CIA Agent Claims Article Written by another CIA Agent was Actually Written by Russian Agents

This has to go down as one of the strangest cases of yellow journalism in history. This truly incredible saga all began when a newspaper called the Guardian posted an obviously false story claiming that one of Trump’s top operatives, Paul Manafort, not only met with Julian Assange while Assange was locked up in the Ecuadorian embassy in London – but that Manafort met with Assange three times. This would have been enough meetings for the two of them to plan all kinds of criminal acts.

What makes this story obviously false – besides the fact that both Manafort and Assange immediately said it was false? It is simply this: London is wired with thousands of crime stopping cameras. You cannot go ten feet in London without getting filmed. These cameras are most dense right outside the Ecuador embassy - where you will find not only the London City cameras but also dozens of UK and CIA cameras keeping a close eye on – you guessed it – Julian Assange. There are even more cameras covering every inch inside the Ecuador embassy. With all of these cameras everywhere, if Manafort actually visited Assange even once, there would be more footage of this meeting than there was of the last Super Bowl.

Thanks to Edward Snowden, we know for certain that the CIA has video tape of everything you and your family have ever done – including video of your child’s last Birthday party.


Given the pervasive video taping the CIA is involved in these days, do you really think that Manafort or anyone else could visit Julian Assange in the Ecuador embassy without the CIA knowing about it and having the whole thing on video tape? I therefore hope we can all at the very least agree that this Assange Manafort story cannot possibly be true.

Now I realize that many members of the American public might not know about all of the cameras in London and all the cameras surrounding the Ecuadorian Embassy. But the Guardian certainly knows about all of the cameras in London and all the cameras at the Ecuadorian embassy for a very simple reason: The Guardian Headquarters is located in (drum roll please)… London. The street address for the Guardian is 90 York Way, Kings Cross, London. This is just a couple blocks west of the US embassy – and just a few blocks south of the Ecuadorian embassy. The Guardian staff could easily walk to either embassy during their lunch hour. Given the closeness of the Guardian to the Ecuadorian embassy, it would be impossible for them to not know about the dozens of cameras surrounding the embassy.


The other reason we can be certain that the Guardian knew about the security cameras in and around the Ecuadorian embassy is that a long article about this subject was written in May 2018 by (another drum roll please) The Guardian! Here is a quote:

His guests went through a security check upon arrival, handing over their passports and mobile phones. The operatives recorded each guest’s passport number and nationality, as well as the purpose of their visit, building up a comprehensive log of everyone Assange met during his stay… This level of scrutiny came after the security company installed CCTV cameras in the embassy’s lobby and a conference room, and on the balcony.”

The Guardian article even included actual images taken by these security cameras. The author of this Guardian article explaining the security system of the Ecuador embassy was none other than Luke Harding – the same person now claiming that Assange met with Manafort.

Here is the link if you want to read it yourself:

This massive monitoring of Assange has gone on for years – costing British and US tax payers millions and millions of dollars. Julian Assange is likely the most closely monitored person in the entire world. Here is what Fidel Narvaez, the staff person at the Ecuadorian embassy for six years had to say about the claim that Assange met with Manafort:

“The embassy is the most surveilled on Earth; not only are there cameras positioned on neighboring buildings recording every visitor, but inside the building every movement is recorded with CCTV cameras, 24/7. In fact, security personnel have always spied on Julian and his visitors. It is simply not possible that Manafort visited the embassy.”

The question then becomes why would the Guardian publish a story which they must have certainly known was false?

Some have claimed that the reason the Guardian published this fake news is because the Guardian is controlled by the CIA. Even former staff members of the Guardian have claimed that the Guardian routinely publishes stories they are given by the CIA without fact checking those stories. We might call this Deep State rubber stamping. I can think of no other reason any newspaper would publish such an obviously false story other than that they were “ordered” by someone to publish the story.

