We’re fighting back against the mob but we need your help. Join our growing army and click here to subscribe to Revolver. Or give the gift of Revolver—simply select the annual subscription and select “This is a gift” on the next page. If you want to give extra during this critical time, you can make a one-time or recurring monthly donation — whether it’s $1 or $1,000, every bit goes towards the battle to save our great nation.
From the failed Chris Wallace-Biden tag-team attempt against Trump, to biased moderator Susan Page’s shrill interruptions of Vice President Pence, to the Presidential Debate Commission’s ridiculous and politically motivated effort to force a “virtual debate” on Biden’s behalf, patriotic Americans have caught on to the fact that there is something deeply unfair about the presidential debates.
This clear bias has justifiably led many observers to wonder what is wrong with the Presidential Debate Commission. Just yesterday, White House Press Secretary Kayleigh McEnany called out the Commission directly:
The Commission on Presidential Debates is little more than a Commission to Re-elect @JoeBiden!
— Kayleigh McEnany (@kayleighmcenany) October 8, 2020
Kayleigh’s characterization of the Commission is of course correct. However, its corruption and bias goes beyond the simple fact that it’s in the tank for Joe Biden. The nominally Republican Chairman of Presidential Debate Commission, Frank Fahrenkopf, is both a co-founder and current board member of the International Republican Institute (IRI), a top “Color Revolution” propaganda outfit. The IRI was run by Never Trump neoconservative John McCain for decades. It is closely linked to the thoroughly discredited Steele Dossier at the center of the Russia Hoax.
At first glance, it might appear as though Fahrenkopf’s Republican Party membership, combined with his board membership at the International Republican Institute, lends him, and by extension the Debate Commission, some semblance of balance.
The Debate Commission’s board has a Republican Co-Chair and a Democrat co-Chair, creating the appearance of fairness and bipartisanship. Nothing could be further from the truth. Bipartisanship in the Trump era all too often means that the corrupt establishment elements of both parties join arms to undermine Trump and his agenda. A Debate Commission consisting of John McCain and Hillary Clinton would be technically bipartisan, but it would not be balanced when it comes to Trump and his supporters. Globalist Republicans and globalist Democrats have far more in common with each other than they do with Trump.
Our choice of John McCain in this example was not arbitrary. As it turns out, the late Senator John McCain served as the Chairman of the Board of the International Republican Institute for 25 years.
Serving as chairman of @IRIglobal for 25 years has been a great honor & I look forward to continuing to serve on its board & support its mission. @SenDanSullivan will be an excellent new leader as IRI continues to advocate for democracy & freedom worldwide.https://t.co/cZ500OkXNL
— John McCain (@SenJohnMcCain) August 3, 2018
Just months before he died, John McCain took to Twitter to scold the Trump Administration for allegedly defunding the organization.
The work of @NEDemocracy @IRIglobal & @NDI to foster the infrastructure of democracy—freedom of the press, political parties & rule of law—is invaluable. Congress must continue to fund these important institutions. https://t.co/k0f1xKJZ42
— John McCain (@SenJohnMcCain) March 5, 2018
The Washington Post article in the above tweet reveals that George Soros’ Open Society Foundation was furious that Trump would dare to “downscale” a “democracy promotion event” at the State Department.
Perhaps McCain was just standing up for his friend Soros, who, incidentally, was a major contributor to the McCain Foundation.
That the current Co-Chair of the Debate Commission Frank Fahrenkopf is himself a sitting board member and Co-Founder of IRI offers insight into just what kind of Republican he is and what sort of balance his Chairmanship really provides — in reality it weighs the scales even more heavily against Trump.
Fahrenkopf’s colleagues on the IRI board include Lindsey Graham, H.R. McMaster, and Senator Mitt Romney. This does not exactly inspire confidence for Trump supporters. By now, it is very clear exactly the type of Republican this organization caters to.
One of Fahrenkopf’s colleagues on the IRI board is especially outrageous — a man by the name of David Kramer.
Kramer was an aide to the late Senator John McCain. He is most notorious for spreading the completely discredited Steele Dossier that served as the basis for the Russia Hoax.
David Kramer, the John McCain aide who leaked the discredited Christopher Steele dossier on President Trump, testified in a libel case that he spread the unsubstantiated anti-Trump material all over Washington during the presidential transition.
