Questionable Judgment? Daily Kos: A CIA Controlled Opposition?

Print Friendly


The blogosphere is abuzz with news that Markos Moulitsas, the Daily Kos’ founder and owner, and outspoken Democratic Party would-be kingmaker was/is a CIA operative… Compounding the wound is Moulitsas’ own admission that “he would have ‘no problem working for them’ in the present.” That’s an awfully odd opinion for a man helming one of the nation’s largest “progressive” blogs. Is there any substance to the claims?

Certainly Moulitsas is not lacking in enemies, or people who simply envy his success or dislike his penchant for authoritarian fiats in support of what many leftists (of the more genuine type) perceive as misplaced support for establishment worthies, even worthies like Howard Dean who like to present themselves as “outsiders.”

The charges are damning, and, because of that, we introduce them here in the spirit of the blogosphere, so that other voices may add information and insight to this matter, but with the caveat (and almost a tinge of disbelief) that Cyrano’s Journal is still sorting out the facts. Surely. whatever we may think of Moulitsas or Daily Kos, he deserves the benefit of the doubt when it comes to such serious allegations.

In this context we should remember that—leaving aside for a moment the possibility that he may be the victim of a Rovian psyops to derail his influence (as suggested by my colleague Guy Zimmerman below), it’s not unusual for people to switch sides.

Since at least the French Revolution some remarkable people have moved from right to left and viceversa. Consider David Brock, former Republican dirty tricks apparatchik, onetime Clintonite tormenter, and later founder of the very liberal and useful MEDIAMATTERS.ORG. On the other hand, many more, perhaps lured by fame, money and other perks facilitated by serving the oligarchy—have traveled to the right. A couple of specimens in this latter smelly bucket are David Horowitz, one of today’s most vicious witchhunters, and Christopher Hitchens, the ertswhile leftist wit who gained acclaim by deconstructing Princess Di and Mother Theresa. Is, then, Markos Moulitsas a recent convert to the left ( Did he really abandon his rightwing proclivities and redeem himself with a drift leftward, even if his official politics today do not make him more dangerous to the status quo than a mainstream liberal or a someone armed with a lollipop?

Perhaps the fairest thing to do might be to suspend final judgment until the major details have been verified. Problem is, too much has happened. My own feeling is that Moulitsas has dug his own grave, and that this set of disclosures will do little for his prestige in, well, progressive circles. Still, whatever the outcome, one thing requires consideration. The Daily Kos is a vast self-publishing place which, for all the policing by Moulitsas’ staff and their erratic attempts at censorship, often escapes editorial control, just like many threads at Cyrano reflect opinions that are often completely at variance with the editors’ own views. As long as Daily Kos continues to serve as a powerful platform for the distribution of legitimate leftwing views, it performs a service above and separate from whatever views Moulitsas himself may pack.

But enough of an introduction. Here’s what’s being said. When more facts are available, we’ll piece together a complete and hopefully definitive dossier on the issue. —P. Greanville


The proudly patriotic Moulitsas Zúñiga, pre DK days.

Is it possible Markos Alberto Moulitsas Zúñiga, leader of the “Kossaks,” that is to say followers and fawners of the Daily Kos, is a CIA operative? Francis Holland, posting on the My Left Wing messageboard, details Moulitsas’ relationship with the CIA:

“Markos Moulitsas Zúniga, owner of the DailyKos website, now admits that he spent six months in the employ of the US Central Intelligence Agency in 2001,” writes Holland. “In a one-hour interview on June 2, 2006 at the Commonwealth Club, Moulitsas, also known as ‘Kos,’ admitted that he was a CIA employee and would have ‘no problem working for them’ in the present.”

“I applied to the CIA and I went all the way to the end, I mean it was to the point where I was going to sign papers to become Clandestine Services,” Moulitsas admits in the interview. “And it was at that point that the Howard Dean campaign took off and I had to make a decision whether I was gonna kinda join the Howard Dean campaign, that whole process, or was I was going to become a spy. (Laughter in the audience.) It was going to be a tough decision at first, but then the CIA insisted that if, if I joined that, they’d want me to do the first duty assignment in Washington, DC, and I hate Washington, DC. Six years in Washington, DC [inaudible] that makes the decision a lot easier.”

Moulitsas considers the CIA “a very liberal institution,” never mind the agency, according to John Stockwell, former CIA Station Chief in Angola (see my John Stockwell: The Third World War video), is responsible for killing more than six million people.

