MercoPress, en Español

Montevideo, January 22nd 2021 - 00:38 UTC



Soros believed to be behind counter-revolutions where the other party wins elections

Thursday, November 17th 2016 - 09:54 UTC
Full article 22 comments

Anti-Trump protests so strong and well coordinated make spontaneity unlikely to the reasoning observer who makes out that ”someone is stirring the pot because America has never traditionally had a problem with accepting the outcome of an election,” as one analyst put it. Read full article


Disclaimer & comment rules
  • DemonTree

    Well well. This isn't Mercopress's usual fare. And no attribution either! The pro-Russian slant should be a clue.

    The “protester for hire in Fountain Hills” was first reported on in March, on the hoax news website

    However, if you go to that page now they have changed the date to November 11, 2016 to make the story seem current.

    The analyst who thinks that “someone is stirring the pot” is apparently Marko Gašic, a British Serbian who is unhappy with how NATO treated his country during the Balkan Wars, and that Kosovo was allowed to secede from Serbia. Most of the other quotes in the article also seem to come from him, as reported by the ever-reliable RT news.

    I'll have to look into the rest later to see if there is any substance behind this overly-spun and anonymised article.

    Nov 17th, 2016 - 01:17 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • Think

    Mr. DemonTree

    Fascinating place..., this disinformaton British site with their unholy alliances... don't you Think...?

    You say...:
    “I'll have to look into the rest later to see if there is any substance behind this overly-spun and anonymised article.”

    I say...:
    Anonymised..., you say...?
    Try “Anonymous”... ;-)

    Nov 17th, 2016 - 01:37 pm - Link - Report abuse -3
  • ChrisR

    @ DemonTree

    Try looking at TheHil and her band of misfits.

    It certainly wasn't Trump was it?

    And he still won. Don't you just love it?


    Nov 17th, 2016 - 02:00 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Think

    Seems that MI6 haven' forgot Black Wednesday...

    Nov 17th, 2016 - 06:59 pm - Link - Report abuse -4
  • ChrisR

    Andrew Neil BBC This Week

    Have a chuckle at the video (if it plays where you are)

    Nov 18th, 2016 - 10:43 am - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Jack Bauer

    It is no secret that Soros is behind all the anti-Trump protests.....and that HRC is no more than one of his puppets....despite all the money 'wasted', she still didn't get in, so now they've gone all out to try to screw Trump. Wikileaks has produced several e-mails from John Podesta (to HRC), in which he outlines the strategy to counter a possible republican victory, counting on the support of G.Soros' BLM...To claim that the riots are spontaneous, is laughable.....These exact same tactics - protests against the legally-installed governmet, and 'planting' disinformation on the internet - are being used here in Brazil, funded by the PT, in order to destabilize the present government.

    Just for one such report (on Soros), google :
    “Soros Fingerprints All Over #NotMyPresident Protests”...........
    Left-wing donors spending hundreds of thousands to foment anti-Trump unrest
    November 17, 2016
    by Matthew Vadum | Updated 17 Nov 2016 at 11:16 AM
    Activist groups funded by radical billionaire George Soros are fomenting civil unrest in the streets in hopes of kneecapping President-Elect Donald Trump even before he takes the oath of office on Jan. 20.

    Nov 20th, 2016 - 08:08 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • DemonTree

    @ Jack Bauer
    That was helpful, I've finally found out where the rest of this article comes from.

    As I said above, the parts about protesters being paid come from a fake news site, so those specific claims are certainly untrue. The quotes from 'an analyst' or 'analysts' are from Marko Gašic, a commentator who regularly appears in RT news.

    The parts beginning with “Billionaire globalist financier George Soros’” seem to be excerpts from this article:

    It also has a link for the quote about allowing “Soros the businessman to literally plunder the former communist countries’ wealth”. It's from an article in a journal published by the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences. Unsurprising, as it is mostly Russia that objects to the 'colour revolutions'.

    As for Clinton being Soros's puppet, that's quite a strong claim. Certainly she appears to have followed his advice at least once, and was no doubt concerned with not losing his funding. The latter would apply to any big donor though and is a general complaint against politicians.

    About the protests, arranged at least some of them, and they have received funding from Soros in the past (2004), but I can't find any evidence either way on whether they have had any recently. supported Bernie Sanders for the Democratic nomination, for what it's worth.

    As I said on the other article, someone had to arrange the protests - at the very least people need to know where to go and when, and big ones usually hire coaches so people can go to a central location. If the protesters are trying to prevent Trump becoming president somehow, then I agree that is a problem, but I haven't heard that they are. So far as I know they are mostly protesting against his planned policies, which is quite a normal thing, and I hope they succeed in changing his mind.