Mr. Kramer, a former State Department official and a Trump detractor, leaked the Democrat-financed dossier material to The Wall Street Journal, The Washington Post’s Fred Hiatt, CNN’s Carl Bernstein, National Public Radio, McClatchy news service and others, he said during his deposition in the libel case.
Prior to his role at IRI, Kramer served as head of yet another “democracy promotion” NGO called Freedom House. In the following clip, Kramer offers some additional insight on where he stands politically. He notes that Freedom House was founded to fight four “isms” — fascism, Nazism, communism and… isolationism. Isolationism is of course a smear word used to refer to the position of people like President Trump and the majority of the American people who reject the Bush-McCain foreign policy of forever wars and democracy promotion. That Kramer would conflate this position with Nazism and communism is quite remarkable.
We could go into quite a bit more on this maniacally unhinged globalist, but for now we will turn to another recent member of IRI’s board named Scott Carpenter.
Scott Carpenter is the director of free expression at Google Ideas where he drives implementation of the team’s overall strategy to make online repressive censorship irrelevant. Prior to joining Google, Carpenter founded and directed Project Fikra as the Keston family fellow at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, where he remains an adjunct scholar.
For those unfamiliar, “Google Ideas” is the precursor to Google Jigsaw, which is Google’s in-house think tank tasked with developing Artificial Intelligence technology to censor so-called “toxic hate speech” online. Revolver briefly covered the Jigsaw program and its founder Jared Cohen in a recent piece as follows.
Infamously biased anti-Trump Tech behemoth Google sponsors a project known as Jigsaw whose main purpose is to develop Artificial Intelligence capabilities to censor so-called “hate speech” online. Of course, hate speech is weakly defined, and almost always ends up casting a wide net. Inevitably, those censored tend to be Trump supporters concerned with law and order, fighting open borders, and ending America’s wars. The man who runs Jigsaw, Jared Cohen, is a veteran of Hillary Clinton’s State Department. Cohen made a name for himself in developing digital strategies to advance American national security objectives.
Jigsaw, a technology incubator within Alphabet, says it has developed a new tool for web publishers to identify toxic comments that can undermine a civil exchange of ideas. Starting Thursday, publishers can start applying for access to use Jigsaw’s software, called Perspective, without charge.
“We have more information and more articles than any other time in history, and yet the toxicity of the conversations that follow those articles are driving people away from the conversation,” said Jared Cohen, president of Jigsaw, formerly known as Google Ideas.
Carpenter’s name no longer appears on IRI’s listing of board members. His official Twitter page now lists his current title as Managing Director at Jigsaw. To get a sense of what this (former?) board member of the International Republican Institute and current managing director of Google’s AI tool to censor “hate speech” thinks about Trump, see the following tweet.
— Scott Carpenter (@JSCarpenter11) August 21, 2020
“Bipartisan” opposition to Trump, just as we suspected. Here is another instructive tweet, retweeted and endorsed by Carpenter.
I am one of them https://t.co/bB63cwKF44
— Gen Michael Hayden (@GenMhayden) June 6, 2020
Michael Hayden, readers will recall, is a virulently anti-Trump former head of the CIA and NSA.
Trump is a lying son of a bitch https://t.co/jJjfIaSVKp
— Gen Michael Hayden (@GenMhayden) September 11, 2020
This consummate Deep State operative oversaw the development of the massive domestic surveillance program that he lied about both to foreign leaders and to the American people.
Hayden has a long history of making misleading and outright false statements, and by the estimation of many lawyers, likely committed countless felonies during the Bush administration. It is something of a wonder that someone responsible for so many reprehensible acts is now considered a totally above-the-fray, honest commentator on all issues intelligence.
While we don’t know whether Scott Carpenter is still on the board of IRI, we do know that he was recently appointed to the board of its parent NGO, the National Endowment for Democracy (NED).
— Scott Carpenter (@JSCarpenter11) February 4, 2020
The IRI is one of four grantees of the NED, and is therefore entirely dependent on it for its funding. The NED is one of the major NGO arms advancing US Government objectives abroad, particularly by supporting the Color Revolution regime change model (more on that later). NED was founded to function as a new, improved CIA.
