How Bloomberg ‘News’ Lies

Eric Zuesse

On December 31st, Josh Rogin of Bloomberg ‘News’ headlined “Inside Obama’s Secret Outreach to Russia,” and his opening sentence ‘reported’ on “the fact that Russian President Vladimir Putin has shown little interest in … halting his aggression in neighboring Ukraine.” That ‘reporter’ from Bloomberg ‘News’ was ‘reporting’ from only sources inside the U.S. Administration — only from individuals who are hired by and who represent Barack Obama, none who are hired by and who represent Obama’s enemy Vladimir Putin; and so the question naturally arises as to whether Rogin and Bloomberg ‘News’ are ‘reporting’ propaganda, or are they instead reporting news (as is claimed by Bloomberg ‘News’)?

Documentation will be presented here to prove that Josh Rogin and Bloomberg ‘News’ were lying, and that the actual aggression has been by Obama, and against Putin — the exact opposite of what Bloomberg ‘News’ and their ‘reporter’ are claiming — and that they knew or ought to have known this reality that contradicts their false charge here. The documentation presented will be in the form of links to articles that are, or else that themselves link to, recorded or filmed events that constitute and display Obama’s aggression against Putin (i.e., against the nation that Putin leads), so that the reader becomes a viewer, of the actual historical events and documents, instead of (as in such fake ‘news’ ‘reporting’ during our new age of online news when people can actually see the truth and not merely read other people’s beliefs about what is true) being merely passive readers of lies — something that during the print age was unfortunately unavoidable for readers, because there were no links at that time.

The most important of these actual events was the February 2014 violent coup by Obama against the democratically elected President of Ukraine, which is a nation right next door to Russia, which coup is an event in history that is comparable to the Cold War event when the Soviet Union took over Cuba, right next door to the United States, and tried to install nuclear missiles there against the U.S. Consequently, if you, the reader, happen to think that when the Soviet Union tried to install nuclear missiles into Cuba, there was no real threat being posed against the national security of the United States, then you will not think that the installation of nuclear missiles into Ukraine constitutes a threat to Russia’s national security, in which case the argument that will be presented here about the fraudulence of Bloomberg ‘News’ can possess no merit at all to you; and any such reader would then be wasting time to read any further here. The following argument can hold valid only for readers who do consider at least the possibility of there being an analogy between Cuba then, and Ukraine now. This is being said in the way of a preface to the documentation, which will now be presented:

U.S. President Barack Obama chose to replace Ukraine’s elected President Viktor Yanukovych with nazis in a February coup because Yanukovych opposed Ukraine’s joining NATO and becoming a staging-area for U.S. nuclear missiles aimed against Russia. U.S. taxpayers are now the chief financial backers of Ukraine’s military campaign (such as here and here and here and here) to exterminate the residents in the pro-Russian region of Ukraine, which had voted 90% for Yanukovych. The U.S. President, Barack Obama, and his financial backers, are seeking to destroy Russia in order for the U.S. aristocracy to enjoy unchallengeable supremacy over the entire world — a goal that will require defeating the only nation that possesses a nuclear arsenal that competes with America’s.

Soldiers such as the one who was interviewed by Ukraine’s Channel 5 are the front-line troops in that American plan.

Even the founder of the American private CIA firm, Stratfor, acknowledges that the overthrow of Yanukovych was a coup (he called it “the most blatant coup in history”); and even Ukraine’s former, 1994-1998, U.S. Ambassador says that Ukraine’s war “is a prelude to World War III.”

The editors and reporters at Bloomberg ‘News’ have had access all along to every one of the news sources that have been linked to here, and to the news-sources that are linked to within those reports, because I have been submitting those news sources to them all along, and also because all of those authentic news sources have been available online and one can reasonably expect that the editors and reporters at Bloomberg ‘News’ knew about them even if individuals such as I had not been sending them those links.

It is up to the reader, and no one else, to determine whether Josh Rogin was the propagandist, or whether Eric Zuesse is. I shall state here for the record that nobody pays me for my news reports. I refuse to be paid as a journalist. My only obligation as a journalist is to the truth, as I see it — not to any individual or group, and it will always be that way.