    Nov 20th, 2016 - 10:37 pm - Link - Report abuse -2
  • Jack Bauer

    During the campaign, Trump certainly came up with some pretty outlandish retrospect, seems he was purposely aggressive in order to make the silent majority wake up and take an interest in what was going on. People tended to have become accomodated with what went on over the last 8 years, and needed shaking up. I have always thought his manner - and ideas - were a bit abrasive, but discounted it as being just campaign rhetoric. Looks like he succeeded in his objective, and now that he's the president-elect, he seems to be toning things down quite a bit, so to keep on with the protests - against something that hasn't happened yet, and might not even happen - is ridiculous. What is clear though, is that these movements are not legitimate grassroot's opposition, but systematic and politically instigated, and by someone who has a lot of money to throw away....and by what I've seen and read, Soros is the man. Considering his (confessed) actions and cooperation with the Nazis, it is undeniable that his only objective is power and personal gain, no matter who it hurts.

    Nov 20th, 2016 - 11:19 pm - Link - Report abuse +2
  • DemonTree

    @ JB
    So you're saying Trump spent his whole campaign lying, cynically saying exactly what he thought would be most likely to get him elected, while having no intention of actually carrying out his promises?

    That's pretty much what I thought all along, and exactly why I didn't want him elected. He's not even a Republican, he's for the party of Trump and only Trump, and his sole concern in office is likely to be maintaining his own popularity.

    As for the protests, there are certainly plenty of Americans who hate Trump; the opposition is real enough. I think it's true that Soros and others are funding the advocacy groups who are arranging the protests, but I don't think it's true that they are paying the protesters or controlling them.

    Soros's foundation was created primarily to help Eastern European countries move away from communism and to encourage democracy in the region. Apparently it has been involved with promoting democracy in several ex-soviet countries, which Russia sees as promoting Western influence - hence the enmity from Russian news sources. In the US its goals include a fair criminal justice system and full participation of minorities and immigrants, which explains the support for BLM and opposition to Trump.

    About his 'cooperation' with the Nazis; he was a Hungarian Jew, and still a child at the time. I imagine he cooperated as much as he needed to do to survive.

    Nov 21st, 2016 - 12:34 am - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Hepatia

    Why would Soros pay when the protesters are willing to work for free?

    Nov 21st, 2016 - 01:27 am - Link - Report abuse -1
  • DemonTree

    Have you been protesting Hepatia? I know you were opposed to Trump.

    Nov 21st, 2016 - 08:20 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    No, I'm not saying he was lying - I said that some of his proposals were a bit far-fetched, in that, while feasible, perhaps not as easy to implement as he thought. So much so, that I believed it was, as I said, to get people off their bums and to start tinking about some of the issues which were affecting the US but had been largely ignored by the current administration.
    While I agree that a lot of people hate Trump - probably a good part of HRC supporters (but not more than 50% of the elctorate), and quite understandable - I am still convinced that these orchestrated, highly organized protests against Trump are staged, instigated by left-wing donors, especially Soros and his and the likes of BLM....
    And very unlikely to happen in the same magnitude, by Trump supporters, had HRC won.
    As to Soros being a 14 year old, being“forced ” to work with the Nazis, it may have been in part the instict of survival at work, but in an interview , a few years back, he candidly admitted to have enjoyed every second of it, and felt no remorse.....that sizes-up his character pretty well, if you ask me...his other actions over time, to me, are just a reinforcement of his past and his ideas. There's nothing good to be said about him.

    Nov 21st, 2016 - 04:11 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • chronic

    Soros supports Soros.

    Nov 21st, 2016 - 04:45 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • DemonTree

    Is this the Soros interview you were talking about?

    He seems very strange; he describes himself as 'amoral' when making money, and then trying to make the world a better place through his foundation and donations. Almost like he has two personalities.

    During the war he was living with a government official under a false identity, and went with him to help confiscate property from other Jews. He doesn't say he enjoyed it, but that he doesn't feel guilty because someone else would have done it if he hadn't.

    But his original foundation that worked on eliminating communism in Eastern Europe and encouraging democracy seems like a good thing to me, and I agree with many of the stated aims of his US foundation. Whether it is really doing what it claims is another question.

    As for Trump, all politicians lie, but he was one of the worst according to fact checking websites. There are youtube videos of him contradicting himself and denying having said things he was recorded saying.

