John Podesta Exposed: Here’s Why U.S. Intelligence Hates Abby Martin
On the fifth of November in 2016, Abby Martin released a documentary exposing John Podesta.
WeAre Change,
8 January, 2016
In the episode of The Empire Files, Abby Martin explored John Podesta’s political rise, his vast network of corporate connections and his think tank “Center for American Progress.”
The
so-called left wing of the establishment appear to be nothing more
than an elite insiders club of the rich and powerful.
“With the Wikileaks release of thousands of emails belonging to John Podesta, very little is known about Podesta himself.
While he is treated as just a well-meaning Clinton supporter who has had his privacy unjustly exposed, he is actually one of the most powerful people in Washington, who has [been] operating mostly behind-the-scenes,” writes Martin.
(We
Are Change) —
Last week U.S. intelligence agencies declassified a DNI
report that
supposedly proved Putin directly ordered
Russian hackers to
help Trump win the 2016 election.
What
you’re not being told is that the report admits “disclosures
through WikiLeaks did not contain any evident
forgeries,” contradicting
previous claims made by the Clinton campaign to explain why
there was so much corruption in the leaked emails.
Official DNI report on Russia says my show Breaking the Set, that ended 2 yrs ago, helped cost Hillary the election https://t.co/LyNZIaDxQm pic.twitter.com/Ha0rWNlSwV
— Abby Martin (@AbbyMartin) January 6, 2017
Related: FBI Says DNC Lied, Denied Permission to Inspect Server
No,
Abby Martin wasn’t included in the official DNI report on Russia
because of her show that ended two years ago.
U.S.
intelligence hates Martin because she told the truth about John
Podesta on the fifth of November.
Abby Martin Responds to Exploitation by NY Times
Abby
Martin issued the following response to the Jan. 7 New York Times
article falsely representing her work at RT America.
The
long-awaited report
by
the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), allegedly proving
Russian “interference” in the US election, includes a section
solely dedicated to bashing RT, and specifically calls out my former
show Breaking the Set, which ended two years ago, as a propaganda
vector marking the beginning of the Kremlin attempt to subvert
American democracy.
Desperate
to push this US intelligence narrative, The New York Times called the
report “damning and surprisingly detailed,” while adding that it
includes no actual evidence.
The
very next day, on Jan. 7, the Times published
another piece titled
“Russia’s RT, The Network Implicated in U.S. Election Meddling.”
In
the article, NYT journalist Russell Goldman used two blatantly false
statements about my work at RT to support the argument that the
network is simply a Putin-dictated propaganda outlet.
First,
he stated “…two anchors who quit during live broadcasts say the
network is a propaganda outlet.”
I
did not quit during a live broadcast, nor did I say that the network
is a propaganda outlet.
He
goes on to say “…Abby Martin, who said before quitting, ‘What
Russia did was wrong.’”
Any
cursory research into the referenced quote—when I spoke out against
Russia’s military entrance into Crimea and the network’s
glorification of it—will find that not only did I not quit on air,
but that I continued my show for an entire year afterward.
I
was interviewed about my on-air statement on many major news
stations, from BBC to CNN, where I defended my editorial freedom and
also called-out the double standards and hypocrisies in their
coverage.
RT
issued an official statement in support of my freedom to state my
opinion on the network. Over the course of the next year, I continued
to voice my concerns and opinions about Russia, from MH-17 to the
Ukraine crisis, unfiltered.
I
quit the network on my own terms in February 2015 because I wanted to
do more in-depth investigative reporting, not because I believed it
to be a propaganda outlet.
The
Times issued a correction after these false accounts were featured
prominently on their website for over 19 hours. But their correction
still misrepresents the facts to push their narrative.
The
correction reads “this article misstated when the RT anchor Abby
Martin left the network. She quit sometime after denouncing on air
Russia’s war in Ukraine, not during the live broadcast.”
The
error in their article was not simply about when I quit, but the
reason and circumstances for leaving the network. The article still
implies that I left over this political disagreement.
Additionally,
they removed from the article the line “two anchors who quit during
live broadcasts say the network is a propaganda outlet,” but they
do not note that change in their correction addendum, as is standard.
The
article now includes a modified sentence: “Abby Martin quit some
time after denouncing Russia’s incursion on air. ‘What Russia did
was wrong,’ Ms. Martin said.”
This
new line twists the truth, omits the facts, and ironically
contradicts their entire argument.
The
glaring fact is that I spoke out about the actions of Putin, Russia
and RT’s coverage of it on air, and not only was I not fired, but I
still had the prime time opinion show on the network for another
year.
That
begs the question to the NY Times: if RT is simply a Kremlin
mouthpiece, how was I allowed to do this and still be featured
prominently on the network?
It
appears that the Times is, once again, working to push a false
perspective being promoted by US government officials and agencies.
To paint RT in such a cartoonish, totalitarian fashion—and to
promote the idea that it is subverting US democracy—is the
dangerous state propaganda that we should be worrying about.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.