So the next question is why would the CIA write and then have the Guardian publish such an obviously false story? Clearly, the CIA is mad at Julian Assange. After all, in March, 2017, Assange published the CIA Vault 7 “Marble Framework” documents – confirming that the CIA not only hacks everyone on the planet – but also places “fake Russian finger prints and breadcrumbs” inside of CIA hacked computers misleading people into believing that they were hacked by Russians - when in fact they were really hacked by the CIA pretending to be Russians.


This shocking expose by Wikileaks calls into question the Russian finger prints found while investigating the 2016 DNC hack:


Wikileaks was not the only one to publish evidence of the CIA planting Russian finger prints on DNC documents. In June 2016, a suspicious person called Guccifer 2 also published some DNC documents with Russian finger prints. A detailed analysis of the Guccifer 2 documents has confirmed that these Russian Finger Prints were deliberately planted on these documents by Guccifer 2 after the documents were hacked (or leaked) from the DNC and before they were published by Guccifer 2. Here is a quote from this analysis: “Guccifer 2 took great care to plant his Russian fingerprints and showed extraordinary skill in making their appearance seem accidental...Guccifer 2 showed an impressive understanding of how to manipulate metadata to plant “Russian fingerprints” into the first five documents that he published.”

Finally, in late December 2016, a collection of US intelligence agencies released a list of 800 IP addresses which they claimed were linked to servers used by Russian agents. In January 2017, I published a detailed 85 page analysis of these 800 IP addresses. My analysis concluded that nearly all of these 800 IP addresses could not possibly be linked to Russians – but that many of these 800 IP addresses were in fact “fronts” or fake server businesses with links to US Intelligence Agencies!

To my shock and amazement, if you do a Google Search on Turning Point News, you will not find my website until Page 3 of the Google results. However, if you do the same search using either Yahoo Search or Duck Duck Go Search, you will see my website near the top of the first page of the Yahoo and Duck Duck Go results. So Google apparently does not want you finding my 85 page report debunking CIA claims.

In short, there appears to be an epidemic of CIA linked people planting fake evidence trying to implicate the Russians. Wikileaks publishing of the CIA Vault 7 Marble Framework was the final nail in the coffin because Wikileaks exposed how the CIA was planting these fake Russian finger prints. So it makes sense that the CIA would plant a fake story trying to get us to believe that the Russians and Assange were working together ( despite Assange saying many times that he has never worked for or with the Russians) and despite the obvious fact that the CIA story is certainly false.

For reasons less clear, the CIA also appears to be mad at Donald Trump. So a story combining a Trump employee (Manafort) meeting with Assange would be a way to kill three birds with one stone – Trump, Assange and Russia - all tied together in one neat little package. There is only one problem with this story – those pesky cameras.

What is the CIA to do when the facts keep interfering with the story they want us all to believe?

Answer: Run the story anyway.

This is where things start to get interesting. Not only did the Guardian publish this obviously fake news. But this fake news was instantly picked up by the corporate media all over the planet in a matter of seconds. Surely at least some of these corporate news outlets must have known this story was false. Even a five year old would know it was false. Given all of the CIA cameras aimed at the Ecuador embassy, there is no chance that this story was true.

Yet here is a list of corporate media giants that published this CIA planted fake news: CNN. MSNBC. CBS. USA Today. NY Post., Huffington Post, Newsweek, CNBC, Newsweek, Washington Post. The list of corporate media (aka CIA media) that repeated this obviously fake news goes on and on and on. Even a week after this fake news broke, a Google search still indicates that none of the major corporate news websites have retracted any part of this story:


Apparently, Google is not as interested in protecting us from Fake News as they have claimed. Google is only interested in making sure you do not read my 85 page analysis debunking 800 CIA linked IP addresses.

This latest Guardian Fake News therefore becomes a perfect example of the Big Lie (made famous in Nazi Germany). Tell a big lie over and over again and people will believe it - even in the face of clear evidence that it cannot possibly be true.