    Do you think he will actually carry out his most famous promises or not? Will that 2,000 mile long wall be built? Will he deport 2-3m illegal immigrants with criminal records immediately? Will he cancel NAFTA and place a 45% tariff on Chinese exports to the US? How about banning all Muslim immigrants?

    What bothers me is the implication that being honest with people is not enough to get someone elected. How well will politics work in the future if the candidates don't tell people what they actually intend to do, but an exaggeration or outright lie that they think will get them attention or make them more popular?

    And the fact he has encouraged people to blame their problems on immigrants and cheap workers in China is a cop out. People are always happy to be told their problems are someone else's fault, so it's not surprising he's popular. But we've seen what anti-free trade policies did in Latin America, why should the USA be any different?

    Nov 21st, 2016 - 11:46 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Jack Bauer

    Not specifically, but a few other, more recent ones (on TV), in which the Q & A are the same. What calls attention is the fact he has no problem in describing himself as 'amoral'. In his defence, when referring to meddling in other countries affairs (main objective? to make money), or his actions as a 14 yo, he shrugs it off with “if it weren't him it would be someone else” (easy way-out), and that he feels “no guilt” (quite obvious)…he confirms his experience with the Nazis shaped his character...positively ; he admits he is “the capitalist that doesn't care about the social consequences of his actions”, Mr. Nice guy ; his 'indirect' participation / funding of anti-Trump protests, plus his very 'close ties' with HRC, are undeniable.
    Referring to “lies”, or “far-fetched” claims during the campaign, they came from both sides...but because Trump never held public office, he had little to lie about, although his extreme proposals did show his lack of political experience ; HRC lied about just everything when challenged on the notorious, awkward issues, during her time as Secretary of State.
    I think Trump will try to keep his promises, because deep down he believes the issues are real problems which need to be solved, but he’ll reign himself in ; Congress, despite being Republican, will also keep him in check.
    Don't think the wall, as he visualizes it, will become reality, but Border Protection needs to be enforced - something BO deliberately ignored, to facilitate the entry of illegals; he should try to deport all illegals with criminal records...nothing wrong with may take time and money, but in the long-run should pay off ; NAFTA will more likely only be renegotiated ; Vetting of all potential immigrants, Muslim or otherwise, should be done ; Politics is a dirty game…in which honesty before the election rarely works. The “export of US jobs” is a real problem, but in no way China’s fault alone. US policy was also to blame.

    Nov 22nd, 2016 - 04:27 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • DemonTree

    @ JB
    It certainly does sound like Soros uses the excuse of 'someone else would do it if he didn't' to justify his actions to himself. He must have really convinced himself too to be so honest in interviews. And he said the Nazis shaped his character by making him need to plan ahead to avoid the tremendous threat, which does kinda explain his Foundations that try and manipulate things behind the scenes = he's trying to prevent that evil from happening again.

    He actually seems bizarrely like a misguided comic book supervillain.

    About Trump, I disagree he had nothing to lie about. He's lied about his own past, like saying he was totally against the war in Iraq; he's lied about plenty of stuff he said in his campaigning, denying sending tweets which everyone can see, claiming he didn't say things that are a matter of record; and of course he lied plenty of times about his opponents, both the Republicans during the primaries and Clinton during the campaign.

    Yes, Clinton lied too, but no one does it as brazenly or as repeatedly as Trump.

    Trump already seems to be backing away from some of his campaign promises. I'm not convinced he really thought ahead to what he would do if he won, because some of his more outlandish proposals will really be impossible to implement. Who knows how his supporters will react if he does not deliver what he promised though. The wall was his flagship policy, it's not like they won't notice.

    By the way, Obama deported more illegal immigrants than any other president, and the number of illegal immigrants in the country held steady during his terms after growing by 2m under Bush, and increasing under every previous president since the 60s.

    I agree more could be done, but a combination of better enforcement of employer checks - there is already a system which was expanded by Obama, but it's still not compulsory - and allowing visas where the jobs can't be filled by domestic workers, would be a lot cheaper and more effective than a wall.

    Nov 22nd, 2016 - 11:35 pm - Link - Report abuse -1
  • Jack Bauer

    What is crystal clearly about Soros, is that he really only looks after himself....his foundations and NGO's, manipulating things behind the scenes, just reinforce their 'not-so-noble' intentions. And I seriously doubt he ever thought about helping others - unless it would help him more...