Whatever you find, please pass it along on social media, so as to inform a broader public about what you have found. Spreading news this way is not mere gossip (such as Bloomberg ‘News’ and its many equivalents might charge); it is, instead, the only way to get beyond controlled ‘news’ determining what the public-at-large believes, in a democracy. This act of getting beyond propaganda, to truth, is essential in order to prevent our nation from becoming merely a ‘democracy’ (if it hasn’t degenerated to that already). So: your efforts can help, and this is the new way to become involved in building democracy — one person at a time.


Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010,  and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

This entry was posted in Business / Economics, Energy / Environment, General, Politics / World News and tagged , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • James Whitten

    Euro-Manezhka was a complete dud. What idiotic attempt to undermine Putin is next?

  • Lynn Walker

    I’d like to know how Eric Zuesse lies. Let’s be clear, everyone lies. Stated more politely, everyone has an agenda. There is no such thing as a “neutral” agenda.

    This does not infer that I find any fault or take any issue with the reporting of Zuesse, but I also have no confidence in his revelations for the simple fact that I do not know his agenda. I must view everything he submits with skepticism that requires independent confirmation before I will consider the information significant.

    I feel that this site is starved for additional input on this and other matters, as all are covered too thinly. Everyone should realize that this site has it’s own FoxNews-type bias. What do we read to counter balance that bias? It isn’t found here.

    • Party Like 1999 BC

      You just gave a very good demonstration of how not to lie…. Thank You!

    • cettel

      Lynn, this is Eric Zuesse replying to your question about how an individual reader can intelligently vet anything that purports to ‘report’ ‘news.’
      You assert that in order to do it, one must first know the author’s agenda; and, second, not consider any “information significant” unless it has “independent confirmation.”
      I have, in each of my articles, provided links to my sources (“independent confirmations”), some of which are videos of the event that is being referenced in my article, and others of which are articles themselves, which in turn link either directly or indirectly to videos, or else to documents, such as photos or court documents.
      Each one of my articles is sourced with great care on my part, so that no one will ever be able to say that, as of the time when the given article is written, a higher-quality, more-reliably authentic and true, evidentiary source on the given allegation exists than the one to which I link of that given issue.
      In other words: My articles are written for readers who are of the highest level of intelligence and of knowledge, who (largely because they are that) trust no authority but instead demand to be presented and to evaluate the evidence entirely on their own, because they know that no basis for anyone’s personal belief can intelligently be higher than their own personal scientifically critical faculties, just as any scientist is taught and as is the foundation of scientific epistemology itself.
      So: if you are seriously interested in any issue that is raised in any one of my articles, then you will click onto the link that I have provided regarding it.
      I am not saying nor suggesting that you are seriously interested (nor that you are not), but only that I have, in fact, provided, in each of my articles, regarding any assertion in it, what any intelligent and scientifically oriented reader will find to be exceptionally high quality evidence, to back up that particular given assertion. This is all that I (or any writer of high integrity) can do. The rest is (and inevitably must be) on your own, as the reader, the ultimate evaluator.
      Regarding your concern about my “agenda,” it is simple to state, but incredibly challenging to execute: 100% truth, that is based on only the highest-quality items of evidence, regarding each and every allegation that is made.
      So: you can see here that the links are absolutely important. In fact, I am generally shy to link to any article that is not online and that is otherwise difficult for a reader to access and to verify online on his or her own. I shall go further and say that one of the criteria that weighs heavily in my selection of which items of evidence to link to and which ones not, is the extent to which that given article itself links to its sources. I want to make as easy as possible for a reader to check out each one of my allegations.
      I shall go even further than that, and say that one of the reasons why I wanted especially to post at this site is that I had found that its sponsor, who calls himself “George Washington,” adheres more fully to the method of presenting news-reports than does any other I know of. I studied his methods (in his own articles here) with considerable care, and took him as my model for the type of reporter that I want to be. In my opinion, he is the best there is, anywhere. However, I am sometimes even stricter than he is regarding my adherence to the best-evidence principle (not “the best-evidence rule,” but the more-basic principle behind that rule). In other words, I am even more punctilious than he is regarding the quality of evidence that I cite. For this reason, however, I must necessarily cite fewer sources for my allegations than he cites for his. But, other than that, I consider myself to be his student; and, in the deepest sense, he has taught me almost everything that I know about journalism. By this I am not referring to the ‘journalism’ that’s taught in our schools of public relations, an antithetical field, to which America’s attachment of ‘journalism’ schools is a farce if not a hoax. George Washington is the master journalist, to which I aspire. And now I have explained why.