Which brings us to the second act in this amazing drama. This one I never saw coming or thought would be even possible. But here it goes. Immediately after the fake news Guardian story was spread all over the world, another even more incredible story appeared in a corporate news outlet called Politico.


This second article began by called the Guardian story a “smoking gun that shows Trump’s campaign knew it was receiving help from Russian intelligence services and perhaps even aided the operation.” But after repeating this obvious lie from the Guardian as if it has some sort of validity, the Politico author, Alex Finley, covered her bet - claiming that should the Guardian story eventually be shown to be false, it will be because the Guardian fell victim to Russian spies planting a fake story.

There are lots of problems with this second story. First, why would the Russians want to plant an article in the Guardian falsely connecting Russia to Trump and Assange? Second, why would the Guardian publish a story that they knew was false and moreover that came from Russian spies? Third, even if the Guardian editors were a pack of idiots and fell for this diabolical Russian plot, why would corporate news outlets all over the world be repeating the Russian planted story over and over and over again - despite the obvious fact that the Guardian story could not possibly be true? Is Russia so good at planting fake news that they are able to fool the editors of every major corporate news outlet in the world?

But this second Russia Did It story gets even better. Because Alex Finley’s former (and perhaps still current) boss was (or is) none other than (another drum roll please)… the CIA. In short, the CIA had a story planted in one paper, the Guardian falsely connecting Trump with Assange and Russia. The CIA then planted a second story in another paper, Politico, blaming Russia for planting the first CIA story.


This second story is why this amazing combination of lies on top of lies on top of lies has to go down as one of the strangest cases of yellow journalism in history. This entire Deep State saga boggles the mind.

So how much money was the Guardian paid to run the fake news about Assange meeting with Manafort? Or how much was Politico paid? Or all the other corporate media giants that also participated in this farce? To make an educated guess, let’s take a look at how much the US bribed the Ecuadorians for helping to hand over Assange.

According to Wikileaks, in August 2018, Ecuador was forced to borrow nearly one billion dollars from two US sources after the US blocked a billion dollar IMF loan to Ecuador.


In case you forgot, Goldman Sachs is the same Wall Street organization that got billions of dollars from US tax payers in bailouts in 2008 and then used hundreds of millions of these tax payer dollars to try to elect Clinton in 2016. So this is yet another case of your tax payer dollars hard at work in trying destroy democracy and kill the person who exposed CIA crimes. Apparently, all Ecuador needs to do is hand over Assange and they will get the billion dollars in IMF funds and then they can pay back Goldman Sachs. Everyone wins except the US tax payers.

If the CIA (or whoever) is willing to loan Ecuador one billion dollars for Assange, surely they are also willing to pay the Guardian (and the rest of the corporate media) a few million bucks to help in that effort. After all, it is not CIA money being spent – it is the hard earned money of US tax payers that is being spent to bribe the corporate media into publishing these stories.

Regardless of how all of this turns out, one thing is for certain. We are now living in a world in which a lot of our news is coming directly from the CIA. So is it the CIA that controls Goldman Sachs or Goldman Sachs that controls the CIA? Or is there someone else hiding behind the curtain that controls the corporate media, Goldman Sachs and the CIA?

There is certainly collusion going on here. But it is not Russian collusion. It is the corporate media and Wall Street bankers who are colluding with the CIA. They appear to be willing to pay practically anything and say practically anything they think we will believe in order to get their hands on Julian Assange.


Of course the real victim here - should the CIA get Assange - will be the right of the America people to make informed decisions about our leaders in future elections. Once the CIA is allowed to torture and kill those who have exposed their crimes, we will never again have any way to learn about other crimes committed by the CIA. It is not merely the future of Julian Assange that is at stake, it is the future of our democracy. If ever you needed another reason to stop listening to the fake news put out by the corporate (CIA) news media, and seek out alternative news sources instead, this is it.