Aletho News


The 4th Annual Fake News Awards!


From the palatial living room studios of The Corbett Report it’s the 4th Annual Fake News Awards. The boldest lies. The stupidest propaganda. The ugliest presstitution. Join James as he debunks the lies and shames the liars behind the biggest fake news stories of 2020. Who will take the Dino for the worst fake news story of the year? Watch and find out!

Watch on Archive / BitChute / LBRY / Minds / YouTube or Download the mp4

For those with limited bandwidth, CLICK HERE to download a smaller, lower file size version of this episode.

For those interested in audio quality, CLICK HERE for the highest-quality version of this episode (WARNING: very large download).

Worst Acting by a Politician or Health Official goes to Matt Hancock crying over William Shakespeare

Best Acting by an Actor in a Fake and Staged Scamdemic goes to Governor Andrew Cuomo for his Scripted Scamdemic Unreality Show

Fakest Fact Check Award goes to FactCheckNI for Can you generate a positive result for COVID-19 from an RT-PCR test?

Fear Porn Story of the Year goes to the New York Post for NYC may temporarily bury coronavirus victims on Hart Island

Best Orwellian Doublethink Award goes to Ali Velshi for “It is not generally speaking unruly but fires have been started.”

Best Suppression of a Real News Story goes to NPR for their refusal to cover the Hunter Biden laptop story

Lockdown Hypocrite of the Year Award goes to Neil Ferguson for breaking the very lockdown orders he himself helped bring about

Fakes Science Story of the Year goes to the BBC for Oxford Covid vaccine ‘safe and effective’ study shows

Fake News Story of the Year goes to Bloomberg for Coronavirus Is 10 Times Deadlier Than Seasonal Flu, Fauci Says


The First Annual REAL Fake News Awards

The 2nd Annual REAL Fake News Awards

The 3rd Annual REAL Fake News Awards

Matt Hancock crying over William Shakespeare

Governor Cuomo Receives Founders Award at 48th International Emmy Awards

Cuomo blames large gatherings in the Hasidic community for spread of COVID-19…

…using a photo from 2006

Cuomo implores New Yorkers to stay home on Thanksgiving: ‘Forget the politics’

Gov. Cuomo cancels Thanksgiving plans with family after backlash

Cuomo orders nursing homes to accept sick patients

Cuomo still refuses to disclose total number of COVID-19 nursing home deaths: watchdog

‘It never happened’: Cuomo denies causing 6,500 nursing home deaths

Can you generate a positive result for COVID-19 from an RT-PCR test?z

COVID19 PCR Tests are Scientifically Meaningless

WHO Information Notice for IVD Users (PCR false positives warning)

Fauci admits PCR high cycle threshold problem on This Week in Virology

Episode 381 – Who Will Fact Check the Fact Checkers?

Fact check: Inventor of method used to test for COVID-19 didn’t say it can’t be used in virus detection

Kary Mullis Explains the PCR Test

Kary Mullis on Fauci

New Coronavirus Wasn’t ‘Predicted’ In Simulation

NYC may temporarily bury coronavirus victims on Hart Island

Lies, Damned Lies and Coronavirus Statistics

Ali Velshi: “It is not generally speaking unruly but fires have been started.”

Nineteen eighty-four

Over 1,000 health professionals sign a letter saying, Don’t shut down protests using coronavirus concerns as an excuse

Same Facts, Opposite Conclusions – #PropagandaWatch

“Fiery but mostly peaceful protests”

NPR explains their refusal to cover the Hunter Biden story

Dave Smith on Hunter Biden story (POTP #671)

Politifact twists itself into pretzel knots over the Hunter Biden coverup

Denver Mayor Hancock flies to visit family for Thanksgiving

Newsom’s winery remains open while other California wineries ordered to shut down over COVID

Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot defends hairstylist visit amid coronavirus outbreak

Dr. Mike called out for partying maskless

CTU board member facing criticism for vacationing in Caribbean while pushing remote learning

MSM presstitute called out live on air for mask hypocrisy

Pelosi’s trip to salon apparently broke COVID-19 rules

Let Them Eat Ice Cream! – #PropagandaWatch

Pelosi staffer’s email has entire folder for hair appointments

Oxford Covid vaccine ‘safe and effective’ study shows

Lancet: Safety and efficacy of the ChAdOx1 nCoV-19 vaccine (AZD1222) against SARS-CoV-2: an interim analysis of four randomised controlled trials in Brazil, South Africa, and the UK

What Vaccine Trials?

The Future of Vaccines

Honourable Mentions and Nominations from the announcement thread

Coronavirus Is 10 Times Deadlier Than Seasonal Flu, Fauci Says

Dr. Anthony Fauci addresses COVID-19 mortality rate

The Worst Miscalculation in Human History

Public Health Lessons Learned From Biases in Coronavirus Mortality Overestimation

Silicon Valley and WEF-Backed Foundation Announce Global Initiative for COVID-19 Vaccine Records

Stop Watching Propaganda – #PropagandaWatch

January 16, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Progressive Hypocrite, Timeless or most popular, Video | | 1 Comment

Did President Trump Promote a Killer Drug by Taking Hydroxychloroquine?

By Peter R. Breggin, MD and Ginger Breggin

Since May 18, 2020, President Trump has been accused of killing people by major media for announcing that he has been taking hydroxychloroquine (HCQ) for two weeks to prevent the occurrence of COVID-19. Even the usually calm Neil Cavuto on Fox News accused the president of killing people by promoting the medication: “It will kill you. I cannot stress this enough. It will kill you.” Fortunately, the thoughtful Fox News doctor, Marc Siegel, afterward supported the President’s use of the drug and affirmed that it saved the life of his 96-year-old father. Today, May 19, 2020 shortly after 4 pm in Washington DC, Trump explained on television he and his doctor made the decision because he had been in close contact with two people who tested positive for the coronavirus, SARS-CoV-2.

Worldwide Use of HCQ

Has Trump gone overboard, taking hydroxychloroquine, and promoting it? Hydroxychloroquine is the most widely used drug worldwide to treat COVID-19 with many doctors reporting it is the best drug available. A March 27, 2020 worldwide survey headlined, “Doctors Rate Hydroxychloroquine Most Effective Therapy for Coronavirus Infection.” India found hydroxychloroquine so essential to saving the lives of its citizens that for a time it stopped exporting it and more recently has been sending it to Africa in the “war against the coronavirus.”

The US lags behind many other nations in using HCQ because of the politically-driven negative PR in this country, but its use remains extensive. Reuters reported, “Doctors and pharmacists from more than half a dozen large healthcare systems in New York, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Ohio, Washington and California told Reuters they are routinely using hydroxychloroquine on patients hospitalized with COVID-19.”