This is a very liberal institution. And in a lot of ways, it really does attract people who want to make a better, you know, want to make the world a better place…. Of course, they’ve got their Dirty Ops and this and that, right but as an institution itself the CIA is really interested in stable world. That’s what they’re interested in. And stable worlds aren’t created by destabilizing regimes and creating wars…. I don’t think it’s a very partisan thing to want a stable world. And even if you’re protecting American interests, I mean that can get ugly at times, but generally speaking I think their hearts in the right place. As an organization their heart is in the right place. I’ve never had any problem with the CIA. I’d have no problem working for them

Is it possible Mr. Moulitsas does not have a problem with the documented fact the CIA’s predecessor, the Overseas Secret Service, imported Nazis to work for the soon to be created CIA under General Reinhard Gehlen? “Gehlen was far from the only Nazi war criminal employed by the CIA. Others included Klaus Barbie (’the Butcher of Lyon’), Otto von Bolschwing (the Holocaust mastermind who worked closely with Eichmann) and, SS Colonel Otto Skorzeny (a great favorite of Hitler’s),” writes Mark Zepezauer (The CIA’s Greatest Hits, Odonian Press, 1994). “There’s even evidence that Martin Bormann, Hitler’s second-in-command at the end of the war, faked his own death and escaped to Latin America, where he worked with CIA-linked groups.

Or that the CIA financed the P-2 Masonic lodge, connected with the Vatican and the Mafia, and enthusiastically supported Operation Gladio, the “strategy of tension” terrorist “stay behind army” effort in Europe, responsible of train station bombings and assassinations, run by former SS Nazis? Is it possible Mr. Moulitsas supports the CIA effort to create shell banks such as the Bank of Credit and Commerce International, accurately characterized by former CIA director and current Sec. Def. Robert Gates as “the Bank of Crooks and Criminals International”? Does Moulitsas support the idea of MK-ULTRA, a program designed to test “radiation, electric shocks, electrode implants, microwaves, ultrasound and a wide range of drugs on unwitting subjects, including hundreds of prisoners at California’s infamous Vacaville State Prison,” as Zepezauer notes? Or what about the CIA getting into the heroin business with the Corsican Mafia, paving the way for highly profitable drug importation operations in Central America and Afghanistan, money used not only to enrich the “investment” (in death and misery) bankers but also used for the CIA’s black budget? How liberal is it to engage in assassination, genocide, and plotting the overthrow of governments in Iran, Guatemala, Indonesia (where more than 500,000 people were put to death, many of them due to CIA drafted “death lists”), and dozens of other countries?

Of course, the CIA long ago penetrated the “liberal” as well as the “conservative” corporate media in America. “Among the executives who lent their cooperation to the Agency were William Paley of the Columbia Broadcasting System, Henry Luce of Time Inc., Arthur Hays Sulzberger of the New York Times, Barry Bingham Sr. of the Louisville Courier-Journal and James Copley of the Copley News Service. Other organizations which cooperated with the CIA include the American Broadcasting Company, the National Broadcasting Company, the Associated Press, United Press International, Reuters, Hearst Newspapers, Scripps-Howard, Newsweek magazine, the Mutual Broadcasting System, The Miami Herald, and the old Saturday Evening Post and New York Herald-Tribune. By far the most valuable of these associations, according to CIA officials, have been with The New York Times, CBS, and Time Inc.,” writes Watergate journalist Carl Bernstein (Rolling Stone, Oct. 20, 1977). “From the Agency’s perspective, there is nothing untoward in such relationships, and any ethical questions are a matter for the journalistic profession to resolve, not the intelligence community.”

Indeed, it would appear Markos Moulitsas finds nothing “untoward in such relationships,” if we are to believe his above quoted comments.

Finally, Moulitsas’ relationship with the CIA makes perfect sense, as Daily Kos appears to be yet another political front operation tasked with cracking the whip over “progressive” Democrats and marching them off to support the Bilderberger Queen Hillary Clinton and her probable running mate, Barack Obama, both on record as supporting the neocon plan to reduce the Muslim world to a smoldering wasteland, albeit with stylistic policy changes. It is no secret the CIA has long stage managed the controlled opposition and Moulitsas’ admitted relationship with the agency should be considered a coup de grâce, an effort designed to reduce the “progressive” Democrat opposition to the invasion and occupation of Iraq and the impending attack to be leveled against Iran as little more than an empty and absurd rhetorical slogan.


July 08, 2007
The Indictment of Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA by Justice and History

Having discovered that Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA, founder of DailyKos) has a long history of participation in and support of the Republican Party and, moreover, trained with the US Central Intelligence Agency in 2001, now research into the life and history of Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑiGA has revealed and established the following facts and, therefore, justice and history now bring this twenty-seven count indictment of Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA:

1). Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA was born in Chicago, NOT El Salvador, and therefore he is a US citizen and is NOT and never was an immigrant, in spite of his habitual assertions to the contrary.

2). Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA lied when he said “I don’t have money. I don’t come from a famous or powerful family. I was an immigrant to the United States.”

3). Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA was a Ronald Reagan Republican throughout the 1980’s, campaigning for Ronald Reagan, George. H.W. Bush, and Republican Representative Henry Hyde, and is a proponent of “states’ rights.” CatoUnbound.Org:Markos Moulitsas [ZÚÑIGA] [NOTE: This claim by Holland sounds strange since Moulitsas, born in 1971, would have been about 10 at the time. —Eds]

4). Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA was trained for six months at Central Intelligence Agency offices in Washington, DC in 2001, with or without pay. Speech to the Commonwealth Club

5). Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA has told the media, without naming her, that his mother “returned to El Salvador several years ago to run a hotel.”

6). In fact, Mr. Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA’s family owns a sumptuous and “exclusive” resort hotel in El Salvador called the Jaltapeque Suites Hotel. [Moulitsas wedding pix at family-owned resort]

7). Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA invited friends and family to celebrate with him at the this Jaltepeque Suites Hotel after he was married in the year 2000.

8). The Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA family’s hotel actually received five million dollars in foreign investments between 1997 and 2000.

9). Carlos Alberto Delgado Zúñiga, the “family” member listed in government records as “manager” of the MoulitsasZÚÑIGA’s hotel is also president of the “Junta Directiva” of the CÁMARA SALVADOREÑA DE TURISMO (CASATUR), the national tourism board of El Salvador.

10). The man listed in public documents as the “manager” of the MoulitsasZÚÑIGA’s hotel is also a member of the “Junta Directiva” of the “Sistema de Integración de Centroamerica” (System for Integration of Central America).

11). The man listed as the manager of the Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA’s hotel is also named in Salvadoran Government documents as the “ADMINISTRADOR UNICO PROPIETARIO” (Administrator Sole Proprietor) of PRODUCTOS TURISTICOS Y OTROS, SOCIEDAD ANONIMA DE CAPITAL VARIABLE – PROTURO, S.A. DE C.V.

12). Proturo, S.A. de C.V. is also known as the “Baja Salt Group,” which does business as “Baja Salt.”

13). Baja Salt distributes table salt and industrial salt in the United States, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, New Zealand, Central and South America, and offices in Odessa, Texas, where President George W. Bush was born.

14). Baja Salt is the sole distributor Central Americafor the salt produced by Mexico’s Exportadora de Sal, S.A. (ESSA).

15). Baja Salt/ESSA is a notorious polluter of pristine grey whale and sea turtle spawning grounds and habitat.

16). ESSA is represented in its environmental pollution cases by the same Skadden, Arps firm that represents The Carlyle Group.

17). The internationally powerful Carlos Alberto Delgado ZÚÑIGA, the “family” member listed in government records as “manager” of the Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA’s hotel is a board member of El Salvador’s ANEP, the Asociación Nacional de Empresas Privadas (National Association of Private Corporations).

18).ANEP is listed by the US Central Intelligence Agency as a right-wing “political pressure group.”

19). ANEP is “a lobby of El Salvador’s most influential businessmen” that advocates free markets and “wants to privatize El Salvador’s water delivery” and its hospitals, which has led to large popular demonstrations in El Salvador against ANEP’s pro-corporate policies. CountryData.Com

20). The large national and international corporate members of ANEP were the principal political opponents of Catholic Archbishop Oscar Romero before he was assassinated.

21). ANEP ran a vigorous media campaign against El Salvador’s populist Catholic Archbishop Oscar Romero in the months that led up to his assassination on March 24 1980.

22). The corporate members of ANEP were the principal political opponents of Catholic Archbishop Oscar Arnulfo Romero before he was assassinated. CIA: Political Pressure Groups

23). While Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA was campaigning for Ronald Reagan and other Republicans, the Reagan Administration provided billions of dollars in military and other aid to the Salvadoran Government and to the right-wing pressure groups believed to be responsible for the assassination of Archbishop Oscar Arnulfo Romero. Total United States aid to El Salvador rose from US$264.2 million in fiscal year (FY) 1982 to an estimated US$557.8 million in FY 1987. On average over this period, economic aid exceeded military aid by more than a two-to-one ratio. [Please see our previous objection on this topic, concerning Moulitsas’ age.—Eds]

Economic aid was provided in the form of Economic Support Funds (ESF), food aid under Public Law 480 (P.L. 480), and development aid administered by the United States Agency for International Development (AID). ESF was intended to provide balance of payments support to finance essential non food imports. Assistance with food imports as well as the direct donation of foodstuffs was accomplished through the P.L. 480 program. Development aid covered a broad spectrum of projects in such fields as agriculture, population planning, health, education, and training. For FY 1987, regular non supplemental ESF appropriations totaled US$181.7 million, and combined food and development aid amounted to US$122.7 million. The regular FY 1987 appropriation for military aid was US$116.5 million. Mongabay.Com: Country Studies/El Salvador.

