Red Scare 2016: As Green Party Power Grows, Jill Stein Accused Of Ties To Putin

During his speech to the Green Party National Convention, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange warned that attacks against Jill Stein ‘are going to go through the roof.’
By | Follow on Facebook | @KitOConnell |
Be Sociable, Share!
    • Google+
    Jill Stein Moscow

    Presidential Candidate Jill Stein pictured in Moscow’s Red Square during the RT Anniversary Conference. (YouTube Screenshot)

    AUSTIN, Texas — As the popularity of the Green Party continues to rise during this divisive election, attacks and smear campaigns against the Greens, and their presidential nominee, Jill Stein, are ramping up.

    The latest rumor suggests Stein is under the control of Russian President Vladimir Putin, and it’s based on a deliberately misleading tweet about a video she recorded during a trip to Russia over the winter.

    On Saturday, economist Andrew Weiss tweeted a link to a video of Stein posted on Dec. 20. The video, “Anti-War Message in Moscow: Jill Stein, 2016 US-Presidential Candidate (Green Party),” was assembled from various sources — notably, a video posted on Stein’s Facebook page — by German anti-war site AntiKrieg.

    Weiss describes the video as “creepy,” and claims that it features Stein “gushing over Russian support for human rights.”

    Journalist Glenn Greenwald refuted Weiss’ statement a day later in a tweet of his own, calling Weiss’ claims about the Stein video “100% false.”

    In the video, Stein briefly thanks the donors and supporters who helped make her travel possible, then praises the other attendees of the RT Anniversary Conference, the event which prompted her visit to Russia. Those attendees included foreign dignitaries like British Labour Party leader Jeremy Corbyn and Cyril Svoboda, former deputy prime minister, minister of foreign affairs, and interior minister of the Czech Republic, as well as Patricia Villegas, president of pan-Latin American news network teleSUR, and Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn, former head of the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency.

    As the title of the video suggests, the video’s message is primarily anti-war and a criticism of heightened tensions between Russia and the West, which many have compared to a new Cold War. Describing discussions at the conference, Stein says:

    “It’s been so inspiring to see, rising up at this very critical and perilous moment that we’re in — a moment of grave militarism, potential nuclear confrontation, climate meltdown, and expanding war. It’s been so wonderful to see people come together from across all borders and from the across the political spectrum, really, come together around basic human values, around human rights, around the need for international law, including the need to reign in U.S. exceptionalism and totally reform and revise our foreign policy so that it is based on international law, human rights, and diplomacy.”

    Following her brief comments, the remainder of the video by AntiKrieg consists of photos and press clippings from Stein’s appearance at the conference, emphasizing her anti-war message. At no point does she praise the human rights records of Russia or Putin.


    Assange: Attacks on Stein are ‘going to go through the roof’

    During an appearance at the Green Party National Convention on Saturday, WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange warned Stein to anticipate more attacks of this nature as her political power rises. He appeared by video conference from the Ecuadorean Embassy in London, where he has lived on asylum for the past four years, fearing extradition to the United States.

    Watch WikiLeaks’ Julian Assange: Attacks Against Jill Stein Are “Going to Go Through the Roof”:

    Assange said:

    “[L]et me tell you that I’ve just seen that the attacks have started to ramp up on Jill Stein. They are going to go through the roof. I’ve had attacks from what is effectively the Clinton threat machine. They’re now post-convention. You guys are going to be post-convention. Those attacks are going to be ferocious.”

    Assange, too, has been forced to defend himself against accusations that he has ties to Russia in the wake of WikiLeaks’ publication of 20,000 leaked internal Democratic National Committee emails that has forced the resignation of Debbie Wasserman Schultz, the party’s chair, and other key DNC staff. The Clinton campaign suggested the emails were leaked by Russian hackers to boost Donald Trump’s prospects in the election, but those claims are based on suspect evidence provided by “experts” with known ties to the NSA.

    “Ultimately, there’s no conclusive proof that the hackers in either instance [including another hacking incident in June] were Russian or even tied to the Russian government,” wrote Mnar Muhawesh, MintPress’ founder and editor-in-chief, on July 25. “The entire case is built upon circumstantial evidence.