A So-Called VA Study Claims that HCQ Kills

A negative study using Veterans Administration data is being used by many, including Neil Cavuto on the air, to prove that hydroxychloroquine kills people. We published a report and a video showing that the study was extremely biased, poorly done, and pure junk. Furthermore, despite the study’s poorly presented data, our reanalysis showed that the combination of hydroxychloroquine with azithromycin was saving many lives because, when given to the sickest patients of all, the death rate dropped to that of the healthiest patients.

A day or two after our analysis of the so-called VA study, the Secretary of the VA, Robert Wilkie, made the TV rounds, rejecting the study, and pointing out the data had been obtained and used by people unaffiliated with the VA. He endorsed HCQ, stating the VA was using it effectively to treat COVID-19. Today, after the President made his remarks, the VA Secretary stated on TV that men like himself who had been in the military frequently used the medication and that on any given day the VA dispenses 42,000 doses.

The FDA’s Political Intervention

The FDA is no watchdog; it is the lapdog of the pharmaceutical industry. In its negative pronouncement about the cheap, inexpensive and widely used drug, hydroxychloroquine, the FDA presented only hearsay evidence of reports of cardiac problems for which it gave not a single citation or piece of evidence. Meanwhile, the FDA has long been critical of using its reporting system to draw conclusions of the kind it drew against hydroxychloroquine. Since it made no reports available, the FDA clearly did not want scrutiny of the supposedly alarming data. They wanted us to run scared without providing particulars.

The Safety of HCQ

In my many decades of experience reviewing drug side effects, hydroxychloroquine is one of the safest drugs I have evaluated. The drug has been FDA approved for 65 years, so its safety profile is well-known. The FDA-approved Full Prescribing Information has no black box warning about lethal risks as many other drugs do, including many psychiatric drugs.

Hydroxychloroquine is on the World Health Organization’s List of Essential Medicines. It has been known for decades as being among the safest and most effective medicines needed in any health system. Almost all problems are with larger or more long-term amounts than used to treat the current epidemic. Deaths are extremely rare, and the WHO states the following,

Despite hundreds of millions of doses administered in the treatment of malaria, there have been no reports of sudden unexplained death associated with quinine, chloroquine or amodiaquine, although each drug causes QT/QTc interval prolongation.”

The cardiac issue, QT interval prolongation that everyone warns about, is extraordinarily common—found in 247 other drugs including many commonly used psychiatric drugs. Many US doctors who use it for various FDA approved purposes—for malaria, for lupus, for rheumatoid arthritis—have announced publicly that they have never seen a death from it over many years.

Trump’s Drug Vs. Fauci’s Drug

Anthony Fauci, Director of NIH’s Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases, has led the criticism of Trump’s enthusiasm for hydroxychloroquine.

How safe is Fauci’s drug remdesivir? Remdesivir had to be stopped from being used in its Ebola trial. Compared to other antiviral drugs in the same study, it had an excessive mortality rate. A recent controlled clinical trial for remdesivir, published in Lancet, showed it had no good effects and that 5% of the people became much worse when taking it. Fauci meanwhile has never released adverse event data from his recent trial, an enormous issue that most readers will be learning for the first time in this report. We have previously discussed these findings in a reported titled “Fauci’s Remdesivir: Inadequate to Treat COVID-19 and Potentially Lethal.” Our report and PDFs of the published clinical trials can be found on our Coronavirus Resource Center on

Right now, hydroxychloroquine is the best drug available for treating COVID-19 and its safety profile is remarkably good. Compared to it, Fauci’s remdesivir is a potentially deadly, highly experimental, unproven drug. So who is killing people, Trump by promoting a drug commonly used worldwide for treating COVID-19 with a good safety profile, or Fauci promoting remdesivir which remains experimental, has potentially lethal adverse effects, and whose safety profile in the recently aborted NIH trial has never been released by Fauci?

January 16, 2021 Posted by | Corruption, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | , | Leave a comment

Twitter Plots Mass Censorship

By Stephen Lendman | January 16, 2021

Big Brother is no longer fiction. It hasn’t been for some time, notably post-9/11, what I earlier called the mother of all state-sponsored false flags.

What’s going on in the US and West includes mass surveillance and growing online censorship of content diverging from the official narrative.

It’s unrelated to national security and foreign threats — everything to do with controlling the message, what totalitarian rule is all about.

What’s unconstitutional is fast becoming the new abnormal.

In Orwell’s envisioned future, Big Brother was “watching,” adding:

“There was of course no way of knowing whether you were being watched at any given moment.”

“How often, or on what system, the Thought Police plugged in on any individual wire was guesswork.”

“It was even conceivable that they watched everybody all the time. But at any rate they could plug in your wire whenever they wanted to.”

Controlling the message includes filtering out unwanted content — done today with electronic ease.

According to Project Verifas, Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey is “laying out a roadmap for future political censorship,” adding:

Besides blocking Trump from its platform permanently and removing 70,000 or more accounts, “(t)his is going to be much bigger” ahead, he said.

“(I)t’s going to go on for much longer than just this day, this week, and the next few weeks, and go on beyond the inauguration.”

“So, the focus is certainly on (censoring and silencing) Trump…”

“But also, we need to think much longer term around how these dynamics play out over time.”

“I don’t believe this is going away anytime soon.”

“You know, the US is extremely divided. Our platform is showing that every single day.”

Diversity of opinions and actions according to the rule of law is what free societies are all about.

Restricting things for mass conformity, according to what higher powers demand, is tyranny — where the US and other Western societies are heading.

A Project Veritasm (PV) video reveals Dorsey’s plot against a free and open society.

He called for greater toughness against Trump and his supporters that number in the millions.

A Twitter insider provided PV with Dorsey’s diabolical plot against constitutionally guaranteed free expression.

Established as an NGO in 2011 by James O’Keefe, PV “investigates and exposes corruption, dishonesty, self-dealing, waste, fraud, and other misconduct in both public and private institutions to achieve a more ethical and transparent society.”

“O’Keefe serves as the CEO and Chairman of the Board so that he can continue to lead and teach his fellow journalists, as well as protect and nurture the (PV) culture.”

It publishes important information it believes is reliable and vital for everyone to know without “advocat(ing) specific solutions” from investigative work.

An earlier PV report called the NYT an American Soviet era Pravda, not how it operates today that includes publishing some of my articles.

An undercover video obtained by PV included the strategy of the Times’ editor for videos Nick Dudich, admitting the broadsheet manipulates content.

Dudich admitted using gatekeeper power to “choose what goes out and what doesn’t go out.”

“We caught (The Times ) admitting” to censoring content, said PV.

“When (it colludes with) You Tube… the bastard child of that relationship is fake news” — a longstanding Times specialty.

PV’s O’Keefe questioned what news sources You Tube considers “legitimate,” adding:

If the company operates as a news business, it’s “going to have to answer for the sins of (its) news partners.”

A separate undercover PV video caught Dudich saying he worked for Hillary’s presidential campaign, adding he didn’t join the Times to “be objective.”

The self-styled newspaper of record is the closest thing to a US ministry of propaganda.