“A lot of what we do today was done covertly 25 years ago by the CIA,” said Allen Weinstein, a founder of the US govt’s National Endowment for Democracy that underwrites neocon outlet @CodaStory https://t.co/oo63r92ZhC
— Max Blumenthal (@MaxBlumenthal) August 20, 2020
This provides more context to NED and Scott Carpenter’s approving quote of former CIA Director Hayden.
NED’s mandate is to focus on “democracy promotion” (Color Revolutions) abroad, but it couldn’t keep from weighing in on the death of George Floyd as BLM and Antifa terrorists were burning down Minneapolis.
The brutal killing of George Floyd by a police officer in Minneapolis has provoked an outpouring of anger and rage that the United States has not seen since the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. more than fifty years ago. Our democracy is being tested as never before in the memory of most living Americans. We will not overcome this crisis and begin to heal our divided nation unless the four police officers responsible for the killing of George Floyd are prosecuted to the full extent of the law, and unless America commits itself fully to the principles of racial justice and equality for all citizens.
The NED’s mission of supporting people around the world who are fighting for democracy is
based upon the same values of freedom and human equality that inspired the movement for civil rights that ended the Jim Crow system of legalized racial segregation and discrimination in the United States. Those values are rooted in the American creed, and it was by appealing to them that the civil rights movement achieved its historic breakthrough. But much more needs to be done to carry forward the struggle to end racism. By doing so, we will be more united and stronger as a country.
The current President of the International Republican Institute, the grant subsidiary of NED, fully concurs.
America’s support for democracy abroad is a natural extension of Americans’ belief in freedom and justice in our own country. My thoughts. https://t.co/eTMFyiI6V4
— Daniel Twining (@DCTwining) June 5, 2020
Twining, the current head of the IRI, was previously at the Soros-funded German Marshall Fund, whose Vice President recently had this say about President Trump.
On transatlantic relations, GMF's Thomas Kleine-Brockhoff notes that “#Germany’s relations with the U.S. are virtually frozen. We have not taken any major initiatives with the U.S. and have been waiting until Trump’s term ends.” https://t.co/UgB6Mcg1uN
— German Marshall Fund (@gmfus) August 9, 2020
Prior to his employment at the German Marshall Fund, Twining distinguished himself as a legislative aide for arch-neoconservative and Trump nemesis Senator John McCain!
By now we have a good idea of what the IRI is about, and have gained a deeper sense of just what a scandal it is that the “Republican” co-chair and co-founder of the Debate Commission, Frank Fahrenkopf, is also a sitting board member and co-founder of this shadowy organization. The IRI is deeply and intimately associated with one of Trump’s most vicious rivals, whose board members have promoted the discredited Steele dossier and are openly supporting Biden on Twitter.
IRI’s official stated position on the George Floyd issue is directly in keeping with the rhetorical narratives fueling the Antifa and BLM fires that are part and parcel of the Color Revolution against Trump. The notion that Fahrenkopf’s status as a registered Republican provides any kind balance when it comes to the presidential debates is laughable and absurd.
But the story is actually much bigger and more sinister than even the above would suggest. Indeed, the IRI and the Debate Commission are not merely partisan. Careful readers will have already picked up a disturbing national security element to the IRI and its parent NGO, the National Endowment for Democracy.
Both the IRI and the NED function primarily as organizations to promote Color Revolutions abroad. The term “Color Revolution” requires a brief bit of explanation for readers who have not yet read Revolver News’ series on the Color Revolution regime change model and its role in the coup against Trump.
First, a quick note on Color Revolutions. A “Color Revolution” in this context refers to a specific type of coordinated attack that the United States government has been known to deploy against foreign regimes, particularly in Eastern Europe deemed to be “authoritarian” and hostile to American interests. Rather than using a direct military intervention to effect regime change as in Iraq, Color Revolutions attack a foreign regime by contesting its electoral legitimacy, organizing mass protests and acts of civil disobedience, and leveraging media contacts to ensure favorable coverage to their agenda in the Western press.
It would be disturbing enough to note a coordinated effort to use these exact same strategies and tactics domestically to undermine or overthrow President Trump. The ominous nature of what we see unfolding before us only truly hits home when one realizes that the people who specialize in these Color Revolution regime change operations overseas are, literally, the very same people attempting to overthrow Trump by using the very same playbook.
