Saturday, August 25, 2007

Proof of Marcos Moulitsas' Involvement with the CIA After Forming Daily Kos


By Stu Piddy, cross-posted from Political Fleshfeast.

Upon closer examination of the audio tape it appears that Daily Kos founder Markos Moulitsas says in fact he was speaking to the CIA up until 2003 about employment and long after he started Daily Kos in May of 2002.

He states that in 2001 "I was underemployed, between jobs so I applied to the CIA" and later in reference to ANOTHER POINT IN TIME ...he made a decision to work for Howad Dean instead of working for the CIA. That decesion could only have taken place in 2003. That is when he went to work for Howard Dean.

Moulitsas discloses to the Daily Kos community that he had decided to work for the Dean Campaign in June of 2003 http://www.dailykos....

I've been on the road a lot the past few months. Some of it was for my day job as a web developer. But the bulk of it was for my new political consulting firm (alongside my partner).

I spent this weekend in Burlington, VT, where we officially accepted work on behalf of presidential candidate Howard Dean. Dean joins a Senate candidate in our still small but hopefully growing roster of clients.

Here we see Moulitsas is saying his decesion to join the Dean campaign is made final and the time is June 2003, NOT ANYTIME IN 2001.

In January 2003 he formed a political consulting partnership with Jerome Armstrong. Sometime later in 2003 he joined the Dean campaign.


Moulitsas says he talked to the CIA about his website. His website was begun in May of 2002.

By his own account, Marcos Moulitsas at least interviewed with the CIA AFTER he formed Daily Kos, not (only) before.

It may be he began the interview process in 2001 and that it continued (or training continued) to just before June 2003.

He says he went "all the way to the end". Does this mean he had compeleted training? If he started a 6 month interview process in 2001 it would have long ended by late June of 2003 when he made his decision to work for the Dean campaign.

He formed his partnership as a political consultant in January 2003 with Jerome Armstrong.

In January of 2003, Markos Moulitsas joined Jerome Armstrong in a political consulting partnership called Armstrong Zuniga, before being formally dissolved in December 2004. Howard Dean hired them for a time as technical consultants in 2003.
It would be interesting to know more about Jerome Armstrong ( he was indicted for securities fraud). He went to work for Dean after forming the partnership...so it must be at THAT point that he made the decision he discusses to work not for the CIA but for Howard Dean and that occurs in June 2003.

If he starts an interview process in 2001 that lasts 6 months and he is making his decesion in or around June 2003 there are at least 12 months in which his relationship with the CIA continues but is not defined.

Therefore, according to his own statements, we can conclude that while Markos Moulitsas was proprietor of Daily Kos, he was also involved in at least discussions with the CIA for employment.

And that, it seems to me, is significant.

Once again these are his words.

3 comments:

Pantelis Kasapis said...

THE END OF ECONOMICS?

The economic science does not seem to provide and promote effective and efficient solutions relating to the basic human problems and issues. This may be attributed to the fact that the economic science is not capable of grasping and comprehending fully the modern reality of the 21st century because it utilizes insufficient theories, instruments, tools and means to carry out such a task.

During the last fifty years new economic development theories come into the fore and scene. However, what is the global economic situation today? The richest 20% of the world’s population consumes the 86% of the world’s goods and services, whereas the poorest 20% of the world’s population consumes only 1.3% of the world’s goods and services. The richest 20% is responsible for the 53% of the globe’s atmospheric pollution whereas the poorest 20% of only 3%.

Consequently, the following questions and issues imply the end of economics:

1) Huge amounts of capital flows continuously between Bangkok, Tokyo, Hong Kong, New York, London, Frankfurt and Singapore taking advantage of the fluctuations in the prices of shares and foreign exchange rates. However, these huge amounts of capital are not invested into the production process. Therefore, someone would wonder whether economic science exists, what is the usefulness and validity of the existing economic theories and tools.

2) The theory of economic development was created within the framework and boundaries of a national economy model. Do these boundaries and framework still in existence? Does the national economy model still function according to its predetermined inner mechanism? Is the production process of a country’s economy placed within its national boundaries or is it wholly incorporated into the global system?

3) What does the phrase ‘’capital accumulation as the base of the development process’’ mean? Does capital accumulation in the United States and the European Union mean the same thing as the capital accumulation in countries such as Cameroon and Philippines?

4) The theory of economic rationality in the economic process is placed under doubts. Is the incorporation of ethics and morality into the economic development theories feasible? The businesspeople, employees, employed, consumers promote their individual interests, utilizing Adam Smith’s invisible hand, without adopting and applying ethical and moral rules and values. However, it has been shown, over the years, that there is a great deal of examples, such as Japan, where ethical and moral rules and values such as duty, respect, solidarity, altruism and devotion constitute a very important and solid base in the economic development process.
5) What is the current relationship and link between investments and employment? According to the relevant economic theory, the realization of an investment creates jobs. Is this still valid? The construction of a road or a dam creates jobs for the short run. However, the economic requirement and objective is the creation of jobs for the long run. However is this feasible, taking into account the fact that the modern technology replaces the human labor? How is it possible for a national economy to resolve and overcome the long term unemployment problem and issue?

6) The economic theory suggests that the developing countries or Third World should utilize the economic development model that has been applied by the Western developed countries. However, considering the recent negative events of the global economy that have taken place, this is not regarded as feasible and practical. The developing countries possess the necessary mechanisms and infrastructure to develop only those industrial sectors which are labor intensive. If a developing country does not possess the necessary mechanisms and infrastructure to become industrialized, in the traditional meaning, then what is the nature of the economic development model that we refer to?

7) Do the increase in the production of goods and services, the size of the business profit and the economic growth mean at the same time that the whole society and its aspects have been developed, prospered and progressed?


NAME: PANTELIS P. KASAPIS,

BSc, MBA, MPSM, FCCA, MAAT, CAT, CPA
ECONOMIST, INTERNATIONALIST, CHARTERED CERTIFIED ACCOUNTANT

17A DEMETRAS STREET, 2101
AGLANDJIA, NICOSIA,
CYPRUS

00-357-99546634

lbdl said...

Obviously, "economic science" has turned out to be about as scientific as psichoanalysis, or else we're being purposefully deceived. The state of the world today follows from a strict adherence to the "logic" of capitalism, where, with possible but not significant exceptions, morality is a burden, not an asset. When continuous growth is a must for the survival of the system, the (parasitical) system in cuestion intevitable ends by killing its host, in this case the planet. But you know what? You can't fix it, the system works beautifully for the ends it's aimed at. The only answer is to change those aims. Do you think it's feasible considering the power the system now has and the imprinting its subjects are submitted to from the cradle to the grave ?

Francis L. Holland Blog said...

I honestly don't know whether humanit can be saved from itself. But since we're here, we might as well give it a try. After all, life is about distinguishing the impossible from the merely improbable.