It betrays readers by reinventing reality, burying vital truths, the same unacceptable actions practiced by other establishment and social media like Twitter, Facebook, and others.

Stephen Lendman is the author of:

How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion, and Class War


Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity

January 16, 2021 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , , , | Leave a comment

There Was No “Violent Assault on the Capitol” and There is Abundant Evidence of Electoral Fraud

Don’t Fall For The Establishment’s Tall Tales

In this important column I provide you with evidence that there was no assault on the Capitol, and I provide you with so much evidence that there was massive electoral fraud that it will take you all weekend to go through the evidence.

By Paul Craig Roberts | Institute for Political Economy | January 15, 2021

Think intelligently. The rally for Trump on January 6 was massive, which is why the presstitutes did not show it to you. No other politician anywhere in the Western World could produce such a turnout of support. For the rest of the politicians in the West, such a turnout would be in opposition like the long-lived “yellow vest” protest in France and the massive protests in Germany against the Covid restrictions.

Here was the situation on January 6, 2021. Members have applied rules that require the House and Senate to listen to the evidence of election fraud. As Lew Rockwell points out, this means the public would also hear the evidence for the first time.

The evidence will show enormous fraud in the swing states where the election was stolen. Regardless of the evidence, everyone suspects Biden is going to be found the winner, because that is what the Establishment demands and has the means to enforce with media, Antifa, and BLM as threats to be unleashed and campaign contributions to cut off. Large majorities of both parties would prefer not to see the evidence than to have to vote against the evidence.

The situation is pregnant with glory for Trump. Congress is putting him out of office in the face of a massive demonstration from 50 states in support of Trump.

The Establishment cannot possibly allow this. The massive support empowers Trump and his supporters as forces for democracy against a corrupt and self-serving Establishment, which is the last thing the Establishment wants and can tolerate. Trump must leave office discredited and blackened and his supporters must be demonized as “MAGA terrorists” and “enemies of democracy.”

This was easily achieved. Such a large and unorganized rally is easy to infiltrate and to lead into a staged “violent assault on the Capitol.”

Here is a report with video evidence that CNN/NPR presstitute Jade Sacker was with Antifa leader John Sullivan among the Trump supporters inside the Capitol. Jake and John are celebrating “We did it!” “It,” of course, is “assaulting the capital,” which deep-sixed the presentation of electoral fraud evidence. The Trump supporters were simply too naive to avoid the trap. 


What happened is, as I have explained in previous columns and which can be verified by numerous available videos until they are censored and taken down, provocateurs appeared on the back steps of the Capitol and provoked the crowd to go up the steps to the barriers, causing police to fire tear gas. The photos and videos of people pushing aside barriers in the midst of swirling tear gas were used by the presstitutes to create the impression of an assault on the Capitol.

As best as I can conclude from my research, no one entered the Capitol from the rear. All entry was in front, and entry happened because the Capitol police opened the door and let the rally attendees inside. The videos show that  the “invaders” walked calmly in, staying in an orderly line and staying within the rope boundaries observed by Capitol visitors. The available videos show no “violent assault on the Capitol.” Here is one example:

“The violent assault on the Capitol” is another fake news success. This Establishment Tale has been propagated all over the world.  For the people in media, the more outlandish the “news,” the more they hype it as that is what gets attention, brings readers, profits, and prizes. It is disconcerting that fake news has again prevailed to the extent that Republicans are being cut off from political donations. As journalist Ekaterina Blinova early realized, the Democrats intend to achieve one party rule by Democrats.

Why was this show orchestrated?  The answer is obvious. The last thing the Establishment can allow is a challenger to the Establishment being kicked out of office in the face of what might be the largest demonstration of support for a political figure in American history. The very last thing that the American Establishment wants is a leader of that half of the American population who understand that the Establishment’s agendas are inimical to their own.

So Trump and his supporters had to be blackened and discredited with an orchestrated event that stopped the presentation of the evidence of electoral fraud and replaced it with an “insurrection against democracy by MAGA terrorists.” In one fell swoop, this got rid of the evidence of electoral fraud and Trump and his supporters. The massive rally of support for Trump was turned into a liability for Trump, his supporters, and Republicans.

There are no grounds for impeachment in Trump’s address to the crowd. But the presstitutes speak with one voice and need no evidence for their claims. The presstitutes create evidence with repetition: “A violent assault on the Capitol” encouraged by an “insurrectionist.”

To further blacken Trump the Establishment had Pelosi hold a second impeachment. The House convicted Trump on false charges, as Democrats are the majority, and Trump goes down in history as the first US president to be twice impeached by the House but not convicted by the Senate.

Without conviction, impeachment fails. But this understanding will not be propagated by the presstitutes.

The Evidence of Electoral Fraud

To begin with, ask yourself how this fits in with Trump losing the election: Gallup Poll Finds Trump To Be America’s Most Admired Man

As the presstitutes immediately deep-sixed the evidence of electoral fraud by declaring with one loud incessant voice that the claims of electoral fraud were the real fraud, the only people who saw the evidence of the massive organized electoral fraud were the members of the legislatures in the swing states who had the evidence presented to them and the members of the public who attended the presentation of the evidence or watched it live on the Internet. 99% of the American population do not know that expert witnesses presented vast evidence of electoral fraud to members of legislatures in the swing states. The Establishment did not want people to know this, and the presstitutes did not tell them.

I watched presentations in three of the swing states of the evidence presented by  professionals who are heads of companies known for their capabilities in pattern analysis, voting patterns, and the capability of voting machines to be programed to weight votes toward the desired winner and to create questionable ballots that have to be adjudicated by election officials, and so on.

Evidence of massive mail-in ballot fraud was provided by hundreds of affidavits signed under penalty of perjury by witnesses to electoral fraud. The witnesses were people of all races, genders, and political party.

The function of the mail-in ballots was to backstop the programmed voting machines. If the machines were insufficiently weighted in favor of Biden, fradulent ballots could be used to further shift the vote in the desired direction.

There are many affidavits of unfolded ballots being counted, that is, ballots never folded, put in an envelop and mailed. There are security camera videos of the same ballots being counted over and over. There are affidavits of illegal aliens voting. There are affidavits of out-of-state people voting in swing states. There are affidavits of people voting from fake addresses. There are affidavits of people voting from graveyards.

This evidence is all over the Internet. No doubt much of it has been removed by our censors. Nevertheless, the presentations of the evidence to legislatures in the swing states is still available if you will commit the hours to watching the video presentations. My own columns and guest columns on this website contain reports on the evidence and links to presentations of the evidence. Most of the presentations will be censored into the Memory Hole, but my check yesterday showed that many of the links in my and my guest columns still exist. Moreover, even where the links have been removed by the tech companies that serve only the Establishment and never the people, the names of the presenters of evidence are there in most cases, and you can use internet searches to find them and ask if the evidence that they presented to swing state legislators is available online. At the end of this column are posted links to live presentations of the evidence and to reports of the evidence. These are just a smattering of the large body of evidence.