      • Lynn Walker

        Very nice and thoughtful response. I appreciate the time you spent in making it and I will fully explore each of your links, as suggested. Thank you, and may all good fortune come to you and your efforts.

  • December 27, 2014 Every major bank to receive survival kits – What do they know that we do not know?

    (Story by Susan Duclos, republished from AllNewsPipeline com, with additional editing by Natural News.) Why would every major bank need survival kits for all their employees? Why is the US government prepared to spend up to $200,000 on survival kits for bank employees at Bank of America, American Express Bank, BMO Financial Corp., Capitol One Financial Corporation, Citigroup, Inc., JPMorgan Chase, and Wells Fargo, just to name a few? What do they know that we do not know?

    Perhaps they are preparing for bank runs and employees to be forced to shelter in place?

  • FuttBuck

    Typical Zuesse. Doesn’t mention that Michael Bloomberg, billionaire owner of Bloomberg News, is Jevvish. Nor does Zuesse mention that Bloomberg’s senior executives are mostly Jevvish. Or that Josh Rogin at Bloomberg News is a Jevv.

    FYI, Michael Bloomberg’s pet projects include buying himself the mayor’s job in NYC; fixing the stock market via fake information in order to make him and his friends trillions (Google ‘Bloomberg terminal’); and trying to ban private gun ownership through the Jewish-dominated anti-gun movements of Everytown, the Brady Campaign, and Sandyhook Promise. (Although Bloomberg likes his bodyguards to own lots of guns, apparently – all the better to shoot goyim.)

    Neither does Zuesse mention that Stratfor is mostly Jevvish owned and run. (I’m sure he forgot to mention it.)

    Jevvs own over 85% of US media.

  • Thomas

    Even Putin admitted Russia had no air force or navy in the early 1990’s. The time to crush Russia was then, if that was the goal. Putin took Georgia, installed a Russian President in Ukraine to thwart NATO membership growth. Putin stated NATO is the problem. However, Monsanto’s Letter of Agreement with Ukraine to introduce GMO foodstuffs is apparent cause for US involvement. The EU would be best served to creatte their own English speaking defense forces including an air force, navy, and commando units…if…the EU was the goal.

  • The Entire Farcical 2014 Market Summarized In One Chart – 01/01/2015

    If someone had just woken up and missed all of 2014, one look at the following chart of the SP is all they need to know what happened: In brief: the 45-degree “bottom left to top right” levitation on negligible volume that started several years ago, continued throughout 2014 with virtually no substantial incidents.

  • clarioncaller

    If you’re getting your news from Bloomberg, chances are you’re being ‘Gruber’d’.

  • Bloomberg is not a news organization, it’s a propaganda organization relentlessly pushing merciless globalization, mass immigration and multiculturalism. Just to give one example, in the last 18 months, Bloomberg has run at least 4 “articles” calling for Japanese politicians to embrace mass immigration whether the Japanese people agree or not (they don’t).

    Among the laughable propaganda pieces this globalist outfit published is one “article” saying that letting Turkey in the EU ought to be one of Francois Hollande’s top priority!
    And another “article” telling Swedish politicians to ram down “diversity” down the throats of their electorates.

    • cettel

      Thanks for calling that to readers’ attention here. No wonder, then, why Michael Bloomberg was the Mayor of Wall Street, who believed (or at least said that he believed) that Wall Street could do no wrong.
      However, I don’t see how any other English-language news-medium (except for this one and around a mere half-dozen other obscure online news-sites) is any different from Bloomberg ‘News.’
      It seems to me that the business of the ‘news’ organizations, at least in the U.S. and Britain, is deceiving the public to think that their modern fascist (or even nazi) state is instead a ‘democracy.’ The ‘news’ media are controlled by the aristocracy, and the public are presented at election-time no politically viable candidates other than ones who have passed muster with the aristocracy; and the aristocracy then sell advertisements to those candidates, for the public to vote on. The aristocracy control the federal government at every step of the ‘democratic’ process.