24). In 1983, another source provided the U.S. embassy with a chilling account of how death-squad operations were planned, financed and executed. According to the source, these right-wing death squads, which were all connected to D’Aubuisson’s group,
“get their orders from paymasters in the Sola family … younger members of the de Sola family and some members of the National Association of Businessmen (ANEP) … The chain of command then proceeds to death-masters like [deleted] [who] have contacts with retired officers who go around to the different security forces as “black bag” men, paying off and recruiting likely foot-soldiers. The latter are recruited at the lower and even middle levels (captains and majors) of the different security forces. Death squad hit-men thus recruited are on the receiving end of a vertical hierarchy leading up to the paymasters (whom the foot-soldiers do not know…).” Center for International Policy

25). In spite of the leadership role of Carlos Alberto Delgado ZÚÑIGA’s in ANEP, and ANEP’s role in the events leading to the assassination of Catholic Archbishop Oscar Romero, Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA has told the public and his supporters — cynically and as part of a continuing history of misinformation and deception — that Archbishop Oscar Romero was one of his “heroes.”

26). Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA could not be unaware of these facts, and yet, through dozens or hundreds of media interviews, he has persistently hid his knowledge of these facts, and of his family’s role, from his supporters and from the American public.

27). Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA has lied to the public about whom he really is, and he is not the person whom he pretends to be, but is an impostor who makes a mockery of progressive people and progressive values.

Still, a myriad of questions remain and demand to be answered about his activities:

1). Why has he NEVER, EVER revealed in public the name of even ONE of his blood relatives?

2). What is the name of the uncle of Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA who was once the Minister of Education in El Salvador?

3. Why has Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA not revealed that the “manager” of his “family business” in El Salvador, Carlos Alberto Delgado ZÚÑIGA , was a board member of ANEP?

4). Who is Maria Elizabeth ZÚÑIGA de Delgado, the woman listed in Salvadoran Government documents as “Alternate Administrator” of Proturo, S.A. de S.V.?

5). To what degree does Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚNÍGA stand to benefit financially from the ongoing financial and political activities of Carlos Alberto Delgado ZÚÑIGA, Maria Elizabeth ZÚÑIGA de Delgado, the Jaltapeque Suites Hotel, the Baja Salt (Group), PROTURO, ESSA, ANEP and any related persons, corporations, groups, economic and political activities?

6). Why has Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚNÍGA never acknowledged, disavowed and disconnected himself from these activities?

7). Is Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚNÍGA now receiving and/or has he ever received (e.g. in 2001) payments or other compensation from the US Government, directly or indirectly, for his intelligence work or other activities?

8). Why has Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA lied about so many things to so many people?

9). Why would any responsible candidate for the Democratic presidential nomination attend a YearlyKos Convention’s Presidential Leadership Forum, named after Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA, before insisting upon learning the answers to all of these pressing and politically significant questions? [No one who understands the US political system, crammed with disgusting opportunists, would ask this question in earnest.—Eds]

10). With so many serious and troubling questions raised about the work and history of Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚÑIGA, the judgment of justice and history call upon and compel all of the Democratic presidential candidates, including Sen. Barack Obama, Sen. Christopher Dodd, Sen. John Edwards, Gov. Bill Richardson, to cancel their participation in the YearlyKos Conference.”

Progressive and other blogs linking to this indictment include:

The Unapologetic Mexican Blog: Markos Revealed!
A reader at this site puts it very cogently:

I have never followed the Kos site — it just wasn’t off the scale enough for me. But it does seem that he is hardly a supporter of privilege or the U.S. right wing. His main sin was to claim a humble background. Bad boy, Kos!

I can honestly say I have tried to read the site, but found it mostly soporific. I might have read it three times in three years. I just don’t “get it”. On the other hand, I do admire anyone that can come up with a scheme to make a very good living from writing what they want to write, and fake-o life story or not, Kos gets my respect there…Also, in a period where public cynicism is the norm he has tried mightily to get people involved with the political crisis. As Nez says, this should be interesting in Blogsylvania, Left and Right. I just hope it does not distract too much from the idea that Bush and Cheney need to be impeached and publicly flayed for good measure. Just a suggestion.

Also linked at the Religious Left blog, which says, “Markos Moulitsas and Ronald Reagan Stood Together Against Progressive Values.”

Also linked at Field Negro, who says, “Markos, if this is true you’re going to have a lot of explaining to do!”

Mo Betta Blog says, “If nothing else, we get a more complete picture of one of the most prominent partisan Democrat bloggers and would-be power players, including perhaps some insight into why DailyKos operates in such an authoritarian manner and the positions that the blog appears to favor regarding the political direction of the US.”

Marisacat links and says of DailyKos, “Thuggishness is going to have consequences.”