Twitter and Facebook, Establishment controlled social media that censor truth-tellers, lost $51 billion in their share prices as a result of censoring the President of the United States.

They would be headed out of business except that the alternatives are being denied service by Apple, Amazon, and Google—all faithful servants of the Establishment. The social media site, Parler, which refuses to censor for the Establishment, has been cut off from service by Big Media.

Some think censorship will backfire on Establishment-serving Big Media, and it has cost Twitter and Facebook $51 billion. But I very much doubt that the Establishment will give up the control over all explanations that it has achieved.  Big Brother is not easy to overcome as Orwell’s 1984 makes clear.

The United States of America, formerly a free country whose citizens were protected from government abuses by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, is today a country indoctrinated by a controlled media serving a ruling elite’s self-serving agendas. Democrats, presstitutes, professors, and celebrities demonstrate vicious hatred toward red state Americans, and open season has been declared on Trump supporters.  Many have been fired from their jobs for attending the Trump rally.

By censoring communication, criminalizing the First Amendment, and controlling explanations, the elite are trapping us in a matrix of lies. The willingness of such a large percentage of the population, not only in America but throughout the Western World, to live in a world of lies and be happy is extraordinary.

Peoples whose ancesters created freedom for them have turned their backs on freedom. Instead they enjoy the pleasure of being superior by denouncing white people—which means themselves—as racists and denouncing the President of the United States and his supporters as “enemies of democracy.”

What the entire world needs to understand is that the evidence of electoral fraud–a stolen American Presidential Election–has never been presented except to a few legislators in the swing states.  The media have not presented the evidence to the public, have not provided evaluations of the evidence by alternative experts.  Instead the media has declared with one voice repeadedly: “There is no evidence.”

No court has looked at the evidence.  The courts avoided examining the evidence by refusing the cases on spurious grounds such as lack of standing to bring a case. Yet news sources worldwide report that the courts rejected the evidence.  This false reporting is used as evidence that there is no evidence.

No election officials in the swing states where the election was stolen have looked at the evidence, and they will not because the evidence shows how the election was stolen. Moreover, those who stole the election already know that they stole the election. They see their success in Biden’s “victory.” For them, the end justifies the means.

So we have evidence of a stolen election that has been refuted by refusing to look at the evidence and endlessly asserting instead that there is no evidence.

As Giuliani said, every US Attorney knows that an affidavit signed under penalty of perjury is evidence.  Giuliani, a former US Attorney, said that he had a thousand affidavits, and the American people never heard about them.

The Establishment’s power to control explanations seems to be approaching total control. The Establishment can block evidence from view. The Establishment can close down all truth-tellers. Parler is alleged to be a violator of “community standards,” which means Parler is violating the Establishment’s controlled explanations.

Cancel culture has no respect for free speech, objective evidence, and democracy, foundations of a free society. Consequently, America is degenerating into totalitarianism.

Links to evidence of electoral fraud:

Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai gave presentations. Here is his affidavit of evidence in print form:

Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai explains to Arizona legislators that the Dominion Machines Counted Biden Votes as 1.3 Votes and Trump Votes as 0.7 Votes

Dr. Shiva Ayyadurai explains the electoral fraud

There is a long list of references to election theft evidence here:

See especially:

Dominion Software Intentionally Designed to Influence Election Results: Forensics Report

More Than 432,000 Votes Removed From Trump in Pennsylvania, Data Scientists Say

Stanford University Expert Hacks Dominion Voting Machines in Real Time Proving Ability to Alter Vote Count

Georgia Election Official Who Scoffed at Election Fraud Evidence Finds that an Out-of-State Woman Used His Address to Vote in Georgia

Testimony from a person of color that white Republican pollwatchers were prohibited from doing their job and were treated like criminals

January 16, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | | 4 Comments

Mainstream media goes full Orwell telling readers they’re using the word ‘Orwellian’ wrong

By Helen Buyniski | RT | January 13, 2021

Complaining about authoritarian government intrusion into one’s life or surreptitious rewriting of history no longer qualify as “Orwellian,” according to an article that ironically embodies the concept in trying to redefine it.

News outlet USA Today has managed to personify the term ‘Orwellian’ in its profoundly condescending writeup scolding readers for “using the term ‘Orwellian’ wrong.” Published on Monday, the piece goes to great lengths to shame those insecure about their vocabulary by suggesting the term “Orwellian” can only be used correctly by liberals.

“Chances are, you’ve seen George Orwell’s name thrown around a lot in the past week on social media, either by conservatives invoking his name with sincerity or by liberals poking fun at conservatives for its misuse,” the article starts, smirkingly laying the groundwork for canceling out all usage of the term by those on the Right.

But the examples it holds up to mock – presidential scion Donald Trump Jr.’s complaint about the disappearance of his father’s Twitter account and Missouri Senator Josh Hawley’s blaming the “woke mob” for the cancellation of his book contract – are not as wide of the mark as the thought police at USA Today would have us believe.

Hawley’s book denouncing the “tyranny of Big Tech,” for example, isn’t just “a publisher drop[ping] your book because your brand has become toxic” – it’s a disturbing example of what are supposed to be separate industries (social media, book publishing) marching in ideological lockstep with the prevailing political ideology.

Nor is the younger Trump’s complaint about Twitter deleting his father’s account ‘just’ an example of “an internet platform enforcing its terms of service.” For better or worse, Trump’s Twitter feed was a historical document, his primary means of addressing the American public throughout his presidency. Suspending it permanently is the equivalent of throwing four years of official proclamations down the memory hole, never to be seen again, as 1984’s protagonist Winston Smith did with inconvenient historical documents as a loyal Party member.

USA Today brings in a scholar who wrote his dissertation on Orwell to connect the iconic “Two Minutes Hate” to the “social media mob mentality” and the QAnon conspiracy theory, perhaps missing the forest (four years of “Orange Man Bad!” ritualistically shouted at the top of one’s digital lungs) for the trees.

The article notes that Orwell fought fascism in Spain, strongly implying today’s conservatives are the ideological descendants of Franco’s fascists – a conclusion it doesn’t try to support with facts, but merely guilt by association. Which dovetails perfectly with the writer’s efforts to narrow the definition of “Orwellian” by the use of “the manipulation of language” to conceal reality.

After all, even this heavy-handed propaganda piece acknowledges that Orwell discovered “the failures of Soviet communism,” finding it one of “two sides of the same totalitarian coin” with fascism and disowning both extremes.

And as much as 21st century liberal revisionists would like to lay claim to the term “Orwellian” just for themselves, the dystopian future-Britain of 1984 was crafted in the image of the Soviet Union, not fascist Spain or Germany. “INGSOC,” the name of the Party’s totalitarian ideology, is short for “English Socialism.” Attempting to dismantle the author’s own intent to sell the ideological flavor-of-the-month is pretty, well, Orwellian.

