CIA Paid $600 Million To The Washington Post To Publish Trump Disinformation

Washington Post owner, Jeff Bezos, was awarded a $600 million federal contract by the Obama CIA to publish disinformation about Donald Trump.

CIA Paid $600 Million To The Washington Post To Publish Trump Disinformation

Amazon founder Jeff Bezos was tasked with undermining President Trump via ‘leaked’ CIA documents given to him when he first took over at The Washington Post.

When writing the 1st Amendment to the Constitution, one area of speech the Founders were specifically interested in protecting was that of a free press. They saw the press as a sort of fourth branch of government, one that would keep the “checks and balances” of the other three branches honest.

However, over time the same press that was given protection has eroded into a propaganda machine driven by money and political agendas of those who own the media outlets. They have crawled into bed with the very entities they are to keep in “check” and bust out if corrupted.

As such is the Mainstream Media today and one the American people no longer trust, and rightfully so given what is being exposed in recent years.

The majority of people do not know Amazon founder and CEO Jeff Bezos purchased the Washington Post and is now the sole owner with no editorial board or ethical review committees to oversee the actions of Bezos as a publisher, much less the courage to stand against the new “boss.”

It begs to question: How is Bezos connected to questionable intelligence leaks in recent months?

What does he have to do with the sudden disruption of web services that kept millions from accessing whistleblowing website, WikiLeaks, during its explosive releases of state department cables?

Cables containing inside information revealing corruption within American politics linked to former secretary of state, and presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton.

The majority of Americans do not know ‘leaked” CIA documents to undermine a new president and administration were leaked through the Washington Post first and after Bezos took the helm of “America’s newspaper.”

Much worse and even more suspicious is the majority of the people have not been informed that Bezos landed a $600 million federal contract and by who? The CIA.

The “deal” is for a computing cloud developed by Amazon Web Services (AWS). It also just happens AWS services all 17 agencies within the US intelligence community.

An unholy alliance in which Bezos stands to gain many more millions by pacifying and working with the CIA through his publication The Washington Post. “Leaks” and “information” Bezos will publish without question, without proper verification and journalistic sourcing.

The CIA will now have its own propaganda publication to do whatever it likes in misinforming and manipulating the American people and the voters.

Vital information intentionally withheld from the American people, as Bezos uses the Post to forge pocket lining government contracts while promoting his own personal political agenda.

Is this lack of reporting of the Bezos/CIA partnership by the MSM the result of massive incompetency? Or a very well-organized cover-up within the MSM inner circle of four or five elitists who now own six companies that control over 90 percent of MSM outlets?

The same outlets which through diverse company divisions own every television station and newspaper in this country with the exception of very small, weekly community publications and certain Christian networks. Even many of those community weeklies have been scooped up by larger publication divisions.

Are we connecting the dots at each cross-section of intertwining strings holding together this corrupt spider web? A vast interlocking network designed to lure and trap average American citizens into its carefully woven web of manipulation and deceit.

The Washington Post is the most widely known and respected news outlet in the world, reaching more people than any other publication including the NY Times. It has always been the standard in which journalistic ethics are established and adhered to by other publications. It sets the example to be followed by the everyday journalists out there on the beat trying to do their jobs.

By utilizing the internet and social media, the Post has literally millions of subscribers and followers reading and watching online video on a daily basis. It is the media center of the nation’s capital and the eye of the DC political belt.

Control the Washington Post and you control the message; the MSM and the “agenda.”

“The Post is unquestionably the political paper of record in the United States, and how it covers governance sets the agenda for the balance of the news media,” journalism scholar Robert W. McChesney revealed to Altenet.org in a December investigative article.

“Citizens need to know about this conflict of interest in the columns of the Post itself,” he added.

In the same article, a statement released by the Public Institute of Advocacy quoted McChesney as saying:

“If some official enemy of the United States had a comparable situation — say the owner of the dominant newspaper in Caracas was getting $600 million in secretive contracts from the Maduro government — the Post itself would lead the howling chorus impaling that newspaper and that government for making a mockery of a free press. It is time for the Post to take a dose of its own medicine.”

If this alliance between the CIA and Bezos isn’t illegal, then it is certainly unethical and displays a huge conflict of interest while also exposing the corruption existing within the MSM. The main sources of news and information Americans sought and believed, until the rise of alternative media outlets.