Even before this news about the CIA, ANEP and Salvadoran death squad questions arose, the Blogroll Amnesty blog said, “I just found this link via Francis Holland’s main blog. It’s called The Truth About Kos. A number of links gathered together in one place.”

Bartcop.Com says, “It seems odd that two of the biggest lefty blogs, Kos and Arianna, are run by former Republicans who will say anything to discredit our Democratic front-runner.”

Salon/Tabletalk.Com commenter says, “This is a very interesting article posted on Bartcop about Kos, including that the poor family he claims he comes from is quite influential and wealthy in El Salvador, and that he trained for the CIA for 6 months in 2001.”

SuprmChaos.Com asks, “Is Kos a Repug Mole?”

Columbuser.Com says,” Hmm. Mark McNally at Paindealer links to an article about Kos at As Ohio Goes, but the post seems to have been disappeared. The link now dumps you to the blog’s front page. The original post is referenced at BlogNetNews, so I’m sure Paindealer didn’t image it. (…) Fortunately, the Kos post was cross-posted at The Truth About Kos (DailyKos).

Democratic Underground says: “The Truth About Kos: Truth or Mere Allegations?”

13 comments on “Questionable Judgment? Daily Kos: A CIA Controlled Opposition?
  1. It is clear that some of the above is beyond a stretch – such as the claims of his support of Reagan.

    I was involved actively in the Women’s Liberation Movement in the 1970s (and onward). We had a woman openly, actively, and financially, involved in the KC Women’s Liberation Union. We found out after several years that Joyce was an FBI plant. While heartbreaking in some ways, it was a learning experience.

    When one enters the realm of information and disinformation – which is a distinct possibility here – then a multitude of scenarios emerge.

    First, it is unlikely that anyone is going to “prove” that “Kos” is a covert op.

    So is Kos under attack by “progressives” being spawned out of reality, or is it disinformation to defuse the political influence that The Daily Kos has become?

    Or is Kos involved with covert ops and the influence represented by The Daily Kos being used to sculpt and control the Democratic party?

    Who knows? The political influence represented via the Daily Kos is very real.

    My personal experience says that the best way to “protect” oneself is to maintain your own integrity. Suggestions by anyone, no matter how much respect one has for the individual (or group) should be evaluated against one’s internal gauge of “rightness.” NEVER suspend your own critical thought.

    The problem with disinformation (and my nose tells me that advertently or inadvertently some to the above “proof” is exactly that) is that it has an element of truth somewhere. Further, it presents a semi-plausible explanation or story. Determining where the information goes adrift becomes the key to getting at the real information.

    The exhibit detailing “family” relationships and connections certainly carries a high possibility of error. People sharing a last name are not necessarily directly related. Even if related, they may not be the immediate family conjectured. Nor, if the companies involved are “bad” companies, does that make Kos a supporter of them. Even if the claims are true, there may be a family rift.

    Has Kos misrepresented himself? Perhaps. However, he was (and perhaps still is) a blogger. He is, for all intents and purposes, a private individual. I do not make public my entire life history, why is there the a feeling that Kos should? Or that it is “proof” of “evil doings” that he has not?

    Information campaign or disinformation campaign? My guess is that there is a fair amount of “stretching” to prove an argument/ support a position. We have all seen THAT happen often enough. Since many of us have been politically active, it is likely that some of us have been victims of similar types of attacks.

    I will maintain my critical approach with The Daily Kos, and not leap on the KOS as spy/provocateur bandwagon.

  2. Commenting on what my colleague Rowan says:

    “will maintain my critical approach with The Daily Kos, and not leap on the KOS as spy/provocateur bandwagon.”

    I agree. Some things do seem out place but it is risky to jump on the bandwagon if these accusations turn out to be nothing…I’m taking the identical position to Rowan on this matter, although what Guy said certainly raises some flags…I’m sure something will break – We’ll just have to wait and see.

    Note: Paul Donovan is Cyrano’s Assistant editor. Rowan (Wolf) is Cyrano’s Senior Contributing Editor and Editor of CJO’s Avenger blog.

  3. Kos has always presented himself as a Dean Democrat and as such opposed to the DLC and the basic strategy of triangulation and accommodation. Still, he’s always pushed his Reagan affiliation and his military past as a way to outflank jingoism from the right and from any wider perspective is undoubtedly a centrist. Remarkably enough, in the current climate the CIA has been an obstacle for the overtly militaristic agenda of the DOD, and this was actually true during the Reagan years as well, the right never having forgiven the CIA for what happened with regard to the Iran-Contra scandal, etc. The CIA is, of course, guilty of decades of malfeance and a host of crimes against humanity and as I write this its operatives are torturing innocents in black sites scattered around the globe. There has to be a limit to what one will do in order to outflank jingoism, in other words, and KOS should be called to account.