Helen Buyniski is an American journalist and political commentator at RT. Follow her on Twitter @velocirapture23

January 13, 2021 Posted by | Fake News, Full Spectrum Dominance, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | | Leave a comment

Cheerleading Politicized Impeachment

By Stephen Lendman | January 12, 2021

Big media cheerlead preemptive wars, support corporate predation, and are indifferent toward world peace, equity, justice, the rule of law, and well-being of ordinary people.

They’re press agents for wealth, power and privilege, hostile toward governance serving everyone equitably.

What democracy is supposed to be, they scorn, supporting its fantasy version alone that’s none at all.

The NYT is in the vanguard of proliferating deep state-approved propaganda exclusively on major domestic and geopolitical issues, truth-telling on what matters most banned in its editions.

Managed news misinformation and disinformation drowns it out. All the news it claims is fit to read responsible editors wouldn’t touch.

Times editors, columnists, and correspondents demand Trump’s impeachment and removal from office — for unconstitutional reasons, not legitimate ones.

In its latest edition, the Times editorial board in charge of misinformation, disinformation, fake news, and Big Lies featured in daily editions screamed “Impeach Trump Again.”

A litany of bald-faced Big Lies followed — a longstanding Times specialty.

The Times : “Trump’s efforts to remain in office in defiance of democracy (sic) cannot be allowed to go unanswered, lest they invite more lawlessness from this president or those who follow (sic).”

According to Times fake news, impeaching Trump a second time is for use of constitutionally protected speech.

It’s about politicized revenge for defeating media darling Hillary, wanting him removed from office in defiance of the rule of law.

It’s unrelated to protecting democracy in America that exists in fantasy version alone.

The real thing is banned, along with peace, equity, justice, the rule of law, and governance serving all Americans equitably — notions the Times and other Big Media abhor.

The Times : Week ago Capitol Hill violence “was the culmination of a campaign waged by (Trump and his congressional) allies… to overturn the results of a free and fair election (sic).”

There’s nothing “free and open” about irrefutable brazen fraud and election theft — nor wanting the Trump team’s constitutional right to challenge the diabolical scheme denied.

The Times wants hard evidence of election theft suppressed.

It called legitimate Trump team challenges “farcical,” along with defying reality by claiming that “Joe Biden won fairly (sic).”

He lost. Trump won, politicized impeachment underway and possible conviction after returning to private life.

What’s going on plunged a dagger into the heart of an open, free and fair society, along with the rule of law — supported by Big Media instead of condemning it.

Falsely claiming Trump incited Capitol Hill violence last week by the Times and other Big Media is typical of how they proliferate Big Lies and breach the public trust.

So is calling totalitarian police state USA democratic.

Suppressing legitimate reasons to want Trump held accountable, the Times and other Big Media want him crucified for invented ones.

The Times virtually called Trump’s First Amendment right of free expression “a crime so brazen (sic) that it demands the highest form of accountability that the legislature can deliver (sic),” adding:

“(T)here is no other option but to vote to impeach (him) a second time” — no matter how unlawful and unjustifiable.

The Times disgracefully called remarks made by Trump below “the most un-American speech ever uttered by a president (sic),” saying:

“We will stop the steal. States want to revote. The states got defrauded.”

“They were given false information. They voted on it. Now they want to re-certify.”

If ballot counting is accurate instead of manipulated and corrupted in key swing states, “we become president.”

“We’re going to walk down to the Capitol, and we’re going to cheer on our brave senators and congressmen and-women, and we’re probably not going to be cheering so much for some of them.”

“Because you’ll never take back our country with weakness. You have to show strength, and you have to be strong.”

“We have come to demand that Congress do the right thing and only count the electors who have been lawfully slated.”

“We fight. We fight like hell. If you don’t fight like hell, you’re not going to have a country anymore.”

Do any of the above remarks and similar ones urge violence? Clearly not!

Do any of Trump’s above remarks and similar ones in tweets warrant impeachment for inciting insurrection?

The answer is self-evident!

What’s going on by Pelosi/Schumer-led undemocratic Dems is an old-fashioned political lynching.

Supported by the Times and other Big Media, it’s flagrantly unconstitutional without a leg to stand on.

Guilt by accusation is the law of the land in the US, Trump’s illegitimate impeachment virtually certain.

The fate of the nation and few remaining freedoms hang in the balance.

America as it once was long ago, warts and all, is long gone.

Totalitarian police state harshness replaced it — heading toward full-blown tyranny, notably by lynch mob injustice against a sitting president that endangers all Americans.

That’s the deplorable state of the nation today.

January 12, 2021 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | Leave a comment

Omaha World-Herald Gets Facts Wrong Blaming Mild Nebraska Drought on Climate Change

By H. Sterling Burnett | ClimateRealism | January 6, 2021

A story in the Omaha World-Herald, titled “Drought, wildfires are Nebraska’s top weather stories of 2020,” asserts climate change caused unusual drought in Nebraska last year. In reality, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) data show Nebraska is benefiting from a long-term increase in precipitation, even if occasional drought still exists. Global warming may not completely end drought in Nebraska, but drought is becoming less frequent and less severe as the Earth modestly warms.

The World-Herald article states, “At the start of 2020, not an acre of Nebraska was in drought, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor. Now, more than 99% of Nebraska is in drought, with half in severe to extreme drought. The state hasn’t seen a drought this extensive since the flash drought of 2012 lingered into 2013, according to the U.S. Drought Monitor, based at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln.”

“Through November, Nebraska was in the midst of its 15th driest year out of 126,” the World-Herald article added.

As the World-Herald admits, Nebraska had not experienced substantial drought during the previous seven years, and 2020 was not even in the top 10 percent of historic droughts. That is hardly the sign of unusual drought, let alone drought caused by climate change.

Indeed, NOAA precipitation data (see the two NOAA charts, below) show Nebraska is enjoying both a long-term increase in precipitation and a medium-term increase in precipitation. If all trends show more precipitation and less drought, how can one blame the few remaining droughts that occur on climate change?

Also, NOAA data (see the NOAA chart below) show no increase in hot summer temperatures. Indeed, hot summer days were much more prevalent throughout the first half of the 20th century than has been the case in recent years and decades. This also contradicts any assertion of more Nebraska drought.

The World-Herald cites a single source, Nebraska state climatologist Martha Shulksi, for the claim that climate change is causing more weather extremes, including drought. But even Shulksi noted, “weather extremes are normal in Nebraska because the state sits at the crossroads of continental climate patterns.” And, of course, 2020 wasn’t even that extreme – it was a fairly typical dry year.

Had the World-Herald examined Nebraska’s drought history for context, it would have found that research published by the University of Nebraska-Lincoln’s Institute of Agriculture and Natural Resources (IANR) states, “It is important to remember that droughts, including multiple-year droughts, are a normal part of Nebraska’s climate.”