Alternative sources of information the MSM bash and attempt daily to discredit as “fake news,” when “fake,” misleading and sometimes right out lies being spread across social media come out of the MSM and pseudo extremist left-wing sites erected simply to misinform and confuse the American voter.

George Soros “Media Matters” machine
Soros Media
Soros Funds A Lot Of These Media Sources

Many Facebook pages and websites that have “popped” up over the past several years whose resources and money are being funded by George Soros’s well oiled “Media Matters” machine. Just one of many “nonprofit” organizations extending from his Open Society Foundation.

Soros also has imbedded ties to many MSM outlets including The New York Times, the Associated Press, NBC and ABC and here it is again, the Washington Post. Readers are urgently encouraged to research Soros, his history and his worldwide organizations.

Altnet also writes, “Amazon’s offer wasn’t the low bid, but it won the CIA contract anyway by offering advanced high-tech ‘cloud’ infrastructure.”

So how is at a time government should be pinching pennies due to the increasing national debt, the CIA passed over lower bidders for the contracted services?

The answer tracks back to the infamous blocking of the WikiLeaks website by Bezos’s company Amazon Web Services (AWS), a service Bezos personally and publicly brags is the most advanced and best high-tech “cloud” infrastructure on the market.

“WikiLeaks was booted from Amazon’s webhosting service AWS. So, at the height of public interest in what WikiLeaks was publishing, readers were unable to access the WikiLeaks website,” reported watchdog group Fair in 2013.

So why did AWS give WikiLeaks the boot? Most likely at the bequest of the CIA, whom Bezos has been doing business with since 2013 when the $600 million contract was awarded to AWS. Bezos also has close ties to the Clintons and backed Hillary in her failed run for the presidency, both in the 2008 primary campaign and in 2016 as the Democrat nominee.

Bezos also publicly voices open contempt for President Trump, and his policies. He recently was behind the Washington challenge to Trump’s 90-day immigration ban and threatened suit himself in an email to his employees, as was reported on this site.

Bezos, without any reference to stock holders input or lack of agreement, said he will put the full resources at Amazon to defeat the policy and implied his mission of taking down President Trump.

The Political Assassination Of General Flynn
michael flynn
Bezos led the charge against General Flynn using his solely owned Washington Post.

It was Bezos’s Washington Post that first leaked documents and led the charge to discredit Trump’s national security advisor cabinet pick. General Michael Flynn was forced to resign due to the unverified information touted in the “leaks.” Flynn was cleared by the FBI of any wrongdoing in those leaks. But the damage was already done.

In recent days, it has been revealed the CIA has full intention of attempting a coup to remove Trump from office, even though “The Donald” was democratically elected by American voters in a free election.

And it appears in the CIA is in conspiracy with Bezos’s plan to use the Washington Post to achieve a mutual goal: to disrupt and destroy President Trump and his administration. A goal that has no regard or concern for national security or the safety and well-being of American citizens.

Any impact on the average citizen, including possible loss of life by terrorist attacks is considered “collateral damage.”

In an exchange of tweets on Feb. 15, John Schindler, former NSA analyst and national security columnist for the Observer answered a question asking what he thought was going on at the NSA right now. Schneider responded, citing a friend in the intelligence community reference to Trump:


Which begs a bigger question than the unethical alliance between the CIA, Bezos and his Washington Post:

Could Trump be impeached? Of is he in danger of befalling the same fate as President Kennedy? Being a previous “anti-establishment” president, Kennedy sought to disengage from the Vietnam conflict and dissolve the Federal Reserve, but was assassinated.

Actions that directly impacted the CIA and wealthy elitists.

 
 
By Donna Kay at Conservative Daily Post.

Obama’s Treatment Of The Mainstream Media

Remember when Obama framed the Mainstream Media as the opposition party?

“We’re going to treat them the way we would treat an opponent,” said Anita Dunn, the White House communications director, in a telephone interview on Sunday. “As they are undertaking a war against Barack Obama and the White House, we don’t need to pretend that this is the way that legitimate news organizations behave.”

Obama's Treatment Of The Mainstream Media

Attacking the news media is a time-honored White House tactic but to an unusual degree, the Obama administration has narrowed its sights to one specific organization, the Fox News Channel, calling it, in essence, part of the political opposition.