    And it’s not a far-fetched notion to suggest that Weiss, the major source of the smear campaign targeting Stein as pro-Putin, could have a pro-Clinton agenda or even a vested interest in her anti-Russian platform. Weiss is a senior advisor to the Albright Stonebridge Group, a global business strategy firm chaired by Madeleine Albright, who served as secretary of state under President Bill Clinton. Weiss has also worked with the Clinton Global Initiative to provide clean water in Haiti.

    Andrew Weiss Bio

    Andrew Weiss’ Bio on the Albright Stonebridge Group website.


    Stein responds to the smear campaign with a call for peace

    Speaking to Kwame Rose, a reporter for The Real News Network, Stein responded directly to the smear campaign after she received her party’s nomination on Saturday.

    Stein reiterated that her main message during her visit to Russia was to speak out against war:

    “My contribution to that panel was to tell Putin and everybody else that it was time for a peace initiative in the Middle East and we needed to stop the war in Syria. We needed to stop the bombing, we need a weapons embargo, and to freeze the funding of those countries that continued to fund terrorism.”

    She said Putin seemed to respond favorably to her message of peace, adding:

    “And interestingly, Putin watched our conference and our panel, and his remarks that night at that dinner was that he had heard the foreign politicians and he was shocked to find that he agreed with us on the need to create a peaceful path forward on Syria.”

    During the interview, Stein reiterated her core anti-war message:

    “The problem is that U.S. foreign policy is too often representing the war properties and the weapons industry. They’’re the only ones who are making out like bandits in this policy in the Middle East. We need a peace offensive. We need to stop having a foreign policy that is essentially a public relations campaign for the weapons industry. These problems are not so difficult to solve if we sit down as human beings.”

    She also called on Hillary Clinton and the U.S. government to stop provoking Russia through a military buildup in Eastern Europe.

    “Unfortunately, Hillary Clinton has been very busy just provoking Russia and not moving forward to a dialogue and solutions that serve us all,” she lamented.

    Watch “Jill Stein Defends Her Decision to Meet with Putin” from The Real News Network:

    Be Sociable, Share!


    Print This Story Print This Story
    You Might Also Like  
    This entry was posted in Front Page: National, Inside Stories, National, Top Stories and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
    • Jerry Reiter

      Jill Stein was the tail on the Trump’nStein monster. She robbed Hillary of 3 key states and handed the election to Putin’s pick for President.

    • Pingback: Red Scare 2016: As Green Party Power Grows, Jill Stein Accused Of Ties To Putin - Kit O'Connell: Approximately 8,000 Words()

    • Pingback: The Democrats’ undemocratic strategy of smearing the Green Party | Compliance Campaign()

    • Pingback: The Noose of Impeachment | Americonoclast()

    • Pingback: Contours of Russophobia – ThePopulist.Buzz()

    • Pingback: Russia-Baiting, Putin-Scaremongering Democrats Now Suddenly Worried About Offending China – Caitlin Johnstone | Timber Exec()

    • Pingback: Girls for Guns, Abuse for Sale: The Uncomfortable Truths About Hillary Clinton, Shooting The Messenger And Lesser-Evilism - New Matilda()

    • Texdakota

      1% in the polls. Whew, that amount of power is just mind blowing.

    • James Wherry


    • Pingback: La persécution d’Assange et la généralisation de la pathologie … | dresser mon chien()

    • Pingback: Топ 10 на конспиративните теории, лансирани от Западна Създаване да манипулира общественото мнение – част 2 – Zahariada()

    • Pingback: Persecuting Assange: the Mainstreaming of Neoliberal Pathology()

    • Pingback: Top 10 ‘acceptable’ Western Establishment conspiracy theories |  SHOAH()

    • Pingback: Top Ten “Acceptable” Western Establishment Conspiracy Theories | Counter Information()

    • James Wherry

      I would like Jill Stein to take a stand against the brutal Iranian theocracy, the way that Ayatollah Montazeri did. Below is a quote from the news story.

      In 1988, nearly a decade after Iran’s Islamic revolution, the country’s leader-in-waiting faced a decision.