The data graphically displayed in Figure 1 in IANR’s paper, “Multiple-Year Droughts In Nebraska,” show no increasing trend in the frequency or intensity of droughts in Nebraska over the past century, nor does it display an increased tendency for Nebraska to swing from weather extremes, wet to dry, year to year.

Data in the paper do show, by contrast, that since 1220 A.D., Nebraska has experienced 11 droughts of more than 10 years in length, but only one since 1900, and that one, ending in 1931, was 90 years of global warming ago. Indeed, Nebraska’s lengthiest droughts occurred before 1700, in the midst of the Little Ice Age, with six droughts surpassing 18 years in length during a 400-year period of cooler temperatures. Nebraska’s lengthiest droughts spanned 38 years (1275 to 1313) and 26 years (1539 to 1564), while the Earth was cooling in the Little Ice Age. Nebraska’s last drought of greater than 10 years in length ended in 1895, which was near the end of the Little Ice Age.

Data from NOAA and the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), discussed in Climate at a Glance: Drought, also demonstrate drought has not become more frequent or severe in recent decades in either the United States or across the Northern Hemisphere as a whole.

Indeed, the IPCC reports with “high confidence” that precipitation has increased over mid-latitude land areas of the Northern Hemisphere (including the United States) during the past 70 years, while IPCC has “low confidence” about any negative trends globally. Also, NOAA reports that the United States is undergoing its longest period in recorded history without at least 40 percent of the country experiencing “very dry” conditions. In 2017 and 2019, the United States registered its smallest percentage of land area experiencing drought in recorded history.

The Omaha World-Herald may be looking to sell newspapers, but it should act responsibly and not attempt to do so by publishing false and sensationalist claims about extreme drought conditions – assertedly caused by human-caused climate change – that simply do not exist.

January 7, 2021 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

Cold Autumn Kills Thousands of Birds – Media Blame Global Warming

By James Taylor | ClimateRealism | January 6, 2021

Google News and the corporate media are promoting claims that global warming caused the deaths of thousands of birds after a cold early autumn induced the birds to migrate south before they were ready. As common sense would suggest, the assertion that global warming causes colder early-autumn temperatures is false, contrary to climate activists’ own predictions, and ridiculous.

In early autumn, people in Nebraska, Colorado, Texas, New Mexico, and Arizona reported nearly 10,000 birds – an unusually high number – to the wildlife mortality database. Scientists discovered that most were migratory birds that had died of starvation. The birds typically migrate south later in the year, but early cold weather in the Upper Midwest, Canada, and Alaska induced the birds to migrate prior to their normal migration, and prior to building up sufficient weight and strength for the migration.

“It’s really hard to attribute direct causation, but given the close correlation of the weather event with the death of these birds, we think that either the weather event forced these birds to migrate prior to being ready, or maybe impacted their access to food sources during their migration,” Jonathan Sleeman, director of the USGS National Wildlife Health Center in Madison, Wisconsin, told the UK Guardian.

Climate activists and their media allies were quick to blame global warming for the cold early autumn that led to the bird deaths.

“The unseasonably cold weather that northern states experienced early this year also worsened the die-off, causing earlier-than-usual bird migrations,” reported NBC television station KPNX in Phoenix.

“Two experts from Arizona State University see the report as another tragedy in the multiple climate change issues the state is facing,” KPNX added.

According to the UK Guardian, the bird deaths were “made worse by unseasonably cold weather probably linked to the climate crisis, scientists have said.”

Google News is promoting the Guardian article among its top search results today under “climate change.”

Climate activists have in the past attempted to blame very cold winters on global warming, but they had not previously blamed cold autumns on global warming. Indeed, climate activists have previously claimed exactly the opposite. For example, in November 2019 Yale Climate Communications published an article titled, “How is climate change affecting autumn? As temperatures warm, the fall season has been delayed.” As another example, Climate Communications published an article titled, “Autumn Falling Back.” The theme of these and many other articles is that global warming is delaying, not accelerating, the onset of cold autumn weather.

No, Google News, global warming does not cause the early onset of cold autumn temperatures, even if the cold temperatures cause politically convenient bird deaths.

James Taylor is the President of the Heartland Institute. Taylor is also director of Heartland’s Arthur B. Robinson Center for Climate and Environmental Policy.

January 7, 2021 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science | | Leave a comment

Anti-Trump NYT Wants Him Removed from Office and Prosecuted

By Stephen Lendman | January 7, 2021

The self-styled newspaper of record has been hostile toward Trump since he announced his candidacy for president in 2015.

The broadsheet’s rage greatly intensified after he defeated media darling Hillary.

It continued virtually daily throughout his time in office — largely for invented reasons, ignoring most important ones.

It wants him tarred and feathered by impeachment and prosecution. See below.

Pre-dawn January 7, the race for the White House officially ended — after what may have been orchestrated Wednesday violence on Capitol Hill.

It shifted over half of congressional Republicans to join with Dems in formally ending Trump’s tenure by elevating Biden/Harris to power in days.

It’s all over but the postmortems that may include an attempt by undemocratic Dems and perhaps GOP collaborators to remove Trump from office despite only days remaining in his tenure.

No US president was ever removed by impeachment. Will Trump break precedent a scant two weeks before Biden/Harris replace him?

What’s inconceivable at this late stage is possible though unlikely.

The Times is leading the 11th hour jihad against him.

In its latest edition, it carpet-bombed him with a virtual blitzkrieg of calls for his head.

Its pro-war, pro-business, anti-governance of, by, and for everyone equitably according to the rule of law editors led the charge — to their disgrace.

“Trump is to blame for Capitol (Hill) attack (sic),” they falsely raged, adding:

He “incited his followers to violence (sic). There must be consequences (sic).”

Claiming he “sparked” Wednesday Capitol Hill violence was a bald-faced Big Lie — typical of how the Times operates while suppressing what’s vital for everyone to know.

Times editors want Trump held “accountable” for what he had nothing to do with, and more.

They want him “criminal(ly) prosecut(ed) (sic).”

They want congressional Republicans “bear(ing) a measure of responsibility for the attack on the Capitol (sic).”

They continue to pretend that Biden/Harris won the November 3 election they lost.

Notably they pretend that fantasy US democracy is the real thing.

They, Times correspondents and columnists consistently lie, deceive and betray the public trust.

Election 2020 and its aftermath are glaring examples of breaching journalism the way it should be, what Times management and editors long ago banned on its pages.

A same day article explained what may have been a Wednesday Capitol Hill false flag to elevate Biden/Harris to power by falsely blaming Trump for what happened.

No evidence suggests it because there is none.

The latest Times edition included the following anti-Trump hit pieces:

“Congress Confirms Biden’s Win (sic), Defying Mob Attack”

“Daily Distortions: There is no evidence that antifa activists stormed the Capitol (sic)”

“A West Virginia lawmaker was a part of the mob of Trump supporters who breached the building (sic).”