    As for the charge that Kos is an active CIA operative, I have to say I detect a strong smell of Rove. Somewhere in the bowels of the American Enterprise Institute pudgy fingers have been busy, I fear. On balance, Daily Kos has made real trouble for Bush and continues to do so. Could they make more trouble? Certainly. Would the left of the right benefit from the demise of the site? To ask the question is to know the answer.

    “To what degree does Markos Alberto Moulitsas ZÚNÍGA stand to benefit financially from the ongoing financial and political activities of Carlos Alberto Delgado ZÚÑIGA, Maria Elizabeth ZÚÑIGA de Delgado, the Jaltapeque Suites Hotel, the Baja Salt (Group), PROTURO, ESSA, ANEP and any related persons, corporations, groups, economic and political activities?” Again, I see pudgy fingers littering the blogosphere with the kind of radioactive breadcrumbs it’s impossible to refute and that linger and corrode…those pudgy fingers are connected via flabby arms to porcine faces lit up right now with big ingratiating smiles. Those gimlet eyes look up into the eyes of Cheney-power, I fear. And the eyes of Cheney-power smile back, ready to give that head a little pat.

    In short, beware.


    Note: Guy Zimmerman is Cyrano’s Journal’s Senior Editor for Cultural & Political Affairs, and serves as co-editor of CJO’s VOXPOP section devoted to those matters.

  4. These revelations could bring some heat with them. I hope all the facts check out and that this isn’t something fabricated by the right – It’s not that I don’t believe it, the Kos’s hostility to ideas that drift too far to the left of center is evident enough if you know the site, which I think we all do.

    It’s possible this well intentioned “anti-bush patriot”, has no political compass whatsoever, and as a result, starting having people posting on his site drifting too far to the left, which may have slipped under his own personal filter and radars. Just maybe the system got to him, maybe even paid him off, or the site has simply been a decoy trap to catalog leftists since the word go?

    If all the facts check out, I think the story should be broken. It’s time the left learned this is a class war, and not simply a war of “my opinion verse yours” let the best “opinion” win, and let democracy prevail.

    It’s time the real left turned up the agitation propaganda a notch. I think all the left sites should jump on this. This Kos issue is a small battle not a war, and if these allegations turn out to be false or misrepresented….. whoever “leads” an attack on the “cause” may find they are up to their knees in shit – people won’t trust you anymore if it gets too big. Maybe the Kos never claimed to be that far left at all, hence Kos’s statement that he would be part of the CIA – It’s not a fun job attacking a straw man…

    Just some thoughts, can’t hurt…


  5. Air and light needed here. I like your measured stance on this.


    PS: did I tell you that I LOVE the section name “The Unairbrushed Female”?

    Note: Susan Fazekas is CJO’s senior art advisor.

  6. My name is Francis L. Holland and I researched and published the above information at “The Truth About Kos.” It is quite reasonable for people to wonder where the truth lies here, because stories involving the CIA are inherently murky.

    I suggest the following procedure. First, follow all of the links at the Truth About Kos Blog and read them for yourself. You will discover that there can be no doubt whatsoever that the people listed there as part of Markos Alberto C. Moulitsas Zúñiga’s (MAMZ’s)”family business” are indeed relatives of MAMZ’s family. MAMZ says in his own online wedding album that this is a “family business.” Are we now to believe that people listed in government documents as the the administrators of this business, and who share MAMZ’s last name, are NOT MAMZ’s relatives? If not, MAMZ need only stand up and say so. If they are only distant relatives then, again, MAMZ need only say so publicly and remove all doubt.

    I am a lawyer and I studied tort law in law school, including the law of libel. If I believed that MAMZ was not a public individual for purposes of libel law, then I never would have published this information about this individual and his family.

    However, legal precedents make it clear (Times v. Sullivan) that people involved in politics, advocating making charges and counter charges, are NOT private citizens. As a matter of law, it is simply untenable to assert that MAMZ is a private citizen. He is not.

    Morever, Carlos Alberto Delgado Zúñiga, the man listed in government documents as the manager of MAMZ’s family business, is also president of three national tourism groups in El Salvadors, mentioned in numerous newspaper stories for his efforts to change national Salvadoran law to benefit the tourism industry and his “family business.” Obviously, if he were considered a “private individual” then it would be impossible for the public to exercise its First Amendment rights to oppose his efforts to create a legislative framework that benefits his family interests while imperiling the environment.

    In any case, under established legal precedents, someone who lobbies the government, leads three national tourism groups and is a member of a national “political pressure group” is not a private citizen and it is not unfair or unlawful to explore and report upon his activities.