      He could stay silent as Iran stepped up a campaign of mass executions, torture and gulag-style imprisonment against perceived internal opponents. Or he could follow his conscience and speak out.

      Ayatollah Hossein Ali Montazeri chose to take a stand.

      It came at a high cost. Montazeri was dumped as the hand-picked successor to the revolution’s leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. He would be declared a foe of the state and placed under house arrest for six years.

      The executions and purges of the late 1980s in Iran are well known and have been examined in books and reports by rights groups such as Amnesty International. Less clear, however, is what transpired at the highest reaches of power during a pivotal period for Iran and, by extension, for the wider region and Tehran’s relations with the West.

      An audio file that surfaced this week — posted on a website maintained by supporters of Montazeri, who died in 2009 — purports to offer a new glimpse into his last, desperate attempt to limit the killings and roundups.

      Its importance derives mostly from historical conjecture. Had Montazeri been elevated to power, Iran could have taken a very different course.

      Montazeri was an unwavering critic of the ambitious reach of Iran’s theocratic state. In broad terms, he felt the spirit of the revolution was betrayed as Khomeini and other clerics consolidated control after the Western-backed shah was ousted in 1979. The clerics, Montazeri believed, should stay on the sidelines as advisers and guides to the nation, while elected officials and hired-on-merit technocrats took the helm.

      The break with Khomeini was sealed by Montazeri’s opposition to secret political trials and summary executions carried out in the name of protecting the revolution.

      It came to a head in the final months of the country’s 1980-1988 war with Iraq. Worn down by conflict and nearly bankrupt, Iran lashed back hard at those it deemed domestic enemies. They included Western-leaning students, ethnic minorities and opposition factions including the Mujahideen-e Khalq, or MEK, which had launched a failed guerrilla offensive.

      A full accounting of what’s called the “death commission” created by Khomeini has yet to be carried out. But thousands died — by hanging or firing squad or in places such as Tehran’s Evin prison. According to an Amnesty report in 1990, “Thousands of people were executed between 1987 and 1990 including more than 2,000 political prisoners between July 1988 and January 1989.” The MEK and other groups place the overall death toll much higher.

      “In my opinion, the greatest crime committed during the Islamic Republic, for which history will condemn us, has been committed by you,” Montazeri is recorded as saying on the July 1988 tape to a group of senior judicial and intelligence figures, including a domestic spymaster, Mostafa Pourmohammadi, who now serves as justice minister in the government of President Hassan Rouhani.

      “Beware of 50 years from now, when people will pass judgment on the leader [Khomeini] and will say he was a bloodthirsty, brutal and murderous leader. … I do not want history to remember him like that,” added Montazeri, who was one of Khomeini’s most trusted allies for decades before they parted ways.

      A translation of the 40-minute recording was provided by an opposition group, the National Council of Resistance of Iran, which has offices in Washington and other cities. Similar translations were made by various outlets, including the BBC’s Persian Service.

      The authenticity of the recording could not be independently verified. Montazeri’s son, Ahmad, a moderate cleric, said Iranian intelligence officials ordered him Wednesday to remove the audio from the website, news reports said.

      Maryam Rajavi, head of the National Council of Resistance of Iran opposition group, urged international prosecutors to use the tape as further evidence that can be used to press charges for the political slayings of the late 1980s. She noted that some of the officials who helped carry out the purges — such as Pourmohammadi and the others who met with Montazeri — “have, from the beginning of this regime to the present day, held posts at the highest levels of the judicial, political and intelligence apparatuses.”

      Khomeini died in June 1989, less than a year after the claimed date of the recording, and was succeeded by a lower-ranking cleric, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Some detractors say Khamenei was selected as a low-risk leader who would not challenge the powers of the theocracy or its powerful backers such as the Revolutionary Guard Corps.

      “Killing is the wrong way to resist against a thought, an idea,” Montazeri said in the 1988 meeting, referring to those opposing the Iranian leadership at the time. “They have one thought, one idea. Responding to a process, a logic — even a faulty logic — with killing will solve nothing. It will make it worse.”

      “We will not be in power forever,” he continued. “In the future, history will judge us.”