“Biden Denounces Storming of Capitol as a ‘Dark Moment’ in Nation’s History (sic)”

“Trump Told Crowd ‘You Will Never Take Back Our Country With Weakness’ ”

None of Trump’s remarks Wednesday or earlier called for inciting violence on Capitol Hill — just the opposite.

“A Mob and the Breach of Democracy (sic): The Violent End of the Trump Era (sic)”

“ ‘Be There. Will Be Wild!’: Trump All but Circled the Date (sic)”— his remark expressing no support for violence.

“Jeff Flake: My Fellow Republicans, Trump Is Destroying Us (sic)”

“Trump’s Real Claim to Fame… He’s going to be remembered by history as the Biggest Loser (sic).”

“Trump Incites Rioters (sic)” — Repeating the Times’ bald-faced Big Lie

The hit piece called him a “Benedict Arnold (sic).”

“The Pro-Trump Movement Was Always Headed Here” — falsely blaming him for Capitol Hill violence.

“Have Trump’s Lies Wrecked Free Speech?”

Indeed he’s a serial liar, but claiming he incited Capitol Hill violence by the Times is a whopper of a Big Lie.

“America’s Friends and Foes Express Horror as Capitol Attack ‘Shakes the World’ ”

How will they react if and when it’s known that Wednesday’s violence was orchestrated against Trump to assure he’s replaced on January 20?

“Impeach and Convict. Right Now (sic).”

The hit piece defied reality by calling Trump “too dangerous to leave in office for even another minute” — typical of Times contempt for truth-telling, along with insulting its readers by feeding them this rubbish.

The piece urged House and Senate members to reconvene straightaway, “remove” him from office, and “bar him from ever holding office again.”

“To allow Trump to serve out his term, however brief it may be, puts the nation’s safety at risk (sic).”

No responsible editors would permit publication of this rubbish.

Like many times before on other issues, the Times featured it.

Thursday’s anti-Trump blitzkrieg by the Times and other Big Media will likely be followed by much more as long as he remains in office, perhaps continuing after his tenure ends.

Instead of truth and full disclosure, continued managed news misinformation and disinformation ahead is certain.

A Final Comment

ABC News reported that unnamed members of Trump’s cabinet are “discussing invoking the 25th Amendment.”

Referring to presidential disability and succession, it states:

“In case of the removal of the President from office or of his death or resignation, the Vice President shall become President.”

The amendment largely deals with presidential succession in case an incumbent dies in office or is too ill or unable to serve.

A number of former presidents died in office, including Lincoln and JFK by assassination and FDR from natural causes.

Others suffered debilitating illnesses and injuries and were unable to perform their duties.

The 25th amendment became US law to assure a smooth transition of power under the above circumstances — not for impeachment by other means.

At this time, it’s unclear what’s ahead during Trump’s remaining days in office.

What’s very clear is that an open, free, and fair US society, according to the rule of law, suffered a major body blow, perhaps a fatal one.

That’s what 1/6/21 will be most remembered for long after the dust clears.

January 7, 2021 Posted by | Civil Liberties, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | 4 Comments

2020 hindsight

Climate Discussion Nexus | January 6, 2021

No, this item is not about COVID and lockdowns. Rather, it’s about the fact that because people like round numbers, a surprising number of alarmist predictions of climate disaster were meant to happen “by 2020” which means it is time to check how clear the crystal ball was. Thus over at Junk Science they praise a video by Climate Resistance that rightly castigates alarmists including James Hansen for all the gloom-laden predictions that didn’t come anywhere close to happening. We don’t expect everyone to be right all the time, and we realize it is difficult to make predictions especially about the future. But we do expect people to admit their errors and, if they make enough of them, to adopt a more seemly tone of humility in making their next forecast. Especially if what they repeatedly say is that everyone must do the drastic things they demand at once or face disaster, and insult or even threaten anyone who dares contest their claims.

While praising other people’s gimlet-eyed look at past alarmist predictions we also invite you to look at our own video based on the research done by, because it is true that a lot of people have made a lot of predictions and it would be unfair to cherry-pick silly claims from the fringes and call them mainstream. But far too many of these predictions come from what passes for the mainstream and there ought to be a cost in credibility for those who continually churn them out or regurgitate them if it turns out they are not just dependably wrong, but dependably wrong in a particular direction.

Speaking of the mainstream, we also want to emphasize that organizations like the UN’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change have not, at least in their more serious scientific publications, said what so many activists and politicians claim they have said. The Summaries for Policymakers are somewhat suspicious, not least because they are not just written for but by policymakers, often without any real scientific scrutiny. But the Working Group reports, as we have noted on a number of occasions, are far more restrained in what they say is happening and the degree of certainty they attach to gloomy forecasts. And the same is true of many scientists who do think man-made climate change is at least potentially problematic but are responsible in their line of argument and their predictions.

Even these groups and individuals, in large measure, are still guilty of breathing second-hand fire because they have not used their position and authority to push back against the madness. Including making Greta Thunberg the face of alarmism when she plainly did not understand anything at all about the science, and refusing to denounce ridiculous predictions of doom “by 2020”. They ought to realize that it brings their more sober concerns into disrepute, because the debate has been hijacked by the screamers. And to a large extent it brings science as a whole into disrepute (as does governments thrashing about on COVID while sonorously claiming to be following “the science” even while flipflopping on policy without scientists objecting).

On that basis we venture our own prediction: In the coming year we will hear a great deal of nonsense about what is going to happen “by 2030” if we do not adopt extreme measures to combat global warming. But almost none about 2029 or 2031. And without any accounting for why all the 2020 predictions were so wrong. Which is a warning that we are hearing hype not science, from people with dismal track records.

January 6, 2021 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Science and Pseudo-Science, Timeless or most popular | Leave a comment

OPCW chief dodges questions on Syria cover-up after new leaks, attacks on whistleblowers

By Aaron Maté · The Grayzone · January 3, 2021

For the first time, OPCW chief Fernando Arias was asked a series of direct questions at the United Nations about the cover-up of a Syria chemical weapons probe. He answered none of them.

Russia’s UN ambassador asked Arias about several damning leaks, some revealed by The Grayzone, as well as ongoing deceptive attacks on the veteran scientists who challenged the censorship of their investigation. Arias refused to answer in public session, and gave vague, non-substantive answers in private.

Aaron Maté recaps the unanswered questions to Arias, as well as recent attacks on the OPCW whistleblowers via Western state-funded outlets Bellingcat and the BBC.

Read more:

Draft debacle: Bellingcat smears OPCW whistleblower, journalists with false letter, farcical claims

Questions for BBC on new White Helmets podcast series attacking OPCW whistleblowers

OPCW executives praised whistleblower and criticized Syria cover-up, leaks reveal

January 6, 2021 Posted by | Deception, Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering, Timeless or most popular, Video | , | Leave a comment

Who To Believe About Venezuela’s Election? Firsthand Observation or PBS Newshour?