    But let’s get back to how to determine where the truth lies in this case. Either the facts listed about MAMZ are true or they are not, regardless of my motive for researching and presenting them. If I say that it is hot outside for the purpose of selling you ice cream, does my motive determine whether it is hot outside? Of course not! The exterior temperature is a matter of fact that you can determine for yourself by looking at a thermometer.

    Likewise, I have not asked you to rely on my credibility for any part of this account of MAMZ’s activities. Read the links for yourselves BEFORE speculating whether they are true or not, but do NOT speculate INSTEAD of reading the primary sources that form the basis of my reporting.

    I have never, ever said that Markos Moulitsas is currently a CIA agent. I don’t have the evidence to assert that as a matter of fact, and I am not going to make an assertion without evidence.

    It is the readers of my blog who are putting two and two together and coming to the conclusion that such is within the realm of possibility. I offer no opinion on that one way or the other, because I believe it is easier to see what the truth is when we focus on the facts on the table instead of muddying the water with speculation.

    Some people have suggested that this must be a right-wing smear. We already know that MAMZ’s family comes from a right-wing background and that MAMZ was a right-winger for a significant part of his adult life.

    But, as the writer of the “Truth About Kos Blog,” my own history is also an open book to anyone who knows how to use Google. I defy anyone to show any evidence whatsoever that I have ever been part of a right-wing group or held a right-wing notion. In fact, the opposite is true. It is precisely because I am from the Left that I am deeply insulted and, in fact, horrified that someone like MAMZ could be pretending to the throne of supreme leader of the Left. If MAMZ is the most credible person we can find to lead the leftist opposition, then we might as well all spend out time at the beach instead of writing about politics, because CIA applicants have NEVER, EVER turned into revolutionary leaders of the left. They only turn into revolutionary INFILTRATORS of the Left.

    Now, just as there are people who will try to convince you that global warming doesn’t exist, in spite of all of the mounting evidence that it does, there are going to be people who will warn you to ignore the evidence that MAMZ was a Republican and IS a Republican.

    Just to make my motives clear, I’ll tell what made me suspect MAMZ. I am in favor of ending the 43-term white male monopoly of the presidency by electing in 2008 – for the first time in American history – a president who is NOT a white male. You can agree or disagree with this goal, but my writings make it clear that I am quite determined in this.

    Last year, I read MAMZ’s article in the Washington Post ridiculing and criticizing Hillary Clinton for being “insufficiently progressive,” and that article by MAMZ alarmed and infuriated me. MAMZ was insisting that the only candidate in the race who was NOT a white man should refrain from running for president, effectively leaving the race 100% white – just like DailyKos is 96% white.

    I am NOT going to accept that! I joined DailyKos and I wrote against MAMZ consistently when I was there, until I was banned. Then, I went to MyDD, where I was also banned, and I was told in public, on the site, researchable today, that I was banned because it was not permissible to criticize MAMZ at MyDD. Why not? Aren’t we at liberty to wonder whether he is the right person to decide the presidential contest in 2008, particularly when he clearly would like to decide the presidential contest in 200?!

    Now, when I discovered the same MAMZ who is ostensibly attacking Clinton from the Left today was attacking Bill Clitnon from the right back in 1993, I realized that there is only one thing that is consistent about this – attacking the Clintons from the Left and the Right.

    Why 1993? In 1993, MAMZ wrote an article for the Northern Illinois University campus newspaper, the “Northern Star,” in which he OPPOSED opening the military to gay servicemen, closeted or not, and he also ridiculed Bill Clinton for not having served in the military.

    So, MAMZ was ridiculing the Clintons from the Right in 1993 and now he is ridiculing them from the Left? I don’t think it’s fair or rational to believe what MAMZ says, even while everything in his history contradicts it, while disbelieving what Clinton says, even though she was a liberal even when MAMZ was supporting the Republicans!

    I’m the kind of guy who prefers lifelong liberals who are clearly not CIA operatives instead of sometime Republican campaign operatives who claim one thing in the present that it utterly at odds with their past.

    When given a choice between believing that something green is an apple and something blue is an apple, I’ll take the green apple over the blue apple every time! And MAMZ is a blue apple. You have to ignore everything you know about the universe to accept him as a progressive leader.

    So, like I said above. Check the links and see if they pan out before you begin speculating about the “motive” for presenting these links. If the links are not true, then my motive as irrelevant. And if the links ARE true, then the information at the links should be the basis for our conversation, and that makes me not as important as the facts that are on the table Because your thermometer and my thermometer both say it’s hot outside, then my OPINION about the temperature and my motive for offering that opinion don’t make much difference, do they?

  7. In 2006, when MAMZ attacked Hillary Clinton in the Washington Post, virtually demanding that she not run for president, she was the only Democrat in the race who was not a white man. To my way of thinking, having an all white male candidate pool is not democracy. It’s the white male supremacy paradigm at work. It is NOT liberal or progressive to suggest that the only woman in the race for the presidency should get out of the race.