      [The age-old tensions between Iran’s clerics and chess]

      Montazeri was placed under house arrest from 1997 until early 2003, leaving him effectively silenced during most of the term of reform-minded President Mohammad Khatami. But Montazeri had one more run left.

      He lived long enough to witness — and encourage — the Green Movement protests after the disputed reelection to the presidency of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in June 2009. Later that year, Montazeri issued a public apology for his participation in the 444-day hostage standoff at the U.S. Embassy that ended in 1981.

      Montazeri died in December 2009 as Iranian authorities gained the upper hand in the post-election chaos. At his funeral in Qom, the center of Shiite religious study in Iran, tens of thousands of mourners streamed through the streets. Some pumped their fists in defiant chants against Khamenei and his security forces.

      Iran’s state-controlled media also got in one last shot. Reports of Montazeri’s death ignored his central role in the Islamic revolution, referring to him dismissively as the “rioters’ cleric.”

      • dale ruff

        The way you take a stand against the theocracy is not through words but through support for the moderates, such as the Iran nuke deal, which the hardliners opposed. Stein has defended the Iran nuke deal and thus supported the moderate reformers who like her are seeking common ground. Iran politics, like ours, is in flux. If we don’t support the moderates, the hardliners will resume power.

    • Pingback: 8.11.2016 Daily Links | Daily Links & News()

    • Nothing new here; Stein is going to get everything and the kitchen sink thrown at her. Democrats spend far more energy trying to prevent the defection of a couple million (at most) voters to the Green Party (out of 126 million plus total) than trying to persuade them millions of voters torn between voting against Clinton or voting against Trump, because a viable Green Party is far more of a threat to their base, and to the vested status quo interests funding them than Trump and the Republicans ever will be.

      • Jerry Reiter

        The Green Party works in nations with parliamentary governments where their votes can be ADDED to the winning coalition. In the US the Green Party SUBTRACTS from the moderate and liberal factions of the Democratic Party. The stronger the Green Party gets the more victories the GOP gets.

    • As it comes to ludicrous conspiracy theories that I’ve heard lately, this one takes the cake …

    • Guy

      Would it not be wonderful if Jill Stein was the first female President of the United States .

      • towerofbabel

        Yes. She’s willing to tell the truth in public.

        • Jerry Reiter

          Jill Stein wasn’t even willing to tell the truth to the anti-vaxxers. She deceived the public when she knew better. Not to mention she was Putin’s pick to get Trump elected.

          • towerofbabel

            What is this? A zombie like Hillbot risen from the grave?

            • Jerry Reiter


              • towerofbabel

                Good. Let’s gang up against the largest crime organization in history.

      • Randall Hamlet

        Certainly not my first choice, but by far better than 99% of other choices.

    • doctorparadox

      It’s *almost* like Assange has a fixation on female candidates…

      • dale ruff

        Huh? Supporting progressives is hardly a fixation.

    • Pingback: Red Scare 2016: As Green Party Power Grows, Jill Stein Accused Of Ties To Putin | Protestation()

    • James Wherry

      Does Assange know something we don’t know, and if so, WHY WON’T HE RELEASE IT???

      Assange should be pardoned for his sheer entertainment value.

      • TeeJae

        What do you think he’s hiding?

        • James Wherry

          Dunno. That’s why I ask. With his opposition to Clinton and Trump, would he withhold something “on principle,” of course, against Stein?

      • dale ruff

        Exposing secrets is strategic: if you dump it all at once, most gets buried in the mass. Also, releases timed with relevant political events garner more attention.

        Nobel Prize for Assange!

        • towerofbabel

          “Nobel Prize for Assange!”
          Given their recent track record that ain’t gonna happen.

          • Jerry Reiter

            Assange is the enemy of free and fair elections in the US. He is a willing tool of dictators like Putin. Instead of Nobel Prize, he deserves “no frills prison.”

    • jo6pac

      Greens are making head way into lame stream media so they must be doing really good to scare the elite.
      Go Greens
      Thanks Kit for the good news.

      • towerofbabel

        At this point if they are talking about her, she’s winning.