By Rick Sterling | Venezuelanalysis | January 5, 2021

In early December I traveled to Venezuela to be an election observer at their national assembly election. I was part of a group of eight persons from Canada and US organized by CodePink. There were about two hundred international observers in total, including the Latin American Council of Electoral Experts. I have previously been an official election observer in Honduras and was an unofficial observer at the 2015 Venezuela national assembly election.

Meeting Opposition Leaders

Before the election, our small group met eight leaders of the Democratic Alliance. This is the major opposition coalition. Pedro Jose Rojas of Accion Democratica said the US sanctions are not doing what is claimed; they are hurting average citizens. Bruno Gallo of Avanca Progressista said Venezuela needs negotiation not confrontation. Juan Carlos Alvarado of the Christian Democratic Party said Venezuelans have been “victims of politics” and that dialogue and flexibility are needed. Several leaders spoke about the importance of the national assembly and the road to change is through voting not violence. Several leaders expressed the wish for better relations with the US; another one said Venezuelan sovereignty needs to be respected. The common request was to end US sanctions and interference in Venezuelan politics.

We visited the factory where voting machines were assembled, tested and certified. The staff was openly proud of their work. In March this year, nearly all the pre-existing voting computers were destroyed in a massive fire at the main election warehouse. There were calls to delay the December election. But in six months, forty thousand new computers were ordered, built, assembled, tested and certified for the December election.

The Election Process

On election day, Sunday December 6, we visited many different elections sites. Typically, the election voting takes place at a school, with five or ten classrooms designated as “mesas”. Each voter goes to his or her designated classroom / “mesa”.

The voting process was quick and efficient, with bio-safety sanitation at each step. The first step is to show your identity card and prove your identity with fingerprint recognition. Step 2 was to make your voting choices at the touchscreen computer and receive a paper receipt. Step 3 is to verify the receipt matches your voting choice and deposit the receipt in a ballot box. The fourth and final step is to sign and put your fingerprint on the voting registry. The entire voting process took about 3 minutes.

At the end of the voting day, we observed the process of tabulating the votes. At each “mesa”, with observers from other parties present, the paper receipts were recorded one by one. At the end, the results were compared to the digital count. Voting results were then transmitted to the headquarters for overall tabulation.

Election results were announced by the Council for National Election (CNE) which manages the entire process. CNE leaders are not permitted to be members of any party and the CNE leadership was recently changed at the request of the opposition. In our discussion with leading opposition members, they complained about incumbent party advantages but acknowledged the election process is free, fair and honest.

PBS Newshour Special

With this firsthand experience, on December 29 I watched a PBS Newshour segment about the Venezuela election and overall situation. PBS reporter Marcia Biggs said, “Maduro’s party essentially ran unopposed in this month’s election.” As noted above, this is untrue.

In fact, there were 107 parties and over 14,000 individuals competing in the December 6 election for 277 national assembly seats. While 8 parties were in alliance with the governing United Socialist Party of Venezuela (PSUV), there were over 90 opposition parties. The strongest opposition coalition was the Democratic Alliance comprising 7 opposition parties. The Democratic Alliance won 1.1 million votes or 18% of the vote. The LEFT opposition to the PSUV, under the banner of the Communist Party of Venezuela, received 168 thousand votes.

Reporter Marcia Biggs claimed that “politics permeates everything in Venezuela and can determine whether you support Maduro and eat or go hungry.” This claim is based on a campaign statement by PSUV Vice President Diosdado Cabello encouraging people to vote. He jokingly said that women are in the forefront and can say to their family, “No vote, no food.” Video of him making the statement is here. This statement has been distorted out of all meaning and context.

The PBS story showed a fistfight in the national assembly, implying that it was the Venezuelan government. But, as reported in the “Juan Guaido surreal regime change reality show”, the fight was between competing factions of the Venezuelan opposition.

When they showed Juan Guaido climbing over a fence, that was a publicity stunt to distract from the important news that Luis Parra was elected Speaker of the national assembly one year ago. That was embarrassing because Guaido’s claim to be “interim president” was based on his being Speaker.

Election turnout was lower than usual at 31% but one needs to account for the election taking place despite covid19 with no mail-in voting. Also, millions of registered voters have had to leave the country due to economic hardship. Also, transportation is difficult due to gasoline scarcity. This was a national assembly election, equivalent to a US mid-term election, which gets lower turnout. Note that 95% of voting eligible Venezuelans are registered voters compared to just 67% in the USA. Thus a turnout of 50% registered voters in the US equates to 33% of eligible voters.

US Meddling in Venezuela

The star of the 7-minute PBS story is Roberto Patino, the Venezuelan director of a food distribution charity. The report neglects to mention that Patino is associated with a major US foreign policy institution. He is a Millennium Leadership fellow and “expert” at the neoliberal Atlantic Council where the “regime change” goals against Venezuela are clear. His food charity “Alimenta la Solidaridad” is allied with the “Rescue Venezuela” funded by the US with the apparent goal of undermining the Venezuelan government and promoting “interim president Juan Guaido”.

Roberto Patino says the Venezuelan government is “very paranoid and they see conspiracies all over.” Paranoia is a mental condition where there is fear of imaginary threats. But US threats and aggression against Venezuela are not imaginary; they are very real:

In 2002 the US supported the kidnapping and coup against the popular and elected President Hugo Chavez. The years have gone by but US hostility persists.

Based on the past twenty years, Venezuela’s government has good reason to be on guard against US threats, meddling and intervention. The PBS program ignores this history.

Another hero of the show is the exiled politician Leopoldo Lopez. He was imprisoned in 2014 for instigating street violence known as “guarimbas” which led to the deaths of 43 people.

Like Patino, Lopez is from the Venezuelan elite, studied in the US and has major public relations support in the US. Like Guaido, Leopoldo Lopez is more popular in Washington than his home country.

Will the US respect Venezuelan sovereignty?

If the PBS Newshour reporters had not been so biased, they would have interviewed members of the moderate opposition in Venezuela. Viewers could have heard Democratic Alliance leaders explain why they participated in the election, why they are critical of US economic sanctions and US interference in their domestic affairs. That would have been educational for viewers.

On January 5, the newly elected national assembly will commence in Venezuela. The fig leaf pretense of Juan Guaido as “interim president” of Venezuela will be removed because he is no longer in the national assembly. In fact, he was removed as speaker of the national assembly one year ago.

But viewers of the PBS special did not learn this. Instead, they received a biased report ignoring the moderate opposition and promoting a few US supported elites. The report ignores or denigrates the efforts of millions of Venezuelans who carried out and participated in an election which compares favorably with the election process in the US. You would never know it from PBS, and you might not believe it, unless you saw it with your own eyes.

Rick Sterling is an investigate journalist based in the SF Bay Area of California. He can be contacted at

January 5, 2021 Posted by | Fake News, Mainstream Media, Warmongering | , | 6 Comments