    Getting back to Trump, sure he omitted plenty, and twisted a few things, but on the other hand, what he did as a private citizen does not carry the same weight as what a politician in HRC's position does, whose decisions can affect the whole country adversely.
    If I were an American, and had voted for Trump due to his 'strong' proposals, I would have been aware of the difficulty in implementing them as sold, but nevertheless would have given him credit for raising serious issues that were being ignored, or circumvented. That BO may have deported plenty of illegals is not surprising, given the amount of them that crossed the border in the first place, incentivated by his lax enforcement of the law, to the extent that the CBP was “encouraged” to not take its obligations so seriously, to turn a blind eye... The surge in unaccompanied children that crossed the southwest border is proof of that, not to mention that the CBP officers actually complained dozens of times that they were 'not allowed' to do their job.
    I agree with your last sentence, “...and allowing visas where the jobs can't be filled by domestic workers, would be a lot cheaper and more effective than a wall”, but reiterate that “illegals” should not be tolerated....Why is it, that when a businessman or a tourist flies into JFK, he needs to comply with the rules - if not he's sent back - while illegals can flow freely over the southern border and disappear into the crowds ? using the country yet paying no taxes ? The notion that the US has any 'obligation' to give shelter to mexicans or central americans, at the expense of the taxpayer, is a 'liberal' thing, only to gain vote(r)s.

    Nov 23rd, 2016 - 06:46 pm - Link - Report abuse +1
  • DemonTree

    @ JB
    How do you think Soros's Foundation helps him? It's not at all obvious that a Democratic government would be better for someone in his position, you'd think less regulation and less taxes would be what he wants. And if Clinton is supposed to be his puppet, and he is controlling, why did it support Sanders for President?

    About Trump, I am not bothered by him omitting things and twisting anything, but the outright lies he told.

    Among other lies he used to discredit Clinton, he said she would give Obamacare, Social Security, and Medicare to illegal immigrants; that she had no child care plan (it was right there on her website), and that she wanted open borders - which is not true - and 650m people could pour into the country in one week, which is preposterous.

    He said inner city crime is hitting record levels, when in fact it has fallen by about half since the mid-nineties. He also said that there could be 30m illegal immigrants in America, rather than the governments estimate of 11m.

    These are seemingly aimed at scaring people and making them think things are worse than they really are, so they will be more inclined to vote for an 'outsider' like Trump. Apparently the real problems were not enough for him.

    We will have to wait and see how many of his promises he abandons, and how his supporters react to that. In my view he has stirred up the mob, and they may not take the same practical view as you.

    As for Obama, why would he allow people in and then deport them? Surely that would cost more than simply enforcing the border, and make everyone more unhappy too? It seems unlikly to me.

    And the reason immigration is enforced at airports is that America would have hundreds of thousands of immigrants from China, India, and the rest of the world if it was not, in addition to the ones they already get from Mexico & Central America. It's easier and cheaper to prevent people coming in through airports than through a 2000 mile long border.

    Nov 24th, 2016 - 10:08 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    Read the review, by David Korten, of Soros’ book “Open Society: Reforming Global Capitalism”; it's a good summary of his intentions, and states in a quite forceful manner that Soros is only interested in furthering his own objectives with regards to world society (Global Open Society), despite not necessarily being what people want…

    He defines Soros as a “high stakes financial speculator, international philanthropist, and a man of grand contradictions” ; In the book’s final paragraph, Soros says “that writing it clarified his thinking on his plan for the world and led him to a clear sense of mission for his foundation network”. He “closes with an ominous sentence” : “I shall not spell it [the mission for his foundation network] out here because it would interfere with my flexibility in carrying it out-there is a parallel here with the problem of making public pronouncements when I was actively engaged in making money-but I can state it in general terms: to foster the civil society component of the Open Society Alliance.”
    Korten writes that the book tells us about “his secret plan to create a global open society”, and “befits the outsized ego of the man who in an interview for a 1995 New Yorker profile reflected on the parallels between himself and the God of the Old Testament and observed that as a child he thought of himself as superhuman”.

    It goes on, but it won't fit here....

    Soros supported Sanders only after he became a serious contestant, and because his views were closer to Soros', but asa Bernie was gone, Soros went right back to Hillary..

    Regarding the other issues you raised - Ob'care, inner-city crime, immigration - will need to comment in the next post.. (not enough room here).

    Nov 25th, 2016 - 03:47 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    @ Jack Bauer
    Go on...