    • tapatio

      HELLary Clinton SHOULD be terrified of Jill Stein and the Green Party. Most of those betrayed by Sanders have gone to the Greens because there is nothing in the Democratic Party that resembles Bernie Sanders claimed positions – obviously, CLAIMED as Obama’s fake promises and position statements of 2008.

      Clinton has proven that she will stop at nothing to win, that she has no moral “glass floor”.

      • dale ruff

        1. Sanders told you what he would do and he did it. That is not a betrayal.
        2. Those who FEEL betrayed (because he kept his word) are a minority who have gone to the
        Greens. Most feel disappointed but not betrayed and will, holding their noses, vote for Clinton in the tight states like Florida.
        3.Evidence: Sanders got 13.2 million votes. If “most” went over to the Greens (a party to which I belong), that would be, minimally, about 7 million. Sanders dropped out JUly 26, so let’s look at the realclearpolitics graph to see if the Convention bounce Clinton on that date was tied with Trump in the polls; less than a week later, she was up 6-7 points. Clearly, many of these were independents or a smaller group of disgruntled Republicans….
        4. 7 points rise is a 15-20% rise. OUt of a voting population of 127 million (2012), a 17% rise would be about 22 million new voters, if we extrapolate. How many represented by this number were on the fence, Republicans who hated Trump, and how many Sanders supporters? We don’t know, but we can make a reasonable guess: of the 22 million new voters represented by the polls, is is reasonable to assume that less than 7 million were Sanders supporters. I don’t think that is reasonable. I think it more likely that the vast majority of new votes were from the Sanders supporters.

        5. And if we look at the jump in the Green Party. The People’s Pundit tracking poll in July found
        “Nearly 16% of Sanders supporters say they will vote for Mr. Trump, but more than a quarter are at least giving Dr. Stein a serious look.”

        6.The same poll found “only 47.7% of those who voted for Bernie Sanders in the primaries are certain that they’ll cast their vote in support of Clinton. It is unlikely that less than 3% of those who supported Sanders and were not “certain” they would vote for Clinton (after all, 15% said they preferred Trump) did not come forth as part of the bounce.

        7. The July 30 Public Policy Poll showed Stein at 2%……that represents about 2.2 million votes (she got less than one million in 2012)…….so where are the 7 million betrayed Sanders supporters, several days after he endorsed Clinton? They aren’t there.

        This is the best research I could find. It shows that most Sander’s supporters have not gone to the greens and that therefore the idea that most feel betrayed is likely false.

        Full disclosure: I am a registered member of the Green Party and will vote for Dr. Stein. I do not let my political loyalties replace my independence and objectivity, however.

        • Michael D

          At least before he deserted the progressive movement, Bernie gave a specific warning, unlike Obama who was total bait-and-switch for those who weren’t paying attention to his past actions. Me, I’ve been through with all of them for a very long time, having voted third party consistently since I first could vote in 1972, and will again this time.

          • dale ruff

            I am 75, the first election I followed was Truman/Dewey. Never in my life has the progressive movement been more popular (67% approve progressive above all other laels: Pew 2011) and Sanders has brought it into the mainstream in a way as never before. You are giving up just as we have gained a new level of power and respect……………this is only the beginning, not the end.

        • s k

          Sanders never said he would support the candidate who won in a rigged primary.

          • dale ruff

            Go back and read what he said: he did what he said, and now he has left the Democratic Party and NOT campaigning for HRC. He may end up saying what you are saying but in politics, timing is everything. You are betraying our revolution by pushing purges and denunciations, a sure recipe for disaster. Withhold judgement until we see how this plays out. Meanwhile, he can still win a write in 43 states and 425 electoral votes up for grabs.

            I agree that Bernie is playing by the rules in a rigged game and that he has every right to challange Rump and Clinton, as the polls shows him beating them both. The majority of Americans have made it clear they do not want Trump of Clinton, and they do want Sanders.

            • Jerry Reiter

              The Russians planted false information in the progressive social media sites and fooled the left as surely as they fooled the right. Trump’nStein won for Putin. And people still have not woken up. They parrot Putin’s propaganda while not realizing it.