“We’re going to treat them the way we would treat an opponent,” said Anita Dunn, the White House communications director, in a telephone interview on Sunday. “As they are undertaking a war against Barack Obama and the White House, we don’t need to pretend that this is the way that legitimate news organizations behave.”

Her comments are only the latest in the volatile exchange between the administration and the top-rated network, which is owned by the News Corporation, controlled by Rupert Murdoch. Last month, Roger Ailes, the chairman of Fox News, and David Axelrod, a senior adviser to President Obama, met for coffee in New York, in what Politico, which last week broke that news, labeled a “Fox summit.”

While neither party has said what was discussed, some have speculated that a truce, or at least an adjustment in tone, was at issue. (Mr. Ailes and Mr. Obama reportedly reached a temporary accord after a meeting in mid-2008.) But shots are still being fired, which animates the idea that both sides see benefits in the feud.

Fox seems to relish the controversy.

“Instead of governing, the White House continues to be in campaign mode, and Fox News is the target of their attack mentality,” Michael Clemente, the channel’s senior vice president for news, said in a statement on Sunday. “Perhaps the energy would be better spent on the critical issues that voters are worried about.”

Source…

Or how about the time, back in 2008, when OBAMA Kicked reporters off his plane because their papers had endorsed John McCain?

OBAMA Kicked reporters off his plane
 

It’s Time To Call “Fake News” By Its Real Name “Weaponized Journalism”

After The WaPost’s Latest Shot, It’s Time To Call “Fake News” By Its Real Name “Weaponized Journalism”

It's Time To Call ‘Fake News’ By Its Real Name ‘Weaponized Journalism’

A Washington Post fake news article misrepresenting the “firing” of the head of the DC National Guard makes clear mainstream media has now weaponized the news.

Defying any sense of journalistic integrity and loyalty to the truth, the Washington Post did it again — publishing Fake News for clicks — which had the desired effect of worldwide outrage to suit a tightly-defined political agenda.

This latest astounding deviation from the facts, however, makes indisputably clear the weaponization of news. Journalists and media outlets make mistakes from time to time, but a pattern and practice of publishing unfounded, unverified, and fraudulent articles cannot be characterized simply as irresponsible.

We are in the midst of an information war of epic proportions — led haplessly astray of the truth with the Post leading the way — and it’s a dangerous and frightening portent of things to come, not the least of which will be propagandized truth and heavy-handed censorship.

On Friday, WaPo published an article claiming President-elect Donald Trump fired Washington, D.C., National Guard Major General Errol R. Schwartz — just in time for the inauguration — and that he would be forced to leave his post as soon as the president takes the oath of office.

But that isn’t true.

“My troops will be on the street,” Schwartz told the Post. “I’ll see them off, but I won’t be able to welcome them back to the armory.” He added he would “never plan to leave a mission in the middle of a battle.”

WaPo’s erroneous reporting included a statement from D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson, who lamented, “It doesn’t make sense to can the general in the middle of an active deployment.”

“I’m a soldier,” the Post quoted Schwartz. “I’m a presidential appointee, therefore the president has the power to remove me.”

But WaPo left out a number of critical points — and horrendously slanted the rest — about this “firing” of the head of the D.C. National Guard.

That D.C. position — unlike the equivalent for states — is appointed by the president, not by the Pentagon, as the Post suggested, nor by any branch of the military. Also, the article glaringly omitted any statement from the Trump transition team, an inexcusable offense, considering it later emerged Schwartz had been offered to keep his position through the end of Inauguration Day — it was Schwartz who turned down the offer, preferring instead to vacate the role at 12 noon, when Trump will be sworn in.

Of course, the blatant misinformation presented by the Post seemed so juicy, countless corporate outlets parroted the claim. Thus this Fake News rippled around the planet earning the scorn of millions who believed Trump must have lost all sensibility for firing a man who had diligently performed his duties since his appointment to the post by former President George W. Bush — during a potentially dangerous event.

This also spawned a number of rumors — with raucous protests planned for Inauguration Day, and the week before, why would the incoming president fire the man in charge of security? Isn’t this a preposterous decision on Trump’s part? What is Trump thinking?

Like previous viral stories — at this point, one would be hard-pressed to deem them ‘news articles’ — the Washington Post published faulty information and subsequently began backtracking.