    Now, MAMZ is also telling everybody who will listen that Barack Obama lacks leadership in the Senate. Why is MAMZ saying that? I don’t know. All I know is that MAMZ is attacking every presidential candidate who is not a white man.

    Now, maybe you don’t like me anymore. Maybe you think I’m against white men. I’m not. I’m against the 43-term white male monopoly of the presidency and vice presidency. I’m against perpetuating that monopoly by electing another pair of white men to the presidency and vice presidency.

    Hate me if you will, but does my motive for attacking MAMZ still seem like a Republican smear. It’s not. It’s a far-left democratic smear on behalf of ending the 43-term white male monopoly of the presidency.

    Some people’s definition of smear is “reporting facts that predictably someone.” TO people who believe this definition, reporting facts that discredit someone is always wrong, because it’s not nice.

    So, if you factually report and reveal, for example, that a candidate for Congress is a convicted child molester who is registered as sex offender, is that a “smear”? Or is it simply an instance of providing relevant information that the public needs in order to make an informed decision? I hope I am providing relevant information about MAMZ that the public needs to make an informed decision.

    The word “smear” itself encourages us to focus on the motives for presenting the information instead of focusing on whether the information is true or not. So, people who are guilty of wrongdoing often say that they are victims of a “smear” so that we will focus our attention on the motives of the person who presented the information rather than on whether the information itself is true.

    Does that really benefit democracy, when we believe that underlying motives are more important that verifiable facts?

    Now, I acknowledge that sometimes people use true information to distract the public from larger issues. The Clinton impeachment, to my way of thinking, was an example of Republicans using true but inconsequential information to distract the public from implementing progressive policy goals. Whether someone got a blow job or not is really inconsequential in the grand scheme of things.

    However, the extent of MAMZ’s involvement with the CIA is not consequential. If he has had a genuine change of heart since the time when he was a Republican elections workers, then perhaps he can be a good leader of a leftist blog today. But if he truly believes that the CIA is a “liberal” organization, then he CAN NEVER, EVER, be a leader of the left, because otherwise there will be no difference between the left and the right.

    I think that’s the risk that everyone is perceiving: That as a result of letting someone like MAMZ become a leader of the Left, we have gotten to the point where there is less and less difference between the left and the right.

    Have you ever wondered why MAMZ has never used his enormous e-mail list to call for a national demonstration? It could be that demonstrations are not effective, but maybe they haven’t been effective simply because they have not been large and sustained enough. Didn’t civil rights non-violent demonstrations lead to the integration of southern lunch counters and buses?

    So, another possible reason for MAMZ never calling for open challenges to the system is that MAMZ was planted within the Left precisely for the purpose of preventing such challenges. I admit that this is speculation because, as someone said above, infiltrators almost never are discovered at the time when they are doing the infiltrating. But this may be an exception to the rule. The jury isn’t in yet, but with the public weighing the evidence there is at least the chance that justice will be served.

  8. I feel quite ambivalent about the situation. Being (at the very least) the centrist that we KNOW he is (and hence representing the “Left” in the minds of many US Americans in our rump political spectrum), “Kos” is sucking up significant amounts of our oxygen. Based on the thrust and content of his site, this individual demonstrates no true dedication to radically altering the status quo. He is a member of the “loyal opposition” and a part of the perverse establishment we love to hate. Therefore, I don’t really care whether the assertions about his closet reactionary tendencies are true or not. Either way, I have little use for him.

    However, I do see the value of DK as a vehicle to disseminate radical views to a large number of centrist/liberaloids. It is my sincere hope that when Patrice and I cross-post CJO content on DK that we are successfully converting some of the liberals who frequent Moulitsas’ site. Despite my misgivings about him and his true motives (be they reactionary or centrist), I don’t want to lose DK as a resource in our battle of communications.

    Jason Miller, Associate Editor, Cyrano’s Journal Online

  9. Jason Miller, I think you’re saying that you have a relationship with MAMZ that you want to protect, and so it’s important that you not offend him, otherwise you might get banned from his site and lose access to his audience.

    I guess, whoever controls the movie studio gets an enormous control over the actors and the scripts. If you want MAMZ to play your movies, you’d better not anger 20th Century Kos, the biggest studio in town.

    Ultimately, only MAMZ decides what films can be shown in his studios, so change might happen IF MAMZ wants it to. That makes MAMZ’s intentions essential to the plot of this movie. IF he is on the up and up, then the process he has established might serve the purposes of those who participate. IF.

  10. I think Francis brings up some pretty rigorous reasoning. I’m going to follow his advice and read his links. Thanks Francis!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.


From Punto Press



wordpress stats