The IRI is clearly a Color Revolution outfit, as it is one of the most prominent United States government-linked NGOs tasked with providing “democratization support” abroad. Rudimentary research on the IRI — or even a brief scroll through its Twitter feed — reveals its obsession with such efforts overseas. Here is a representative tweet from IRI President Twining.S
The fixation on Belarus, whose combination of a contested election scenario and massive “peaceful protests” bears all the hallmarks of a Color Revolution, is revealing. We urge readers to read Revolver’s first Color Revolution installment, The Curious Case of George Kent, for further context.
The similarity between the Atlanticist-backed Belarus riots and the way the organized ANTIFA and BLM protests operate in the United States is impossible to ignore. Indeed, many of the Color Revolution experts currently fixated on Belarus have explicitly made this comparison in relation to the United States. The Transatlantic Democracy Working Group (more about them later) is a deeply anti-Trump so-called “bipartisan” group that is essentially a Who’s Who of every influential Color Revolution regime-change NGO in the World.…
Many have noticed theoretical parallels and similarities between how US State Department and associated Atlanticist NGOs run color revolutions in foreign countries, and the sustained operations targeted against Trump in the United States. The case of George Kent — and many others to be exposed in this series — demonstrates that these similarities are not merely theoretical—they literally involve the same people! The very same people running cover revolution operations in Ukraine and Eastern Europe have been using the very same playbook to overturn 2016 and destroy the legitimacy of President Trump’s election.
And guess who runs the Belarus station at the State Department? If you guessed star never Trump impeachment witness George Kent, the “color revolution professional,” you might be right.
In his tweet above, Twining favorably quotes David Kramer, his fellow board member at IRI who shopped the Steele Dossier. Kramer once served in a diplomatic post in Eastern Europe. In fact, almost every major operative in the effort to overthrow Trump has or has had a diplomatic post in Eastern Europe. Kramer happened to serve from 2005-2008 as a Deputy Assistant Secretary of European and Eurasian Affairs — working on issues related to Belarus, Russia, and Ukraine. George Kent currently occupies this very same post. What a coincidence!
Revolver’s Color Revolution thesis explains why there is such an overlap between State Department officials focused on Eastern Europe and key never-Trump operatives — from Lt. Colonel Vindman to Fiona Hill to Yovanovich to George Kent and David Kramer. They are running an Eastern European-style Color Revolution against Trump because they are Color Revolution professionals used to deploying the same strategies and tactics against target regimes in Eastern Europe.
Note the name McFaul in the above Belarus Tweet. Michael McFaul is yet another professional covered in Revolver’s previous reports. Also note the wording of the title of the NBC News piece referenced in the Tweet: “Belarus is on the edge of a democratic breakthrough.”
Autocrats have demonized the phrase, "color revolutions." (& revolution generally has a negative connotation for many.) Instead, I use the term "democratic breakthroughs."
— Michael McFaul (@McFaul) August 23, 2020
McFaul elucidated precisely what he meant by a “democratic breakthrough” in a deleted tweet that was perhaps too honest about his intentions.
If you are still unconvinced that IRI and its parent NGO, the National Endowment for Democracy aren’t principally Color Revolution outfits, consider these passages from the Senate Subcommittee on European Affairs from July 29, 1999. In this remarkable exchange, Soros representative J. Fox explains to Senator Joe Biden the role of organizations like IRI, NED, and IRI’s sister NGO, NDI in the “democracy promotion” process.
Here Biden calls to give Serbia’s “peaceful protesters” walking money to facilitate their overthrow of Milosevic.
And here is Biden learning about the NED, IRI, and NDI from Soros Foundation representative Fox, who details the IRI-NDI operational procedures to Biden.
Continuing along this line, Fox complains that the resources devoted to Color Revolution NGOs like NED and IRI in Croatia have not yet been deployed in Serbia (Spoiler Alert: they got their way and effected a Color Revolution against Milosevic called “Otpor!”).
It is worth noting that in Color Revolution craft, the terms “democracy” and “democratization,” like the term “peaceful protest,” are actually terms of art. As McFaul’s own tweet suggests, “democratic breakthrough” is the preferred euphemism for Color Revolution. Here is additional insight on how and why these people use the word “democracy,” taken from the third installment of Revolver’s Color Revolution series.