Notably, in each case, after erroneous information went viral worldwide, edits after publication go largely unnoticed by most of the populace. While retractions and post-publication editor’s notes sometimes appear on WaPo’s articles they are orders of magnitude less popular than the original story and, in this instance, the firing of Schwartz story has only been appended in content — no editor’s note yet graces the top or bottom of the article. (The original version can be found here.)

Any news organization actually practicing journalism would tell you this is egregiously irresponsible.

Except, it’s beginning to appear the Washington Post publishes misinformation and Fake News intentionally — knowing any subsequent disputation of its claims won’t gather as much steam as the original publication.

A distinct reason exists why this would be the case — Brandolini’s law.

“The amount of energy necessary to refute bullshit is an order of magnitude bigger than to produce it,” Alberto Brandolini, an Italian independent software development consultant, keenly observed in 2013 — the Post knows this, and has been manipulating public perception exactly this way.

It was, after all, the Washington Post who initiated the altogether ironic war on Fake News — first turning from journalistic duty in the publication of several items blaming disinformation for the downfall of, well, nearly everything.

WaPo published an ‘article’ about supposed blacklist of over 200 outlets a nascent and seemingly prepubescent website, PropOrNot, had decided were Russian propagandists — linked either directly to the Russian government or had haplessly joined the effort by reporting Fake News during the election.

Literally nothing in that Post article was true. None of the claims were backed by evidence, no research or investigation had been performed, nothing. WaPo just printed the claims of PropOrNot and inserted plausible deniability by failing to link to the list or site. A subsequent retraction at the top of the page was akin to plugging a crack in a dam that’s already burst — damage to many reputable and award-winning outlets listed had already been done.

Previously:
RED ALERT: Head Of DC National Guard Removed From Command During Inauguration

 

Source… Claire Bernish  at The Free Thought Project

RED ALERT: Head Of DC National Guard Removed From Command During Inauguration

Head of D.C. National Guard to be removed from post in middle of inauguration

Head Of DC National Guard Removed From Command During Inauguration

What are they planning?

The Army general who heads the D.C. National Guard and has an integral part in overseeing the inauguration will be removed from command effective at 12:01 p.m. Jan. 20, just as Donald Trump is sworn in as president.

The head of the District of Columbia National Guard has been ordered to step down immediately after President-elect Donald Trump takes office.

Maj. Gen. Errol Schwartz will be stepping down at 12:01 p.m. on Jan. 20, just after Trump is sworn in, Maj. Byron Coward, a guard spokesman said.

Schwartz, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, told The Washington Post in an interview “the timing is very unusual” but that he’s following orders.

Unlike the commanders of state-level National Guard units, the head of the District’s National Guard serves at the pleasure of the president. At the time Schwartz departs, he will be in the midst of commanding thousands of Guard troops from the District and around the country who are providing support for the inauguration.

“My troops will be on the street,” he said in an interview, according to the paper. “I’ll see them off, but I won’t be able to welcome them back to the armory.” He went on to say that he would “never plan to leave a mission in the middle of a battle.”

Phil Mendelson, the D.C. Council chairman, criticized the move.

“It doesn’t make sense to can the general in the middle of an active deployment,” Mendelson told The Post. He added that Schwartz’s sudden departure will be a long-term loss for the District. “He’s been really very good at working with the community, and my impression was that he was good for the Guard.”

The Post reported that there have been contradictory stories about the behind-the-scenes developments leading to the decision. A person close to the Trump transition team reportedly said transition officials wanted to keep him, but the Army pushed for a replacement. Schwartz reportedly said the orders came in an email from the Pentagon. He will be replaced by a brigadier general at 12:01 p.m.

Source…

This is highly unusual!

Maj. Gen. Errol R. Schwartz may be a good guy who will properly respond to insurrection and shut down a criminal anti Trump DC riot by paid Soros/Clinton agitators.

His replacement may let it grow to a disaster.

UPDATE:
From Gateway Pundit:

FAKE NEWS: WaPo Did Not Tell Whole Story on DC National Guard Chief’s Resignation

Now This…
The Trump administration told FOX News of Friday the story is a crock.

Schwartz was offered to stay on his post until after the Inauguration but decided to quit during the ceremony and then he ran to the press to complain.

According to FOX,

“The Trump Transition team reportedly offered to let him keep his job until the ceremonies were over. Maj. Gen Schwartz refused. It appears he would rather argue his would rather argue his case though in the press.”

WOW!

 

Load More