Saturday, February 4, 2017

City-Journal: Connoisseur of Chaos:The dystopian vision of George Soros, billionaire funder of the Left

Via David

When the dust was cleared and the debris swept away, he stood revealed as Hillary Clinton’s most generous billionaire donor. Yet his name rarely surfaced during the presidential campaign—and that’s generally the way he likes it. Dark Money, Jane Mayer’s book about covert political funding, refers to the Koch brothers more than 300 times in its excoriation of the “radical right” but mentions progressive icon George Soros just six times; three are footnotes.

One of the planet’s richest men, his past marred with crimes and misdemeanors, the 86-year-old billionaire skates on. More than a decade ago, he moved his financial headquarters to Curaçao, a tax-free haven in the Caribbean designed for monied hypocrites who talk one game and play another. The place is not bulletproof; on occasion, Soros has been accused—and even convicted—of insider trading. A French court found him guilty of that crime and levied a fine of $2.3 million. In the parlance of the billionaires’ club, that was small change. Investigative journalists, a dwindling cadre, show little interest in him. They prefer to scrutinize safer, softer targets.

More @ City-Journal


  1. Old nazi needs to be taken out!


  2. They prefer to scrutinize safer, softer targets. Yes, I can understand that. If I was one of the few true investigative journalists remaining, I would be very afraid of ending up like anyone who could be a whistle blower against the Clintons........

    Being one of the most evil men on the planet, there is a wonderfully sanitized biography of his life in Wikipedia.........

  3. It is very easy to revise things on WIKI. You just need to be far left leaning and have millions of dollars to donate to them. Then you can write pretty much anything that you desire, as long as it is 100% factual according to their strict *standards of research and verification.

    underwritten by the Clinton Foundation

    1. I thought anyone could, but hadn't gotten further than that. Thanks.

    2. Sorry Brock, I was being facetious, but I have heard many anecdotes over the years that Wikipedia will purge most things that are critical of the left while allowing to pass as factual, highly edited and out of context material about conservatives and their causes.

    3. Not at all, as that happened when a friend revised the one on General Forrest. Thanks .