And there we have it, folks—Norm Eisen, former Obama Ethics Czar, Ambassador to Czechoslovakia during the “Velvet Revolution,” key counsel in impeachment effort against Trump, and participant in the ostensibly bi-partisan election war games predicting a contested election scenario unfavorable to Trump—just happens to be a Color Revolution expert who literally wrote the modern “Playbook” in the explicitly acknowledged tradition of Color Revolution Godfather Gene Sharp’s “From Dictatorship to Democracy.”
Before we turn to the contents of Norm Eisen’s Color Revolution manual, full title “The Democracy Playbook: Preventing and Reversing Democratic Backsliding,” it will be useful to make a brief point regarding the term “democracy” itself, which happens to appear in the title of Gene Sharp’s book “From Dictatorship to Democracy” as well.
Just like the term “peaceful protestor,” which, as we pointed out in our George Kent essay is used as a term of craft in the Color Revolution context, so is the term “democracy” itself. The US Government launches Color Revolutions against foreign targets irrespective of whether they actually enjoy the support of the people or were elected democratically. In the case of Trump, whatever one says about him, he is perhaps the most “democratically” elected President in America’s history. Indeed, in 2016 Trump ran against the coordinated opposition of the establishments of both parties, the military industrial complex, the corporate media, Hollywood, and really every single powerful institution in the country. He won, however, because he was able to garner sufficient support of the people—his true and decisive power base as a “populist.” Precisely because of the ultra democratic “populist” character of Trump’s victory, the operatives attempting to undermine him have focused specifically on attacking the democratic legitimacy of his victory.
In this vein we ought to note that the term “democratic backsliding,” as seen in the subtitle of Norm Eisen’s book, and its opposite “democratic breakthrough” are also terms of art in the Color Revolution lexicon. We leave the full exploration of how the term “democratic” is used deceptively in the Color Revolution context (and in names of decidedly anti-democratic/populist institutions) as an exercise to the interested reader. Michael McFaul, another Color Revolution expert and key anti-Trump operative somewhat gives the game away in the following tweet in which the term “democratic breakthrough” makes an appearance as a better sounding alternative to “Color Revolution.”
We conclude this installment by returning to the key subject of the piece, Debate Commission Co-Chair and Co-Founder Frank Fahrenkopf.
The fact that Fahrenkopf is chair of the Commission on Presidential Debates and a co-founder and current board member of IRI takes on a more interesting and sinister overtone when we consider the affiliation of his co-chair, Kenneth Wollack.
Prior to his appointment as Co-Chair of the Commission on Presidential debates, Wollack Served as President of the National Democratic Institute (NDI). Like the IRI, the NDI is also an NGO whose purpose is to aid “democracy” efforts overseas — in other words, to serve as a propaganda arm promoting Color Revolution efforts on behalf of the US Government.
Although the IRI is staffed mostly with Republicans and NDI mostly with Democrats, the IRI and NDI are “sister organizations” as two of the four core grantees of the National Endowment for Democracy, which is itself a major umbrella group responsible for aiding Color Revolution efforts. In fact, Debate Commission Co-Chair and Co-Founder Frank Fahrenkopf also co-founded the National Endowment for Democracy, and served as board member and vice chair from 1983-1993.
What does all of this mean? For one, it is rather odd that the commission would have one chair, Fahrenkopf, who co-founded NED and who still sits on the board of IRI, which he also co-founded, and another Chair, Kenneth Wollack, who previously ran NDI. In fact, Fahrenkopf co-founded the Commission on Presidential Debates with Paul Kirk, who, like Wollack, had previously served as President of NDI. Taken alone, the deeply rooted connections between the Commission on Presidential Debates and Color Revolution NGOs (IRI, NDI, NED) would be suspicious in its own right.
This connection becomes positively explosive, however, when one considers it within the context of Revolver’s thesis that the coup being run against Trump is based on the Color Revolution regime change model. The same people, the same networks, and the same institutions tasked with Color Revolutions abroad are the key players in deploying the same strategies here at home against our democratically elected President, Donald J. Trump. As we have shown in this fourth installment of the series, these biased debates are literally being run by the people and institutions tasked with revolutionary propaganda efforts abroad — and this is just the tip of the iceberg.