    Nov 25th, 2016 - 04:42 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer


    “Among other lies he used to discredit Clinton, he said she would give Obamacare, Social Security, and Medicare to illegal immigrants;”

    It is quite normal - although lamentable - that most politicians, besides telling outright lies, omit the full truth, or play on the voter's fears. But looking at BO's and the democrat's attempts to allow illegals to vote - by claiming it was 'unfair and discriminatory' to demand that voters present identification before going to the voting booth - you get an idea of what's at the back of their minds...and also the fact that illegals have the right to be attended at public hospitals, no questions asked, is already halfway to giving them social security and other rights. I remember up in northern NJ, when you saw someone walking, or on a bicycle - myself included, many times - people would say “look at the mexicans”, for the simple reason that illegals were unable to obtain driving licences....apparently, they are now allowed to, despite their status. I mean, where does it stop ? Is there no limit ?
    It is also notorious that many democrats were in favour of letting the illegals in, without too many restraints, because they counted on the probability that this would prompt the 'legal' hispanic immigrants to vote for Hillary...the weak application of the immigration laws confirms this (ex: the surge of children crossing the border). As to the number of illegal immigrants, I doubt it's anywhere near 30 m, but it is a damned sight more than 11 the early 90's, the official stats already put them at 12 m.
    As to the obviousness of why air and seaport arrivals are easier to check, while down south it's 'scramble over the border', to me it has more to do with BO's policy of lax controls than the lack of CBP's ability to stop them. Years back, mexicans flowed in and out, doing menial jobs, but many started staying, and going further north. I'm not against immigration...just controlling it.

    Nov 25th, 2016 - 07:39 pm - Link - Report abuse 0
  • DemonTree

    @ JB
    It's probably true the Democrats hope to get votes from the legal Hispanic population in America. But why do you think Bush and earlier Republican presidents did not stop the flow of migrants?

    There is actually some evidence that increasing border security resulted in more illegal immigration to the USA, as workers who used to come in and out to do seasonal work decided that crossing the border was too risky and stopped - on the USA side. Then they sent for their families to join them, greatly increasing the illegal population.

    As to the number of illegals, there are independent organisations that study immigration and they all put the number around 11m. Is your guess based on any evidence? Trump has given none for his figure, it's purely a scare tactic (as if 11m isn't high enough already!)

    As I understand it, Obama's policy was to concentrate on deporting people caught near the border, anyone who arrived recently, and those with criminal records, while mostly ignoring those who had been settled in the country for a long time, and already had jobs and family ties. That doesn't sound too unreasonable to me.

    About the voter ID question, I didn't understand why anyone would object, until it was explained by some Americans. There is no national ID card in America, so to get a valid ID people must pay for a driving licence or passport. Most well off and young people already have these, but poor people and many older people don't. Other forms of ID which mostly poor people have, such as government-issued public assistance cards, are not valid under the new laws. Basically, it makes it harder to vote for the groups who mostly vote Democrat, and that is why Democrats often oppose the measures.

    As for giving benefits to illegal immigrants, they already can get emergency treatment at hospitals and send their children to public schools. (And most of them do pay taxes, too.) Claiming Clinton will give them Social Security etc is simply false.

    Nov 26th, 2016 - 10:02 am - Link - Report abuse 0
  • Jack Bauer

    First of all, based on official stats, I have to correct my estimate of 12m illegals for the mid-90's, to 5m. I did not research it, and the reason why that number stuck with me, was because , at the time it was the number that was thrown around in business meetings... obviously incorrect ; seems the number went increasing gradually, peaking in 2009 , then more or less stabilizing after that.
    As to why Bush and previous presidents didn’t stop the flow of immigrants, I don’t know, but I would think that perhaps it was because with the economy doing OK, and unemployment not being the issue it became after 2008, it wasn’t something that bothered people.
    Agree that there is no national ID system, however, it is cheap to obtain a driver’s license, unless of course, you require a load of lessons from a professional instructor. If you don’t have a driver’s license, other forms of ID are accepted (presume this varies from State to State), such as State-issued ID cards, birth certificates (along with some other form of ID showing you’re the person named on the certificate, such as a bank statement with name & address) , and legal immigrants have their citizenship papers, and those still in the process, have green cards….so really, only if you are illegal you won’t be able to prove you have the right to vote. Besides, mandatory ID reduces the possibility of electoral fraud. But, almost 1/3 of the States require no ID whatsoever, and that is where the system’s Achilles heel is…But if it’s the democrats who believe that requiring voter ID in effect discriminates against minorities (that supposedly can’t afford them) - and who they believe would vote for them - then provide voter ID's free-of-cost, like in other countries. Surely cheaper, and easy to implement.
    I did not claim Hillary “would” give them social security, I suggested it wouldn't be above her to do so.

    Nov 26th, 2016 - 05:12 pm - Link - Report abuse 0

Commenting for this story is now closed.
If you have a Facebook account, become a fan and comment on our Facebook Page!