31 Comment By cdugga On December 6, 2016 @ 10:48 am

[9]
Since this is in the NYT it is probably fake news. Who does fake news benefit? I would say that it can make losers winners and make winners losers. In the end we have to depend on the american people to be able to decide what is real. Funny that the changing demographics always cited as reason for the eventual rise of the democratic party turns out to be trumped by the rise of fake news and where the new demographics get their information. Like, I know from fake news readers that climate change is actually the government dispersing chemicals in plane contrails to either make it rain too much, or make it not rain at all. I guess depending on the chemicals. The don could tweet that information and mitch’s constituents would have something to discuss in the line waiting to get their rotten teeth pulled for free before getting in the next line for a job digging.

#32 Comment By Lisa . On December 18, 2016 @ 8:59 am

Phil Post CIA, So there’s legions of botnets and paid human trolls that collect information and tweet it to one another and amplify it online. And that makes these stories that in many cases are false or misleading look much bigger than they are, and they’re more likely to end up trending on Google News or end up in your Facebook feed all the more important. Always look for whose who gain. For a longer journey to truth, well, that’s not included in your story.

#33 Comment By Marcia Wood On November 19, 2017 @ 3:06 pm

Here is a blog you might like.

Devil in Liberal Togs a.k.a. CIA

Propaganda is very damaging to a Democracy and is parallel to the evil corruption of dictatorships. There are many unanswered questions in our Nation that should be answered.

Who controls the Mainstream media, their journalists & anchors and why do millions of Americans follow the NETS 24/7 believing their lies, fake news and propaganda?

It all started back in the 40’s when the CIA decided that in order to control Americans they had to control the news media, which meant the news venues had to be infiltrated.
Some of the best of the best journalists eagerly responded to the CIA because money & promises of a glorious future were two very persuasive gimmicks.

There is a lot of information out there but one has to actually search and study it before they can understand what has happened to America‘s freedom.

If you’re interested in learning more about what has happened in our Country, who owns the Liberal Media & how top journalists were hired and used as gophers & spies to actually do the CIA’s dirty work. Go to Youtube “Operation Mockingbird: CIA Control of Mainstream Media – The Full Story [10]

The Mainstream anchors are conditioned, brainwashed and definitely owned by the CIA; they can’t pat their head & rub their tummy at the same time.

These anchors fit the definition of robots to a “T.” They can’t perform or reason on their own and definitely are outcasts in the community because they’ve lost total control of their communication skills.

We, American citizens are under the long octopus arms of the CIA. Millions of Americans lap up the propaganda, lies and fake news laced with dirt, immoral behavior, threats and attacks using it as an adrenalin injection.

The terrifying part of all this is the fact that the CIA has a network of Americans and foreigners, some paid and some not paid who jump at their beckon call.

These people perform daily doing their blogs, their tweets on “twitter,” Facebook, their news venues and National TV spreading the CIA propaganda like good little kids never questioning why they’re doing what they’re doing.

CIA controls Hollywood, the actors, directors, politics, financial institutions, schools, social media and much, much more.
Those who manage Facebook, Twitter and other social networks are well –trained puppets without a blooming thought in their head. They are told “When, What, Where & How” and not one of them are brave enough to confront the “crooked” CIA.

The NETS treat all Americans like pet puppy dogs and throw them a bone laced with fake news on a daily basis. Of course there’s a silver lining to all of this, there are some who refuse to be controlled by the NETS and that’s a good thing because we do have other sources to get the real news.

In finishing here is the theory that the CIA works on and it’s pretty plain and simple. They know it’s a proven fact that if a human being hears the same thing often enough, they will start believing it. That is how our Nation is controlled by the CIA. Just that simple!

CIA gives the NETS, Bloggers, article writers, authors their marching orders daily telling them what to say, when to say it and how to say it.

For example, the past few days Judge Roy Moore was attacked by many women accusing him of sexual misbehavior.

No one knows the truth at this time, but in the end the CIA will spend millions to get rid of the Judge.

The Social Media immediately convicted the Judge without having a clue whether the women were telling the truth or being paid to lie.

Although Mitch McConnell, McCain & other GOP gophers were probably the ones to start these horrific attacks on the Judge, they got their marching orders from the CIA and were told that Judge Moore had to go period.

So after the attack was splattered all over National Media, the bloggers, social media gophers went to work, with one intent only, get rid of the Judge. The NETS news anchors, Liberals proceeded to spread the fake dirt, because they were instructed to do this by the CIA.

The Judge may or may not make it thru all of this political abuse, but his reputation & personal character has been & will be tattered the remainder of his life.

In 2016 the CIA suffered devastating damage after being in control for years. Their carefully choreographed scheme to own and control Americans took a hit that was earth shattering to them.

A TV Celebrity threw his hat into the ring to run for the Presidency in 2016. The CIA was actually quite jovial and joyful about this; they enjoyed using this person to create false stories, what ifs & juicy gossip for their faithful NETS & Social Media. (Pet Gophers & Spies)

In fact, Brennan, Clapper & the Nets thought this man was a big joke. Ratings had been in the tank for the NETS, but this man a TV Star & self – made billionaire was the answer to their prayers.

He was great for the night time comedians because he had a very interesting past making him the brunt of one sloppy joke after another until November 8th 2016.
This was the night all “Hell” broke loose and the first time in Americas’ history an outsider was now the Commander in Chief of our United States.
One man broke the CIA mold and the NETS, FBI, NSA, Hillary,Liberals lost it causing what would probably be called a “Political” heart attack.

If Sir Isaac Newton were around today, he’d be able to create a mathematical formula that would explain this phenomenon.

CIA will continue using the NETS, Liberals, Deep State to try to remove President Donald Trump from office because in one short year he achieved more than any other President in the History of our Country.

President Trump has put a great Conservative man, Neil Gorsuch in the Supreme Court. He’s strengthened our Military and met very successfully with foreign leaders throughout the World.

Our Vets are starting to receive the care that they’ve always deserved. ISIS is starting to retreat & diminish. Many EO’s were used to correct the stifling hold Obama had on business big and small. EPA still presents many problems, but the miners are back to work and many ridiculous costly regulations have been removed.

Our President has put America first and is remembering the forgotten man and women who have been ignored for many, many moons.

We have been very blessed in the year of 2017, but the “silent majority” must remain vigilant because the CIA has trillions of dollars and resources all over the World that they intend to use to remove our President.